Looking for prior art for US Patent No. 7,635,594 which predates May, 2005

Publication number US7635594 B2

Publication date - Dec 22, 2009

Filing date - Mar 24, 2006

Priority date - May 9, 2005

Claim 1 of US Patent No. 7,635,594:

  1. A two-way communication system for monitoring an analyte in a bodily fluid from a subject, comprising:

    • an external device configured to transmit a protocol to a reader assembly;
    • a fluidic device configured to be inserted into the reader assembly, said fluidic device comprising:
    • a sample collection unit configured for collecting a sample of bodily fluid that contains an analyte
    • an assay assembly containing reactants that react with said sample of bodily fluid based on the protocol transmitted from said external device to yield a detectable signal indicative of the concentration of said analyte present in said bodily fluid; and
    • an identifier that is configured to provide the identity of said fluidic device and is also configured to trigger the transmission of said protocol;
  • What you are looking for is called a Prior Art Request on Ask Patents. You are more likely to get help from the community if you simplify, shorten, and reformat your request to be consistent with this answer: meta.patents.stackexchange.com/a/146/1767 Also, removing intimation of inequitable conduct by inventor as this is a statement not a question and the topic of inequitable conduct is generally not within the scope of the site. Thanks for participating in Ask Patents. Specific prior art which has already been considered by examiner can be included as an answer to your own question Jun 7, 2013 at 17:30
  • Micah I appreciate you work for Stanford which is associated with, and holds interest in, Theranos and this patent. "Editors" should not be editing posts that impact their employer.
    – user3359
    Jun 7, 2013 at 19:26
  • @user3359 - I have no interest in that company and am not really familiar with the technology. One other great things about Ask Patents is its somewhat dispassionate tone. Questions posed in a way they can be answered and relatively straightforward answers. Leaving out personalities and innuendo, chit chat and pointless arguments as much as possible significantly is a strength of the site. I'm generally reluctant to hack up someone's question but I think Micah's edits improved the site as an information source with an inviting and professional tone. Sorry for the chit chat.
    – George White
    Jun 7, 2013 at 21:16

3 Answers 3


Trying to find something closer than anything considered by the examiner on an application with a large number of cited documents and a very long prosecution history is a huge undertaking.

Also, one of the documents listed on an IDS is a US2005/0100937 (item 4 below) is listed in google patents as a counterpart to WO 2005/025413. So it was cited by the applicants.( mooting the bulk of the question as originally posted)

enter image description here

  • Good point George I didn't catch that. The misspelling of the inventor name "HOMES" threw me - only checked the others. Your answer no longer makes sense though thanks to Micah editing - which I have an issue with sine he works for an entity that has an interest in the patent. This forum needs some basic rules prohibiting editing for self-interest.
    – user3359
    Jun 7, 2013 at 19:35

Blood sugar monitors would seem to fit into this category. Put a bit of blood onto the test strip, insert test strip into monitor, and get your feedback instantly.

Would one of the oxygen sensors that gets put over your fingernail (reads optically) fit this as well?

  • That wouldn't have a communication protocol, I would think.
    – George White
    Jul 25, 2013 at 21:43

I would look at the i-stat patents by Imants R. Lauks. These start in the 1980's-1990's and continue to the present.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .