Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/008,129

NON-TRANSITORY COMPUTER-READABLE MEDIUM, PORTABLE INFORMATION TERMINAL, SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR NOTIFICATION ABOUT ACTIVATION OF AUTOMATED EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATOR

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Dec 02, 2022
Examiner
LEE, ERICA SHENGKAI
Art Unit
3796
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Nihon Kohden Corporation
OA Round
4 (Final)
65%
Grant Probability
Moderate
5-6
OA Rounds
3y 10m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 65% of resolved cases
65%
Career Allow Rate
384 granted / 593 resolved
-5.2% vs TC avg
Strong +32% interview lift
Without
With
+31.6%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 10m
Avg Prosecution
51 currently pending
Career history
644
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.3%
-33.7% vs TC avg
§103
48.3%
+8.3% vs TC avg
§102
13.2%
-26.8% vs TC avg
§112
25.0%
-15.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 593 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 Amendment The amendment filed March 3, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 8 have been amended. Claim 5 is canceled. Claim 12 is new. Claims 9-11 were previously withdrawn. Currently, claims 1-4, 6-8 and 12 are pending for examination. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-8, filed March 3, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-4, 6-8 and 12 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Jafri et al. (US 2020/0286353). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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. 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) 1-4, 6-8 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Andrews et al. (WO 2019/070516 A1) in view of Jafri et al. (US 2020/0286353). Regarding claim 1, Andrews et al. discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having recorded thereon a program that makes a processor ([0085]; “external device's processor” [0182]; claim 10) of a portable information terminal 105, 200 execute ([0049]): a detection step of detecting presence/absence of an automated external defibrillator 110 in an activated state based on presence/absence of a wireless signal sent from the automated external defibrillator ([0055], [0120]), the wireless signal becoming detectable in response according to activation of the automated external defibrillator ([0177]) having a wireless communication module ([0052], [0055], [0139]); and a first transmission step of transmitting notification information for notification about the activation of the automated external defibrillator to a management computer 280 in response to the automated external defibrillator in the activated state being detected ([0139], [0173], [0178], fig. 10) in the detection step. Andrews et al. discloses a memory 213 of the portable information terminal ([0085]) and the automated external defibrillator 110 set as a detection target for a portable information terminal 105, 200 (“The base defibrillation unit 110 is a fully functional defibrillator that is configured so that its functionality can be supplemented by connecting the base unit 110 to a mobile communication device 105 (such as a smartphone, a tablet computer, etc.) having a defibrillator control app installed thereon, or by attaching an interface unit 200 to the base unit 110.” [0051]) but Andrews et al. does not expressly disclose a step of registering an automated external defibrillator of a plurality of automated external defibrillators as a detection target by storing in a memory of the portable information terminal, information about the automated external defibrillator set as the detection target. Jafri et al. teaches that for a plurality of automated external defibrillators 10 (“AED (1)” to “AED (n)”, fig. 1a-b), registering an automated external defibrillator as a detection target (“registered as a public access AED” [0107]) by storing, in a memory of a portable information terminal 20, information about the automated external defibrillator set as the detection target (“registration provides information about the AED's availability to the responder network and such availability information can also be utilized in the selection process” [0107]; “hours of public availability” [0108]; “identify an AED as a mobile device or a fixed device as part of the registration process and/or the static/roving nature of the AED can be determined or inferred by the AED network via periodic status reports sent by the AED that report the AED's current geo-location” [0109]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Andrews et al. to register the automated external defibrillator as a detection target amongst a network plurality of automated external defibrillators as taught by Jafri et al. in order to provide accessibility information of the automated external defibrillator to the portable information terminal within the network to thereby maximize the usefulness of the automated external defibrillator in an emergency situation ([0124-0125]), this registration step is a known technique in the art, the results of such a modification being reasonably predictable. Regarding claim 2, Andrews et al. discloses making the processor further execute a step of acquiring position information of the portable information terminal ([0083]) in response to when the automated external defibrillator in the activated state being detected in the detection step, wherein the notification information includes the position information ([0041], [0104]). Regarding claim 3, Andrews et al. in view of Sturman et al. discloses making the processor further execute a step of storing, in the memory 213 of the portable information terminal ([0085]), individual information about the portable information terminal, the automated external defibrillator or a user of the portable information terminal in a memory, wherein the notification information includes the individual information ([0058], [0144], [0172], [0190-0193]). Regarding claim 4, Andrews et al. discloses a step of receiving at least a portion of physiological information of a person in need for rescue acquired by the automated external defibrillator from the automated external defibrillator; and a second transmission step of transmitting the portion of the physiological information to the management computer ([0178]). Regarding claim 6, Andrews et al. does not expressly disclose the detection step is executed at a predetermined interval set by a user of the portable information terminal. Sturman et al. teaches a similar program where a portable information terminal (“listener”) performs a detection step of detecting the presence/absence of an automated external defibrillator ([0101]) in an activated state based on the presence/absence of a wireless signal sent from the automated external defibrillator, the wireless signal broadcasted at regular and frequent intervals ([0100]) set by a user (“programmed instructions” [0155], [0164]; 0171]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Andrews et al. to incorporate a predetermined interval for the detection step, set by the user as taught by Sturman et al. in order to ensure the maximum chance of an emergency mode status being broadcast and detected by the portable information terminal ([0100]). Regarding claim 7, Andrews et al. discloses the wireless communication module is a wireless LAN module or a Bluetooth module ([0052], [0055], [0139]). Regarding claim 8, Andrews et al. discloses a portable information terminal 105, 200 comprising: a detector 210 ([0085]) that detects presence/absence of a wireless signal sent from the automated external defibrillator ([0173], “such connections can be entirely wireless” [0195]), the wireless signal becoming detectable in response to activation of the automated external defibrillator ([0177]) having a wireless communication module ([0052], [0055], [0139]); and a first transmitter 230 ([0085]) that transmits notification information for notification about the activation of the automated external defibrillator to a management computer 280 when the automated external defibrillator in the activated state has been detected ([0139], [0173], [0178], fig. 10). Andrews et al. discloses the portable information terminal comprises a memory 213 ([0085]) and the automated external defibrillator 110 set as a detection target for a portable information terminal 105, 200 (“The base defibrillation unit 110 is a fully functional defibrillator that is configured so that its functionality can be supplemented by connecting the base unit 110 to a mobile communication device 105 (such as a smartphone, a tablet computer, etc.) having a defibrillator control app installed thereon, or by attaching an interface unit 200 to the base unit 110.” [0051]) but Andrews et al. does not expressly disclose a register configured to store, in the memory, information about the automated external defibrillator of a plurality of automated external defibrillators, the automated external defibrillator is set as a detection target. Jafri et al. teaches that for a plurality of automated external defibrillators 10 (“AED (1)” to “AED (n)”, fig. 1a-b), registering an automated external defibrillator as a detection target (“registered as a public access AED” [0107]) by storing, in a memory of a portable information terminal 20, information about the automated external defibrillator set as the detection target (“registration provides information about the AED's availability to the responder network and such availability information can also be utilized in the selection process” [0107]; “hours of public availability” [0108]; “identify an AED as a mobile device or a fixed device as part of the registration process and/or the static/roving nature of the AED can be determined or inferred by the AED network via periodic status reports sent by the AED that report the AED's current geo-location” [0109]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Andrews et al. to include a register configured to store, in the memory, the automated external defibrillator set as a detection target amongst a network plurality of automated external defibrillators as taught by Jafri et al. in order to provide accessibility information of the automated external defibrillator to the portable information terminal within the network to thereby maximize the usefulness of the automated external defibrillator in an emergency situation ([0124-0125]), this registration step is a known technique in the art, the results of such a modification being reasonably predictable. Regarding claim 12, Andrews et al. in view of Jafri et al. disclose wherein a second automated external defibrillator (“private AED” [0107]) of the plurality of automated external defibrillators 10 (“AED (1)” to “AED (n)”) is coupled to the portable information terminal (fig. 1a-b), wherein the second automated external defibrillator is in an activated state (“There are many circumstances where a private AED may elect to receive notifications of nearby incidents.” [0083]), and wherein the detection step comprises detecting presence/absence of only the registered automated external defibrillator (“AEDs 10 can be queried to report their current functionality status and current location” [0054]; as compared to “private AED may be AEDs that are not generally available to the public” [0107]; “public access AEDs…periodic status reports sent by the AED that report the AED's current geo-location” [0109]). 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 ERICA S LEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1480. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-7pm, flex. 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. /ERICA S LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Dec 02, 2022
Application Filed
Feb 21, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
May 23, 2025
Response Filed
Jul 22, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Oct 16, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 23, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Oct 27, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 08, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Feb 19, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Feb 19, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 03, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 21, 2026
Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589238
ROTOR, MAGNETIC COUPLING DEVICE, ELECTRIC MOTOR FOR A CARDIAC SUPPORT SYSTEM, PUMP UNIT FOR A CARDIAC SUPPORT SYSTEM, AND METHOD FOR PRODUCING A ROTOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589244
CERAMIC-TO-METAL JOINT FOR IMPLANTABLE PULSE GENERATORS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12588965
ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEM AND CONTROL METHOD OF ROBOTIC SURGICAL SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12576278
LEADLESS BIOSTIMULATOR HAVING OVERMOLDED HEADER ASSEMBLY
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12551718
ELECTROMAGNETIC AND PHOTOBIOMODULATION DEVICES FOR TREATING EYE DISORDERS AND METHODS OF USING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

5-6
Expected OA Rounds
65%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+31.6%)
3y 10m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 593 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month