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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the 112 rejection, the applicant’s arguments have not satisfied the examiner’s confusion over the first and second scales. Claims 1-4, [0032]-[0033], and figure 2 define the first scale 250 as a color scale and the second scale 260 as a y-axis stretching scale that allows for visual examination. Yet, figure 4 steps 430, 440 and [0039] define the first scale as a y-axis stretching scale that allows for visual examination and second scale as a color scale. Why does figure 4 contradict the claims and figure 2? [0039] states Figure 4 is a method of the display in figure 1, thus it is not a separate embodiment and should be consistent.
Regarding the arguments directed towards the 102 rejection, the examiner is not persuaded.
Applicant 1st argues on page 11: “Applicant respectfully submits that the 3-D color mapping plot 118 is a separate display as it is shown in the corner and the color plot 118 does not affect the view of any other plots in the graph (the plots are in fact separated - i.e., it is not a second scale on a plot). Similarly, the 2-D color mapping plot 120 and key parameters color map bars 122 are not a second scale on the same set of plots”.
This argument is not found persuasive because the applicant is interpreting the phrase “display” too narrowly. The examiner is interpreting all of figure 5 as the “display”. In figure 5, elements 146, 148, and 150 (the inputs), 118 (the first scale), and 120 (the second scale) are all on the same display, element 100 of figure 5. The applicant also argues with the use of the word “plots”. There are no “plots” in the claims and thus the applicant is arguing limitations not claimed.
Applicant 2nd argues on pages 11-12: “The color scales 124 and 126 are not utilized on the other plots especially plots 12, for example. Certainly, the color plots 124 and 126 are not provided to the entirety of the signal displayed - as even if applied to the signals (a point which Applicant disagrees), there are two of them applied which conflict and will not work simultaneously - as such they must not be applied to all of the displayed signals.
This is not found persuasive because the examiner did not cite elements 124 or 126. Thus, this argument is irrelevant.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
In particular, the examiner cannot tell what the first and second scales are. Claim 2 states “first scale is provided in color” and claims 3 and 4 refer to the second scale but never actually define it. [0033] defines element 250 as a color scale and [0032] defines element 260 as a scale defined by scaling the y-axis height. Thus, it seems as if the first scale is color and the second scale is y-axis height. However, figure 4 and [0039] define the first scale as height. The examiner is confused.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Luo (Pub. No.: US 2011/0021936 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 13, Luo discloses a method of display of a plurality of measured signals, the method comprising: receiving inputs indicative of the plurality of measured signals (e.g. see figure 5A elements 146, 148, 150, [0039]); processing the received inputs to determine a plurality of values, each value of the plurality of values corresponding to one of the plurality of measured signals (e.g. see figure 5A element 118, [0042]); displaying the plurality of values as a corresponding plurality of measured signals on a display utilizing a first scale for display of each of the plurality of measured
signals (e.g. see figure 5A element 118, [0042]); providing a control of a second scale for at least a portion of the displayed plurality of values (e.g. see figure 5A element 120, [0043], “By default, warm colors (i.e. red and yellow tones) are for ST elevation and cool colors (i.e. shades of blue tones) are for ST depression during a stress test. The program allows user changes so that the warm colors can be for ST depression and cool colors for ST elevation”), the controlled second scale being different from the displayed first scale of the plurality of values (e.g. see figure 5A elements 118, 120, [0042]-[0043]. The 3-D mapping plot 118 is different from 2-D mapping plot 120 as the two plots have different color scales that are controlled independently); and displaying on the display the at least a portion of the plurality of values corresponding to at least a first of the plurality of measured signals adjusted from the first scale based on the controlled second scale while maintaining the display of the plurality of values on the display utilizing the first scale (e.g. see figure 5A elements 118, 120, [0042], [0043]).
Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, Luo discloses the first scale is provided in color (e.g. see figure 5A element 118, [0042]).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 15, Luo discloses the control of the second scale is independent of the first scale (e.g. see figure 5A element 120, [0043], “By default, warm colors (i.e. red and yellow tones) are for ST elevation and cool colors (i.e. shades of blue tones) are for ST depression during a stress test. The program allows user changes so that the warm colors can be for ST depression and cool colors for ST elevation”).
Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, Luo discloses the control of the second scale allows for visual examination on the display of the first of the one or more of the plurality of values (e.g. see figure 5A elements 118, 120, [0042], [0043]).
Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, Luo discloses the first scale allows for direct comparison across ones of the one or more of the plurality of values (e.g. see figure 5A element 118, [0042]).
Regarding claims 6, 12, and 18, Luo discloses the received inputs are from an electrocardiograph (ECG) (e.g. see figure 5A elements 146, 148, 150, [0039]).
Regarding claim 19, Luo discloses the plurality of values as the corresponding plurality of measured signals are provided in a single graph (e.g. see figure 5A elements 146, 148, 150, [0039]. Note: The examiner is interpreting the portions encompassing 146, 148, and 150 as one total area/graph).
Regarding claim 20, Luo discloses the first of the plurality of values corresponding to at least a first of the plurality of measured signals are included in the single graph (e.g. see figure 5A elements 146, 148, 150, [0039]. Note: The examiner is interpreting the portions encompassing 146, 148, and 150 as one total area/graph).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP C EDWARDS whose telephone number is (571)270-1804. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri, 9:00-5:00 EST.
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, Unsu Jung can be reached on 571-272-8506. 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.
/P.C.E/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/UNSU JUNG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792