DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
The action is in response to the application filed on 02/21/2025. Claims 1-9 are pending and examined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Regarding claims 1-9, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to receiving and manipulating data without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites “A method of deriving biometric data of a specific time point displayed on a terminal of an analyte monitoring system, the method comprising: acquiring a corresponding time point biosignal, which is a biosignal of a time point corresponding to the specific time point; generating a corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies a preset condition; determining any one of the corresponding time point biosignal and the corrected biosignal as input data; and deriving biometric data of the specific time point using the input data.”
This falls into a mental process grouping of abstract ideas. These limitations are either capable of being performed mentally by looking at measurements and making mental assessments thereafter or considered insignificant extra-solution activity.
The step of acquiring a corresponding time point biosignal, which is a biosignal of a time point corresponding to the specific time pointis insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering).
The step of generating a corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies a preset condition is a mental process that can be performed in a human mind or by a pencil and paper by a skilled clinician.
The step of determining any one of the corresponding time point biosignal and the corrected biosignal as input data is a mental process that can be performed in a human mind.
The step of deriving biometric data of the specific time point using the input data is a mental process that can be performed in a human mind.
Additionally the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because no additional elements are provided.
Finally, the claims analyzed as a whole do not provides any element, or combination of elements, sufficient to amount to significantly more than the mental process no additional elements are provided.
Regarding dependent claims 2-9, the claims also fail to add something more to the abstract independent claims as they merely further limit the abstract idea or provide insignificant extra solution activity.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1, and claims dependent thereof, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites the limitation “A method of deriving biometric data of a specific time point displayed on a terminal of an analyte monitoring system” in the preamble; however the body of the claim fails to state any step in which the data is actually displayed. As such it is unclear if this is necessary for the claim. As such the claim is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20190110698 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Ko”).
Regarding claim 1, Ko, an apparatus and method for processing bio-information, teaches A method of deriving biometric data of a specific time point displayed on a terminal of an analyte monitoring system (paragraphs [0043], [0052], [0103], [0109]), the method comprising:
acquiring a corresponding time point biosignal, which is a biosignal of a time point corresponding to the specific time point (paragraphs [0043], [0052], [0103], [0109]);
generating a corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies a preset condition (paragraphs [0075]-[0076]);
determining any one of the corresponding time point biosignal and the corrected biosignal as input data (paragraphs [0075]-[0076]); and
deriving biometric data of the specific time point using the input data (paragraphs [0075]-[0077], [0095]-[0099]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 6, and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ko as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 20190159734 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Budiman”).
Regarding claim 2, Ko does not explicitly teach wherein the generating of the corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the preset condition is satisfied comprises:
acquiring an average value for a plurality of biosignals over a predetermined period of time;
generating an ideal signal by applying the average value to the corresponding time point biosignal;
generating a weight; and
generating the corrected biosignal by applying the weight to the corresponding time point biosignal and the ideal signal.
However, Budiman teaches wherein the generating of the corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the preset condition is satisfied comprises:
acquiring an average value for a plurality of biosignals over a predetermined period of time (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]);
generating an ideal signal by applying the average value to the corresponding time point biosignal (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]);
generating a weight (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]); and
generating the corrected biosignal by applying the weight to the corresponding time point biosignal and the ideal signal (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ko, weight and filter the signal, as taught by Budiman, because doing so provides a better signal for data analysis.
Regarding claim 6, Ko, in view of Budiman, teaches wherein the generating of the weight comprises generating a first weight applied to the corresponding time point biosignal and a second weight applied to the ideal signal (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]; as taught by Budiman),
the first weight and the second weight have a negative correlation (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]; as taught by Budiman), and
the generating of the corrected biosignal comprises generating the corrected biosignal by adding a first weighted signal obtained by applying the first weight to the corresponding time point biosignal and a second weighted signal obtained by applying the second weight to the ideal signal (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]; as taught by Budiman).
Regarding claim 7, Ko, in view of Budiman teaches wherein the first weight and the second weight have values that vary between 0 (zero) and 1 (paragraphs [0056]-[0057], [0074]; as taught by Budiman).
Regarding claim 8, Ko does not explicitly teach wherein the generating of the corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition comprises determining whether or not the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition according to whether or not the corresponding time point of the corresponding time point biosignal has exceeded an end of a preset period of time.
However, Budiman teaches wherein the generating of the corrected biosignal from the corresponding time point biosignal when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition comprises determining whether or not the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition according to whether or not the corresponding time point of the corresponding time point biosignal has exceeded an end of a preset period of time (claim 1; paragraphs [0067]-[0068], [0078]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ko, to have a threshold timepoint as taught by Budiman, because doing so ensures a reliable signal is used.
Regarding claim 9, Ko does not explicitly wherein the determining of any one of the corresponding time point biosignal and the corrected biosignal as the input data comprises,
when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition and the corrected biosignal is greater than or equal to the corresponding time point biosignal, determining the corrected biosignal as the input data, and
when the corresponding time point biosignal does not satisfy the preset condition or the corrected biosignal is smaller than the corresponding time point biosignal, determining the corresponding time point biosignal as the input data.
Budiman teaches wherein the determining of any one of the corresponding time point biosignal and the corrected biosignal as the input data comprises,
when the corresponding time point biosignal satisfies the preset condition and the corrected biosignal is greater than or equal to the corresponding time point biosignal, determining the corrected biosignal as the input data (claim 1; paragraphs [0067]-[0068], [0078]), and
when the corresponding time point biosignal does not satisfy the preset condition or the corrected biosignal is smaller than the corresponding time point biosignal, determining the corresponding time point biosignal as the input data (claim 1; paragraphs [0067]-[0068], [0078]). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Ko, to have a threshold for determining the biosignal to use, as taught by Budiman, because doing so ensures a reliable signal is used.
Conclusion
The claims are rejected under 35 USC 101, but claim 3 and claims dependent thereof, provide subject matter not found in the prior art search.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABID A MUSTANSIR whose telephone number is (408)918-7647. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 am to 6 pm Pacific Time.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jason Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABID A MUSTANSIR/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights