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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over De Ridder (US 10780277 B2).
Regarding claim 1, De Ridder discloses A method of treating a central nervous system disorder in a patient in need thereof (eg. Abstract), comprising the steps of: (a) determining the presence of an abnormal correlation interaction or an abnormal anticorrelation interaction or an abnormal uncorrelated interaction between at least one or more nodes within an identified brain network of interest and determining whether to reinstate a desired normal anticorrelation therefore or a desired normal correlation interaction therefore (eg. Col. 2, Ln. 15-30, Col. 11, Ln. 24-48, Col. 8 , Ln. 12-54, Col. 9, Ln. 29-37); (b) setting first parameters that define a carrier waveform, wherein said carrier waveform exhibits an infraslow or a slow selected waveform frequency (eg. Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, LN. 30 – Col. 18 Ln. 10); (c) setting second parameters that define a high frequency waveform, that is nested upon said carrier waveform, and wherein at least one of said carrier waveform, and said high frequency waveform are defined to correspond to physiologic neural oscillations or firing modes associated with at least one of said identified networks or interacting brain regions of interest (eg. Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, Ln. 30 – Col. 18 Ln. 50); (d) providing one or more implantable pulse generators configured to generate a plurality of nested stimulation waveforms defined to reinstate one or more desired normal correlation interactions or normal anticorrelation interactions, in said patient (Eg. Col. 19, Ln. 30 – Col. 26, Ln. 28); and (e) reinstating normal anticorrelated or normal correlated interactions by delivering a first nested stimulation waveform through one or more electrodes of said implantable pulse generators to one or more other identified regions of interacting brain regions within said network of interest (Eg. Col. 19, Ln. 30 – Col. 26, Ln. 28, the Examiner interprets this as an intended result of the stimulation); and (f) delivering a second nested stimulation waveform through one or more electrodes of said pulse generators to said one or more other identified networks of interacting brain regions of interest (eg. Col. 19, Ln. 5-29, separate distinct nested stimulation waveforms).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have combined embodiments of different IMD lead configurations and treatment sites as taught by De Ridder to provide nested stimulations to treat a variety of different conditions.
Regarding claim 2, De Ridder discloses the additional step of delivering at least a third or more nested stimulation waveforms through one or more electrodes of said pulse generators to a third or more other identified networks of interacting brain regions of interest (eg. Col. 19, Ln. 5-29, separate distinct nested stimulation waveforms).
Regarding claim 3, De Ridder discloses additionally including the step of reinstating a normal uncorrelated interaction (The claims recite a desired outcome, which holds no patentable weight (see MPEP 2111.04 and (Minton v. Nat’l Ass’n of Securities Dealers, Inc., 336 F. 3d 1373, 1381, 67 USPQ2d 1614, 1620 (Fed. Cir. 2003), the Examiner recommends adding the steps the stimulation must take to result in reinstating uncorrelated interactions).
Regarding claim 4, De Ridder discloses normalization of an interaction consists of delivering an infraslow or a slow wave that is in phase, between said nodes or said brain regions of said identified network (eg. Col. 13, Ln. 17-25).
Regarding claim 5, De Ridder discloses in that disruption of correlated or anticorrelated interactions between said nodes within an identified network results in uncorrelated activity within the identified network and consists of pseudorandom or random delivery of the phases of infraslow or of slow carrier waves (Eg. Col. 10, Ln. 22 – Col. 13, Ln. 7).
Regarding claim 6, De Ridder discloses networks in which said phase of said infraslow or said slow carrier wave in different regions are used to treat or correct one or more abnormal correlated, anticorrelated or uncorrelated conditions constitute a network selected from the group consisting of the default mode, salience, central executive, emotional, affective, somatosensory, medial, lateral and descending pain, auditory, vestibular, visual, olfactory, gustatory, social, mirror neuron, dorsal attention, ventral attention, reward, dysreward, central sympathetic, or parasympathetic networks (eg. Col. 2, Ln. 45-50, Col. 8 Ln. 28-58).
Regarding claim 7, De Ridder discloses treatment of nervous system disorders, for neuroenhancement, for ameliorating non-pathological states, or for strengthening neurological resilience by: (a) comprising the additional step of ameliorating one or more abnormal interactions between said first brain network and at least one or more further brain networks (Col. 2, Ln. 45-50, Col. 8 Ln. 28-58) (b) delivering a first infraslow stimulation wave of from about 0.01 Hz to about 0.1 Hz, or a first slow stimulation wave of from about 0.1 Hz to about1 Hz) stimulation wave to said first brain network (Eg. Col. 12, Ln. 24-37 and Col. 17, Ln. 60 – Col. 18, Ln. 10); and (c) delivering a second infraslow stimulation wave of from about 0.01 Hz to about 0.1 Hz, or a second slow stimulation wave of from about 0.1 Hz to about1 Hz) stimulation wave to said second brain network (Eg. Col. 12, Ln. 24-37 and Col. 17, Ln. 60 – Col. 18, Ln. 10); wherein a phase difference between said first and said second infraslow or said first and said second slow stimulation waves is selected for amelioration of said abnormal interaction (Eg. Col. 10, Ln. 22 – Col. 13, Ln. 7).
Regarding claim 8, De Ridder discloses treatment of nervous system disorders, for neuroenhancement, for ameliorating non-pathological states, or for strengthening neurological resilience by comprising the additional step of ameliorating an abnormal condition within a first brain network and ameliorating one or more abnormal interactions between said first brain network and at least one or more further brain networks (Col. 2, Ln. 45-50, Col. 8 Ln. 28-58) by: (a) delivering a first infraslow stimulation wave of from about 0.01 Hz to about 0.1 Hz, or a first slow stimulation wave of from about 0.1 Hz to about1 Hz) stimulation wave to said first brain network Col. 12, Ln. 24-37 and Col. 17, Ln. 60 – Col. 18, Ln. 10); and (b) delivering a second infraslow stimulation wave of from about 0.01 Hz to about 0.1 Hz, or a second slow stimulation wave of from about 0.1 Hz to about1 Hz) stimulation wave to said second brain network; and wherein a phase difference between said first and said second infraslow or said first and said second slow stimulation waves is selected for amelioration of the abnormal interaction Col. 12, Ln. 24-37 and Col. 17, Ln. 60 – Col. 18, Ln. 10 and Col. 10, Ln. 22 – Col. 13, Ln. 7).
Regarding claim 9, De Ridder discloses a method of treating a central nervous system disorder in a patient (eg. Abstract), comprising the steps of: (a) identifying abnormal connectivity between at least two or more identified networks of interacting brain regions where connectivity has been disrupted from its normal communication activity and said disruption is related to a central nervous system disorder (eg. Col. 2, Ln. 15-30, Col. 11, Ln. 24-48, Col. 8 , Ln. 12-54, Col. 9, Ln. 29-37); (b) recording electrical activity related to neural activity in the brain of said patient (eg. Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, LN. 30 – Col. 18 Ln. 10); (c) with reference to said recording, determining the presence of an abnormal correlation interaction or an abnormal anticorrelation interaction between each identified network of interacting brain regions with each of the remaining other identified networks of interacting brain regions, and determining whether to reinstate a normal anticorrelated or a normal correlated interaction (eg. Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, LN. 30 – Col. 18 Ln. 50); (d) setting first parameters that define a stimulation carrier waveform, wherein said carrier waveform exhibits an infraslow or slow selected waveform frequency in a range of frequencies of up to 1 Hz (eg. Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, LN. 30 – Col. 18 Ln. 10); (e) setting second parameters that define a stimulation high frequency waveform, where said high frequency waveform is nested upon said carrier waveform, and wherein at least one of said stimulation carrier waveform and said high frequency waveform are defined to correspond to physiologic neural oscillations associated with at least one of said networks of interacting brain regions (Eg. Col. 19, Ln. 30 – Col. 26, Ln. 28, the Examiner interprets this as an intended result of the stimulation); (f) providing and operating an implantable pulse generator to generate a plurality of nested stimulation electrical waveforms, which individually are comprised of said carrier waveforms and of said high frequency waveforms, wherein said nested stimulation waveform comprises a plurality of pulse bursts, and wherein said pulse bursts are characterized in that each of said pulse bursts is comprised of a plurality of discrete pulses, and said plurality of discrete pulses within each pulse burst are repeated according to a frequency parameter of said high frequency waveform, and wave amplitude of each said discrete pulse within respective said pulse bursts is controlled according to said high frequency waveform nested on said carrier waveform such that wave amplitude peaks of the corresponding plurality of said discrete pulses vary within each respective said pulse burst Col. 12, Ln. 61 – Col. Col. 13, Ln. 67, Col. 15, LN. 30 – Col. 19 Ln. 29);; (g) reinstating normal anticorrelated or normal correlated interactions by delivering a first nested stimulation waveform through one or more applied implantable pulse generator electrodes to a first network of interacting brain regions of interest, and delivering a second nested stimulation waveform through one or more applied pulse generator electrodes to a second network of interacting brain regions of interest eg. Col. 19, Ln. 5-29; and (h) where said patient is in need of a third or more other nested stimulation waveforms, delivering a third or more nested stimulation waveforms through one or more applied electrodes of said pulse generator to a third or more additional other networks of interacting brain regions of interest (eg. Col. 19, Ln. 5-29 separate waveforms).
Regarding claim 10, De Ridder discloses one or more of said nested stimulation electrical waveforms is selected from the group consisting of pink noise, brown noise, red noise, black noise, grey noise, white noise, blue noise, violet noise, or green noise (Eg, Col. 21, Ln. 23-27).
Regarding claim 11, De Ridder discloses in one or more of said nested stimulation electrical waveforms is defined as 1/fα, with f being wave frequency and α being any number between -5 and +5 or is defined as a composite of 1/fαand 1/f -α,with f being wave frequency and α being any number between -5 and +5 (Eg. Col. 14, Ln. 1-8, Col. 27, Ln. 7-24).
Regarding claim 12, De Ridder discloses nested noise stimulation electrical waveforms are generated in a pseudo-random manner (Eg, Col. 21, Ln. 23-27).
Regarding claim 13, De Ridder discloses one or more of said nested noise stimulation waveforms comprises pink noise nested on a carrier wave form (Eg, Col. 21, Ln. 23-27).
Regarding claim 14, De Ridder discloses one or more of said nested noise stimulation waveforms comprises grey noise nested on a carrier wave form (Eg, Col. 21, Ln. 23-27).
Regarding claim 15, De Ridder discloses networks of interacting brain regions are selected from the central executive network, the default node network, or the salience network (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-59).
Regarding claim 16, De Ridder discloses said networks of interacting brain regions are selected from the left and/or right central executive network, the left and/or right default node network, or the left and/or right salience network (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-59, Col. 10, Ln. 22-35).
Regarding claim 17, De Ridder discloses networks additionally comprise a fourth network, selected from the group consisting of the sensorimotor system, the auditory system, the visual system, the somatosensory system, or the motor network (eg. Col. 27, Ln. 50-60, Col. 16, Ln. 4-26).
Regarding claim 18, De Ridder discloses networks additionally comprise a fourth network, selected from the group consisting of the attentional network, the dorsal attentional network or the ventral attentional network (eg. Col. 9, Ln. 37-55, Col. 10, Ln. 22-35, Col. 32, Ln. 41-65).
Regarding claim 19, De Ridder discloses networks additionally comprise a fourth network, the mirror neuron network. (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-58).
Regarding claim 20, De Ridder discloses said networks additionally comprise a fourth network, the affective/emotional network (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 10-25, Col. 12, Ln. 24-37).
Regarding claim 21, De Ridder discloses networks additionally comprise a fourth network, the central autonomic network (eg. Col. 2, Ln. 46-50, Col. 19, Ln. 54 – Col. 21).
Regarding claim 22, De Ridder discloses networks additionally comprise a fifth networks, selected from the group consisting of the sensorimotor network, one or more of the attentional networks, the mirror neuron network, the emotional/affective network, or the central autonomic network (Col. 8, Ln. 10-25, Col. 12, Ln. 24-37, Col. 2, Ln. 46-50, Col. 8, Ln. 28-58, Col. 9, Ln. 37-55, Col. 10, Ln. 22-35, Col. 32, Ln. 41-65Col. 19, Ln. 54 – Col. 21)
Regarding claim 23, De Ridder discloses aid abnormal interaction between nodes clinically manifests itself as a disease selected from the group consisting of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, autism, obsessive compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder syndrome, or schizophrenia, mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimers dementia, Lewy-body disease dementia, multi-infarct dementia, thalamocortical dysrhythmias, tinnitus, pain, Parkinson Disease, stress, epilepsy, a disorder of consciousness, a minimally cognitive state, a vegetative state, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, a stress autonomic nervous system disorder or an immune disorders (eg. Col. 7, Ln. 15-31, Col. 8, Ln. 12-27, Col. 11, Ln. 49-65).
Regarding claim 24, De Ridder discloses abnormal connectivity takes place in communications between said default mode network and said central executive network (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-60).
Regarding claim 25, De Riddler discloses abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-60, . Col. 19, Ln. 30 – Col. 26, Ln. 28, the claims are written as a desired outcome and does not hold patentable weight, the Examiner recommends adding the steps the stimulation must take to result in reinstating uncorrelated interactions).
Regarding claim 26, De Riddler discloses abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal correlated communication. (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-60, . Col. 19, Ln. 30 – Col. 26, Ln. 28, the claims are written as a desired outcome and does not hold patentable weight, the Examiner recommends adding the steps the stimulation must take to result in reinstating uncorrelated interactions).
Regarding claim 27, De Ridder discloses abnormal connectivity takes place in communications between said central executive network and said salience network (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-60, Col. 11, Ln. 49-62).
Regarding claim 28, De Ridder discloses said abnormal connectivity communicates between said salience network and said default mode network. (eg. Col. 8, Ln. 28-60, Col. 11, Ln. 49-62).
Regarding claim 29, De Ridder discloses first, second, and third nested stimulation waveforms are delivered to said patient contemporaneously (eg. Col. 16, Ln. 25-42, Col. 19, Ln. 5-29, Col. 28, Ln. 19-26).
Regarding claim 30, De Ridder discloses said abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be opposite in phase between said default mode network and said central executive network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Regarding claim 31, De Ridder discloses said abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be opposite in phase between said default mode network and said salience network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Regarding claim 32, De Ridder discloses abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be opposite in phase between said central executive network and said salience network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Regarding claim 33, De Ridder discloses said abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be in phase between said default mode network and said central executive network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Regarding claim 34, De Ridder discloses wherein said abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be in phase between said default mode network and said salience network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Regarding claim 35, De Ridder discloses said abnormal connectivity communication is reinstated to a normal anticorrelated communication by configuring said infraslow carrier wave form to be in phase between said central executive network and said salience network (Eg. Col. 13, Ln. 4-67, Col. 16, Ln. 4 – Col. 18, Ln. 50).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J LAU whose telephone number is (571)272-2317. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5:30 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, Carl Layno can be reached at 571-272-4949. 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.
/MICHAEL J LAU/Examiner, Art Unit 3796