Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/358,246

SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR NATIVE DIRECT CONSOLE TO PATIENT DEVICE IMAGE SHARING

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Jul 25, 2023
Examiner
ELFERVIG, TAYLOR A
Art Unit
2445
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
GE Precision Healthcare LLC
OA Round
4 (Non-Final)
62%
Grant Probability
Moderate
4-5
OA Rounds
12m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 62% of resolved cases
62%
Career Allowance Rate
261 granted / 418 resolved
+4.4% vs TC avg
Strong +38% interview lift
Without
With
+37.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 11m
Avg Prosecution
13 currently pending
Career history
442
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.4%
-38.6% vs TC avg
§103
93.0%
+53.0% vs TC avg
§102
4.5%
-35.5% vs TC avg
§112
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 418 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . General Remarks This communication is considered fully responsive to Applicant’s response filed 03/17/2026. Application filed: 07/25/2023 Applicant’s PgPUB: 2025/0037840 Claims: Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 10 and 19 are independent. Claims 1, 3, 10, 12, 19 and 20 are amended. IDS: Previous IDS: IDS filed 07/25/2023 has been considered. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant's response, filed 03/17/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive to overcome the prior rejection. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0005630 A1 to Jung et al. (“Jung”). 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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1, 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0005630 A1 to Jung et al. (“Jung”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0365356 A1 to Kurita et al. (“Kurita”). As to claim 1, Jung discloses: a computer-implemented method for sharing ultrasound imaging data, comprising: receiving, at a processor of a console of an ultrasound imaging system, a selection of one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips of a region of a subject acquired by the ultrasound imaging system (Fig. 22, ultrasound apparatus, 3000; image generator, 3122; Fig. 24, ¶0351 – Jung teaches a technician of the ultrasound apparatus 3000 may acquire the ultrasound image of the patient,), wherein the processor is configured to acquire ultrasound signals of the region of the subject with the ultrasound imaging system and to generate the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips from the ultrasound signals, wherein the selection is received from one input device of a plurality of input devices of the console (¶0351 – Jung teaches in operation S2410, and may perform initial analysis and processing of the ultrasound image, in operation S2411. The ultrasound apparatus 3000 may provide the second device 1000 with the ultrasound information that the patient may easily comprehend, in operation S2412. For example, the patient may be provided with a display of the ultrasound image in which the features of interest are signified by color and annotated and/or explained by text.); receiving, at the processor, a first input to start sharing the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips to a portable computing device associated with the subject (Fig. 1,Fig, 24, first device, 1000 (patient)), and initiating, via the processor, sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips directly from the console to the portable computing device via a device-to-device connection (Fig. 1, ¶0124 – Jung teaches The ultrasound apparatus 3000 of an exemplary embodiment may transmit the ultrasound information to a receiving device (for example, the first device 1000 or the second device 2000) according to the sharing level of the receiving device. That is, the ultrasound apparatus 3000 may determine a type and/or amount of pieces of information to be transmitted to the receiving device, according to the sharing level of the receiving device.; ¶0127 – Jung teaches ltrasound apparatus 3000 may transmit the ultrasound information to the first device 1000 or the second device 2000 via wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), Bluetooth, ultra wideband (UWB), or IEEE 1394 communication). Kurita discloses what Jung does not expressly disclose. However, Jung discloses use of a variety of devices such PDA and smartphones which are commonly known to have cameras. The device specific to the patient is unclear. To provide better clarity, Kurita is referenced to show that a device used by a patient can include a camera. Kurita discloses: wherein the portable computing device comprises a camera, wherein the first input is received from one input device of the plurality of input devices of the console(¶0060 – Kurita teaches using a start button to initiate a transfer of images to an information terminal (i.e., tablet PC or portable computing device; ¶0127 – Kurita teaches that the information terminal has a camera); Jung and Kurita are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to sharing/transferring of medical data between devices. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate device with a camera as discussed in Kurita with method for sharing ultrasound imaging data as discussed in Jung by adding the functionality of Kurita to the system/method of Jung in order to demonstrate that a patient device can include features such as a camera. As to claim 10, similar rejection as to claim 1. As to claim 19, similar rejection as to claim 1. Claims 5-9 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0005630 A1 to Jung et al. (“Jung”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0365356 A1 to Kurita et al. (“Kurita”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0242829 A1 to Russano (“Russano”). As to claim 5, Jung and Kurita discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 1, Russano discloses what Jung and Kurita do not expressly disclose. However, Jung does teach usage of wireless fidelity (Wi-Fi), Bluetooth, ultra wideband (UWB), or IEEE 1394 communication (¶0127) Russano discloses: further comprising initiating, via the processor, a secure Wi-Fi hotspot for a single inbound connection upon receiving the first input (¶0032, ¶0033 – Russano teaches use of establishing wi-fi connections and implementing network security protocols). Jung, Kurita and Russano are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to sharing/transferring of medical data between devices. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate secure WIFI connections as discussed in Russano with device with a camera as discussed in Kurita with method for sharing ultrasound imaging data as discussed in Jung by adding the functionality of Russano to the system/method of Jung and Kurita in order to demonstrate that a patient device can include features such as a camera. As to claim 6, Jung, Kurita and Russano discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 5, and Russano discloses: further comprising causing, via the processor, display of a Wi-Fi access quick response code on a display of the ultrasound imaging system, wherein the Wi-Fi access quick response code is natively configured to work with an operating system of the portable computing device (¶0032, ¶0033 – Russano teaches use of establishing wi-fi connections and implementing network security protocols; ¶0051 – Russano teaches providing graphic codes, such as bar codes and/or QR codes). As to claim 7, Jung, Kurita and Russano discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 6, and Russano discloses: further comprising detecting, via the processor, a connection to the secure Wi-Fi hotspot by the portable computing device when the portable computing device utilizes the Wi-Fi access quick response code (¶0032, ¶0033 – Russano teaches use of establishing wi-fi connections and implementing network security protocols; ¶0051 – Russano teaches providing graphic codes, such as bar codes and/or QR codes; ¶0116 – Russano teaches a two ways communication wireless channel is opened between the medical device and the smartphone 2. This channel allows to exchange data between the smartphone 2 and the medical device 1 which denotes the detecting/recognition of the network connection). As to claim 8, Jung, Kurita and Russano discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 7, and Kurita discloses: further comprising initiating, via the processor, a content file server upon detecting the connection to the secure Wi-Fi hotspot, wherein the content file server is restricted to only access the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips that were selected (¶0144-¶0146 – Kurita teaches using a URL to access the image data from a server function (i.e., content file server) and view via a web browser). As to claim 9, Jung, Kurita and Russano discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 8, and Kurita discloses: further comprising causing, via the processor, display of a content uniform resource locator quick response code on the display of the ultrasound imaging system, wherein the content uniform resource locator quick response code is natively configured to work with an operating system of the portable computing device, and the content uniform resource locator quick response code is configured to provide the portable computing device access to the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips when utilized by the portable computing device (¶0144-¶0146 – Kurita teaches using a URL to access the image data from a server function (i.e., content file server) and view via a web browser). As to claim 14, similar rejection as to claim 5. As to claim 15, similar rejection as to claim 6. As to claim 16, similar rejection as to claim 7. As to claim 17, similar rejection as to claim 8. As to claim 18, similar rejection as to claim 9. Claims 2, 3, 11, 12 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0005630 A1 to Jung et al. (“Jung”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0365356 A1 to Kurita et al. (“Kurita”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0070297 A1 to Kato (“Kato”). As to claim 2, Jung and Kurita discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising Kato discloses what Jung and Kurita do not expressly disclose. Kato discloses: ceasing, via the processor, the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips to the portable computing device (Fig. 26A, Fig. 28A, ¶0264 – Kato teaches using a button to start and stop image sharing). Jung, Kurita and Kato are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data sharing. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate controlled sharing as discussed in Kato with device with a camera as discussed in Kurita with method for sharing ultrasound imaging data as discussed in Jung by adding the functionality of Kato to the system/method of Jung and Kurita in order to control the length of time data is available for sharing (Kato, ¶0264). As to claim 3, Jung, Kurita and Kato discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 2, and Kato discloses: wherein ceasing the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips comprises receiving a second input, at the processor, to cease the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips¸ wherein the second input is received from one input device of the plurality of input devices of the console (Fig. 26A, Fig. 28A, ¶0264 – Kato teaches using a button to start and stop image sharing). The suggestion/motivation and obviousness rejection is the same as in claim 2. As to claim 11, similar rejection as to claim 2. As to claim 12, similar rejection as to claim 3. As to claim 20, similar rejection as to claim 2. Claims 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0005630 A1 to Jung et al. (“Jung”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0365356 A1 to Kurita et al. (“Kurita”) in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0070297 A1 to Kato (“Kato”) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0182626 A1 to Miller et al. (“Miller”). As to claim 4, Jung, Kurita and Kato discloses: computer-implemented method of claim 2, Miller discloses what Jung, Kurita and Kato do not expressly disclose. Miller discloses: wherein ceasing the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips comprises automatically ceasing, via the processor, the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips after a fixed amount of time passes after initiation of the sharing of the one or more ultrasound images and/or cine clips (Fig. 5B, ¶0049 – Miller teaches to end the sharing of information after a threshold amount of time has passed). Jung, Kurita, Kato and Miller are analogous arts because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to data sharing. Before the effective filing date, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate timed sharing as discussed in Miller with controlled sharing as discussed in Kato with device with a camera as discussed in Kurita with method for sharing ultrasound imaging data as discussed in Jung by adding the functionality of Miller to the system/method of Jung, Kurita and Kato in order to limit the amount of time data is accessible (Miller, ¶0049). As to claim 13, similar rejection as to claim 4. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. PgPUB 2016/0278739 A1 to Pelissier et al. - An ultrasound imaging system comprising a multi-use electronic display device and an ultrasound imaging device. The multi-use electronic display device is capable of communicating with one or more ultrasound imaging devices and selecting which to connect with based on at least one of previously store information, user input, and information gathered from the ultrasound imaging devices. PgPUB 2016/0100824 A1 to Kim - An ultrasound diagnosis apparatus which is connectable to a wireless probe that acquires first data by scanning an object PgPUB 2019/0298315 A1 to Dickie et al. - providing viewing access to an ultrasound image feed generated at an ultrasound imaging machine. A multi-use display device may form a first link-layer connection with the ultrasound image machine for transmitting commands that control imaging parameters of the ultrasound image feed. 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 TAYLOR A ELFERVIG whose telephone number is (571)270-5687. The examiner can normally be reached Monday (10:00 AM CST) - Friday (4:00 PM CST). 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, Oscar Louie can be reached at (571) 270-1684. 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. /TAYLOR A ELFERVIG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Show 8 earlier events
Nov 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 18, 2025
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §103
Mar 09, 2026
Interview Requested
Mar 17, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 17, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 17, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 21, 2026
Final Rejection mailed — §103
Jun 03, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12682408
SOCIAL NETWORK APPLICATION DATA PROCESSING METHOD, COMPUTER DEVICE, AND STORAGE MEDIUM
2y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12676901
TECHNOLOGIES FOR CONFERENCE CALLS WITH PRIVACY CONTROL
2y 1m to grant Granted Jul 07, 2026
Patent 12647328
METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR GENERATING A VIRTUAL GRAPH OF MULTI CHANNEL COMMUNICATIONS
4y 6m to grant Granted Jun 02, 2026
Patent 12632505
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR INSERTING LINKS
2y 9m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Patent 12634230
ENTERPRISE SLICING LEVERAGING SAME UPF INSTANCE
2y 5m to grant Granted May 19, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

4-5
Expected OA Rounds
62%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+37.7%)
3y 11m (~12m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 418 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month