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 .
This action is in response to the filing on 11/18/2025. Since the previous filing, claims 1 and 14 have been amended, claim 13 has been cancelled and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-3 and 5-12 and 14-15 are pending in the application.
In regards to the previous 103 Rejections, Applicant has amended to overcome these rejections and they are therefore withdrawn with new rejections entered below.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11/18/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-7 and 9-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanan (US 2020/0237607) in view of Ben-nun (US 6846295), Ballas (US 2012/0065561) and Wright (US 2014/0052028).
In regards to claim 1, Ramanan discloses a system for applying pneumatic compression to a portion of a body (therapy system 1000) comprising: a wrap (compression garment 1004, paragraph 106) comprising at least two air bladders (paragraph 111), each air bladder adapted to (i) make direct contact with the body (skin contacting layer forms one side of the chambers, abstract, paragraph 9); and a control unit (CPG device 1002), wherein the control unit is configured to control the air pressure in the at least two air bladders (paragraph 113).
Ramanan does not disclose wherein each air bladder (ii) overlap with another air bladder such that, upon inflation, there is no gap in a compressive force applied to the body along the at least two air bladders; one or more additional wraps comprising at least two air bladders; and one or more additional control units, wherein the control unit and the one of more additional control units synchronize to compressive force applied to the body along each air bladder of the wrap and the one or more additional wraps by sending treatment synchronization signals to one another using RF communication.
However, Ben-num teaches wherein each air bladder (ii) overlap with another air bladder (column 3 line 6-10, Fig 2) such that, upon inflation, there is no gap in a compressive force applied to the body along the at least two air bladders (column 1 line 26-29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan wherein each air bladder (ii) overlap with another air bladder such that, upon inflation, there is no gap in a compressive force applied to the body along the at least two air bladders as taught by Ben-nun as this would allow the device to apply pressure in a continuous manner (Ben-nun: column 1 line 26-29).
In addition, Ballas teaches a compression device further comprising: one or more additional wraps comprising at least two air bladders (compression devices 102a and 102b); and one or more additional control units (control units 108a and 108b, paragraph 40), wherein the control unit and the one or more additional control units synchronize the compressive force applied to the body along each air bladder of the wrap and the one or more additional wraps by sending treatment synchronization signal to one another using wireless communication (control units may control coordinated or synchronized operation of compression devices, paragraph 42; communications link 114 may be any suitable wireless communications, paragraph 44).
Further, Wright teaches a compression device with a wireless communication system including RF communication (paragraph 74).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan to have one or more additional wraps comprising at least two air bladders; and one or more additional control units, wherein the control unit and the one of more additional control units synchronize to compressive force applied to the body along each air bladder of the wrap and the one or more additional wraps by sending treatment synchronization signals to one another using RF communication as taught by Ballas and Wright as this would allow the device to be used simultaneously and synchronously on both legs to ensure proper treatment.
In regards to claim 2, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 1 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the wrap comprises at least one of a calf wrap, a foot wrap, an ankle wrap, a shoulder wrap, an arm wrap, a thigh wrap, a knee wrap, a forearm wrap, an elbow wrap, a bicep wrap, an upper arm wrap, and a shoulder wrap (paragraph 8, Fig 12A-B and 14-19).
In regards to claim 3, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 1 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the wrap further comprises: an outer layer comprising means to (i) fasten the wrap to a user (Velcro closures, paragraph 200 and 310) and (ii) force pressure from the at least two air bladders toward the user (paragraph 349); and an inner layer close to or in contact with a skin surface of the user, wherein the at least two air bladders are disposed between the outer layer and the inner layer (paragraph 183).
In regards to claim 5, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 1 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the control unit comprises at least one of a plurality of solenoid valves (paragraph 165), a battery (paragraph 129), a printed circuit board (PCB) (paragraph 118), a programming interface (paragraph 166).
In regards to claim 6, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 5 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the plurality of solenoid valves are configured to at least one of inflate or deflate the at least two air bladders (paragraph 165).
In regards to claim 7, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 5 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the control unit further comprises a Bluetooth chip to achieve Bluetooth connection between the system and a mobile device (paragraph 158 and 161).
In regards to claim 9, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 5 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the user interface comprises at least one of a display (display 4294), a Bluetooth connection status indicator (Fig 3).
In regards to claim 10, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 9.
While Ramanan teaches that the display may be an LED display (paragraph 166), it does not teach wherein the display comprises an organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display.
However, Wright teaches a compression device wherein the display comprises an organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display (paragraph 57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan wherein the display comprises an organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display as taught by Wright as this is a known display type for these types of devices.
In regards to claim 11, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 9 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the Bluetooth connection status indicator comprises a blue LED to light up when connected to a mobile device (Fig 3).
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanan (US 2020/0237607) in view of Ben-nun (US 6846295), Ballas (US 2012/0065561) and Wright (US 2014/0052028) and in further view of Bennett (US 2020/0261303) and Ramakrishna (US 2016/0361224).
In regards to claim 5, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 1 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the control unit comprises at least one of a plurality of solenoid valves (paragraph 165), a battery (paragraph 129), a printed circuit board (PCB) (paragraph 118), a programming interface (paragraph 166).
Ramanan does not disclose a compressor or a battery charging interface, wherein the battery charging interface is a USB-C charging port.
However, Bennett teaches a compressor (paragraph 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan to have a compressor as taught by Bennet as this is a well known means by which to provide pneumatic pressure to such compression devices.
Further, Ramakrishna teaches a compression device having a battery charging interface, wherein the battery charging interface is a USB-C charging port (USB port 30 for battery recharging, paragraph 47).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan to have a battery charging interface, wherein the battery charging interface is a USB-C charging port as taught by Ramakrishna as this is a known means to recharge such batteries.
In regards to claim 8, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas, Wright, Bennett and Ramakrishna teaches the device of claim 5 and Bennett further teaches wherein the compressor is a miniature DC compressor (paragraph 5).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanan (US 2020/0237607) in view of Ben-nun (US 6846295), Ballas (US 2012/0065561) and Wright (US 2014/0052028) and in further view of Johnson (US 2021/0275387).
In regards to claim 12, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun, Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 1 and Ramanan further discloses wherein the system runs a treatment algorithm (paragraph 115) to generate sensation from at least part of the at least two air bladders to skin.
Ramanan does not disclose wherein the sensation is a pulsing sensation.
However, Johnson teaches a compression device (system 100) wherein the sensation is a pulsing sensation (paragraph 57).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan wherein the sensation is a pulsing sensation as taught by Johnson as this would permit the device to provide a comfortable and effective treatment pattern.
Claim(s) 14 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramanan (US 2020/0237607) in view of Ballas (US 2012/0065561) and Wright (US 2014/0052028).
In regards to claim 14, Ramanan discloses a system for applying pressure to a portion of a body (therapy system 1000), comprising: a first body wrap comprising a first plurality of air bladders (compression garment 1004 having chambers, paragraph 111); a first control unit disposed on the first body wrap (CPG device 1002, paragraph 113).
Ramanan does not disclose a second body wrap comprising a second plurality of air bladders; and a second control unit disposed in the second body wrap, wherein the first control unit and the second control unit include electro-mechanically autonomous systems that synchronize the compressive force applied to the body along the first plurality of air bladders and the second plurality of air bladders by sending treatment synchronization signals to one another using RF communication.
However, Ballas teaches a compression system comprising a second body wrap comprising a second plurality of air bladders (devise 102a and 102b); and a second control unit disposed in the second body wrap (control units 108a and 108b), wherein the first control unit and the second control unit include electro-mechanically autonomous systems that synchronize the compressive force applied to the body along the first plurality of air bladders and the second plurality of air bladders by sending treatment synchronization signals to one another using wireless communication (control units may control coordinated or synchronized operation of compression devices, paragraph 42; communications link 114 may be any suitable wireless communications, paragraph 44).
Further, Wright teaches a compression device with a wireless communication system including RF communication (paragraph 74).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ramanan to have a second body wrap comprising a second plurality of air bladders; and a second control unit disposed in the second body wrap, wherein the first control unit and the second control unit include electro-mechanically autonomous systems that synchronize the compressive force applied to the body along the first plurality of air bladders and the second plurality of air bladders by sending treatment synchronization signals to one another using RF communication as taught by Ballas and Wright as this would allow treatment to be applied to both limbs at once.
In regards to claim 15, Ramanan in view of Ben-nun and Ballas and Wright teaches the device of claim 14 and the combination further teaches wherein the synchronization is achieved by RF communication (Wright: paragraph 47) between the first plurality of air bladders and the second plurality of air bladders (Ballas: paragraph 42)
Response to Arguments
In regards to the arguments concerning the independent claims, these arguments are not persuasive. The primary arguments are in regards to the amendments made to the claims which incorporate formerly dependent limitations moved into the independent claims. Applicant argues that Ramanan and Ben-nun do not teach the one or more devices having one or more control devices which communicate using RF communication to synchronize the therapy being applied to the body. While this is correct, neither of the above named reference are being called upon to teach these limitations. Arguments regarding dependent claims and tertiary references applied are also aimed at the RF communication to synchronize operation and are mostly not persuasive as the tertiary references in question are not being called upon to teach the argued limitations. Arguments concerning cancelled dependent claim 13, which contained the limitations incorporated into the independent claims, do address the references called for the argued limitations but these arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues against the combination using Ballas and Wright to teach dual devices synchronizing operation via RF communication between the dual control devices. Examiner disagrees. The cited paragraphs of Ballas teach wireless communication between dual devices which allow the dual devices to provide “coordinate or synchronized” treatment and while Ballas does not specify the type of wireless communication, Wright teaches a wearable compression device which uses RF communication. The Examiner maintains that the combination therefore teaches the synchronization of dual devices using wireless communication and that a type of wireless communication known in the art is RF communication.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Arielle Wolff whose telephone number is (571)272-8727. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-4:00.
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, Kendra Carter can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
/ARIELLE WOLFF/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785