DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 1-14 and 16-17 are pending.
Claim 15 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues “Giap does not disclose that an ordered sequence of medical action points from a received protocol specification is the controlling input that determines what media elements appear and in what order.” See Remarks at 7.
Applicant’s argument has been fully considered but it is not persuasive.
Giap teaches an ordered sequence of medical action points (e.g., maintain certain positions) from a received protocol specification (e.g., based on imaging modality) is the controlling input that determines what media elements appear and in what order (e.g., game avatar for instruction, feedback, or live images). See, e.g., [0100] (“The Virtual Reality Medical Application System of one embodiment of the invention uses body sensor to detect the 3-D body position, comparing to the reference or desired position, and give feedback to patients via a game avatar to instruct patient to make adjustment on a specific body parts on their own to get within the reference position.”); [0101] (“The Virtual Reality Medical Application System relies on motion sensors, goggle, and 3-D game to monitor patients during the radiation treatment and provide instant feedback to patients to remind them staying still via such process as pausing of the game, commands from game character, etc.”); [0103] (“The Virtual Reality Medical Application System of one embodiment can also allow patients to visualize the real live images of the procedure that the physicians see on their scope.”); [0120] (“FIG. 4 is a system level block diagram of the software of the Virtual Reality Medical Application System of the present invention generally designated 400. Software block diagram 400 includes a module subsystem 402 which includes the user interface module, artificial intelligence used for character behavior, a rules engine for determining avatar movement, an achievement module used to track avatar actions, and various animations, sound and communication functions. Engine subsystem 404 provides rendering, animation, sound, input processing and physics simulations to provide accurate virtual reality images and physical behavior.”); [0135] (“If the patient position is not within the set limits as determined in step 560, the magnitude of the deviation is determined in step 568. If the deviation is small, the patient is alerted to make an adjustment in step 570, and control returns to step 558 for continued monitoring and treatment. However, if the deviation is not small, then the treatment is paused in step 572 until the patient makes a proper position adjustment, and treatment resumes in step 574 and control returns to step 558 for continued monitoring and treatment.”); [0140] (“The patient is positioned in his or her proper reference position in step 630, and verified in step 632. If the patient is not in the proper reference position, feedback is provided to the patient and technician in step 634, and the patient position is then verified in step 628. Once proper positioning is achieved as determined in step 632, control returns in step 636 to the calling procedure.”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Giap et al. (US 20150306340 A1, 2015-10-29) (hereinafter “Giap”).
Regarding claims 1-14, as discussed above (Response to Arguments incorporated by reference herein), Giap teaches a user guidance system (e.g., [0084]) comprising: an interface (e.g., 150) for receiving configured to receive a specification of a medical protocol for a given patient, the specification defining a sequence of medical action points (e.g., [0086]-[0088]); a synthesizer (e.g., 402) configured to synthesize a media sequence in accordance with the sequence of medical action points, to obtain a synthesized media sequence for the said patient, the media sequence suitable to guide the patient in a medical procedure based on the medical protocol (e.g., [0120], [0124], wherein the medical protocol includes a medical imaging protocol (e.g., [0103]) (as recited in claim 1);wherein the media sequence is of a pre-selected category (e.g., [0124]) (as recited in claim 2); comprising a selector (e.g., 312, Fig. 3) configured to select the category based on at least one of an input from the patient or user received through a user interface (e.g., 310); or based on characteristics of the patient (e.g., [0115]) (as recited in claim 3); comprising a transducer controller (TC) configured to control, based on the synthesized media sequence, a transducer (TR) to produce a media output for the patient (e.g., [0096]) (as recited in claim 4); wherein the synthesized media sequence comprises a sequence of media elements associated with respective ones of the action points (e.g., Fig. 4, 402; [0120]-[0121]) (as recited in claim 5); wherein the synthesizing operation includes: i) changing an order of media elements in an existing media sequence; and ii) modulating a media element in accordance with an action point (e.g., [0172], [0212]) (as recited in claim 6); comprising a delay measurement device (DMD) configured to measure an elapsed time period between the transducer being controlled as per a given media element and the patient preforming the associated action point (e.g., [0010]) (as recited in claim 7); comprising a tuner module (TU), configured to tune the specification of the medical protocol based on the measured time period to produce a tuned specification of the medical protocol (e.g., Fig. 6, 546, 548, 570, 572) (as recited in claim 8); comprising a control interface, configured to control a medical imaging apparatus or therapy apparatus, based on the tuned specification (e.g., [0068]) (as recited in claim 9); wherein the media sequence is one or more of: audio, imagery and or video (e.g., [0120]) (as recited in claim 10); wherein the synthesizer is based on a machine learning model of the generative type (e.g., [0120]) (as recited in claim 11); comprising a medical imaging or therapy device; and the system of claim 1 (e.g., [0103]) (as recited in claim 12); a computer-implemented method, comprising: receiving a specification of a medical protocol for a given patient, the specification defining a sequence of medical action points; and synthesize a media sequence in accordance with the sequence of medical action points, to obtain a synthesized media sequence for the said patient, the media sequence configurable to guide the patient in a medical procedure, based on the protocol, wherein the medical protocol includes a medical imaging protocol (e.g., [0086]-[0088], [0120]-[0123], [0103]) (as recited in claim 13); a computer program element stored on a non-transitory computer readable medium, which, when being executed by at least one processing unit, is configured to cause the processing unit to perform the method of claim 13 (e.g., [0085]) (as recited in claim 14);
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 16 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giap in view of Choubey et al. (US 20040148403 A1, 2004-07-29) (hereinafter “Choubey”).
Regarding claims 16 and 17, as discussed above (Response to Arguments incorporated by reference herein), Giap teaches a user guidance system (e.g., [0084]), except comprising a parser. Choubey teaches use of structured medical data and associated mechanisms to process, parse, and transer the data. See, e.g., [0017]-[0019].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Choubey with the invention taught by Giap such that the invention further comprises a parser configured to parse a structured protocol data file representing the specification of the medical protocol to extract the sequence of medical action points in a correct order, wherein the extracted sequence of medical action points forms master data used by the synthesizer to synthesize the media sequence by selecting or associating media scenes or landmarks corresponding to respective ones of the medical action points (as recited in claim 16); the computer-implemented method of claim 13, further comprising parsing a structured protocol data file representing the specification of the medical protocol to extract the sequence of medical action points in a correct order, wherein the extracted sequence of medical action points forms master data used to synthesize the media sequence by selecting or associating media scenes or landmarks corresponding to respective ones of the medical action points (as recited in claim 17) in order to improve the functionality of the invention.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT T LUAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1860. The examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm, M-F (generally).
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Gary Jackson, can be reached on 571-272-4697. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
Scott Luan
/SCOTT LUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights