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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I (claims 1-14) and Species 1 (claims 1-8) in the reply filed on 2/4/26 is acknowledged.
The traversal is on the grounds that the restriction requirement between Group I and Group II is improper because independent claim 1 (Group I) recites a “shield layer” and independent claims 9 (Group I) and 15 (Group II) have been amended to recite the same “shield layer,” and are thereby not distinct from each other because they both recite the same shielding structure.
Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because the apparatus claimed in Group I (claims 1-14) can be used to practice another and materially different process as claimed in Group II (claims 15-20), such as a process that does not measure skin temperature using the thermistor while the inductor provides electrical isolation between microwave signals and temperature sensing signals.
Furthermore, the traversal is on the grounds that the election of species requirement between Species 1 (corresponding to claims 1-8) and Species 2 (corresponding to claims 9-14) of Group I is improper because amended independent claim 1 (Species 1) newly recites a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture, and independent claim 9 (Species 2) also recites a radiometer, such that both independent claims 1 and 9 recite a thermistor and a radiometer, which are disclosed to be used together (integrated), and are thereby not distinct from each other.
However, applicant’s arguments are not persuasive because Species 1 is drawn to a sensor assembly comprising a coaxial connector and adhesive, whereas Species 2 is drawn to a system using a switch module and determining a temperature difference using a radiometer for temperature measurement. Therefore, the characteristics of a sensor assembly comprising a coaxial connector and adhesive and a system using a switch module and determining a temperature difference using a radiometer for temperature measurement are mutually exclusive and distinct characteristics between Species 1 and 2.
Claims 9-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the first conductive layer of the sensor assembly including a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture configured to receive microwave signals from tissue, as recited in lines 5-7 of claim 1, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim (the original disclosure (e.g., paragraph 18 of the published application) discloses that the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and the antenna aperture are a part of the sensor assembly (the radiometer is not included in the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and the radiometer does not comprise the antenna aperture)). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, there is lack of antecedent basis in the specification for the first conductive layer of the sensor assembly including a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture configured to receive microwave signals from tissue, as recited in lines 5-7. The specification (e.g., paragraph 18 of the published application) discloses that the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and the antenna aperture are a part of the sensor assembly (the radiometer is not included in the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and the radiometer does not comprise the antenna aperture). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Referring to claim 1, the claim contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 1 has been amended to state that the first conductive layer of the sensor assembly includes a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture configure to receive microwave signals from tissue (lines 5-7). However, the specification (e.g., paragraph 18 of the published application) and drawings (e.g., figures 8A 8B, 8C) disclose that the radiometer is not included in the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and that the radiometer does not comprise the antenna aperture because the conductive layer of the sensor assembly and the antenna aperture are a part of the sensor assembly (100) (as shown in figures 1A-7).
Claims 2-8 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0092817 to Allison et al in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0206976 to Thompson et al [hereinafter Thompson] and U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0219846 to Allison.
Referring to claim 1, Allison et al disclose (figures 2, 4; paragraphs 17, 18, 20, 22, 26-29, 31, 32) a sensor assembly for non-invasive temperature measurement comprising:
a circuit board (paragraph 29) having a first surface and a second surface opposite the first surface (a board), the circuit board including a dielectric layer (28) (paragraph 20), a first conductive layer disposed on the first surface (electrically conductive features on the board) (paragraph 18), and a second conductive layer disposed on the second surface (electrically conductive features on the other side of the board) (paragraph 18), wherein the first conductive layer includes an antenna aperture (13) configured to receive microwave signals from tissue (paragraphs 17, 18);
an inductor (68) electrically connected to the antenna aperture (figure 4; paragraph 32);
a thermistor (45) electrically connected to the inductor (68) and configured to measure skin temperature (paragraphs 17, 18, 28);
a capacitor (72) electrically connected between the thermistor (45) and a ground connection (74) (figure 4; paragraph 32);
a coaxial connector (50) having a center conductor and an outer conductor (by definition a coaxial conductor), wherein the center conductor is electrically connected to the antenna aperture (figure 4) and the outer conductor is electrically connected to the ground connection (74) (figure 4; paragraphs 27, 31);
a shield layer (36) positioned above the first surface of the circuit board and configured to reduce electromagnetic interference (metal) (figure 2; paragraph 22); and
an adhesive layer (38) positioned on the second surface of the circuit board and configured to adhere the sensor assembly to skin (figure 2; paragraph 26).
Allison et al do not disclose the circuit board being a flexible circuit board; and a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture.
However, Thompson discloses a sensor assembly for non-invasive temperature measurement (figure 13; paragraphs 2, 50, 56, 66, 116) that comprises a flexible circuit board in order to provide flexibility and comfort when adhered to a living subject’s body.
Furthermore, Allison discloses a sensor assembly for non-invasive temperature measurement (figure 6; paragraphs 33, 38-40) comprising a radiometer with an antenna aperture that is configured to receive microwave signals from a tissue in order to measure a temperature of the tissue.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a flexible circuit board as the circuit board of Allison et al, as suggested by Thompson, in order to provide flexibility and comfort when adhered to a living subject’s body.
Also, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide Allison et al with a radiometer comprising the antenna aperture, as suggested by Allison, in order to receive microwave signals from a tissue in order to measure a temperature of the tissue.
Referring to claim 2, Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison disclose an assembly having all of the limitations of claim 2, as stated above with respect to claim 1, wherein Allison et al disclose that the circuit board has a thickness (by being a board), but do not explicitly disclose that the circuit board has a thickness of approximately 0.006 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the circuit board of Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison have a thickness of approximately 0.006 inches in order to provide a desired size based on the dimensions of a particular sensor assembly to determine a proper temperature measurement; and since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim disclosed in the prior art, discovering the “optimum range” (approximately [more or less] 0.006 inches) involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1995).
Referring to claim 3, Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison disclose an assembly having all of the limitations of claim 3, as stated above with respect to claim 1, wherein Allison et al disclose that the shield layer (36) comprises a metal having a thickness (figure 2; paragraph 22), but do not explicitly disclose that the metal is aluminum foil having a thickness of approximately 0.002 inches.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison by making the metal of the shield layer of Allison et al of aluminum foil and have the thickness of the shield layer be approximately 0.002 inches in order to provide a desired protection depending on a particular interference; and since the particular type of material used to make the shield layer of Allison et al is considered to be the use of a “preferred” or “optimum” material out of a plurality of well-known materials that a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been able to provide based on the intended use of applicant’s apparatus, i.e., suitability for the intended use of applicant’s apparatus (see In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), where the courts held that a selection of a material on the basis of suitability for intended use of an apparatus would be entirely obvious); and since it has been held that, where the general conditions of a claim disclosed in the prior art, discovering the “optimum range” (approximately [more or less] 0.002 inches) involves only routine skill in the art. See In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (CCPA 1995).
Referring to claim 4, Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison disclose an assembly having all of the limitations of claim 4, as stated above with respect to claim 3, wherein Allison et al disclose (figure 2) that the shield layer (36) is oriented at an angle relative to the circuit board such that vertices of the shield layer (36) extend from sides of the antenna aperture (13) (which is considered to provide maximum shielding area in directions of highest antenna sensitivity to electromagnetic interference based on the angular structure).
Referring to claim 5, Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison disclose an assembly having all of the limitations of claim 5, as stated above with respect to claim 1, wherein Allison et al disclose (paragraph 20) that there is a foam spacer (the dielectric cavity 28) comprising a close-cell material positioned between the shield layer (36) and the circuit board, but do not explicitly disclose that the closed cell material is polyethylene foam.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison by making that the closed cell material of Allison et al a polyethylene foam in order to provide a desired amount of protection; and since the particular type of material used to make the close-cell material of Allison et al is considered to be the use of a “preferred” or “optimum” material out of a plurality of well-known materials that a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been able to provide based on the intended use of applicant’s apparatus, i.e., suitability for the intended use of applicant’s apparatus (see In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960), where the courts held that a selection of a material on the basis of suitability for intended use of an apparatus would be entirely obvious).
Referring to claim 8, Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison disclose an assembly having all of the limitations of claim 8, as stated above with respect to claim 1, wherein Allison et al disclose (paragraph 27) that the coaxial connector swivels; but do not explicitly disclose that the coaxial connector comprises a push-on connector configured to rotate without disconnecting.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the assembly of Allison et al in view of Thompson and Allison by making the coaxial connector of Allison et al such that it comprises a push-on connector configured to rotate without disconnecting in order to swivel the coaxial connector, as suggested by Allison et al, without disconnecting the coaxial connector; and since the use of the particular type of coaxial connector claimed by the applicant is considered to be nothing more than a choice of engineering skill, choice, or design, because the use of the particular coaxial connector claimed by the applicant is considered to be the use of numerous and known alternate types of coaxial connectors that a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been able to provide using routine experimentation in order to provide a coaxial connector as already suggested by Allison et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 are 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, and amended to overcome the objection and the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 1st paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art of record does not disclose or suggest the following in combination with the remaining limitations of the claims:
A sensor assembly for non-invasive temperature measurement, wherein the inductor has a self-resonant frequency, and wherein a parasitic capacitance of the inductor at the self-resonant frequency is configured to provide impedance matching for the antenna aperture (claim 6); and wherein the second conductive layer includes an aperture positioned beneath the center conductor of the coaxial connector, wherein the aperture is sized to optimize capacitance between the center conductor and the second conductive layer for impedance matching (claim 7).
Conclusion
The references made of record and not relied upon by the examiner are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure by disclosing a non-invasive temperature sensor assembly, but do not disclose the allowable subject matter stated above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIRELLYS JAGAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2247. The examiner can normally be reached Tuesday-Friday 8-6.
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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/MIRELLYS JAGAN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2855
6/12/26
Prosecution Insights