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 § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Applicant claims within claim 2, ”from the most highly technical to clinically routine” are vague and not defined within the specifications.
Claim 12 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.
Claim 12 contains the trademarks “Alienware Gaming Computer”, “Axis PTZ Camera”, “EVISIMED”. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify certain types of computers, cameras and software and accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
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.
Claims 1-2, 11, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvi (U.S Pub # 20210358599) in view of Grabow (U.S Pub # 10462428).
With regards to claim 1, Alvi discloses a system for providing real-time near latency-free visual and acoustic access to medical procedure rooms/suites/theaters, which comprises, in combination:
an open-and-go container with at least two connection ports, able to be set up within 10 minutes ([0028] various equipment connected to a wireless hub);
acoustical sensing and transmitting ability ([0028] microphone);
secured connections to end users ([0022] live surgical data may be encrypted);
HIPAA compliant data streams ([0022] health insurance portability and accountability act of 1996);
software running connections to special and or general purpose portable computing machines to register and compose data sets ([0035] wireless hub 160 may use one or more communications networks to communicate with operating room devices including various wireless protocols, such as IrDA, Bluetooth, Zigbee, Ultra-Wideband, and/or Wi-Fi. [0101] Processing unit 704 may be implemented as a special purpose processor, such an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), which may be customized for a particular use and not usable for general-purpose use. In some implementations, an ASIC may be used to increase the speed of feature extraction from live surgical data. In some embodiments, processing unit 704 may include one or more graphics processing units (GPUs)); and,
fully resourced medical diagnostics, therapeutics and inter-optioned equipment creating delimited procedural access to remote and proximate users and patients ([0019] hospital operating room [0118] allow for a local or remote surgeon to watch procedures).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
at least a 360 degree camera set ([Col. 5 lines 18-48] 360° camera);
proprietary software ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] remote video recorder 140 (e.g., Atomos Ninja2®, Ninja Blade®);
combined with panning and zooming views (Grabow [Col. 4 lines 23-52] GoPro action video camera)
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include a an omnidirectional camera to capture live surgical operations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 2, Alvi further discloses:
whereby the interactive experience enables medical service providers and support personnel to review, understand, and agree upon procedures from the most highly technical to clinically routine, using conventional ("off-of-the-shelf') tools, pointers and resources offering for consideration unobstructed visualization, recording and artificially intelligent data sets, manipulated by end-users, for real-time management of medical issues ([0118] operating room personnel may off input based on operating room data from live surgical data captured on camera. [0066] machine learning algorithms).
With regards to claim 11, Alvi discloses an open and go system for managing at least one of training, proctoring and procedure support, further comprising, in combination:
whereby real-time medical, interventional and procedural support options may be arrayed, sampled and combined to support optimized outcomes ([0037] surgical data structure using a surgical data structure explorer. The control center personnel may update the surgical data structure during surgery based on changing patient conditions).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
at least a container for housing a plurality of omnidirectional cameras and acoustical sensors and transmitters ([Col. 5 lines 1-5] GoPro housing or waterproof housing for a camera);
customizable data streams for registering and composing images for medical device- based diagnosis, demonstration and procedure support; and,
remote connectivity without latency ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] no latency).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include a an omnidirectional camera to capture live surgical operations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 13, Alvi discloses an improved telemedicine platform being fully gamified, portable and able to be rapidly deployed, which comprises, in combination:
a fully equipped procedure room having real-time connections to relevant medical imaging and theatre; HIPAA compliant patient data via software ([0022] health insurance portability and accountability act of 1996)([0019] hospital operating room [0118] allow for a local or remote surgeon to watch procedures);
remote clinician and physician access ([0118] remote personnel), and
registered, synchronized and composed aggregates of medical device signals used to compose salient data sets, being software which coordinates lag-free comprehensive access to all patient, provider and equipment driven information, mediated by humans, and supervised by gated AI ([0028] wireless hub communicating with various equipment) ([0066] surgical weights may be determined or updated using a machine learning algorithm based on collected surgical data, including surgical outcomes. In some embodiments, a user (e.g., surgeon, nurse or team member) may update the weights pre-surgery using a surgical data structure explorer).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
three-hundred and sixty degree views ([Col. 5 lines 18-48] 360° camera);
proprietary software ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] remote video recorder 140 (e.g., Atomos Ninja2®, Ninja Blade®).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include a an omnidirectional camera to capture live surgical operations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
Claims 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvi (U.S Pub # 20210358599) in view of Grabow (U.S Pub # 10462428) and in further view of Ezad (U.S Pub # 20210233668).
With regards to claim 3, Alvi further discloses:
a set of optimized remote access tools incorporated into a system for case support, proctoring and training, as defined and shown herein, further comprising ([0027] improve procedural consistency across entities involved in performance of a surgery including those remotely present):
at least a customizable software platform ([0041] customize parameters);
a GPU plus platform technology ([0101] GPUs to process live surgical data);
managed pricing ([0069] lowest cost route selected).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
near zero (zero human-perceived) latency ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] zero latency);
connectivity without issues impacting the ability to perform diagnostic, interventional and surgical procedures, consistent with the standard of care in respective medical fields ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] zero latency connection for live view of medical procedures).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include an omnidirectional camera to capture live surgical operations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
Alvi does not disclose however Ezad discloses:
256-bit data security ([0021] 256-bit encryption for audio and video data).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi and Grabow by Ezad to encrypt live surgical data by 256-bit encryption to secure communications.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to transfer a patient’s private medical data (Ezad [0004]).
With regards to claim 4, Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
effective to provide medical case support using telemedicine ported via platform, purpose-built visual and acoustic streams and using conventional technology which obviates the need to for a traditional medical suite, saving:
time to destination; travel and preparation for same; schedulings; delays and spatial limitations whereby users are empowered to interact and collaborate outside of the limitation of conventional browser-based tools ([Col. 4 lines 23-67] customized surgical head gear to stream live surgical data).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include to have mobile operational equipment to perform medical procedures.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 5, Alvi further discloses:
medical device procedure support, procedural collaboration and support, clinical trial collaboration and support, training programs, peri-operative training with proprietary software merging and rendering simultaneous realities, offering meaningful collaboration and origin views whereby augmented reality merges with and collaborates naturally with remote users (Alvi [0027] Some techniques described herein can improve procedural consistency across entities involved in performance of a surgery (e.g., a surgeon, surgical team, hospital, etc.), improve procedural consistency for a given entity involved in performance of a surgery and/or improve outcomes of a surgery. Further, the real-time feedback can serve to supplement or partly replace training provided by a physically or remotely present procedural expert. Thus, the techniques can promote efficiency in this regard. Additionally, the feedback is provided at a critical time, such that mistakes can be avoided before any harm is cause to a patient).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
without latency ([Col. 6 lines 20-31] zero latency).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include an omnidirectional camera to capture live surgical operations.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 6, Alvi further discloses:
whereby multiple communication signals are integrated, minimal physical footprint, natural interactive collaboration is enhanced as remote users' views are not origin user dependent ([0034] Along with these peripheral communication devices, the system 100 can be integrated with any devices within the operating room providing live surgical data 150 concerning the state of the patient 112, for example, heart rate and blood pressure monitors. In addition to vital signs, the live surgical data may include operating room characteristics such as lighting used, ambient temperatures, personnel identification/movement, and any other data that may indicate the progress of a surgical procedure. Sensors that can collect and provide live surgical data 150 may include (for example) electromagnetic sensors, (e.g. hall effect sensors to determine when surgical tools are lifted off an operating room table), optical sensors, in addition to video sensors, and near infrared sensors (to assist with mapping patient anatomy, tracking blood flow, etc.)).
With regards to claim 7, Alvi further discloses:
incorporation of any needed off of the shelf tools and devices subject to account-based customization ([0041] user may customize the risk thresholds or individual parameter weightings based on (for example) surgeon, team member, patient, and/or hospital specific characteristics);
realistic and intuitive interfacing, generating meaningful collaboration ([0118] live surgical data);
hazard reduction and expense via remote personnel support and logistical separation ([0118] remote personnel).
Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
gamification of virtual/augmented cross-reality merges driven by lack of latency ([Col. Lines 6-31] zero latency live view to allow observers to see exactly what the wearer sees);
.360 degree views creating realistic perspectives and visibility ([Col. 5 lines 18-48] 360 degree camera);
simplified assembly for rapid access ([Col. 5 lines 1-5] rotating arms and attachable parts).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include to have mobile operational equipment to perform medical procedures.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 8, Alvi does not disclose however Grabow discloses:
able to be shipped within a single container, requiring no permanent hardware mounts, or other fixed capital intensive equipment to be pre-established, prior to full operation ([Col. 45 lines 42-05] camera such as a GoPro that is able to be attached).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi by Grabow to include to have mobile operational equipment to perform medical procedures.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to provide a live view of a procedure (Grabow [Col. 1 lines 22-30]).
With regards to claim 9, Alvi further discloses:
compose needed visual and acoustic data sets to support training, proctoring and medical diagnostic, and interventional procedures by registering signals from remote sources which enables real-time access to patient data and interaction with these data sets to deliver information, care and diagnostic information to patients, clinicians and students ([0027-0028] real-time feedback can serve to supplement or partly replace training provided by a physically or remotely present procedural expert. camera and microphone for visual and sound data).
With regards to claim 10, Alvi further discloses:
wherein said software enables procedure specific compilations of data structures, mediated by humans and facultively filtered by AI as needed, to optimize outcomes and patient/ teachings and training benefits ([0066] surgical weights may be determined or updated using a machine learning algorithm based on collected surgical data, including surgical outcomes. In some embodiments, a user (e.g., surgeon, nurse or team member) may update the weights pre-surgery using a surgical data structure explorer).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvi (U.S Pub # 20210358599) in view of Grabow (U.S Pub # 10462428) and in further view of Brandt (U.S Pub # 20150187209).
With regards to claim 12, Alvi does not disclose however Brandt discloses:
an Alienware Gaming Computer; an Axis PTZ Camera; a Router; and ENVISIMED type of Software for registering and composing visual and acoustical images and waveforms ([0272] an audio visual device including a router).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the date the current invention was effectively filed to have modified Alvi and Grabow by Brandt to include a router to communicate live surgical data.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to receive and transfer data to another node in a network (Brandt [0097]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TONY WU whose telephone number is (571)272-2033. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, Sanjiv Shah can be reached at (571) 272-4098. 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.
/TONY WU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2166
Prosecution Insights