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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 18 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. Limitation “the support structure is installed in a cabin such that the first emitter and the second emitter are positioned on opposite sides of the individual” is unclear. It is unclear because in claim 16, the support structure varies a spacing between the first emitter and the second emitter. According to paragraph [0056] and Figs. 4-5, there are different embodiments. Some embodiments the emitters spacing is fixed and other embodiments the emitter spacing is variable. Claim limitation in claim 18 is not the same embodiment as claim 16. The support structure installs in a cabin such that the first emitter and the second emitter are positioned on opposite sides of the individual can not have variable spacing.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
2. Claims 16-17, 20-23, 25-27, 29-34 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyler (US 2012/0289869 (provided in the IDS)) and in view of Menz et al. (US 2020/0384292).
Addressing claims 16, Tyler discloses a stimulator configured to apply acoustic energy to a target zone of an individual, comprising:
- a first acoustic energy emitter comprising a first array of electroacoustic transducers and a second acoustic energy emitter comprising a second array of electroacoustic transducers (see [0018[, [0031], [0049], [0061], Figs. 1C, 8A-B and 8F);
- a support structure configured to hold the first emitter and the second emitter in an opposing arrangement (see Figs. 1C-E);
- an electronic management unit configured to control the electroacoustic transducers of the first array and of the second array (see Fig. 4, [0047-0049]; microprocessor/microcontroller to control/activate ultrasound transducers);
- wherein: the support structure comprises an adjustment mechanism configured to vary a spacing between the first emitter and the second emitter (see [0052]; transducers on support structure; support structure that is make of flexible material therefore is capable of vary a spacing between the first emitter and the second emitter);
- the first emitter and the second emitter are arranged on opposite sides of the head (see Figs. 1C-E);
- the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array to generate a first acoustic beam and to activate the transducers of the second array to generate a second acoustic beam (see Fig. 4, [0047-0049]; microprocessor/microcontroller to control/activate ultrasound transducers);
- the first acoustic beam and the second acoustic beam converge toward at least one focal region located along the acoustic axis between the emitters;
- the electronic management unit is configured to sequentially activate the transducers of each array according to an activation sequence progressing toward the acoustic axis so as to progressively concentrate acoustic energy within the focal region (see [0047-0049] and Figs. 8A-B and F; concentric circle array with different diameter activate as successive concentric circles or rings which is an activation sequence progressing toward the acoustic axis; in a concentric rings ultrasound transducer (also known as a phased array transducer), the individual rings are activated in a sequence; if one to type in concentric phase array transducer firing sequence in google one would find out that in a concentric phased array transducer, elements are arranged in concentric rings, and the firing sequence involves sequentially activating rings to focus the ultrasound beam at different depths along an axis Concentric Ring Structure: Annular array probes, a type of phased array, are composed of a set of concentric rings; Focusing at Different Depths: The rings allow the ultrasound beam to be focused to different depths along an axis; Sequential Firing: The firing sequence involves activating the rings in a sequence, starting from the innermost ring and moving outwards, or vice versa; Beam Steering: By controlling the timing and phase of the signals sent to each ring, the ultrasound beam can be steered and focused at different depths; firing sequence from innermost ring and moving outwards, or vice versa generate a progressive focusing of the acoustic waves within the target zone).
Tyler does not explicitly disclose the first emitter and the second emitter are arranged on opposite sides of the target zone and face one another along a common acoustic axis extending between the emitters. Menz discloses the first emitter and the second emitter are arranged on opposite sides of the target zone and face one another along a common acoustic axis extending between the emitters (see Fig. 1A; 102, 104 and 106 are transducer array; 102 and 104 are the first emitter and the second emitter are arranged on opposite sides of the target zone and face one another along a common acoustic axis extending between the emitters; the beams converge toward target 110 along a common acoustic axis). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tyler to have the first emitter and the second emitter are arranged on opposite sides of the target zone and face one another along a common acoustic axis extending between the emitters as taught by Menz because this allows the phase array to target/focus treatment to overlap at a specific volume/target of interest (see [0025]).
Addressing claims 17, 20-23, 25-27, 30-34 and 36, Tyler discloses:
Addressing claim 17, wherein the acoustic waves are sound waves (see [0061], ultrasound).
Addressing claim 20, wherein the acoustic waves are ultrasound waves (see [0061]).
Addressing claim 21, wherein the ultrasound frequency of the waves of the first beam is different from the ultrasound frequency of the waves of the second beam (see [0049], [0065] and [0096]; the system is capable of adjust parameters to have the first different from the ultrasound frequency of the waves of the second beam).
Addressing claim 22, wherein the acoustic waves emitted by the transducers of the first array have the same features as the acoustic waves emitted by the transducers of the second array (see Fig. 1C; the same transducer; could be the same or different parameters depend on user; Tyler does not disclose the arrays using different parameters therefore it is implicit that the arrays are activate with the same features/parameters).
Addressing claim 23, wherein the transducers of the first array and the transducers of the second array are directive diffusion electroacoustic transducers (see [0042]; focus ultrasound at a site therefore it is directive diffusion).
Addressing claim 25, and wherein the target zone is located along the acoustic axis between the first emitter and second emitter (see Menz’s Fig. 1A).
Addressing claim 26, wherein the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array and the transducers of the second array in accordance with the same sequence (see [0049], [0065] and [0096]; the system is capable of only activate the two transducer arrays with the same or different sequence).
Addressing claim 27, wherein the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array in accordance with a first sequence and the transducers of the second array in accordance with a second sequence different from said first sequence (see [0049], [0065] and [0096]; the system is capable of only activate the two transducer arrays with the same or different sequence).
Addressing claim 30, a device for the therapeutic treatment of a neurological disease comprising a brain cell stimulator, wherein said brain cell stimulator is the stimulator of claim 16 (see Figs. 1A-E, 2, 8A-F; [0028] and abstract).
Addressing claims 31-34 (see [0047-0049] and Figs. 8A-B and F; activating the transducers are activated in the form of successive concentric circles or rings with different diameters, in the form of a spiral progression, in the form of a helix progression rotating about said acoustic axis, progresses from peripheral transducers of each array toward the acoustic axis (see concentric circle array with different diameter activate as successive concentric circles or rings; in a concentric rings ultrasound transducer (also known as a phased array transducer), the individual rings are activated in a sequence; if one to type in concentric phase array transducer firing sequence in google one would find out that in a concentric phased array transducer, elements are arranged in concentric rings, and the firing sequence involves sequentially activating rings to focus the ultrasound beam at different depths along an axis Concentric Ring Structure: Annular array probes, a type of phased array, are composed of a set of concentric rings; Focusing at Different Depths: The rings allow the ultrasound beam to be focused to different depths along an axis; Sequential Firing: The firing sequence involves activating the rings in a sequence, starting from the innermost ring and moving outwards, or vice versa; Beam Steering: By controlling the timing and phase of the signals sent to each ring, the ultrasound beam can be steered and focused at different depths; firing sequence from innermost ring and moving outwards, or vice versa generate a progressive focusing of the acoustic waves within the target zone; the device is capable of activating in sequence of successive rings, helical progression, spiral progression and progresses from peripheral transducers of each array toward the acoustic axis).
Addressing claim 36, wherein the first emitter and the second emitter are symmetrically arranged in a mirror arrangement such that the first array faces the second array along the acoustic axis (see Menz’s Fig. 1A; symmetrically arranged in a mirror configuration on opposite sides of the target zone).
Addressing claim 29, the stimulator in claim 16 performs the method in claim 29 therefore claim 29 is being rejected for the same reason as claim 16.
6. Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyler (US 2012/0289869 (provided in the IDS)), in view of Menz et al. (US 2020/0384292) and further in view of Chen (US 2009/0062724 (provided in the IDS)).
Addressing claims 18, Tyler does not disclose wherein the support structure is installed in a cabin such that the first emitter and the second emitter are positioned on opposite sides of the individual. In the same field of endeavor, Chen discloses wherein the support structure is installed in a cabin such that the first emitter and the second emitter are positioned on opposite sides of the individual (see Figs. 3-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tyler to have wherein the support structure is installed in a cabin such that the first emitter and the second emitter are positioned on opposite sides of the individual as taught by Chen because this allows for wide ultrasound treatment; treatment of the whole body (see abstract).
Claims 24 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyler (US 2012/0289869 (provided in the IDS)), in view of Menz et al. (US 2020/0384292) and further in view of Owen et al. (US 2008/0091125).
Addressing claims 24 and 35, Tyler does not disclose the first beam converges toward a first focal point to define a first stimulation focal zone; the second beam converges toward a second focal point, distinct from said first focal point, to define a second stimulation focal zone; and a third stimulation focal zone corresponds to an overlapping zone where the first beam intersects the second beam. Owen discloses the first beam converges toward a first focal point to define a first stimulation focal zone; the second beam converges toward a second focal point, distinct from said first focal point, to define a second stimulation focal zone; and a third stimulation focal zone corresponds to an overlapping zone where the first beam intersects the second beam (see Fig. 15, intersect around 144, first focus at 142a and second focus at 142b). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tyler to have the first beam converges toward a first focal point to define a first stimulation focal zone; the second beam converges toward a second focal point, distinct from said first focal point, to define a second stimulation focal zone; and a third stimulation focal zone corresponds to an overlapping zone where the first beam intersects the second beam as taught by Owen because this improve the treatment; the overlap enhance the intensity as it combine the intensity of first and second beam.
Claim 28 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tyler (US 2012/0289869 (provided in the IDS)), in view of Menz et al. (US 2020/0384292) and further in view of Johnson et al. (US 2007/0282200).
Addressing claim 28, Tyler does not disclose wherein the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array and the transducers of the second array with a time lag. However, to activate arrays simultaneously or sequentially only require ordinary skill in the art. Johnson explicitly discloses wherein the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array and the transducers of the second array with a time lag (the arrays are activated sequentially) (see [0430]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tyler wherein the electronic management unit is configured to activate the transducers of the first array and the transducers of the second array with a time lag as taught by Johnson because this allows for ultrasound beam to cover all position/target about the object in shorter time (see [0428-0429]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 16-18 and 20-36 have been considered but are moot because amended claim 16 introduce new limitations and cancel old limitations therefore the rejection is based on new ground of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2015/0305716 (see [0058]; firing in helical offset pattern) and US 6,359,367 (see claim 12; select spiral activation).
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 HIEN NGOC NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7031. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Anne Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/HIEN N NGUYEN/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights