The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
This is in response to amended claims filed on 6/10/25, in which Claim 1 is presented for examination.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the patient...” in line 11. Please change to "a patient…” to avoid antecedent basis issues.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claim 1 is generally broader than the Claims 1-20 in previous patent US 9,918,884 and Claims 1-15 in US 10,905,600 and Claims 1-19 in US 12,329,617 B2. Broader claims in a later application constitute obvious double patenting of narrow claims in an issued patent. See In re Van Ornum and Stang, 214, USPQ 761, 766, and 767 (CCPA) (the court sustained an obvious double patenting rejection of generic claims in a continuation application over narrower species claims in an issued patent); In re Vogel, 164 USPQ 619, 622, and 623 (CCPA 1970) (generic application claim specifying "meat" is obvious double patenting of narrow patent claim specifying "pork").
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nissim et al. (Nissim; US 5,760,694) in view of Lewis et al. (Lewis; US 2012/0268278).
Regarding Claim 1, Nissim discloses a patient monitoring system comprising a sensor system (Col 1 Lines 26-34), the sensor system comprising: a voiding sensor (124 of Fig 2) comprising an electrical circuit (Fig 3) configured to be transitioned from a first impedance state to a second impedance state in response to a voiding event in an absorbent region of an absorbent article (Col 3 Lines 52-62), wherein the electrical circuit is either open or closed in the first impedance state and the other of open or closed in the second impedance state (Col 3 Lines 1-4, 52-62); logic configured to: determine, based on whether the impedance state of the electrical circuit is open or closed, that the voiding event has occurred (Col 4 Lines 43-67), and generate, based at least in part on the occurrence of the voiding event, patient status data of the patient (Col 3 Lines 11-32); and a communication module (344 of Fig 3) configured to wirelessly transmit, via a relay module (RT of 344 of Fig 3, Col 4 Lines 26-43), the patient status data to a remote monitoring device that is distinct from the relay module (Col 3 Lines 33-38), but doesn’t specify a processor.
In the same field of endeavor, Lewis discloses a system for monitoring incontinence in subjects comprising display means; input means operable by a user; transmitters, each transmitter being associated with one or more subjects being monitored; the one or more transmitters being configured to transmit signals containing continence-related data for the one or more subjects.
Lewis teaches a patient monitoring system comprising a sensor system, the sensor system comprising: a voiding sensor (200 of Fig 3) comprising an electrical circuit configured to be transitioned from a first impedance state to a second impedance state in response to a voiding event in an absorbent region of an absorbent article ([0072]), one or more processors ([0059] processor contained in the transmitter allocated to each subject) configured to: determine, based on whether the impedance state of the electrical circuit, that the voiding event has occurred ([0072]), and generate, based at least in part on the occurrence of the voiding event, patient status data of the patient ([0060]); and a communication module ([0059] wireless transmitter/receiver) configured to wirelessly transmit, via a relay module (including repeaters R1, R2, receiver 112 and processor 102 of Fig 1), the patient status data to a remote monitoring device (including 108 of Fig 1) that is distinct from the relay module ([0055], [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Nissim with Lewis using a processor in order to provide an efficient, cost effective, compatible system for improved monitoring and managing of incontinence, as suggested by Lewis ([0006]-[0007]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Jeutter et al. (Jeutter; 2002/0070868) discloses a monitoring method for signaling a predetermined status in an article having a monitored portion. The monitoring system includes an interrogator which is located in an operative proximity to the article, and is configured to provide input energy with a predetermined input frequency. A status signaling device is located at the monitored portion of the article. The status signaling device includes a sensor which can indicate a change of state that occurs when the monitored portion of the article changes from a first condition to a different, second condition.
b. Charna et al. (Charna; US 2015/0080819) discloses a diaper structure, a communication chip and a metal antenna attached to the outer surface of the diaper and connected with each other to form an RFID tag. Change in the permittivity of an anti-leak layer causes a change in the impedance value of the metal antenna and a change in the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave signal transmitted by the RFID tag enabling rapid detection of a wet condition of the diaper.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S RUSHING whose telephone number is (571)270-5876. The examiner can normally be reached on 10-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARK S RUSHING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights