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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nova et al (US 2003/0212311 A1, hereinafter “Nova”) in view of Freeman (US 2006/0270952 A1, hereinafter “Freeman”).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 15, Nova discloses a support structure configured to be worn by a patient (par 0032, as in figure 2B); an energy storage module configured to store an electrical charge (par 0035); a discharge circuit configured to discharge the electrical charge through the patient while the support structure is worn by the patient (pars 0035); and wherein the WCD system is configured to output a human perceptible indicator to get help from a nearby bystander (par 0058, 0060).
Nova discloses the claimed invention (as outlined above), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the WCD system is configured to output a human perceptible indicator that communicates a request to a bystander to place a mobile communication device proximate to the WCD system, wherein the request is for the mobile communication device to be placed onto the patient. Freeman is analogous art in regard to a resuscitation device that provides defibrillation and audible instruction during use (par 0049-0050). Freeman discloses it was known in the art to provide a mobile unit that is placed on the patient to support effective chest compressions (pars 0095-0098). Applied to the invention of Nova, the features of Freeman would provide means for the WCD system to output a human perceptible indicator that communicates a request to a bystander to place a mobile communication device proximate to the WCD system as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 2, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose the mobile communication device is that of the patient. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses incorporation of a cell phone such that the cell phone is used for continuous monitoring of the patient, which Examiner considers to read on the mobile communication device being that of the patient (par 0101). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide the mobile communication device being that of the patient as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 3, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose the mobile communication device is that of the bystander. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses the use of the cell phone by the rescuer (abstract, pars 0015-0017, 0097-0098), which Examiner considers to be a bystander and since the device is being used by that person, this feature reads on the mobile communication device is that of the bystander. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide the mobile communication device is that of the bystander as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 4, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose the human perceptible indicator includes the words "PHONE", "CELLPHONE", "TELEPHONE", "SMARTPHONE", "MOBILE PHONE", or a combination thereof. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses the human perceptible indicator includes the words "PHONE", "CELLPHONE", "TELEPHONE", "SMARTPHONE", "MOBILE PHONE", or a combination thereof. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a speaker for conveying prompts to the user (par 0019, 0049, 095) and use of the cell phone (including accelerometer – par 0095) placed on the sternum during CPR (par 0097), such that the prompt would include direction about the cell phone using terms such as "PHONE", "CELLPHONE", "TELEPHONE", "SMARTPHONE", "MOBILE PHONE" as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 5, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose a request for the mobile communication device to be placed proximate to a speaker system. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses a speaker for conveying prompts to the user (par 0019, 0049, 095) and use of the cell phone and its speakerphone (placed on the sternum during CPR (par 0097-0098), such that the prompt would include direction about the cell phone placement in the conveyed prompts. Examiner interprets the placement of the mobile communication device necessarily includes placement proximate to a speaker system in this example since both are included in the same device. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a request for the mobile communication device to be placed proximate to a speaker system as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 6, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 5 above), but does not explicitly disclose the human perceptible indicator communicates a reminder to place or maintain the mobile communication device proximate to the speaker system. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses a speaker for conveying prompts to the user (par 0019, 0049, 095) and use of the cell phone (including accelerometer – par 0095) placed on the sternum during CPR (par 0097) and use of multiple units utilizing bluetooth communications during patient treatment (par 00192, 0116), where Examiner interprets the prompting unit would communicate placement of the cell phone proximate to an external system such as a speaker system. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide means for the human perceptible indicator to communicate a reminder to place or maintain the mobile communication device proximate to the speaker system. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 8, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose the request is for the bystander to maintain the mobile communication device in proximity to the patient, without touching the mobile communication device to the patient. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses a speaker for conveying prompts to the user (par 0019, 0049, 095) and use of wireless communication to enable use of multiple units utilizing bluetooth communications during patient treatment (par 0116), where Examiner interprets the prompting unit would communicate a request for the bystander to maintain the mobile communication device in proximity to the patient, without touching the mobile communication device to the patient. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a request for the bystander to maintain the mobile communication device in proximity to the patient, without touching the mobile communication device to the patient as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 9, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose the human perceptible indicator further requests the bystander to dial a specific telephone number on the mobile communication device before placing the mobile communication device. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses the further features of Freeman would provide a speaker for conveying prompts to the user (par 0019, 0049, 095) and activation of CPR prompting that initiates a call to emergency medical services/911 (par 0098-0100). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide prompts including a request to the bystander to dial a specific telephone number on the mobile communication device before placing the mobile communication device. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 10 Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose a memory configured to store one or more data files encoding patient data about the patient or a medical provider related to the patient or the WCD system, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates at least some of the patient data. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of memory to store patient-related data (pars 0075-0077) and use of a speaker to communicate patient-related information (par 0018, 0080-0082). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a memory to store data encoding patient data about the patient as well as a speaker indicating information such as patient-related data as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 11, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the physiological input. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of memory to store patient-related data (pars 0075-0077) and monitoring features that use a speaker to communicate patient-related information such as an identified episode (par 0018, 0080-0082). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the physiological input as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 12, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal; and a processor configured to determine from the physiological input an ailment of the patient, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the determined ailment. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of memory to store patient-related data (pars 0075-0077) and monitoring features that use a speaker to communicate patient-related information such as an identified episode (par 0018, 0080-0082). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal; and a processor configured to determine from the physiological input an ailment of the patient, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the determined ailment as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 13, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 1 above), but does not explicitly disclose a location sensor configured to detect a location of the support structure, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the detected location. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of wireless communication to enable use of multiple units utilizing bluetooth communications during patient treatment (par 0116) and a speaker (pars 0095, 0098) for prompts such as proper depth for CPR technique or orientation of the patient (par 0105) as well as monitoring of said depths or orientations for indication/feedback (pars 0053, 0062, 0083, 0095-0096). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a location sensor configured to detect a location of the support structure, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the detected location as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 16, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 15 above), but does not explicitly disclose the mobile communication device is that of the patient. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses incorporation of a cell phone such that the cell phone is used for continuous monitoring of the patient (par 0101). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide the mobile communication device being that of the patient as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 17, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 15 above), but does not explicitly disclose the mobile communication device is that of the bystander. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses the use of the cell phone by the rescuer (abstract, pars 0015-0017, 0097-0098), which Examiner considers to be a bystander and since the device is being used by that person, this feature reads on the mobile communication device is that of the bystander. Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide the mobile communication device is that of the bystander as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 18, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 15 above), but does not explicitly disclose a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal; and a processor configured to determine from the physiological input an ailment of the patient, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the determined ailment. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of memory to store patient-related data (pars 0075-0077) and monitoring features that use a speaker to communicate patient-related information such as an identified episode (par 0018, 0080-0082). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a measurement circuit configured to render a physiological input from a patient physiological signal; and a processor configured to determine from the physiological input an ailment of the patient, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the determined ailment as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Regarding claim 19, Nova in view of Freeman discloses the claimed invention (see rejection of claim 15 above), but does not explicitly disclose a location sensor configured to detect a location of the support structure, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the detected location. Freeman is continued analogous art with regard to CPR-related technologies (abstract). Freeman further discloses use of wireless communication to enable use of multiple units utilizing bluetooth communications during patient treatment (par 0116) and a speaker (pars 0095, 0098) for prompts such as proper depth for CPR technique or orientation of the patient (par 0105) as well as monitoring of said depths or orientations for indication/feedback (pars 0053, 0062, 0083, 0095-0096). Applied to the invention of Nova in view of Freeman above, the further features of Freeman would provide a location sensor configured to detect a location of the support structure, wherein the human perceptible indicator further communicates the detected location as known in the art. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the features of Freeman in the invention of Nova, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of a resuscitation device that assists a rescuer in resuscitating a patient, promoting better outcomes with more successful rescues.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14 and 20 is 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 Lindsey G Wehrheim whose telephone number is (571)270-5181. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. EST.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached at (571) 272-4156. 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.
Lindsey G Wehrheim
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3799
/LINDSEY G WEHRHEIM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 4/3/2026
Prosecution Insights