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 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.
Claims 10-11 are 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 10 recites the limitation “to increase a strength” in line 5. The term “to increase” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Without first establishing a baseline or reference for comparison, an “increase” cannot be meaningfully defined.
The dependent claims not specifically addressed above are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as indefinite due to their dependence from indefinite claims.
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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Herbette et al. (US 2008/0281318), in view of Palti (US 2005/0209642).
Regarding claim 1, Herbette et al. teaches a cancer treatment apparatus (Abstract) comprising:
a power supply (para. 0029, where the power source 150 may be included in the controller 102; Fig. 5, power source 150) configured to apply an alternating current (para. 0020; where the controller 102 supplies the alternating current); and
a magnetic field generation apparatus (para. 0023; Fig. 2, paddle 110 includes a coil unit 120) configured to generate an alternating magnetic field in response to the alternating current that is applied by the power supply to the magnetic field generation apparatus and apply the alternating magnetic field to cancer cells (Fig. 1, target tissue 111; paras. 0020, 0025, and 0030).
Herbette et al. fails to specifically disclose wherein at least one of the alternating current or the alternating magnetic field has frequency components having a plurality of frequency spectrums different from each other.
Palti teaches an analogous cancer treatment apparatus wherein at least one of the alternating current or the alternating magnetic field has frequency components having a plurality of frequency spectrums different from each other (paras. 0082 and 0116-0120; Figs. 30A-31A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the cancer treatment apparatus of Herbette et al. with the alternating magnetic field or the alternating current having a plurality of frequency spectrums of Palti. The physical characteristics of each tumor cell determines the optimal frequencies for damaging said diseased cells. Therefore, considering a cluster of tumor cells with varying sizes, a frequency spectrum tailored to the expected size distribution of the target cells will ensure that the population of glioma cells, for example, is destroyed (Palti, para. 0117).
Regarding claim 2, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 1 as stated above wherein the cancer treatment apparatus further comprises a controller (Herbette et al., Fig. 1, controller 102) configured to control the power supply to generate a waveform pattern of the alternating current (Herbette et al., para. 0020),
wherein the controller is further configured to change the waveform pattern of the alternating current that is applied to the magnetic field generation apparatus (Herbette et al., paras. 0033-0034 and 0036).
Regarding claim 3, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 2 stated above wherein the waveform pattern of the alternating current is generated by data of the plurality of the frequency spectrums (Palti, paras. 0082 and 0119).
Regarding claim 4, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 2 stated above wherein the waveform pattern of the alternating current is generated by connecting data of the plurality of the frequency spectrums (Palti, para. 0119, Fig. 31B, where different frequencies F1, F2, and F3 are consecutively applied).
Regarding claim 5, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 2 stated above wherein the waveform pattern of the alternating current is generated by superimposing data of the plurality of the frequency spectrums (Palti, Fig. 30B; paras. 0116-0117, superimposing two frequencies (170 kHz and 250 kHz)).
Regarding claim 6, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 1 as stated above wherein data of the plurality of the frequency spectrums are continuous (Palti, paras. 0119-0120; Fig. 31A, three frequencies F1, F2, and F3 employed consecutively).
Regarding claim 7, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 1 as stated above wherein data of the waveform pattern of the alternating current include frequency spectrums ranging from 100 kHz to 400 kHz (Palti, paras. 0072 and 0082).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood in light of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 2 as stated above wherein data of the frequency spectrums have different amplitudes (Palti, paras. 0115-0116; Figs. 30A-30B, field intensity (V/cm)).
Regarding claim 9, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 2 as stated above wherein data of the frequency spectrums have different time lengths (Palti, Fig. 31B, t1, t2, and t3; para. 0120).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood in light of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above, Herbette et al. in the embodiment relied upon above, in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 1 as stated above.
Herbette et al., in the embodiment relied upon above, fails to teach wherein the magnetic field generation apparatus includes: a plurality of magnetic field generation devices, wherein the plurality of the magnetic field generation devices are arranged so as to incase a strength of the alternating magnetic field.
Herbette et al., in a separate embodiment, teaches wherein the magnetic field generation apparatus includes:
a plurality of magnetic field generation devices (para. 0018, “multiple paddles”),
wherein the plurality of the magnetic field generation devices are arranged so as to increase a strength of the alternating magnetic field (para. 0018).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have further combined the cancer treatment apparatus disclosed in the first embodiment of Herbette et al., in view of Palti, with the plurality of magnetic field generation devices disclosed in the second embodiment of Herbette et al. Two magnetic field generation devices configured to be activated simultaneously may form a Helmholtz configuration, thereby generating an electromagnetic flux strong enough to penetrate deep into a patient’s body (Herbette et al., para. 0018).
Regarding claim 11, as best understood in light of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) above, Herbette et al., in view of Palti, teaches the cancer treatment apparatus according to claim 10 as stated above wherein the plurality of the magnetic field generation devices are coils (Herbette et al., Fig. 2, paddle 110 includes a coil unit 120; Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 12, Herbette et al. teaches a cancer treatment method (Abstract) comprising:
applying an alternating current by a power supply to a magnetic field generation apparatus (para. 0020);
generating an alternating magnetic field in response to the alternating current (para. 0020), and
applying the alternating magnetic field to cancer cells (Fig. 1, breast cancer is the target tissue 111; para. 0025).
Herbette et al. fails to specifically disclose wherein at least one of the alternating current or the alternating magnetic field has frequency components having a plurality of frequency spectrums different from each other.
Palti teaches an analogous cancer treatment method wherein at least one of the alternating current or the alternating magnetic field has frequency components having a plurality of frequency spectrums different from each other (paras. 0082 and 0116-0120; Figs. 30A-31A).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have combined the cancer treatment method of Herbette et al. with the alternating magnetic field or the alternating current having a plurality of frequency spectrums of Palti. The physical characteristics of each tumor cell determines the optimal frequencies for damaging said diseased cells. Therefore, considering a cluster of tumor cells with varying sizes, a frequency spectrum tailored to the expected size distribution of the target cells will ensure that the population of glioma cells, for example, is destroyed (Palti, para. 0117).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Litovitz (US 6853864) discloses an apparatus for the treatment of cancer by superimposing two time-varying electromagnetic fields. While induction coils are used to generate the electromagnetic, Litovitz is silent on the control system that regulates the applied current. Sivo (US 8449441) discloses a cancer treatment apparatus that applies an electromagnetic field to biological tissues to adversely alter the bio-regulatory electrical energies of cancer cells. A maintained 10 MHz bipolar sinusoidal waveform is delivered to the tissue site of interest. Basser (US 2017/0014637) discloses a cancer treatment apparatus with a plurality of coils configured to generate a time-varying magnetic field. Basser does not specifically disclose an alternating current or an alternating magnetic field, however, the frequency parameters of the applied current are configured to be modulated. Zhu (CN 1545985) discloses a tumor therapeutic instrument equipped with one coil unit and capable of delivering an alternating magnetic field with a frequency range between 10-1000 kHz. Terai et al. (JP 2005137784) discloses a cancer treatment apparatus wherein the frequency of alternating current flowing through an induction coil is between 129 and 604 kHz. Terai et al. further discloses altering the resonance frequency. Matsuura Masayuki (JP 2005230567) discloses a fluctuation therapy method and apparatus wherein the plurality of frequencies corresponds to the type of disease being treated. Matsuura Masayuki (JP 2005230567) does not disclose a coil or frequency spectrum above 10,000 Hz. Li et al. (CN 108031008) discloses a controller, magnetic field generator, and magnetic nano material for locally treating diseased tissue. Li et al. does not disclose superimposing or connecting a plurality of frequency spectrums.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BROGAN R LANDEEN whose telephone number is (571)272-1390. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 6:00pm.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/B.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights