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 21-24, 27, 29-37, 39-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2017/0172542 A1) in view of Venturini et al. (US 2020/0268393 A1).
PNG
media_image1.png
777
577
media_image1.png
Greyscale
With respect to claim 21, Lee discloses an ultrasound imaging system, comprising (see Figure 2): an ultrasound imaging apparatus (ultrasound probe #200); a dual function unit operable with the ultrasound imaging apparatus (docking station#204); and a power cord configured to detachably couple, at one end, to the ultrasound imaging apparatus, via the dual function unit, and to detachably couple, at another end, to a multi-use display device (see display device #122 in Figure 1); wherein the power, when coupled to the ultrasound imaging apparatus enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus (as shown in Figure 1 attached herein; see paragraphs 0023 and 0036). Furthermore, Lee discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for specifying that the power and data conveyance cord, when coupled to both the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device, enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data between the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device. However, Venturini discloses a dual function cord when coupled to both the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device through a cord/wire, enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data between the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device (see paragraphs 0077-0080). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have a dual function cord that enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data as taught by Venturini in combination with Lee’s cord for the purpose of providing charge as well as communication between the units following the communication standard RS 485 for communication capacity and charging parameters for the devices connected through said cord or wire while isolating the charging voltage from the communication bus connected to the cable avoiding interference while operating with dual functions (see paragraphs 0077-0080 and 0082).
With respect to claims 22 and 36, Lee discloses data comprises ultrasound image data acquired by the ultrasound imaging apparatus (see paragraphs 0016, and 0020-0021).
With respect to claims 23 and 37, Lee discloses the data comprises control signals from the multi-use display device to the ultrasound imaging apparatus (see paragraphs 0019-0021).
With respect to claim 24, Lee discloses the dual function unit (docking station #204) comprises a power conveying element (see charging unit #220) and a power port for mating with the power cord (see paragraphs 0023 and 0036).
With respect to claim 27, Lee discloses the power conveying element comprises an induction coil for wireless charging (see Figure 2, disclosing induction ring #226 in the power conveying element/unit #220 and inductive ring #213 the power accepting interface #212).
With respect to claim 29 and 39, Lee discloses the multi-use display device comprises a display (see display #122 in Figure 1) for displaying the ultrasound image data (see paragraphs 0019-0021).
With respect to claim 30 and 40, Lee discloses the multi-use display device comprises storage for the ultrasound image data (see memory device #118).
With respect to claim 31 and 41, Lee discloses the multi-use display device receives data from the ultrasound imaging apparatus alternatively through the power and data conveyance cord and wirelessly, via a wireless connection between and the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device (see paragraphs 0028-0029 and 0034-0037 disclosing wireless connection).
With respect to claim 32, Lee discloses the multi-use display device and the ultrasound imaging apparatus exchange data through the wireless connection therebetween and the ultrasound imaging apparatus receives power through the power and data conveyance cord (see paragraph 0022).
With respect to claim 33, Lee discloses the ultrasound imaging apparatus is handheld (see Figure 2 showing the probe #202 as a handheld device).
With respect to claim 34, Lee discloses the multi-use display device is a device comprising a processor communicatively operable with a screen interface, selected from the group consisting of laptop computer, a tablet computer, a desktop computer, a smart phone, a smart watch, spectacles with a built-in display, a television, and a bespoke display (see paragraph 0015).
With respect to claim 35, Lee discloses a method of data and power connection between an ultrasound imaging apparatus and a multi-use display device comprises: providing a dual function unit operable with the ultrasound imaging apparatus (see docking station#204 for charging and cooling); providing a power conveyance cord configured to detachably couple, at one end, to the ultrasound imaging apparatus (charging unit #220 is connected to an external power source inherently though a cable labeled by the examiner in the bottom surface #210), via the dual function unit, and to detachably couple, at another end, to a multi-use display device; conveying power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus when the power conveyance cord is coupled to both the ultrasound imaging apparatus (as shown in Figure 1 attached herein; see paragraphs 0023 and 0036).
Furthermore, Lee discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for specifying that the power and data conveyance cord, when coupled to both the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device, enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data between the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device. However, Venturini discloses a dual function cord when coupled to both the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device through a cord/wire, enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data between the ultrasound imaging apparatus and the multi-use display device (see paragraphs 0077-0080). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to have a dual function cord that enables the conveyance of power to the ultrasound imaging apparatus and enables the transfer of data as taught by Venturini in combination with Lee’s cord for the purpose of providing charge as well as communication between the units following the communication standard RS 485 for communication capacity and charging parameters for the devices connected through said cord or wire while isolating the charging voltage from the communication bus connected to the cable avoiding interference while operating with dual functions (see paragraphs 0077-0080 and 0082).
Claims 25, 28 and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2017/0172542 A1) and Venturini et al. (US 2020/0268393 A1) in view of Yim et al. (US 2019/0290239 A1).
With respect to claims 25, 28 and 38, Lee discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for the power port is selected from the group consisting of a micro A Universal Serial Bus (USB), a micro B USB, a micro USB 3 and a USB C. However, Yim discloses the use of a USB as a power port with the cable (see paragraph 0116). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art at the time the invention was filed to have a USB as taught by Yim with Lee’s power port for the purpose of disclosing a well-known in the art electrical connection device to connect the charger to an electrical outlet by using a device easily accessible and compatible to any electronic means.
Furthermore, “TechTerms” (see in references cited in PTO 892) discloses different types of USB ports known since 1997 including all types between A to C. “TechTerms” is not relied upon for the purpose of the rejection above, and instead as a supporting document to further demonstrate the use of all kinds of USB’s are well known in the art wherein the selection of the well-known USB type for the disclosed intended purpose requires only routine skill in the art according to its suitability.
Claim 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US 2017/0172542 A1) and Venturini et al. (US 2020/0268393 A1) in view of Zhenghe (Zhenghe product description).
With respect to claim 26, Lee discloses the claimed invention as stated above except for a power accepting interface comprises a plurality of spring-loaded pins and power conveying element comprises a plurality of target mating receptacles. However, Zhenghe discloses a power accepting interface comprises a plurality of spring-loaded pins and power conveying element comprises a plurality of target mating receptacles (see Pogo Pin (spring-loaded connector) section). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art at the time the invention was filed to have power accepting interface comprises a plurality of spring-loaded pins and power conveying element comprises a plurality of target mating receptacles as taught by Zhenghe with Lee’s charging system (comprising charging ring #126 in contact with charging ring #213) for the purpose of providing a charge to the probe #202 from Lee by using a known contact system that is reliable for providing said charge to a device since it requires only routine skill in the art according to its suitability for the disclosed intended purpose.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-41 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIXOMARA VARGAS whose telephone number is (571)272-2252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Raymond Keith can be reached at 571-270-1790. 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.
/DIXOMARA VARGAS/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798