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 .
Response to Arguments
The previous objection to claim 11 has been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims, filed 12/22/25. However, upon further consideration and in light of the amendments to the claims, new objections have been presented to claims 10 and 12, as discussed in detail below.
The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been withdrawn in light of the amendments to the claims. However, a new objection to claim 10 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is presented based on the amendments to the claim, as discussed in detail below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Accordingly, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been withdrawn.
Specification
The Specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: The Specification does not disclose wherein instructions output by the user output device may comprise alteration of anesthesia, as required by claim 9.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“emitted RF modulated multi-spectral light” recited in claim 10, ln. 3-4 should likely read “emitted radio frequency (RF) modulated multi-spectral light”; and
“wherein the user output device further comprises at least one of an audio output and a visual output, and a haptic feedback module, and” recited in claim 12, ln. 2-3 should likely read “wherein the user output device further comprises at least one of an audio output and a visual output,.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 10 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. Claim 10 recites “The ECLS cerebral monitoring device of claim 9, wherein the controller is further configured to control the optical source, control the one or more optical detectors of the measurement probe, and compare emitted RF modulated multi-spectral light to detected RF modulated multi-spectral light according to at least one of frequency-domain diffuse optical spectroscopy (FD-DOS) and diffuse correlation spectroscopy (DCS), or time-domain diffuse optical spectroscopy (TD-DOS) and DCS techniques.” It is indefinite as to whether “emitted RF modulated multi-spectral light” and “detected RF modulated multi-spectral light” are intended to differ from the emitted multi-spectral light that is compared to the detected multi-spectral light in claim 9.
A suggested amendment is as follows: “compare the emitted the detected
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 11, and 13-16 are allowable. Claim 10 is objected to, as well as rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the objection and rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action. Claim 12 is currently objected to, but would be allowable if corrected as indicated above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As presented, the combination of all the elements of the independent claim does not appear in a single reference of prior art. Additionally, based on the art of record, it does not appear that it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to combine various pieces of the cited prior art to obtain each and every limitation as currently required by the independent claim. That is, the previously cited prior art fails to disclose, teach, or suggest determining ECLS procedures based on the plurality of cerebral tissue parameters comprising blood flow, and controlling a user output device to perform one or both steps of instructing a user to perform the ECLS procedures, and controlling an automated ECLS device to perform the ECLS procedures, wherein the user output device comprises a haptic feedback module, and where instructions output by the user device (for instructing the user to perform the ECLS procedures) comprise at least one of administration of medication and alteration of anesthesia, as required by the amended independent claim. It is noted that cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a separate, initial emergency procedure from ECLS. Additional relevant art includes U.S. Pub. 2020/0000680 A1, wherein a feedback device may provide a haptic indicator for instructing an acute care provider to perform an action such as begin a chest compression, and U.S. Pub. 2008/0125821 A1, wherein instructions regarding proper medications to be administered during CPR are audibly provided through an output means, however, these references fail to cure all of the deficiencies noted above.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 9, 11, and 13-16 are allowable. The restriction requirement between inventions I and II, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 04/30/25, has been reconsidered in view of the allowability of claims to the elected invention pursuant to MPEP § 821.04(a). The restriction requirement is maintained because the nonelected claims do not require all the limitations of an allowable claim.
Remarks
Multiple attempts have been made to contact Applicant’s Representative (voicemail left on 1/15/26 and follow-up voicemail left on 1/20/26), however, no response has been received.
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 ALYSSA N BRANDLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol, can be reached at (571)272-4430. 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.
/ALYSSA N BRANDLEY/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/DMITRY SUHOL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715