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 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 11 is 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. This claims contain an instance of vague indefinite claim language, including the use of the phrase “can”. It is unclear whether the features following “can” in each claim is intended to be positively recited as part of the claimed invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21 & 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker et al. (U.S. Publication Number 2019/0261844) in view of WU et al. (U.S. Publication Number 2022/0338724).
Referring to claim1, Walker et al. discloses comprising a laryngoscope including a blade provided with a plurality of force sensors therealong (paragraph 0054), the force sensors being adapted to detect forces applied thereon resulting from a user inserting or manipulating the laryngoscope inside a mouth and an airway (paragraph 0054), and transmitting respective force signals (Figs. 3 & 5), discloses a processing device comprising a processor and storage medium having stored thereon (Figs. 3 & 5) and outputting for display a visual indication indicative of a deviation of the force distribution being applied along the blade from the reference force distribution, in real-time (225); and providing personalized feedback to the user regarding force adjustments needed along different portions of the blade to come closer to one of the previously learned force distribution patterns (paragraph 0018). Walker et al. discloses a processing device comprising a processor and storage medium having stored thereon a trained predictive model and processor-readable instructions for: processing force data derived from the respective force signals and, determining a force distribution along the blade based on the force data; comparing the force distribution determined with a reference force distribution, the processing device comprising a trained predictive model for recognizing a force distribution pattern applied by the user based on previously learned force distribution patterns derived from previously recorded force data.
However, WU et al. teaches discloses a processing device comprising a processor and storage medium having stored thereon a trained predictive model and processor-readable instructions (Fig. 8) for: processing force data derived from the respective force signals (140) and, determining a force distribution along the blade based on the force data (paragraph 0048); comparing the force distribution determined with a reference force distribution, the processing device comprising a trained predictive model for recognizing a force distribution pattern applied by the user based on previously learned force distribution patterns derived from previously recorded force data (paragraph 0048). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to include a processing device comprising a processor and storage medium having stored thereon a trained predictive model and processor-readable instructions for: processing force data derived from the respective force signals and, determining a force distribution along the blade based on the force data; comparing the force distribution determined with a reference force distribution, the processing device comprising a trained predictive model for recognizing a force distribution pattern applied by the user based on previously learned force distribution patterns derived from previously recorded force data, as disclosed by WU et al., incorporated into Walker et al.. in order to compare data and address subject safety concerns.
Referring to claim 2, Walker et al. discloses wherein the force sensors are provided on a flexible sensor strip positioned on an inner surface of the blade devised to be in contact with airway structures (paragraph 0054).
Referring to claim 3, Walker et al. discloses further comprising a display for displaying a graphical user interface, the graphical user interface comprising the visual indication (225).
Referring to claim 4, Walker et al. discloses further comprising a printed circuit board (PCB) including a communication unit, the communication unit including input connections for receiving the respective force signals from the force sensors, and one or more output connection(s) for sending the force data via a wired or wireless connection to the processing device (Figs. 3 & 5).
Referring to claim 5, WU et al. discloses wherein reference force distribution data is stored onto the storage medium of the processing device and the comparing is performed based on predetermined thresholds (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Referring to claim 6, WU et al. discloses wherein the visual indication comprises a representation of the blade, and wherein the force distribution and/or the deviation is illustrated on or near the blade using color, icons, letters or numbers (paragraph 0048 – Feedback being given the manner in which is given in this claim does not provide an advantage for one or the other).
Referring to claim 7, Walker et al. discloses further comprising an on-board video camera provided on or near the blade, for capturing images during training sessions,
the graphical user interface further displaying the images captured in real-time, in addition to the visual indication of the force distribution and/or deviation from the reference force distribution (Fig. 4).
Referring to claim 8, WU et al. discloses the graphical user interface comprises the visual indication, said visual indication comprising a visual representation of the
blade, wherein the force distribution and/or deviation from the reference force distribution is illustrated along the blade as the user manipulates the
blade (Fig. 10).
Referring to claim 9, WU et al. discloses wherein: the processing device is configured for storing several force distribution patterns associated with
a user over time (Figs. 2, 4, 6, 10-12); and the processing device is further configured for providing, using the trained predictive model, an indication of an
improvement of a performance of the user over time, in reaching a standard force distribution pattern (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Referring to claim 10, Walker et al. discloses wherein the processing device further comprises an additional trained predictive model trained on previously captured laryngoscopy images labelled as valid or invalid, to determine whether the
blade is properly positioned (Fig. 4).
Referring to claim 11, Walker et al. discloses wherein the additional trained
predictive model determine a grade or degree of aperture of the larynx based on previously labelled laryngoscopy images (paragraph 0018).
Referring to claim 12, WU discloses wherein the processing device is configured for processing in real time a plurality of time buffers, and for computing, for each time buffer, statistical data of the forces measured by each of the sensors
during a predetermined period while an instructor or clinician performs a laryngoscopy using the laryngoscope, the trained predictive model being configured to detect force
distribution patterns along the blade using the statistical data computed for the plurality of time buffers (Figs. 2, 4, 6, 10-12).
Referring to claim 13, WU et al. discloses wherein the trained predictive model is a support-vector machine (SVM) model (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Referring to claim 14, Walker et al. discloses comprising a step of associating the distribution of forces applied by the user to a given force distribution pattern
determined using a predictive model (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Referring to claim 15, Walker et al. discloses comprising determining additional practice time required by the user to reach a standard force distribution
pattern using the predictive model (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Referring to claim 16, Walker et al. discloses comprising: measuring force signals associated to forces applied to different portions of a blade of a laryngoscope manipulated by a user during the laryngoscopy (paragraphs 0047 & 0048);
converting the force signals into force data indicative of a distribution of forces along the blade (paragraphs 0047 & 0048); comparing the distribution of forces along the blade with
at least one previously determined force distribution pattern (paragraph 0048 of WU); and providing for output, in real time, an indication of whether too little, adequate or too much force is applied to each of the different portions of the blade, relative to the at
least one previously determined force distribution pattern, while the user manipulates the laryngoscope (paragraph 0018).
Referring to claim 17, WU et al. discloses wherein comparing the distribution of forces is performed using a predictive model trained on previously collected force signals, collected during a valid laryngoscopy procedure (paragraph 0048).
Referring to claim 18, WU et al. discloses comprising determining additional practice time required by the user to reach a standard force distribution pattern using the predictive model (Figs. 2, 4, 6, 10-12).
Referring to claim 19, Walker et al. discloses a processor to: process force data derived from force signals indicative of forces applied to different portions of a
blade of a laryngoscope manipulated by a user during the laryngoscopy
determine a distribution of forces along the blade (Fig. 3); compare the distribution of forces along the blade with at least one previously determined force
distribution pattern (paragraph 0048 of Wu et al.); and provide for output, in real time, an indication of whether too little or too much force is applied to each of the portions of the blade, relative to the at least one previously determined force distribution pattern, while the user manipulates the laryngoscope (paragraph 0018).
Referring to claim 20, Walker et al. discloses further comprising instructions
for causing the processor to: use a predictive model trained on previously collected force signals, collected during a valid laryngoscopy procedure (Fig. 8 of Wu et al.).
Referring to claim 21, Walker et al. discloses further comprising instructions for causing the processor to: determine additional practice time required by the user to reach a standard force distribution pattern using the predictive model (Fig. 3).
Referring to claim 22, Walker et al. discloses wherein the visual indication
comprises whether too little, adequate or too much force is applied to each of the different portions of the blade, relative to the at least one previously determined force distribution pattern, while the user manipulates the laryngoscope (paragraphs 0047 & 0048).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response, filed 4/22/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-22 under 35 USC 102 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KESHA FRISBY whose telephone number is (571)272-8774. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 730AM-4PM.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at 571-272-7147. 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.
/KESHA FRISBY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights