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 1-21 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because the gray-scale images may not reproduce well. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-9 and 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moser et al. (US 20140155978 A1, 2014-06-05) (hereinafter “Moser”).
Regarding claims 1-9 and 18-21, Moser teaches an applicator for applying functional electrical stimulation (FES) to rehabilitate a person ([0029], [0030], Figs. 1-5, 13, 14), the applicator including: a surround (10, Figs. 3, 4) for surrounding a portion of the person (e.g., [0032]-[0033]) ; and one or more electrodes (e.g., 24, 26, Fig. 2) for locating within the surround (e.g., [0032]-[0033]) (as recited in clam 1); wherein the electrodes are borne by the surround, when attaching the surround to the portion, to greatly reduce set-up time (e.g., [0032]-[0033]) (as recited in clam 2); including electrode fastening means for fastening the electrodes to the surround (e.g., [0007], [0037],[0032]-[0033], [0045]-[0048]) (as recited in clam 3); wherein the electrode fastening means is releasable and/or position adjustable (e.g., [0007], [0037],[0032]-[0033], [0045]-[0048]) (as recited in clam 4); wherein the electrode fastening means includes a hook-and loop fastener (e.g., [0036]-[0037]) (as recited in clam 5); wherein the fastener is adhesive-backed (e.g., [0036]-[0037]) (as recited in clam 6); including surround fastening means for fastening the surround to itself (e.g., [0007], [0037],[0032]-[0033], [0045]-[0048]) (as recited in clam 7); wherein the surround fastening means is releasable and/or tightness adjustable (e.g., [0007], [0037],[0032]-[0033], [0045]-[0048]) (as recited in clam 8); wherein the surround fastening means includes a hook-and loop fastener (e.g., [0036]-[0037]) (as recited in clam 9); wherein the portion includes a limb, and the surround is shaped to fit at least part of the limb (e.g., Figs, 3, 4) (as recited in clam 18); wherein the applicator includes a garment (e.g., Figs, 3, 4) (as recited in clam 19); including a processor or computer (16, Fig.1; [0051]) borne by the surround (as recited in clam 20); a rehabilitation method involving: surrounding a portion of a person with a surround; and applying functional electrical stimulation (FES) to the person using one or more electrodes located within the surround (as recited in clam 21).
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 10-15 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Yang et al. (US 20190217078 A1, 2019-07-18) (hereinafter “Yang”).
Regarding claims 10-15 and 17, Moser teaches an applicator as claimed in claim 1, as discussed above. However, Moser does not expressly teach the use of gels or the various feature recited in the clams at issue. Yang teaches use of gels (e.g., [0004]-[0005], various electrode layers and materials (e.g., [0011]-[0020]), electrode connectors (e.g., [0033], [0076]). 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 Yang with the invention taught by Moser such that the invention further comprises wherein the electrodes include a gel coating, and a protector for protecting the gel coating (as recited in clam 10); wherein the protector includes a sheet (as recited in clam 11); wherein the sheet includes plastics material (as recited in clam 12); wherein each electrode includes a pad, and a conductor extending from the pad (as recited in clam 13); wherein the conductor terminates in a connector or adaptor (as recited in clam 14); wherein the connector or adaptor is located external the surround (as recited in clam 15); wherein the surround includes a resilient sheet, preferably a neoprene sheet (as recited in clam 17) in order to improve the usability of the invention.
Claims 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moser in view of Yang, as applied to claim 14, and further in view of Su et al. (US 20080003841 A1, 2008-01-03) (hereinafter “Su”).
Regarding claim 16, Moser teaches an applicator as claimed in claim 1, as discussed above. However, Moser does not expressly teach wherein the connector or adaptor includes a light emitting diode (LED). Su teaches a connector or adaptor includes a light emitting diode (LED). See, e.g, [0022]-[0026]. 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 Yang with the invention taught by Moser such that the invention further comprises wherein the connector or adaptor includes a light emitting diode (LED) (as recited in clam 16) in order to improve the usability of the invention.
Conclusion
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, Ph.D.
/SCOTT LUAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792