DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant has cancelled claims 15-34, as such the Requirement for Restriction dated 01/14/2026 is not moot.
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.
Regarding claims 1, the claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to receiving and manipulating data without significantly more.
Claim 1 recites “A method, comprising: receiving, at one or more processors, intravascular data for a blood vessel, the intravascular data comprising a plurality of pressure measurements at a location within the blood vessel collected by an intravascular instrument; and determining, by the one or more processors based on the plurality of pressure measurements, a mean transit time of blood within the blood vessel, wherein the determining is not dependent on temperature measurements.”
This falls into a mental process grouping of abstract ideas. These limitations are either capable of being performed mentally by looking at measurements and making mental assessments thereafter or considered insignificant extra-solution activity.
The step receiving intravascular data for a blood vessel, the intravascular data comprising a plurality of pressure measurements at a location within the blood vessel collected by an intravascular instrument is insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering).
The step of determining, based on the plurality of pressure measurements, a mean transit time of blood within the blood vessel, wherein the determining is not dependent on temperature measurements is a mental process that can be performed in a human mind or by a pencil and paper by a skilled clinician.
Additionally the judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional element of one or more processors for performing the steps is, at its broadest reasonable interpretation, a generic computer structure for performing the generic computer function of data processing, which does not qualify as an integration of the abstract idea into a practical application.
Finally, the claims analyzed as a whole do not provides any element, or combination of elements, sufficient to amount to significantly more than the mental process as only an analysis unit and generic optical sensor for data collection are claimed. As noted previously, the addition of a generic computer structure for performing the generic computer function of data processing does not qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Regarding dependent claims 3, 6-9, 12-13, 35 the claims also fail to add something more to the abstract independent claims as they merely further limit the abstract idea or provide insignificant extra solution activity.
Regarding claim independent claim 14, the claim is a parallel apparatus claim, to that of claim 1 and is rejected for substantially the same reasons.
Regarding dependent claims 36-45 the claims also fail to add something more to the abstract independent claims as they merely further limit the abstract idea or provide insignificant extra solution activity.
Conclusion
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 USC 101, but contain subject matter not found in the prior art search.
WO 2022/133200 A1 (cited in IDS dated 06/10/2024; hereinafter referred to as “Blaber”) teaches a method comprising receiving, at one or more processors, intravascular data for a blood vessel (receives intravascular imaging data comprising a plurality of image frames collected at a location within a blood vessel by an intravascular imaging probe and stores and processes the data using one or more processors; paragraphs [0003]–[0006], [0034], [0069]–[0078], Figs. 1, 2A–2F, and 11);
determining, by the one or more processors based on the plurality of intravascular measurements, a mean transit time of blood within the blood vessel (determines the cross-sectional area of a bolus in successive image frames, creates an area-dilution distribution curve, and determines mean transit time based on the distribution curve; paragraphs [0013]–[0014], [0078], [0087]–[0090], [0100]–[0105], Figs. 6–10); and
that the determination is not dependent on temperature measurements (Blaber expressly replaces thermodilution temperature measurements with intravascular imaging measurements of a contrast bolus; paragraphs [0002]–[0006], [0034]–[0035]).
US 20030032886 A1 (hereinafter referred to as “Dgany”) teaches receiving and processing a plurality of intravascular pressure measurements obtained in a blood vessel by an intravascular instrument (by using a pressure guidewire having a pressure transducer at its distal tip and a signal-processing device, including pressure waveforms obtained at proximal and distal vessel locations; paragraphs [0005], [0007], [0022]–[0026], Figs. 1–4),
and processing the pressure measurements using a digital processor (determining coronary-flow information directly from the pressure measurements rather than from separately measured flow information; paragraphs [0007]–[0011], [0022], [0026]–[0037], Figs. 5–9).
However, the prior art does not teach or suggest “that the plurality of intravascular measurements used to determine the mean transit time are pressure measurements” in combination with the other limitations of the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABID A MUSTANSIR whose telephone number is (408)918-7647. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10 am to 6 pm Pacific Time.
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, Jason Sims can be reached at 571-272-7540. 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.
/ABID A MUSTANSIR/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights