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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 3/26/26 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mazlish et al. (US 20190274624 A1 – cited by Applicant), hereinafter Mazlish.
Regarding Claim 1 and 7, Mazlish teaches: A method, performed by an alarm system linked to a drug injector, of differentially generating an alarm (paragraph 0004-0005), as well as a computer-readable recording medium having recorded thereon a program for executing the method on a computer (paragraph 0095; 0105; figure 1A); the method comprising the steps of:
receiving state information from the drug injector (paragraph 0005);
determining priority of an alarm and a type of the alarm based on the received state information of the drug injector and a response scenario corresponding to the state information (paragraph 0005); and
differentially generating an alarm that stimulates at least one of senses of sight, hearing, and touch, based on the type and priority of the alarm, and the response scenario(paragraph 0005 - audible, visual, or haptic alarm).
Regarding Claim 2, Mazlish teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the step of receiving the state information comprises: a step of receiving state information regarding an operation or an error of the drug injector, through a communication module of the drug injector, or a communication module of a controller linked to the drug injector (paragraph 0004-0006; 0013).
Regarding Claim 3, Mazlish teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein a type of the response scenario comprises at least one of a response scenario related to a significant risk to a user's safety, a response scenario requiring an urgent process, a response scenario related to a predicted future situation, and a response scenario for managing the drug injector or the controller (paragraph 0007-0008).
Regarding Claim 4, Mazlish teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the step of differentially generating the alarm comprises a step of:
first providing a visual alarm and a tactile alarm according to the determined priority and type of the alarm and then differentially providing an auditory alarm and a visual alarm, or
providing an auditory alarm along with the visual alarm and the tactile alarm (paragraph 0021-0025).
Regarding Claim 5, Mazlish teaches: The method of claim 1, wherein the step of differentially generating the alarm comprises steps of:
mapping an alarm expression method according to the determined priority and type of the alarm (figure 4);
selectively combining alarm expression methods based on the response scenario (figures 5A-16B; paragraph 0097-0101); and
differentially providing the alarm to a user based on the combined alarm expression methods (figures 5A-16B; paragraph 0097-0101).
Regarding Claim 6, Mazlish teaches: The method of claim 1, further comprising a step of recommending an alarm providing method setting suitable for a user based on the user's alarm checking habits (paragraph 0004).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY B SHAH whose telephone number is (571)272-0686. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at 571-272-5001. 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.
JAY SHAH
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/JAY B SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights