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 § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Aspa et al (2023/0226238).
Regarding claim 1, Aspa et al disclose an ultrasound probe hanger (22) configured to suspend a wireless ultrasound probe (16) in a chamber of an ultrasound transducer high-level disinfection (HLD) system during a disinfection process (104, abstract), the HLD system comprising a housing having an opening at a top side of the housing (100), the chamber disposed within the housing and accessible from the top side via the opening (fig.10), the ultrasound probe hanger comprising:
a stem having a distal end, a proximal end, and a stem portion extending along a longitudinal axis between the distal end and the proximal end (elongate hanger 22 – fig.10), wherein the distal end of the stem comprises an enlarged portion that is larger than the opening (ring 26 – fig.10), and wherein the stem portion is configured to extend through the opening when the hanger is positioned for the disinfection process with the enlarged portion positioned above the top side of the housing adjacent the opening (fig.10); and
a lower hanger portion coupled to the proximal end of the stem (link arm 60 - fig.9), the lower hanger portion configured to hold the wireless ultrasound probe within the chamber during the disinfection process (fig.10).
Regarding claim 11, Aspa et al disclose a system comprising:
an ultrasound transducer high-level disinfection (HLD) system comprising:
a housing (100 – fig.10);
a chamber disposed within the housing (104 – fig.10);
an opening in a top side of the housing providing access to the chamber (fig.10), the opening comprising an attachment mechanism (clamp 106 – [0049]; fig.10); and
an ultrasound probe hanger comprising:
a stem having a distal end, a proximal end, and a stem portion extending along a longitudinal axis between the distal end and the proximal end (elongate hanger 22 – fig.10), wherein:
the distal end of the stem comprises an enlarged portion that is larger than the opening (ring 26 – fig.10),
the enlarged portion configured to be positioned about the top side of the housing adjacent the opening (fig.10),
the stem portion is smaller than the opening and configured to extend through the opening into the chamber (fig.10), and
the stem portion is configured to be received by the attachment mechanism (clamp 106 – [0049]; fig.10); and
a lower hanger portion coupled to the proximal end of the stem (link arm 60 – fig.9), the lower hanger portion configured to securely suspend the wireless ultrasound probe in the chamber (fig.10).
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) 2, 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aspa et al (2023/0226238).
Regarding claim 2, Aspa et al disclose wherein the lower hanger portion comprises a probe holder (base 54 – fig.10). Aspa et al fail to explicitly disclose the probe holder comprising four protrusions on an inside surface of the probe holder, the four protrusions configured to contact the wireless ultrasound probe to hold the wireless ultrasound probe within the probe holder.
However, Aspa et al teach at least one support member (12) comprising protrusions (52) on an inside surface of the probe holder, the four protrusions configured to contact the wireless ultrasound probe to hold the wireless ultrasound probe within the probe holder (fig.9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the probe holder and at least one support member comprising a pair of protrusions with four protrusions as it would provide retaining and holding an object in a closed configuration ([0009];[0075]).
Regarding claim 5, Aspa et al disclose wherein the lower hanger portion comprises shoulders extending away from the longitudinal axis of the stem (62), a central shoulder portion of the shoulders is connected to the proximal end of the stem (screw mount 62 – [0075]), and outer should portions of the shoulders are coupled to the probe holder (54) (fig.9).
Regarding claim 6, Aspa et al disclose wherein the outer shoulder portions are one or more of arched or angled away from the stem (sloped away from stem 22 as seen in fig.9).
Regarding claim 7, Aspa et al disclose wherein the probe holder is coupled to the shoulder via arms extending outwards from the longitudinal axis of the stem (fig.9).
Regarding claim 8, Aspa et al disclose wherein the ultraosund probe hanger is a single integrated apparatus (fig.9).
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aspa et al (2023/0226238) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Huang et al (2007/0167817).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Aspa et al disclose the invention as claimed and discussed above, but fail to explicitly disclose wherein the four protrusions are ball protrusions and wherein each of the four protrusions is configured to provide a dot contact with a different corner portion of the wireless ultrasound probe.
However, Huang et al teach in an analogous field of endeavor, four protrusions (210a and 210b – [0035]; fig.3) that are ball protrusions (fig.3) and wherein each of the protrusions is configured to provide a dot contact with a different corner portion of a wireless ultrasound probe (guiding slots 122a and 122b provided on the probe casing 10 – [0035]; figs. 1 and 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the protrusions of Aspa et al with ball protrusions and a dot contact with a different corner portion of the wireless ultrasound probe of Huang et al as it would provide a well-known and conventional configuration to facilitate attachment of two structures.
Claim(s) 10 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Aspa et al (2023/0226238) in view of Dallago et al (2007/0016057).
Regarding claims 20, Aspa et al disclose the invention substantially as claimed, but fail to explicitly disclose wherein the ultrasound probe hanger is VALOX 357.
However, Dallago et al teach in the same medical field of endeavor, an ultrasound probe hanger that is VALOX 357 (the handle 258) may be formed, for example, of different types of hard plastic, such as Valox 357 – [0030]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ultrasound probe hanger of Aspa et al with VALOX 357 as it would provide a material which is well-known and conventional in the construction of ultrasound probe devices as it provides a hard plastic.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9 and 12-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROCHELLE DEANNA TURCHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7104. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 6:30-2:30.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at (571)272-7230. 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.
/ROCHELLE D TURCHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
/CHRISTOPHER KOHARSKI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3797