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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/25/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6, 8-9, and 23-26 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability.
Claim 1-3, and 8-9 are newly amended.
Claims 7, and 10-22 are newly cancelled.
Claims 23-26 are newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6, 8-9, and 23-26 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 4-8, 11-12, 17-19 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yik (US 20170092227 A1) in view of Eteminan (US 20190133445 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Yik teaches a medical system for conducting a medical treatment (abstract), comprising:
a medical device for performing the medical treatment and having a display (paragraph 7: "According to the system described herein, a medical system includes a medical device having a display and includes a display ... The medical device may be a peritoneal dialysis machine or a hemodialysis machine."); and
a contactless proximity control system having a contactless interface including at least one motion sensor that is configured to detect motion at or near the at least one motion sensor, and at least one proximity sensor that is configured to receive short-range wireless signals, wherein the a contactless interface that is configured to enable contactless interaction by an operator with the medical device (paragraph 7: "The display dimness control device includes at least one sensor that includes a motion sensor and/or a proximity sensor."; paragraph 27: "In the event of machine interface interaction, the occurrence of a machine alarm or warning, or the detection of movement by the proximity sensor, the machine display would be immediately undimmed.")
wherein the display of the medical device identifies an action at the medical device that is enabled by interaction with the contactless interface(paragraph 37: "In the event of movement/proximity has been detected by the motion and/or proximity detector sensor (Yes-at step 508), the process proceeds to step 509 where the machine display exits the dimmed state and the process then returns to the step 50.").
Yik fails to teach wherein the contactless proximity control system enables at least three operational states of the medical device, the at least three operational states including:
a first operational state of the medical device that is enabled after the operator presents credential information via a short-range wireless signal to the proximity sensor, wherein, in the first operational state, the at least one motion sensor is activated;
a second operational state of the medical device that is enabled after the at least one motion sensor detects a first gesture of the operator, wherein, in the second operational state, the contactless interface enables limited contactless operations to be performed at the medical device; and
a third operational state of the medical device that is enabled after the at least one motion sensor detects a second gesture of the operator, wherein, in the third operational state, the contactless interface enables at least one additional contactless operation action to be performed at the medical device.
Eteminan teaches a patient monitoring and communication system wherein the contactless proximity control system enables at least three operational states of the medical device, the at least three operational states including (paragraph [0004]):
a first operational state (operation 404) of the medical device that is enabled after the operator presents credential information via a short-range wireless signal to the proximity sensor, wherein, in the first operational state, the at least one motion sensor is activated (paragraph [120]);
a second operational state (fusion stack) of the medical device that is enabled after the at least one motion sensor detects a first gesture of the operator, wherein, in the second operational state, the contactless interface enables limited contactless operations to be performed at the medical device (paragraph [0072]); and
a third operational state (interface stack) of the medical device that is enabled after the at least one motion sensor detects a second gesture of the operator, wherein, in the third operational state, the contactless interface enables at least one additional contactless operation action to be performed at the medical device (paragraph [0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yik to have the operational states of Eteminan in order to support adaptation to patients with varying abilities and condition (Eteminan, paragraph [0004]).
Regarding Claim 4, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik further teaches wherein the at least one motion sensor includes at least two motion sensors (151 and 152) coupled at different locations on the medical device, and wherein a first motion sensor (151) of the at least two motion sensors corresponds to [0020], and is positioned remotely from, a first button displayed on the display of the medical device, and wherein a second motion sensor (152) of the at least two motion sensors corresponds to, and is positioned remotely from, a second button displayed on the display of the medical device (paragraph [0020]).
Regarding Claim 5, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik further teaches wherein the action includes one or more of muting or resetting an alarm at the medical device (paragraph [0025]).
Regarding Claim 6, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik further teaches wherein the action includes modifying a parameter of the medical device to respond to an alarm at the medical device (paragraph [0027]).
Regarding Claim 7, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik further comprises a proximity sensor coupled to the medical device, wherein the proximity sensor is configured to receive short-range wireless signals (paragraph [0020]).
Regarding Claim 8, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 7. Yik further teaches wherein the short-range wireless signals include WiFi, Bluetooth or RFID signals (paragraph [0021]).
Regarding Claim 23, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Eteminan further teaches wherein the at least one motion sensor includes a first motion sensor (various sensors), and wherein the first gesture of the operator that enables the second operational state is a gesture detected by the first motion sensor (paragraph [0072), and wherein the second gesture of the operator that enables the third operational state (fusion stack 214 as movement gestures) is a gesture detected by the second motion sensor (paragraph [0072]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yik to have the operational states of Eteminan in order to support adaptation to patients with varying abilities and condition (Eteminan, paragraph [0004]).
Eteminan discloses the claimed invention except for two motion sensors. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to include a 2nd motion sensor, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding Claim 24, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Eteminan fails to explicitly teach wherein the first gesture of the operator that enables the second operational state is a swiping motion by a hand or a foot of the operator near the at least one motion sensor, and wherein the second gesture of the operator that enables the third operational state is a hand wave indicating an increase or decrease action.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to the first gesture of the operator that enables the second operational state is a swiping motion by a hand or a foot of the operator near the at least one motion sensor, and wherein the second gesture of the operator that enables the third operational state is a hand wave indicating an increase or decrease action, since applicant has not disclosed that the specific body part used solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally well with motion from any other body part.
Regarding Claim 25, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik further comprises wherein the medical device is a dialysis machine (abstract).
Claim(s) 2 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yik (US 20170092227 A1) in view of Eteminan (US 20190133445 A1) in view of Ziraknejad (WO2018148845A1)
Regarding Claim 2, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 1. Yik fails to teach wherein the contactless interface of the at least one motion sensor includes an ultrasonic sensor. In the same field of endeavor, Ziraknejad teaches a medical system with a motion sensor wherein the contactless interface of the at least one motion sensor includes an ultrasonic sensor (paragraph [0065]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motion sensor of Yik so the sensor is an ultrasonic sensor so the information is relayed to the practitioner via their sense of touch rather than their sense of vision which may be preoccupied (as motivated by Zriaknejad, paragraph [0065]).
Regarding Claim 9, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 7. Yik fails to teach further comprising a credential device that provides a wireless signal containing credential information of the operator to the proximity sensor. Ziraknejad teaches a credential device that provides a wireless signal containing credential information of the operator to the proximity sensor (paragraph [0107]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motion sensor of Yik so that provides a wireless signal containing credential information of the operator to the proximity sensor, similar to Ziraknejad, so the appropriate signal is detected from the user (as motivated by Zriaknejad, paragraph [0107]).
Claims 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yik (US 20170092227 A1) in view of Eteminan (US 20190133445 A1) in view of Junior (US 6520928 B1)
Regarding Claim 3, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the device according to claim 1. Yik fails to teach wherein the at least one motion sensor is disposed at a base of the dialysis machine and configured to respond to motion of a foot of the operator. In a similar field of endeavor, Junior teaches a medical device wherein the at least one motion sensor is disposed at a base of the machine and configured to respond to motion of a foot of the operator (claim 25). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Yik so the machine is configured to respond to motion of a foot of the operator similar to Junior so that the user’s hands are still available.
Claims 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yik (US 20170092227 A1) in view of Eteminan (US 20190133445 A1) in view of Hogard (US 20200061273 A1)
Regarding Claim 26, Yik in view of Eteminan teaches the medical system according to claim 25. Yik and Eteminan fail to teach wherein the at least one additional contactless operation action includes one or more of (i) increasing or decreasing a venous drip chamber level of the dialysis machine or (ii) increasing or decreasing a pump speed of the dialysis machine. Hogard teaches a dialysis system wherein the at least one additional operation action includes one or more of (i) increasing or decreasing a venous drip chamber level of the dialysis machine (paragraph [0077]) or (ii) increasing or decreasing a pump speed of the dialysis machine (paragraph [0014]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the contactless control system to includes one or more of (i) increasing or decreasing a venous drip chamber level of the dialysis machine or (ii) increasing or decreasing a pump speed of the dialysis machine, similar to Hogard so that the dialysis machine functions more efficiently.
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 KATE ELIZABETH STRACHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached on (571)-270-5879. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)-270-5879.
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.
/KATE ELIZABETH STRACHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/REBECCA E EISENBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781