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 Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) selecting all of the electrodes one by one, and performing for each of the selected electrodes a measurement operation.
The limitation of selecting all of the electrodes one by one, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “providing a measurement unit,” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind. For example, but for the “providing a measurement unit” language, “selecting” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually choosing all of the electrodes one by one. Similarly, the limitation of performing for each of the selected electrodes a measurement operation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components. For example, but for the “providing a measurement unit” language, “performing for each of the selected electrodes a measurement operation” in the context of this claim encompasses the user manually calculating a measurement for each electrode. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites one additional element – providing a measurement unit that is connected to the electrodes and that measures impedance. The measurement unit in both steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic measurement unit performing a generic computer function of choosing electrodes one by one and calculating a measurement for each electrode) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claim is directed to an abstract idea.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of providing a measurement unit to perform both the selecting and calculating steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. The claim is not patent eligible.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 are allowed. The following is an examiner's statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record fails to teach “a medical device system comprising: a medical device including three or more electrodes to be inserted into a biological body; a measurement unit configured to measure impedance among the electrodes; the measurement unit being configured to, by selecting all the electrodes one by one, perform a measurement operation of measuring impedance between one end of a selected electrode from any one of the electrodes and one end of a parallel circuit of all the electrodes other than the selected electrode” in the context of the claims as a whole.
The most pertinent prior art references of record are U.S. 6,740,080, U.S. 2010/0280563, U.S. 2023/0190364, U.S. 2017/0042449, and U.S. 2016/0287136, which all teach a similar system comprising some of the claimed limitations (e.g., systems configured to measure impedance between electrodes). However, these references all fail to explicitly disclose the specifically-claimed ‘measurement unit’ limitation (which is ‘configured to, by selecting all the electrodes one by one, perform a measurement operation of measuring impedance between one end of a selected electrode from any one of the electrodes and one end of a parallel circuit of all the electrodes other than the selected electrode’), especially the specifically-claimed ‘parallel circuit’ limitation. As noted previously (see prior Interview Summary), the claimed "measurement unit" limitation is being interpreted as a 'controller/processor' based on Applicant’s Specification, as confirmed by Applicant. No other pertinent prior art references were found that would have overcome these deficiencies. Therefore, Examiner asserts that there is no motivation (either in these references or elsewhere in the art) for making such specific and significant modifications thereto, and in some cases these references would even teach away from such modifications.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS ANTHONY GIULIANI whose telephone number is (571)270-3202. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, Joanne Rodden can be reached at 303-297-4276. 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.
/THOMAS A GIULIANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794