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 1-16 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.
The term “depending on” in claims 1, 7, and 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “depending on” 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.
The dependency on the “target frequency” used to select the “various drive frequencies” to constitute the “electrical signal” is not defined by the claim or established by the specification.
The term “sufficiently” in claim 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “sufficiently” 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.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-4 and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 98/10522 to Leviathan Legacy Inc.
Leviathan Legacy Inc. clearly teaches a Method of Alerting Marine Mammals and Other Mammals Underwater of the Danger of Approaching Motor Vessels, comprising the step of:
driving a transmitting device (20, 54) by an electrical signal (output of power amplifier 18, 52) comprising various drive frequencies (see Figures 1, 2, 4A, and 4B) selected depending on a target frequency.
With regards to claim 2, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
at least one of the drive frequencies of the electrical signal is different from the target frequency (see Figures 1, 2, 4A, and 4B).
With regards to claim 3, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
the drive frequencies being sufficiently one of different and distant from one another (see Figures 2, 4A, and 4B) such that:
their total spectral field thereof does not exceed the spectral field of any one of the individual drive frequencies.
With regards to claim 4, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
the drive frequencies being selected such that the target frequency can be reached by a combination of the plurality of drive frequencies.
With regards to claim 13, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
at least one of:
the method is at least one of a medical and an ultrasound method; and
the device is at least one of a medical and an ultrasonic probe.
With regards to claim 14, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
at least one of:
the transmitting device transmits a wave in order to at least one of process and observe the medium; and
the device transmits an electromagnetic wave when the device is driven.
With regards to claim 15, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
a computer program (see Figures 5 and 6) comprising instructions that, when the program is executed by a computer, lead it to implement implements the method according to paragraph 8 above.
With regards to claim 16, Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses:
the transmitting device operates with a target frequency (see Figures 1, 2, 4A, and 4B), the system being configured to:
drive the transmitting device by an electrical signal comprising various drive frequencies selected depending on the target frequency.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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 5-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 98/10522 to Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0021599 A1 to Uehara.
Leviathan Legacy Inc. discloses a Method of Alerting Marine Mammals and Other Mammals Underwater of the Danger of Approaching Motor Vessels as described in paragraph 8 above.
However, it fails to disclose the electrical signal consisting of successive waveforms such that each waveform has for frequency one of the drive frequencies.
Uehara discloses an Imaging Apparatus for Diagnosis, Method of Controlling Imaging Apparatus for Diagnosis, Computer Program, and Computer Readable Storage Medium, comprising:
an electrical signal (see Figures 3, 4, and 5) consisting of successive waveforms such that each waveform has for frequency one of the drive frequencies.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to use the electrical signal consisting of successive waveforms as disclosed by Uehara on the Method of Alerting Marine Mammals and Other Mammals Underwater of the Danger of Approaching Motor Vessels disclosed by Leviathan Legacy Inc., for the purpose of utilizing an electrical signal having a frequency within a desired frequency range.
With regards to claim 6, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
at least one of:
the waveforms are repeated; and
the waveforms are alternated with one another, so that each waveform is partially interrupted.
With regards to claim 7, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
each waveform being weighted by at least one of an impedance and a current value depending on the target electrical signal.
With regards to claim 8, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
the waveforms forming a predefined time sequence of N1 drive frequency pulses fl, followed by N2 drive frequency pulses f2, ..., followed by Nn drive frequency pulses fn;
N1, N2, ..., Nn being whole numbers greater than or equal to 1.
With regards to claim 9, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
the waveforms forming a random time sequence of drive frequency pulses.
With regards to claim 10, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
at least one of the waveforms and the drive frequency pulses are configured to stimulate a piezoelectric element of an ultrasonic probe.
With regards to claim 11, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara discloses:
the device being controlled by an electrical signal having the target frequency, wherein the waveforms are selected, such that their set can reach the target electrical signal.
With regards to claim 12, Leviathan Legacy Inc. in view of Uehara disclose:
the waveforms being selected such that an average energy, referred to as “Q-Peak”, of each waveform is less than the average energy of the target electrical signal.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PEDRO J CUEVAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2021. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 AM - 6:00 PM.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at 571-272-2098. 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.
/PEDRO J CUEVAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2834 June 12, 2026
Prosecution Insights