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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 04/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but are not persuasive or are moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Applicant argues the recited references fail to teach the limitation, "detect whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period, the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module of the charger" as recited in amended independent claim 184”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Piha teaches an analogous wearable cardiac defibrillator (WCD) [0005-0006], and teaches a charger (fig. 3: 303) comprising of a charger communication module (395) configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger
([0067-0069]: communication module 395 may communicate via comlink 393 and includes user interface 371 for outputting indications; [0074-0075]: user interface 371 may output secondary human indications to attract attention from an attendant in the vicinity of the charger, which provides an indication that the charger is being used as a way to provide timely intervention and ensuring that someone hears the warning for impeding shock; [0094]: charger antenna 892 of charger communication module 895 may transmit a siren command).
Piha teaches that the charger contains a user interface 371 (fig. 3) which may output secondary indications regarding the external defibrillator ([0074-0075]: determination that timely intervention will be provided) to attract attention from an attendant who may be in the vicinity of the charger [0075] so they can confirm that the patient is aware of an impending shock [0075]. This means that encoded message 397 travels via commlink 393 (fig. 3) and is received by charger antenna 392 [0068], so it may be outputted by user interface 371 [0068]. Piha further teaches that a charger communication module 895 (fig. 8; [0094]) of a charger (803) may communicate with a unit communication module (fig. 8: 890) of an external defibrillator 800 (fig. 8) through a comlink 893 (fig. 8; [0093-0094]). Additionally, Piha teaches that features from embodiments may be combined [0121].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to try to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide detecting whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module of the charger and a charger communication module configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger, in order to attract attention from an attendant who may be in the vicinity of the external defibrillator, for the same reasons that Piha teaches that the charger may output secondary indications regarding the external defibrillator to get the attention of an attendant who is in the vicinity of the charger, and also because Piha teaches that features from embodiments may be combined.
Applicant argues, “Powers does not teach or suggest that the specific condition corresponds to a negation of proper charging of the high-power-source battery 105, when the high-power-source battery 105 is received in a charger receptacle of a charger of the high-power-source battery 105…. Aghassian, Kapadia, and Hayakawa do not cure the deficiencies of Owen, Muntermann, Piha, and Powers.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees. Powers teaches an analogous defibrillator [0001, 0005], and teaches
a first battery (fig. 6: 107) and
a processor [0004] configured to:
detect whether a unit communication module ([0033]: part of AED which receives notification when a battery has a charge level below a standard) has received, within a time period ([0033]: time frame when AED 12 is monitoring batteries 107 and 105), a transmitted status indication ([0033]: charge level on either battery is a status indication),
determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met ([0033]: charger-not-charging condition is met when the charge level is below the standard),
wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger ([0033]: checks if either batteries fall below a predetermined standard, which is a negation i.e. absence of proper charging of the second battery);
control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met (see above), a UI ([0033]: portion of AED 12 which provides a warning to a user; [0019]: AED has a plurality of inputs that a user can interact with such as a microphone and a button) to output a prompt ([0033]: warning to replace cartridge 40) regarding a second battery (105) not being charged by a charger [0033].
Powers further teaches providing a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard [0033], so that they can be replaced [0033], especially since batteries may degrade with exposure to heat [0033].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein a processor configured to determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met, wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger, and control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met, the UI to output a prompt regarding the second battery not being charged by the charger, as taught by Powers, because a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard can be provided so they can be replaced, which is necessary since batteries may degrade with exposure to heat.
Regarding the limitation, “wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle”, at the time the instant application was filed it would be obvious to try to provide wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle, because Powers teaches providing a notification of the charger-not-charging condition when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard (see above), which could include when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle.
Furthermore, when there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Therefore, since at the time the instant invention was filed there was a need to determine whether the second battery was below a predetermined standard and because there are only a finite number of times when the second battery can be checked (i.e. any time the second battery is received in the charger receptacle), one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, especially because Powers teaches providing a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard so they can be replaced.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 184-185, 187 and 189-190 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen et al. (US 2014/0364918) in view of Muntermann (US 2009/0051320) in view of Piha et al. (US 2016/0331986) in view of Powers et al. (US 2003/0181950).
In re claim 184, Owen discloses a wearable medical system (WMS) [0002], the WMS comprising:
a sensor ([0028]: an electrode from an electrode array) configured to sense a parameter ([0028]: electrical activity of a heart; [0109]: sensing electrodes may measure ECG) of a patient [0028];
a therapy electrode ([0028]: an electrode which delivers pacing impulses);
a first battery (fig. 17: power supply 20 which includes batteries 184 is considered a first battery; [0101]) and a second battery (fig. 8: 54),
wherein: each of the first [0137] and the second battery [0122] is configured to store electrical charge [0122, 0137], and
the second battery is rechargeable [0122];
a charger ([0122]: charger of backup battery 54 since 54 is rechargeable) having: a charger receptacle configured to receive therein the first battery or the second battery ([0122]: backup battery 54 is rechargeable and therefore must have a charger receptacle to charge it),
the charger configured to recharge the second battery when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle [0122]; and
a diagnostics module ([0189]: diagnostics module 84 does cold start diagnostics which includes primary power supply voltage tests) configured to transmit a status indication ([0188-0189]: primary power supply voltage tests; [0163]) about an operation of a battery [0163, 0188-0189];
a unit (fig. 7B: housing 40) having:
a unit receptacle (50) configured to receive therein
the first battery ([0116]) or
the second battery (see above);
a unit communication module (fig. 8: combination of master control 90 and Basic I/O system; [0139, 0163]) configured to receive the transmitted status indication [0163];
a user interface (UI) (fig. 7B: 47);
a capacitor (fig. 8: 69) electrically coupled to the therapy electrode ([0008]: electrode alter the characteristics of the defibrillation energy which the electrodes transmit); and
a processor (64; [0138]) configured to:
detect whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period ([0163]: time period for master control module 90 to receive diagnostics from diagnostics module 84), the transmitted status indication ([0122]: detects whether power supply 20 has failed during operation so backup battery 54 can be used to power enunciator 46 instead; [0163, 0188-0189]) from the diagnostics module [0163],
wherein the transmitted status indication includes an indication of a second battery level ([088-0189]: cold start diagnostics includes backup battery voltage tests which would provide an indication of the backup battery level, for instance, a very low backup battery level would show a low voltage test; [0163]);
determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- failure condition is met ([0122]: detects whether power supply 20 has failed; [0188-0189]);
control, responsive to a determination that the charger- failure condition was met ([0188-0189]: diagnostics module 84 determines if there are issues with the primary battery and transmits it to master control module 90), the UI to output a prompt regarding the first battery failing ([0163]: master control module 90 alerts the patient; [0155]: master control module 90 outputs messages to user interface; [0139]);
determine, from the sensed parameter, whether or not a defibrillation criterion is met ([0140-0141]: ECG analysis module 87 analyzes patient’s ECG; [0150]: ECG information used to determine if R-waves are present which is considered a defibrillation criterion since the R-waves are used to synchronize defibrillation energy; [0015, 0028]); and
control, responsive at least in part to a determination that the defibrillation criterion was met (see above), the capacitor
to receive charge from one of
the first battery ([0167]: power supply 20 powers all components on defibrillator 10; [0137]) and
the second battery
that is received in the unit receptacle (see above) and
to discharge the received charge via the therapy electrode through a body of the patient [0008, 0150]; and
a support structure (fig. 3: electrode harness 4; [0070]), coupleable to the unit (fig. 2; [0071]), configured to be worn by the patient [0070].
Owen fails to disclose
each of the first battery and the second battery is rechargeable;
a charger communication module configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger;
a processor configured to:
detect whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module of the charger,
determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met,
wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle;
control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met, the UI to output a prompt regarding the second battery not being charged by the charger.
Muntermann teaches providing rechargeable batteries [0001] for use in medical appliances such as defibrillators [0001], and teaches a first rechargeable battery [0051] and a second rechargeable battery [0051].
Muntermann further teaches that using rechargeable batteries is advantageous for use in medical appliances such as defibrillator [0050], since they can be stored for a long time [0059] and because they are installed for emergencies [0059].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system taught by Owen, to provide wherein each of the first battery and the second battery is rechargeable, as taught by Muntermann, because rechargeable batteries are useful for defibrillators since they can be stored for a long time and may be needed during emergencies.
Regarding the limitations,
“a charger communication module configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger,
detect whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module of the charger,”
Piha teaches an analogous wearable cardiac defibrillator (WCD) [0005-0006], and teaches *a charger (fig. 3: 303) comprising of a charger communication module (395) configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger
([0067-0069]: communication module 395 may communicate via comlink 393 and includes user interface 371 for outputting indications; [0074-0075]: user interface 371 may output secondary human indications to attract attention from an attendant in the vicinity of the charger, which provides an indication that the charger is being used as a way to provide timely intervention and ensuring that someone hears the warning for impeding shock; [0094]: charger antenna 892 of charger communication module 895 may transmit a siren command).
*Regarding the limitations, “a charger communication module configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger”, Piha teaches that the charger contains a user interface 371 (fig. 3) which may output secondary indications regarding the external defibrillator ([0074-0075]: determination that timely intervention will be provided) to attract attention from an attendant who may be in the vicinity of the charger [0075] so they can confirm that the patient is aware of an impending shock [0075]. This means that encoded message 397 travels via commlink 393 (fig. 3) and is received by charger antenna 392 [0068], so it may be outputted by user interface 371 [0068].
Piha further teaches that a charger communication module 895 (fig. 8; [0094]) of a charger (803) may communicate with a unit communication module (fig. 8: 890) of an external defibrillator 800 (fig. 8) through a comlink 893 (fig. 8; [0093-0094]). Additionally, Piha teaches that features from embodiments may be combined [0121].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to try to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide a charger communication module configured to transmit a status indication about an operation of the charger and detect whether the unit communication module has received, within a time period the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module of the charger, in order to attract attention from an attendant who may be in the vicinity of the external defibrillator, for the same reasons that Piha teaches that the charger may output secondary indications regarding the external defibrillator to get the attention of an attendant who is in the vicinity of the charger, and also because Piha teaches that features from embodiments may be combined.
Regarding the limitations, “a processor configured to:
determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met,
wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger…;
control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met, the UI to output a prompt regarding the second battery not being charged by the charger,”
Powers teaches an analogous defibrillator [0001, 0005], and teaches
a first battery (fig. 6: 107) and
a processor [0004] configured to:
detect whether a unit communication module ([0033]: part of AED which receives notification when a battery has a charge level below a standard) has received, within a time period ([0033]: time frame when AED 12 is monitoring batteries 107 and 105), a transmitted status indication ([0033]: charge level on either battery is a status indication),
determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met ([0033]: charger-not-charging condition is met when the charge level is below the standard),
wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger ([0033]: checks if either batteries fall below a predetermined standard, which is a negation i.e. absence of proper charging of the second battery);
control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met (see above), a UI ([0033]: portion of AED 12 which provides a warning to a user; [0019]: AED has a plurality of inputs that a user can interact with such as a microphone and a button) to output a prompt ([0033]: warning to replace cartridge 40) regarding a second battery (105) not being charged by a charger [0033].
Powers further teaches providing a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard [0033], so that they can be replaced [0033], especially since batteries may degrade with exposure to heat [0033].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein a processor configured to determine, from the detection, whether or not a charger- not-charging condition is met, wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger, and control, responsive to a determination that the charger-not-charging condition was met, the UI to output a prompt regarding the second battery not being charged by the charger, as taught by Powers, because a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard can be provided so they can be replaced, which is necessary since batteries may degrade with exposure to heat.
Regarding the limitation, “wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle”, at the time the instant application was filed it would be obvious to try to provide wherein the charger- not-charging condition indicates a negation of proper charging of the second battery by the charger when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle, because Powers teaches providing a notification of the charger-not-charging condition when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard (see above), which could include when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle.
Furthermore, when there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely that product [was] not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense.
Therefore, since at the time the instant invention was filed there was a need to determine whether the second battery was below a predetermined standard and because there are only a finite number of times when the second battery can be checked (i.e. any time the second battery is received in the charger receptacle), one of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success, especially because Powers teaches providing a notification when either of the batteries fall below a predetermined standard so they can be replaced.
In re claim 185, the proposed combination yields wherein: the unit communication module is configured to receive the transmitted status indication directly as transmitted from the charger communication module (see in re claim 184 above, where Piha teaches that the unit communication module receives the transmitted status indication from the charger communication module).
In re claim 187, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) wherein: the charger-not-charging condition (as yielded by the proposed combination in re claim 184 above) is met responsive to a detection that the unit communication module has not received the transmitted status indication within the time period ([0188-0189]: diagnostics module 84 tests primary power supply voltage tests and then transmits the results to master control module 90, which decides if patient needs to be alerted; [0122]).
In re claim 189, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) wherein: the processor is further configured to:
determine whether or not a validation criterion is met ([0118]: determine if there is a power-up error; [0163, 0188-0189]); and
output of a caution prompt when the validation criterion is met ([0118]: LED 41 is continuously illuminated during power-up error).
In re claim 190, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) wherein: the processor is configured to determine whether or not the validation criterion is met responsive to a detection that a power-up routine has been executed [0163].
Claim 186 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen et al. (US 2014/0364918) in view of Muntermann (US 2009/0051320) in view of Piha et al. (US 2016/0331986) in view of Powers et al. (US 2003/0181950) in view of Aghassian (US 2013/0096650).
In re claim 186, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) comprising:
an electronic device (fig. 8: Base station which is part of accessory communication 59) distinct from the unit and from the charger ([0163]: information may be transmitted to base station 2),
wherein:
the electronic device is configured to receive the status indication that is transmitted by the diagnostics module [0163],
the electronic device is further configured to retransmit the received status indication ([0191]: base station transmits results of the diagnostics and would retransmit the status indication if there is still an error), and
the unit communication module is configured to receive the status indication that is retransmitted by the electronic device ([0139]: I/O module controls transfer of data between software modules within processing block 64; fig. 8).
The proposed combination fails to yield wherein the electronic device is configured to receive the status indication that is transmitted by the charger communication module.
Aghassian teaches
an analogous charger [0002] for an implantable medical device [0002],
wherein the charger comprises a charger communication module ([0050]: portion of charger which transmits alert information via a communications link), and
wherein an electronic device ([0050]: remote control or external controller) is configured to receive a status indication ([0050]: receives alert information such as the charger being in a critical position) that is transmitted by the charger communication module [0050].
Aghassian further teaches that it may be difficult for a person to receive alert information from the charger [0050], and it may be easier to provide alert information to another external device, such as an external controller [0050], which may wirelessly transmit instructions used for programming [0053] or reading status information [0053].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein the electronic device is configured to receive the status indication that is transmitted by the charger communication module, as taught by Aghassian, because it may be difficult for a person to receive alert information from the charger, and it may be easier to provide alert information to another external device, such as an external controller, which may wirelessly transmit instructions for programming or reading status information.
Claims 188 and 191-192 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen et al. (US 2014/0364918) in view of Muntermann (US 2009/0051320) in view of Piha et al. (US 2016/0331986) in view of Powers et al. (US 2003/0181950) in view of Kapadia et al. (US 2021/0193312) in view of Hayakawa et al. (US 2010/0280776).
In re claim 188, the proposed combination (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) yields wherein:
the processor further comprises a processor memory (57) configured to store the second battery level of an amount of charge stored in the second battery ([0163]: diagnostics module 84 stores data in memory block 57; [0188-0189]: diagnostics module 84 conducts cold start diagnostics such as backup battery voltage tests) when the defibrillator powers-up [0188],
the status indication includes the indication of the second battery level stored in the processor memory [0163, 0188-0189],
the diagnostics module is further configured to transmit an updated status indication ([0188-0189]: runtime diagnostics are continuous and include primary power supply and backup battery voltage tests) that includes an updated indication of the second battery level [0163, 0118-0189], and
the charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to a detection that the updated indication of the second battery level is below a threshold (see in re claim 184 above, where Powers teaches that the charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to the charge level being below the standard, which would be updated by Owens, as shown above).
The proposed combination fails to yield wherein:
the charger further comprises a charger memory configured to store the second battery level of an amount of charge stored in the second battery when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle,
the status indication includes the indication of the second battery level stored in the charger memory,
the charger communication module is further configured to transmit an updated status indication that includes an updated indication of the second battery level, and
the charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to a detection that the updated indication of the second battery level is not larger than the indication of the second battery level.
Regarding the limitation, “wherein the charger further comprises a charger memory configured to store the second battery level of an amount of charge stored in the second battery”, Kapadia teaches a medical device [0004] and teaches
wherein a charger (fig. 5: 56; [0049]: 56 charges battery 60) further comprises
a charger memory (110; [0063]) and
wherein a status indication ([0069]: battery charger controller 106 stores data in memory 110 such an information about amperage, current charge capacity, and faults) includes an indication of a battery level ([0069]: current charge capacity provides an indication of battery level i.e. how much power is left before needing to be charged) stored in the charger memory ([0067]: battery charger controller 106 stores data in its memory 110).
Kapadia further teaches that the battery charger memory is physically located on battery charger circuit board [0063], and that the battery charger memory contains identifiers specific to the battery charger circuit board ([0067]: Battery charger circuit board PID data subset 130 contains five identifiers).
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein the charger further comprises a charger memory and wherein the status indication includes an indication of the second battery level stored in the charger memory, as taught by the battery charger memory and the battery charger circuit board of Kapadia, because the charger memory will be physically located on the second battery, and will allow the charger memory to contain identifiers specific to the second battery.
Regarding the limitations,
“ …memory configured to store the second battery level of an amount of charge stored in the second battery when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle” and
the charger communication module is further configured to transmit an updated status indication that includes an updated indication of the second battery level, and
the charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to a detection that the updated indication of the second battery level is not larger than the indication of the second battery level”,
Hayakawa teaches
an analogous rechargeable battery [0001],
a storage unit (fig. 3: 42) configured to store a battery level of an amount of charge ([0010]: second voltage information) stored in a battery [0010] when the battery is received in a charger receptacle ([0010]: second voltage information is measured when the rechargeable battery is mounted),
wherein a charger communication module (fig. 5: 101) is further configured to transmit an updated status indication that includes an updated indication of a battery level ([0027]: first voltage information is updated while the rechargeable battery is mounted), and
wherein a charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to a detection that the updated indication of the battery level is not larger than the indication of the battery level ([0070]: when V1 is higher than V2, a value related to discharging is added i.e. charger is not charging).
Hayakawa further teaches that it’s difficult to determine a life state of batteries when they have been replaced [0008] (i.e. when the current battery is different from a previous battery), therefore, a voltage of a rechargeable battery is stored as a first voltage information [0010] and is updated each time the rechargeable battery is mounted [0010], so that the first voltage information [0010] can be compared [0023] with a current i.e. second voltage information [0010]. If the first and second voltage information are different [0066-0068], then information regarding a number of times charging is corrected [0018], which can be used to determine if the battery has reached an end [0019-0021].
Additionally, Hayakawa teaches that this can be done on a plurality of rechargeable batteries [0056] and also allows for an accurate determination of charging life [0062].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein the charger memory is configured to store the second battery level of an amount of charge stored in the second battery when the second battery is received in the charger receptacle and the charger communication module is further configured to transmit an updated status indication that includes an updated indication of the second battery level, and the charger-not-charging condition is met responsive to a detection that the updated indication of the second battery level is not larger than the indication of the second battery level, as taught by Hayakawa, because it’s difficult to determine a life state of batteries when they have been replaced, therefore, comparing a number of times with a previous number of times helps determine a batteries end of life and determine an accurate charging life.
In re claim 191, the proposed combination fails to yield wherein: the processor is configured to determine whether or not the validation criterion is met responsive to a detection that a different battery is received in the unit receptacle than immediately before the power-up routine.
Hayakawa teaches wherein: a processor [0050] is configured to determine whether or not a validation criterion ([0066-0068]: validation criterion is checking if V1 and V2 are different) is met responsive to a detection that a different battery is received in a unit receptacle ([0027]: portion which receives mounted rechargeable battery; [0049-0050]) than immediately before a power-up routine ([0015]: each time charging of a rechargeable battery starts, unit extracts a value corresponding to a voltage value of the rechargeable battery; [0080]: power-up routine occurs when rechargeable battery is mounted; ([0066-0068]: if V1 and V2 are different, then the battery is different because it must have been previously charged by a different charger to have a different number of times charging and discharging than what is stored in the memory).
For substantially the same reasons as discussed in re claim 188 above, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein: the processor is configured to determine whether or not the validation criterion is met responsive to a detection that a different battery is received in the unit receptacle than immediately before the power-up routine, because it’s difficult to determine a life state of batteries when they have been replaced, therefore, comparing a number of times with a previous number of times helps determine whether a battery is different, as well as an accurate charging life.
In re claim 192, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated) wherein: the unit further comprises a unit memory (fig. 8: combination of 82 and 57; fig. 2; [0164]).
The proposed combination fails to yield the processor is configured to detect that a different battery is received in the unit receptacle by:
inputting a battery status datapoint of at least one of:
a first battery level of an amount of charge stored in the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle,
a first battery identification (ID) code of the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle, and
a time input of a time of the inputting or the storing of the first battery level or the first battery ID code;
storing the inputted battery status datapoint in the unit memory;
again inputting the battery status datapoint after the power-up routine; and
comparing the again inputted battery status datapoint to the stored battery status datapoint.
Hayakawa teaches
a unit (fig. 1: 1) further comprises a unit memory (fig. 3: 42)
the processor is configured to detect that a different battery is received in the unit receptacle (see in re claim 191 above) by:
inputting a battery status datapoint of at least one of:
a first battery level of an amount of charge ([0066]: first voltage information V1 thus stored are retained) stored in a first battery (fig. 2: 32) when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle ([0066]: first voltage information V1 is stored an retained each time the rechargeable battery is inputted),
a first battery identification (ID) code of the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle, and
a time input of a time of the inputting or the storing of the first battery level or the first battery ID code;
storing the inputted battery status datapoint [0066] in the unit memory [0056, 0066, 0070];
again inputting the battery status datapoint after the power-up routine ([0066]: V2 is measured when the rechargeable battery is mounted); and
comparing the again inputted battery status datapoint to the stored battery status datapoint ([0066-0068]: when the rechargeable battery is inputted, V2 aka the current voltage of the rechargeable battery is compared with V1 to determine if the values are different, which would mean the battery is different because it must have been previously charged by a different charger to have a different number of times charging and discharging than what is stored in the memory).
For substantially the same reasons as discussed in re claim 188 above, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein the processor is configured to detect that a different battery is received in the unit receptacle by: inputting a battery status datapoint of at least one of: a first battery level of an amount of charge stored in the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle, a first battery identification (ID) code of the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle, and a time input of a time of the inputting or the storing of the first battery level or the first battery ID code; storing the inputted battery status datapoint in the unit memory; again inputting the battery status datapoint after the power-up routine; and comparing the again inputted battery status datapoint to the stored battery status datapoint, because it’s difficult to determine a life state of batteries when they have been replaced, therefore, comparing a number of times with a previous number of times helps determine whether a battery is different, as well as an accurate charging life.
Claim 206 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Owen et al. (US 2014/0364918) in view of Muntermann (US 2009/0051320) in view of Piha et al. (US 2016/0331986) in view of Powers et al. (US 2003/0181950) in view of Hayakawa et al. (US 2010/0280776) in view of Janssen (US 2019/0130332).
In re claim 206, the proposed combination yields (all mapping directed to Owen unless otherwise stated wherein: the unit further comprises a unit memory (see in re claim 192 above) configured to store situational parameters associated with the patient ([0164]: contains data such as a patient’s ECG at various times, which would be situational parameters i.e. parameters dependent on defibrillation energy).
Regarding the limitations, “wherein: the processor is further configured to: determine a first battery level of an amount of charge stored in the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle”, see in re claim 192 above, where it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein: the processor is further configured to: determine a first battery level of an amount of charge stored in the first battery when the first battery is received in the unit receptacle, as taught by Hayakawa, for substantially the same reasons discussed above.
The proposed combination fails to yield wherein:
the processor is further configured to: determine, based on the stored situational parameters, whether or not an opportune condition is met,
wherein the opportune condition includes a prediction of an upcoming length of time in which a delivery of a low-charge prompt to the patient is undesirable; and
control, based on the determined first battery level and a determination that opportune condition was met, the UI to output a prompt to swap, in the unit receptacle, the first battery with the second battery.
Janssen teaches a battery management system [0001] for use in a telemetry physiological patient monitoring system [0001], wherein
a unit ([0034]: transmitters are interpreted as receptacles) comprising
a unit receptacle ([0034]: transmitters are powered by batteries and would have a unit receptacle that receives the batteries; [0074]: includes remaining battery life) and
a battery management system (fig. 2: 200; [0074]) configured to store (230) situational parameters
([0052]: situational parameters include whether a planned event is scheduled or occurs for a patient, as well as statuses of patients and actions to be performed by the batteries; [0049]: battery life predictor 212 predicts battery level based on SpO2 related state changes)
associated with the patient [0049, 0052, 0074], and
the processor is further configured to:
determine a first battery level of an amount of charge stored in the first battery ([0034]: transmitters measure battery statuses such as a battery level),
determine, based on the stored situational parameters, whether or not an opportune condition is met ([0064]: determines if a battery replacement alarm would occur during a patient event; fig. 7C: 722),
wherein the opportune condition includes a prediction of an upcoming length of time in which a delivery of a low-charge prompt ([0064]: low-charge prompt occurs when battery needs to be replaced) to the patient is undesirable (fig. 7: responding ‘Yes’ to block 724; [0064]: undesirable to have a predicted alarm of battery replacement needed during an upcoming patient event); and
control, based on the determined first battery level and a determination that opportune condition was met (see above), a UI ([0038]: central station 140 provides alarms) to output a prompt to swap, in the unit receptacle, the first battery with a second battery ([0064]: if first battery needs to be replaced with a second battery, then an alert is generated to swap the batteries; [0038]: alarm may include flashing lights).
Janssen further teaches that the patient may have an upcoming event, such as dialysis [0064], where it would be undesirable to have an alert generated for battery replacement [0064], and therefore would be helpful to output a prediction regarding whether a battery should be replaced before a predicted alarm [0064].
It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art at the time the instant invention was filed to modify the wearable medical system yielded by the proposed combination, to provide wherein the processor is further configured to: determine, based on the stored situational parameters, whether or not an opportune condition is met, wherein the opportune condition includes a prediction of an upcoming length of time in which a delivery of a low-charge prompt to the patient is undesirable; and control, based on the determined first battery level and a determination that opportune condition was met, the UI to output a prompt to swap, in the unit receptacle, the first battery with the second battery, as taught by Janssen, because it’s helpful to output a prediction regarding battery replacement before a patient event occurs.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
North et al. (US 2005/0177206) discloses a programming device (abstract) that programs an implantable neurostimulator (abstract) and provides estimates battery drain rates (abstract) for each programs (abstract).
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUMAISA R BAIG whose telephone number is (571)270-0175. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 8am- 5pm.
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, David Hamaoui can be reached at (571) 270-5625. 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.
/RUMAISA RASHID BAIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
/DAVID HAMAOUI/SPE, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights