DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 19, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-16 and 18-21 are pending in the application.
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
in claim 21, lines 2-3: “the plurality of first electrodes or the plurality of second electrodes or a combination thereof” should read “the plurality of first electrodes, the plurality of second electrodes, or a combination thereof”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 6-8, 13-16, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0165626 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Irina, and in view of Rogers et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0145352), hereinafter Rogers, and in view of Reber et al. (US Patent 5,961,451 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Reber.
Regarding Claim 1, Irina teaches devices, methods, and kits for measuring or otherwise evaluating the concentration of an analyte in a bodily fluid, including sweat (see abstract and Fig. 7). Irina teaches a portable glucose monitoring system (¶[0044] and ¶[0097] the meter 700 and the test strip 100 for measuring the concentration of glucose in sweat, ¶[0114] the small test strips are easily transportable; Figs. 1 and 7), the system comprising:
a test strip (¶[0044] and ¶[0097] the test strip 100; Fig. 1) comprising a first portion (¶[0044] the base 106 of the test strip 100; Fig. 1) and a second portion extending distally from the first portion (¶[0044] the test region 108 of the test strip 100, the membrane 104 generally located within the test region 108; Fig. 1);
wherein the second portion comprises:
an electrochemical transducer comprising glucose oxidase (¶[0045] the membrane 104 of the test strip may comprise a colorimetric membrane, ¶[0020] and ¶[0075] the colorimetric membrane may comprise glucose oxidase; Fig. 1; the specification of the present application defines that an electrochemical transducer may be glucose oxidase, see ¶[0063]); and
a test strip reading device configured to receive the first portion of the test strip (¶[0097] the meter 700, ¶[0099] and ¶[0109] the test strip may be inserted into the meter 700; Figs. 7-8) and to keep the second portion of the test strip accessible to a contact by a skin of a finger of a user (¶[0109] the measurement device may measure the sweat glucose concentration 808 while the test strip is in contact with the subject’s skin, ¶[0044] and ¶[0097] the user’s skin contacts the membrane 104 of the test strip 100 so as to deliver the sweat sample; Figs. 1 and 7-8),
wherein the second portion of the test strip is configured to receive a sweat sample from the skin of the user by the contact of the skin of the finger of the user to a surface of the second portion positioned over the glucose oxidase (¶[0015], ¶[0044], and ¶[0097] the user’s skin contacts the membrane 104 of the test strip 100 so as to deliver the sweat sample, ¶[0109] the meter may directly interrogate the membrane of the test strip by measuring chemical, electrical, or optical signals; Figs. 1 and 7-8), and
wherein the test strip is configured to detect glucose in the sweat sample (¶[0110] during the interrogation 808, the sweat glucose concentration may be obtained, and if so desired, may then be used to derive a blood glucose concentration; Fig. 8).
Irina teaches that electrochemical detection may be utilized instead of colorimetric detection (see ¶[0013], ¶[0015], ¶[0044], ¶[0048], and ¶[0109]), but does not teach the specifics of such electrochemical detection, including that the second portion comprises: a plurality of first electrodes and a plurality of second electrodes that are alternately arranged; a counter-interference layer.
Rogers teaches a versatile sensing platform for sensing and analysis of biofluids, particularly of sweat (see abstract), in which the analyte may comprise glucose sensed via glucose oxidase (see ¶[0017], ¶[0022], ¶[0159], ¶[0287], ¶[0292], and ¶[0311]), which may be utilized with a mediator (see ¶[0022], ¶[0159], and ¶[0161]), in which the glucose sensor may comprise interdigitated electrodes (see ¶[0106], ¶[0159], ¶[0374], and ¶[0379]; Figs. 4 and 50). Here, the specification of the present application details that counter-interference layer may comprise a mediator (see specification ¶[0014]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the electrochemical glucose sweat sensing implement of Rogers as the electrochemical glucose sensing in Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results; and/or (2) Irina teaches that electrochemical glucose sweat sensing may be utilized and Rogers teaches one such implement of glucose sweat sensing; and/or (3) interdigitated electrodes are inexpensive, easy to fabricate, and provide high sensitivity (see for example Mazlan et al., “Interdigitated electrodes as impedance and capacitance biosensors: A Review”, 3rd Electronic and Green Materials International Conference 2017, AIP Publishing, September 26, 2017, abstract); and/or (4) the mediator would help shuttle electrodes to the contact pad or current collector, so as to help facilitate the receiving of the measurement signal (see Rogers ¶[0022]).
The modified Irina teaches that the test strip may be inserted into the meter (see ¶[0097] the meter 700, ¶[0099] and ¶[0109] the test strip may be inserted into the meter 700; Figs. 7-8); however, the modified Irina does not specifically teach that the test strip reading device comprising a slot.
Reber teaches a noninvasive apparatus including a grasping region 44 and an extraction device 10 to noninvasively extract a sample from a hand of an end user at the grasping region 44 (see abstract and col. 5, ln. 21-33; Fig. 2), in which the housing 42 includes a slot 60 through which the biosensor 16 is inserted and removed (see col. 5, ln. 60-65; Fig. 2), and while the biosensor 16 is inserted into the slot 60 and retained through the retaining member 22 acting on the peripheral portion 70 (i.e., the first portion), the interior portion 68 (i.e., the second portion) is configured for contact with the user for a noninvasive test or diagnostic, over the transducer 14 (see col. 5, ln. 66 – col. 6, ln. 20; Fig. 2).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the test strip inserting implement of Reber as the inserting implement in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results; and/or (2) the modified Irina teaches that the test strips may be inserted and Reber teaches one such implement of inserting the test strips; and/or (3) the implement of Reber provides a significant improvement in extracting the sample while the end user is holding the apparatus (see col. 9, ln. 14-18).
Regarding Claim 6, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Irina further teaches the test strip reading device further comprises a pressure switch positioned below the slot (¶[0097] the meter 700 may comprise a pressure sensor that informs the user whether sufficient pressure has been applied to obtain an adequate quantity of sweat). Here, the specification of the present application defines that a pressure switch “can record an amount of pressure being applied to the test strip throughout a reading, thereby providing feedback to the user about the amount of pressure being applied” (see specification ¶[0189]), which is read upon by the pressure sensor of the present claim.
Regarding Claim 7, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 6 as stated above. The modified Irina further teaches the pressure switch is configured to be below the second portion of the test strip when the test strip is placed into the slot (see Irina ¶[0097], the meter 700 may comprise a pressure sensor that informs the user whether sufficient pressure has been applied to obtain an adequate quantity of sweat, ¶[0015], ¶[0044], and ¶[0097] the user’s skin contacts the membrane 104 of the test strip 100 so as to deliver the sweat sample, ¶[0044] the membrane 104 generally located within the test region 108 (i.e., the second portion), Fig. 1; see Reber col. 5, ln. 66 – col. 6, ln. 20, the biosensor 16 is inserted into the slot 60 and retained through the retaining member 22 acting on the peripheral portion 70 (i.e., the first portion), the interior portion 68 (i.e., the second portion) is configured for contact with the user for a noninvasive test or diagnostic, over the transducer 14, Fig. 2). Here, the modified Irina teaches that the test strip is retained through a slot inserted into the meter about the optical window 702 and/or other sensing means (i.e., in the electrochemical embodiment), with the pressure sensor used to determine a sufficient quantity of sweat, in which the membrane 104 (i.e., the second portion) is placed on top window 702 and pushed down. Therefore, the pressure sensor would necessarily be positioned below the second portion of the test strip (i.e., the membrane 104 generally within the test region 108), as otherwise the pressure sensor would not be capable to determine whether sufficient pressure has been applied to obtain an adequate quantity of sweat.
Regarding Claim 8, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 6 as stated above. Irina further teaches the pressure switch is configured to determine at least one of a presence or a pressure of the contact by the skin of the user (¶[0097] the meter 700 may comprise a pressure sensor that informs the user whether sufficient pressure has been applied to obtain an adequate quantity of sweat).
Regarding Claim 13, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Irina further teaches that the system further comprises a computer processor operably coupled to the test strip reading device and configured to determine a glucose concentration in the sample (¶[0102]-[0104] the processor for executing the computer-executable code, such as to convert the sweat glucose concentration value to a blood glucose concentration value, ¶[0110] during the interrogation 808, the sweat glucose concentration may be obtained, and if so desired, may then be used to derive a blood glucose concentration; Fig. 8).
Regarding Claim 14, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Irina further teaches that the system further comprises a wireless communication module, wherein the wireless communication module is configured to communicate with a computing device, wherein the computing device comprises a mobile phone, a watch, a wearable device, a laptop computer, or any combination thereof (¶[0104] the glucose measurement devices may include a link (wireless, cable, or the like) to a computer, such as a mobile device).
Regarding Claim 15, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Irina further teaches that the system further comprises a sensor configured to measure one or more of a signal of the user, wherein the signal comprises temperature, a moisture level, a sweat gland density, a sweat rate, a transdermal water loss rate, a pressure, a hydration level, a heart rate, or a blood oxygen level (¶[0097] the meter 700 may comprise a pressure sensor that informs the user whether sufficient pressure has been applied to obtain an adequate quantity of sweat, ¶[0091] time lapsed imaging may also be utilized, such as to estimate sweat rate).
Regarding Claim 16, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Irina further teaches the test strip reading device is calibrated by a concentration of glucose in a blood sample of the user (¶[0102] the meter may convert the sweat glucose concentration value to a blood glucose concentration value, such as via an algorithm that was calibrated with a calibration algorithm which may be used to relate measured values of detected glucose to blood glucose values measured with blood sticks).
Regarding Claim 18, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. The modified Irina does not specifically teach that the test strip further comprises a second layer, wherein the second layer comprises one or more of alginate, chitosan, acrylate, methacrylate, saccharides, or polyethyleneimine (PEI).
Rogers further teaches that the electrochemical sensors for lactate and glucose with the anode and cathode may further have protective biocompatible polymeric membranes of chitosan and polyvinyl chloride coated over the electrode (i.e., the anode portions) for obviating leaching and for increasing the detection range (see ¶[0159]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the protective coatings of chitosan and polyvinyl chloride of Rogers with the electrochemical glucose sensor in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the protective coatings would obviate leaching and increase the detection range (see Rogers ¶[0159]).
Regarding Claim 19, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 18 as stated above. The modified Irina further teaches the test strip further comprises a third layer, wherein the third layer comprises one or more of perfluorosulfonic acid polymer, polychlorotrifluoroethylene, polyfluoroalkanes, fluorine rubber, chitosan, polyethyleneimine, polyurethane, poly(p-phenylenediamine), polystyrene sulfonate, polyvinyl sulfate, polyvinyl alcohol, or polyvinyl chloride (see Rogers ¶[0159], the protective coating of chitosan and polyvinyl chloride).
Regarding Claim 20, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. The modified Irina further teaches a method of determining a blood glucose concentration of the user (see Irina ¶[0110], during the interrogation 808, the sweat glucose concentration may be obtained, and if so desired, may then be used to derive a blood glucose concentration; Fig. 8), the method comprising:
a) providing the portable glucose monitoring system of claim 1 (see above claim 1 mapping);
b) contacting a portion of the skin of the user to the second portion of the test strip (see Irina ¶[0015], ¶[0044], and ¶[0097], the user’s skin contacts the membrane 104 of the test strip 100 so as to deliver the sweat sample, ¶[0109] the meter may directly interrogate the membrane of the test strip by measuring chemical, electrical, or optical signals; Figs. 1 and 7-8);
c) detecting an electrochemical signal using the plurality of first and second electrodes (see Irina ¶[0109] the meter may directly interrogate the membrane of the test strip by measuring chemical, electrical, or optical signals, Figs. 1 and 7-8; see Rogers ¶[0106], ¶[0159], ¶[0374], and ¶[0379], the glucose sensor may comprise interdigitated electrodes, Figs. 4 and 50); and
d) determining the blood glucose concentration of the user with the test strip reading device based at least on the electrochemical signal (see Irina ¶[0109], the meter may directly interrogate the membrane of the test strip by measuring chemical, electrical, or optical signals, ¶[0110] during the interrogation 808, the sweat glucose concentration may be obtained, and if so desired, may then be used to derive a blood glucose concentration; Fig. 8).
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina in view of Rogers and Reber as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Richter et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0358035 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Richter.
Regarding Claim 2, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. The modified Irina does not specifically teach that the test strip reading device further comprises a lid configured to cover the second portion of the test strip when the test strip is placed into the slot.
Richter teaches an apparatus for eliciting a blood sample from a user, comprising a housing 707 and an apparatus (i.e., the aperture cover 702) movable between first and second positions (see abstract and Figs. 25-27), in which test disc members 802 (see ¶[0141]) or test strips (see ¶[0128]) are utilized with an enzyme to detect glucose concentration (see ¶[0059], ¶[0065], and ¶[0135]), such that the aperture cover 702 seals the aperture 705 in the first position, and the aperture 705 is opened in the second position (see ¶[0134]-[0136]; Figs. 26-27), so that water vapor in the air cannot adversely affect the enzyme used to measure the blood glucose levels when the device 700 is not in use (see ¶[0135]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the cover (i.e., the lid) of Richter with the electrochemical glucose sensing meter in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) sealing the aperture (i.e., the slot) would prevent water vapor in the air from adversely affecting the enzyme (i.e., the glucose oxidase) used to measure the blood glucose levels (see Richter ¶[0135]).
Regarding Claim 3, Irina in view of Rogers, Reber, and Richter teaches the device of claim 2 as stated above. The modified Irina further teaches the lid is movable to uncover the second portion of the test strip when the test strip is placed into the slot (see Richter ¶[0134]-[0136] the second position when the aperture cover 702 to unseal the aperture 705; Fig. 27).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina in view of Rogers and Reber as applied to claim 6 above, and in view of Aysin (US Patent Application Publication 2018/0321178 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Aysin.
Regarding Claim 9, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 6 as stated above. Irina teaches the usage of a pressure sensor (see ¶[0097]); however, the modified Irina does not teach any specific pressure sensor.
Aysin teaches a test meter and method for detecting the presence and/or concentration of an analyte in a liquid biological sample received on a test strip (see abstract and Figs. 1-2), in which a pressure sensor 76 is utilized to sense a pressure exerted by the inserted strip 30 relative to the meter housing 12 (see abstract and ¶[0032]; Fig. 5), in which the pressure sensor may comprise square force-sensitive resistors (FRS), robbon soft pots, or capacitive touch pads (see ¶[0054]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a pressure sensor (i.e., the capacitive touch pads) of Aysin as the pressure sensor in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the modified Irina requires a pressure sensor and Aysin teaches one such pressure sensor.
Regarding Claim 10, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 6 as stated above. The modified Irina does not specifically teach that the system further comprises a protective barrier positioned between the pressure switch and the test strip.
Aysin teaches a test meter and method for detecting the presence and/or concentration of an analyte in a liquid biological sample received on a test strip (see abstract and Figs. 1-2), in which a pressure sensor 76 is utilized to sense a pressure exerted by the inserted strip 30 relative to the meter housing 12 (see abstract and ¶[0032]; Fig. 5), in which the pressure may not be directly contacted by the strip, rather, the meter may comprise a moveable wall 104 that the sensor detects as an indication of pressure, which eliminates the repeated contact of test strips directly with the pressure sensor, which over time may damage the sensor (see ¶[0042]; Fig. 8).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the movable wall of Aysin with the pressure sensor in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) this would prevent repeated contacts between the test strips and the pressure sensor, which over time may damage the sensor (see Aysin ¶[0042]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina in view of Rogers and Reber as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Cole et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0256024 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Cole.
Regarding Claim 12, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. The modified Irina does not specifically teach that the test strip reading device comprises a haptic feedback module configured to provide a vibrational feedback when the user activates or deactivates the test strip reading device.
Cole teaches a modular analyte monitoring device comprising a base module and an attachment module (see abstract and Fig. 1A), in which glucose may be monitored, and the sample types may include sweat (see ¶[0031]), and that the attachment module 102 may include a haptic feedback module 1330 for activating a motor or mechanical actuator to provide a vibrational effect to the analyte processing device for a wide-range of meter-related activities (i.e., activating/deactivating the device), readings, alerts, alarms, etc. (see ¶[0250] and Fig. 13).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the haptic feedback module 1330 of Cole with the electrochemical glucose sensing meter in the modified Irina, for various events, including the activation/deactivation of the device, because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the haptic feedback when the device is activated/deactivated would give the user confirmation that the device is ready for glucose detection and/or ready to be stored/put away in a powered down (i.e., to save power) state.
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina in view of Rogers and Reber as applied to claim 1 above, and in view of Wang et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2019/0117083 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Wang.
Regarding Claim 21, Irina in view of Rogers and Reber teaches the device of claim 1 as stated above. Rogers contemplates the usage of dehydrogenase (see ¶[0022]); however, the modified Irina does not specifically teach that the second portion further comprises glucose dehydrogenase (GDH) disposed upon the plurality of first electrodes or the plurality of second electrodes or a combination thereof.
Wang teaches methods, systems, and devices for a wearable, real-time, multimodal sensing of electrochemical parameters (see abstract and Fig. 9), in which the device may monitor glucose from the user’s perspiration (see ¶[0009] and ¶[0067]), which may be detected via a reagent layer on electrodes for the target analyte, such as via glucose oxidase and/or hydrogenase for glucose detection (see¶[0085] and ¶[0088]; Fig. 9).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the glucose hydrogenase of Wang alongside and/or in place of the glucose oxidase in the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results; and/or (2) it is a simple substitution of one known element for another to yield predictable results; and/or (3) such a combination involving glucose hydrogenase would have been utilized among the combination to meet the target response characteristics (see Wang ¶[0088]).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irina in view of Rogers, Reber, and Richter as applied to claim 2 above, and in view of Parsons (WIPO Publication WO 96/30752 A1 – cited in prior action), hereinafter Parsons.
Regarding Claim 4, Irina in view of Rogers, Reber, and Richter teaches the device of claim 2 as stated above. The modified Irina does not specifically teach that the test strip reading device further comprises a lid sensor configured to detect an open state or a closed state of the lid.
Parsons teaches an apparatus for monitoring glucose levels with a case 10 and a lid 22 adapted to cover and uncover the base of the case 10 (see abstract and pg. 4 ln. 4-17; Figs. 1-2), in which the reed switches 26/36 on the monitor case and the magnets 28/38 placed on the lid control the ON and OFF monitor status (see pg. 4 ln. 4-17; Figs. 1-2) so that the monitor is automatically activated when the lid is opened and shut off when the lid is closed (see pg. 2 ln. 26-29).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the ON/OFF switches and magnets of Parsons with the cover of the modified Irina because (1) it is the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield predictable results and/or (2) the monitor is automatically activated when the lid is opened and shut off when the lid is closed (see Parsons pg. 2 ln. 26-29), ensuring a smooth user operating experience and utilizing less power than if the device were left on.
Regarding Claim 5, Irina in view of Rogers, Reber, Richter, and Parsons teaches the device of claim 4 as stated above. The modified Irina further teaches the lid sensor comprises a pressure sensor, a magnetic sensor, a positional sensor, a light sensor, an electrical sensor, or any combination thereof (see Parsons pg. 4 ln. 4-17, the reed switches 26/36 on the monitor case and the magnets 28/38 placed on the lid control the ON and OFF monitor status; Figs. 1-2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, objections to the specification
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 5, filed February 19, 2026, with respect to the objection to the specification have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, objections to the specification
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 5, filed February 19, 2026, with respect to the objections of claims 6 and 10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, prior art
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 5-7, filed February 19, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-10, 12-16, and 18-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The declaration/affidavit under 37 CFR 1.130(A) filed February 19, 2026 is sufficient to overcome the rejection of claim 1 based upon Wang et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2025/0064360). Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 7-16, filed February 19, 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-10, 12-16, and 18-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection are made in view of Rogers et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0145352).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 11 remains allowable for the reasons of record as stated in the Final Office Action mailed on September 09, 2025.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hayashida et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2024/0027483) teaches a component measurement system including an elongated test strip (see abstract and Figs. 1A-1C), in which the housing 44 of the meter includes a discharge mechanism 54 for ejecting the test strip 12 by pushing the test strip 12 with the pressing portion 58a (see ¶[0047]-[0049]; Fig. 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D. MORONESO whose telephone number is (571)272-8055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30AM - 6:00 PM, MST.
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, JENNIFER M. ROBERTSON can be reached at (571)272-5001. 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.
/J.D.M./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791