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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “one or more securing elements configured to secure” in claims 1, 3, 13 and 30, “one or more second securing element configured to secure” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 7-15 and 17-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rahardja et al (2023/0225706).
Regarding claim 1, Rahardja et al disclose an apparatus for holding and charging a wireless ultrasound probe used in an ultrasound imaging system, the apparatus comprising:
a probe holder configured to securely engage, at least, a probe charger that is configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1);
wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]);
wherein the probe holder is configured to engage a corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.); and
wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place, once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system, based on a securing mechanism (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.).
Regarding claim 3, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one securing element configured to secure in place, at least in part, both the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (at least one attachment means…the attachment means is formed with mating components on a housing of the dural function charging and cooling unit and on a surface of the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]).
Regarding claim 4, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one element that comprises a hook-like structure extending from an edge of the probe holder and configured to engaging a side part of one or both of the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (a plurality of nubs or protrusions 401 – [0073]; fig.4).
Regarding claim 7, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe holder comprise one or more second securing elements configured to secure in place the probe holder, once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system, based on the securing mechanism (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. Examiner interprets the first attachment means as the “one or more securing elements” and the second attachment means as the “one or more second securing elements.).
Regarding claim 8, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the securing mechanism comprises a magnetic force based mechanism, and wherein the one or more second securing elements comprise at least one structure configured to house a magnet (the dual function charging and cooling unit is coupled to the ultrasound imaging apparatus using magnetic force. Said housing includes at least one magnet for performing detachable coupling…a body of the ultrasound imaging apparatus includes a magnetic material for mating with said at least one magnet – [0039]).
Regarding claim 9, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the at least one structure is on a bottom-side of the probe holder (magnet 602 – fig.6).
Regarding claim 10, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the at least one structure is at a location that is opposite a location of at least one corresponding structure on the corresponding part of the ultrasound system, and wherein the corresponding structure is configured to house a magnet, or to house a steel or iron-based bracket when the at least one structure houses a magnet ([0080]; fig.6).
Regarding claim 11, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system comprises one or more recesses configured to receive the probe holder, and wherein the probe holder is configured to reside or fit with each of the one or more recesses (a plurality of nubs or protrusions which each nest or snap with respective apertures 510 – [0073]; fig.5).
Regarding claim 12, Rahardja et al disclose wherein one or both of the probe holder and the corresponding part of the ultrasound imaging system are configured to enable placement of the probe holder at a right-side position or a left-side position with respect to a user of the ultrasound imaging system (portable – [0095]. Examiner notes the system is portable and can therefore be placed in any configuration desirable with respect to the user including a right-side or left-side position).
Regarding claim 13, Rahardja et al disclose an apparatus for holding and charging a wireless ultrasound probe used in an ultrasound imaging system, the apparatus comprising:
a probe charger configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (power source 138 – fig.1); and
a probe holder configured to engage at least the probe charger (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1);
wherein the probe charger is configured to charge the wireless ultrasound probe when engaged therewith (external power source 138 – [0066]);
wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements, and wherein at least one securing element is configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]); and
wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.).
Regarding claim 14, Rahardja et al disclose wherein one or both of the probe holder and the probe charger are configured such that when engaged to one another there is space between the probe holder and the probe charger to allow for air flow (air egress is via purpose-created gaps in the coupling of the dual function charging and cooling unit to the ultrasound imaging apparatus to allow air to flow past – [0073]).
Regarding claim 15, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the one or more securing elements comprise at least one element that comprises a hook-like structure extending from an edge of the probe holder and configured to engaging a side part of one or both of the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe (a plurality of nubs or protrusions 401 – [0073]; fig.4).
Regarding claim 17, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe charger comprises one or more structures configured for securing in place, at least in part, the wireless probe once engaged therewith (connector 134 – fig.1).
Regarding claim 18, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe charger comprises a port configured to receive a connector for providing power from the ultrasound imaging system via a charging cable (power port for mating with a detachable power cord – [0033]).
Regarding claim 19, Rahardja et al disclose wherein the probe holder comprises one or more structures configured to secure in place the charging cable once plugged into the port (power port for mating with a detachable power cord – [0033]. power source 138 mated to housing via connector 134 and fastened to the ultrasound probe 136 – fig.1).
Regarding claim 20, Rahardja et al disclose an ultrasound imaging system comprising:
a wireless ultrasound probe (an ultrasound imaging apparatus 110 – [0061]; fig.1);
a probe charger configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe (power source 138 – fig.1);
a probe holder configured to engage at least the probe charger (charging and cooling unit 130 – [0062]; fig.1);
wherein the probe charger is configured to charge the wireless ultrasound probe when engaged therewith (external power source 138 – [0066]);
wherein the probe holder comprises one or more securing elements, and wherein at least one securing element is configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]); and
wherein the probe holder is configured for being secured in place once engaged with the ultrasound imaging system (the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The probe holder is secured in place once engaged, i.e., “attached to” via an attachment means to the ultrasound imaging system.).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rahardja et al (2023/0225706) in view of Aspa et al (20230226238).
Regarding claim 2, Rahardja et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed, but fail to explicitly disclose wherein the probe holder comprises or is made from a transparent material.
However, Aspa et al teach in the same medical field of endeavor, wherein a probe holder comprises or is made from a transparent material (the at least one support member is formed from quartz glass and/or transparent/translucent plastics – [0018]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the probe holder of Rahardja et al with being transparent as it would provide increased visibility through the probe holder.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 6 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Examiner notes Applicant’s comments regarding the Claim Interpretation under 112(f).
Applicant's arguments filed 28 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant states the independent claims unambiguously recite that the claimed system/apparatus therein comprises, inter alia, a probe charger and a probe holder with the probe holder engaging an ultrasound system on one end and engaging the probe holder on the other end, and the probe charger in turn engaging the ultrasound probe. Applicant points to Figure 3 for this configuration.
Applicant states the Office Action equates the charging and cooling unit 130 with both the probe holder and probe charger in rejecting claim 1 and equates the probe holder with the charging and cooling unit 130 while equating the probe charger with the power source 138 in claims 13 and 20.
Applicant states the Office Action erroneous fails to account for the requirement of using two different components in claim 1. Further, Rahardja clearly describes the power source 138 as an external power source that is being used to provide power to the charging and cooling unit rather than being used as a “charger” that engages and charges an ultrasound probe.
Further, Applicant states the claim limitations at issue are clearly directed to two different and distinct securing mechanisms and/or securing elements for providing namely, first securing mechanism/elements for securing the probe holder to the ultrasound system and second securing mechanism/elements for securing the probe charger to the probe holder. Rahardja’s alleged teaching with respect to the coupling and securing of the charging and cooling unit to the ultrasound imaging apparatus may, at most, equate with securing one of two securing functions recited in the claims, but not both.
Regarding claim 1, Examiner notes the claim states “a probe holder configured to securely engage, at least, a probe charger that is configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe”. The probe holder is positively recited; however, both the probe charger and the wireless ultrasound probe are not positively recited. Further, the limitation references “securely engage” the probe holder to a probe charger and more broadly discloses that the probe charger would be configured to “engage” the wireless ultrasound probe. In both cases, the term “engage” is not defined and the written description does not provide any specific meaning to the term.
Examiner notes that while Applicant references the configuration of figure 3, this is a non-limiting example which is not to be read into the claims. Further, nothing in the claim references that the probe holder engaging an ultrasound system on one end, and engaging the probe holder on the other end, and with the probe charger in turn engaging the ultrasound probe.
Examiner notes that if the “probe charger” and “wireless ultrasound probe” were positively recited structures, the structures would correspond to the power source 138 and probe 114 as set forth in the other independent claims.
Examiner maintains the position that the probe holder corresponds to the dual function charging and cooling unit 130 as shown in figure 1. The probe holder configured to securely engage, at least, a probe charger corresponds to the dual function charging and cooling unit 130 being coupled at connector 134 as shown in figure 1. The probe charger that is configured to engage the wireless ultrasound probe is engaged via the dual function charging and cooling unit 130 using connectors 132 and 122. Specifically the interface/connection between unit connector 132 and apparatus connector 122 may: iii) enable dual function charging and cooling unit 130 to convey power, directly or indirectly, to ultrasound imaging apparatus 110 as set forth in paragraph [0062].
Examiner’s position is the prior art discloses both the one or more securing elements and the securing mechanism. Examiner notes the claim does not define the structure of the “one or more securing elements” and further the claim does not define the one or more securing elements as being a different structure than the securing mechanism. Examiner recognizes a 112(f) interpretation for “one or more securing elements”; however, a specific embodiment of this feature is not defined in the claims. The prior art discloses a structural equivalent. Based on the claims, as written, one or more securing elements and the securing mechanism can be the same structure and include two elements total. The prior art discloses the dual function charging and cooling unit comprises at least one attachment means to enable attachable/detachable coupling to the ultrasound imaging apparatus – [0039]. The at least one attachment means of Rahardja equates to one or more securing elements and a securing mechanism of the probe holder that is ”configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder”. The probe charger being secured in place relative to the ultrasound probe via the attachment means. Examiner notes the claim does not define the structure with which the at least the probe charger is “secure[d] in place” relative to.
Examiner also notes the prior art additionally discloses the probe holder comprises one securing element configured to secure in place at least the probe charger once engaged with the probe holder as the power cord 142 may be attached to the connector 134 – [0066] once the probe charger is engaged with the opening of the dual function charging and cooling unit as set forth in the body of the rejection.
Independent claims 1, 13 and 20 are anticipated by Rahardja in view of the remarks above. Additionally, the dependent claims have not been individually challenged and are not allowable for at least the reasons set forth with respect to the independent claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 ROCHELLE DEANNA TURCHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-2:30.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571)272-7230. 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.
/ROCHELLE D TURCHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights