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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022-001891, filed on 01/07/2022.
Claim Objections
Claim 4 and 9 objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 4 and 9, “a color” should instead recite “the color” or “said color”.
In claim 9, recites “the display controller replaces a color”, however in the specification only ever describes “change”. It is unclear whether “replaces” is intended to have the same meaning as “change”, or if it implies a different action.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites “notification that calls attention to a rescuer so as to prompt the rescuer …”, it is unclear and not specific what is the scope of the claim. The claim limitation is indefinite because “notification that calls attention” is vague and does not provide objective boundaries and without clear structural limitation for determining the scope of the claim. The specification also does not define any specific structure or combination for this disclosed elements.
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.
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 1-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20170252571 A1 to Dascoli et al. (hereinafter “Dascoli”) in view of US 20140236261 A1 to Ternes et al. (hereinafter “Ternes”).
Regarding Claim 1, Dascoli teaches an automated external defibrillator (see abstract: “an automated external defibrillator”, also Para 5) configured to deliver an electric shock (see Para 35: “to provide a therapeutic electric shock”) for defibrillation to a heart of a subject (see Para 5: “delivers a defibrillating shock to a patient based on the mode-specific energy configuration”, also see Para 51: “The sensing pulse is followed by a biphasic defibrillation waveform having energy sufficient for defibrillating the patient's heart.”), the automated external defibrillator comprising:
a display (see Para 28: “a graphical display 120 which can display instructions, treatment feedback, and other information to a user which may be useful for administering resuscitative therapy.”, also Para 47, 69) that presents at least one of time information (see Figs. 10B-10D) regarding a time length until the electric shock is delivered (see Para 120: “FIG. 10A shows an example of an instruction 1000 displayed if an electric shock is recommended. The instruction can be shown on the display 120 and can include pictorial, textual, and auditory instructions.”, also see Para 122: “the instructions in FIGS. 10B-10D can be shown in sequence to count down to the moment when the electric shock can occur. In some examples, the countdown can begin immediately once the computer processor determines that the electric shock is recommended. … The instructions can include large numerical digits 1020 which decrease in value in subsequent instructions.”), an illustration (see Figs. 5-6 and 11) regarding reception of the electric shock (see Para 123: “once the countdown is completed the AED can administer the electric shock. In some examples, the electric shock can be applied immediately when the shock button 170 is pressed. Once the electric shock has occurred, a confirmation screen 1100 can be displayed.”), and a warning text (see Figs. 9A-9C) regarding the reception of the electric shock (see Para 122: “The numerical digits 1020 can be accompanied by the shock symbol 1175. The shock symbol 1175 can match a symbol on the shock button 170. The shock symbol can be a symbol which connotes a relationship to electricity, such as a lightning bolt.”); and
a display controller that controls the display (see Para 67: “when the button 130 is pressed, the operating mode of the AED 100 is immediately toggled (e.g. with little or no delay perceptible to the user) from one mode to another. … The display 120 can also immediately toggle between adult and pediatric instructions and images when the control 130 is toggled.”),
wherein the display controller changes a color presented on the display in accordance with the time length until the electric shock is delivered (see Para 120: “The instruction can be shown on the display 120 and can include pictorial, textual, and auditory instructions. In some examples, the instruction can include a bright, vibrant color (e.g. orange, red, or similar). In some examples, the bright vibrant color can match the color of the shock button 170 such that the user can associate the shock button 170 with the instruction 1000. The bright vibrant color can serve as a warning to the user to proceed with caution.”).
Dascoli teaches that the display may have various colors related to the display instruction.
However, does not teach that the display controller changes color presented on the display in accordance with the time length until the electric shock is delivered.
Ternes teaches a similar device (see Para 39: “a defibrillator”) and further teaches the display controller changes a color presented on the display in accordance with the time length until the electric shock is delivered (see Para 61: “the visual indication can be configured as a countdown timer such as illustrated in FIG. 9C. … the countdown timer can indicate such as a timing countdown indicative of time left for the completion of a particular state of the duty cycle … the countdown timer 902 in the FIG. 9 indicates "3" which can indicate that the current state (e.g. stimulation ON) state will complete in 3 units of time such as 3 seconds or any other. The time remaining may be displayed. Additionally, the display may flash for each second or otherwise enhance the visual representation of the countdown. The display also may change the brightness or color or other representation as the countdown gets closer to the end. For example, the display may be a first color during a first portion of the count down, and then switch to another color during a second portion of the countdown (e.g. last "x" seconds)”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to represent the time length getting closer by changing color on the display and give a clear status display to a user during the electric shock delivery.
Regarding Claim 2, Dascoli teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of claim 1, wherein the time information is information including a discrete numerical value (see Para 122: “see FIGS. 10B-10D show examples of a countdown during the electric shock therapy stage … include large numerical digits 1020 which decrease in value”); and
However, Dascoli, fails to teach wherein the display controller changes the color presented on the display at a predetermined time interval shorter than a time interval at which the numerical value of the time information changes.
Ternes, teaches a similar defibrillator wherein the display controller changes the color presented on the display at a predetermined time interval shorter than a time interval (see Para 61: “the countdown timer 902 in the FIG. 9 indicates "3" which can indicate that the current state (e.g. stimulation ON) state will complete in 3 units of time such as 3 seconds or any other.“) at which the numerical value of the time information changes “(see figure 9A-9D, also Para 60-62; see para 61: “The time remaining may be displayed. Additionally, the display may flash for each second or otherwise enhance the visual representation of the countdown”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to represent the changes of the color to enhance the visual representation of the countdown.
Regarding Claim 3, Dascoli teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of claim 1, wherein the time information is information including a discrete numerical value (see Para 122: “FIGS. 10B-10D show examples of a countdown during the electric shock therapy stage … include large numerical digits 1020 which decrease in value”);
However, Dascoli, fails to teach wherein the display controller changes the color presented on the display at a timing when the numerical value of the time information changes.
Ternes, teaches a similar defibrillator wherein the display controller changes the color presented on the display at a timing when the numerical value of the time information changes (see Para 61: “The display also may change the brightness or color or other representation as the countdown gets closer to the end. For example, the display may be a first color during a first portion of the count down, and then switch to another color during a second portion of the countdown (e.g. last "x" seconds).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to represent the display controller changes the color as the time length getting closer by changing color on the display and give a clear status display.
Regarding Claim 4, Ternes further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of claim 1, wherein the display controller changes at least one of a color of the time information (see Para 51: “a visual indication as provided by the visual indicator 410 of the INS timing indicator 406. In an example, a light emitting device such as a light emitting diode (LED) or any other may provide the visual indicator 410. The light emitting device can emit different colors corresponding to different timings … the visual indications can include, but are not limited to … a counter visualization, clock face visualization, timer visualization, and other visual indications.”) and a background color, that are presented on the display (see Para 61: “the display may be a first color during a first portion of the count down, and then switch to another color during a second portion of the countdown (e.g. last "x" seconds).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to represent enhanced visual representation of the countdown.
Regarding Claim 5, Ternes further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, wherein the display controller changes at least one of the color of the time information and the background color, that are presented on the display, several times (see Para 61: “the display may flash for each second or otherwise enhance the visual representation of the countdown. … the display may be a first color during a first portion of the count down, and then switch to another color during a second portion of the countdown (e.g. last "x" seconds).”.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to provide an enhanced visual representation of the countdown.
Regarding Claim 6, Ternes further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, wherein the time information is information including a discrete numerical value (see Para 61: “FIG. 9 indicates "3" which can indicate that the current state (e.g. stimulation ON) state will complete in 3 units of time such as 3 seconds or any other.”); and
wherein the display controller changes at least one of the color of the time information and the background color, that are presented on the display, several times within a time interval at which the numerical value of the time information changes (see Para 61 “the visual indication can be configured as a countdown timer such as illustrated in FIG. 9C. … the countdown timer can indicate such as a timing countdown indicative of time left for the completion of a particular state of the duty cycle ... For example, the countdown timer 902 in the FIG. 9 indicates "3" which can indicate that the current state … state will complete in 3 units of time such as 3 seconds or any other. … the display may flash for each second or otherwise enhance the visual representation of the countdown. The display also may change the brightness or color or other representation as the countdown gets closer to the end. For example, the display may be a first color during a first portion of the count down, and then switch to another color during a second portion of the countdown (e.g. last "x" seconds). … the displayed number can also represent the time remaining to start the next state such as the OFF state of the INS. Different color schemes or shading may be used to distinguish a countdown … Some embodiments may change a textual description associated with the counter changes depending on delivery status.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to represent a better visual of the countdown during the completion of the shock.
Regarding Claim 7, Ternes further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, wherein the display controller changes at least one of hue of the time information, brightness of the time information, chroma of the color of the time information, hue of the background color, brightness of the background color, and chroma of the background color, which are presented on the display. (see Para 51: “a light emitting diode (LED) or any other may provide the visual indicator 410. The light emitting device can emit different colors corresponding to different timings … different colors of light are shown on a graphical interface of the external device 118 in the form of a circle or a slash.” and see Para 60: “The circle may include areas of a different shade or color to graphically illustrate a portion of the duty cycle” also see Para 61: “The display also may change the brightness or color or other representation as the countdown gets closer to the end. “).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to provide a better visual of the display and information/countdown.
Regarding Claim 8, Ternes further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, wherein the display controller changes at least one of the color of the time information and the background color so that an angle of a hue difference between the color and the changed color is more than 45° in a hue circle divided into 24 equal parts (see para 51: “a red light is emitted when the programmed INS is disabled, a green light is emitted when the programmed INS is enabled and the current timing of the programmed INS is the stimulation ON time, and a yellow light is emitted when programmed INS is enabled and the current timing of the programmed INS is the stimulation OFF time. Furthermore, the color for a state may change or the visual indicator otherwise adapted as the time approaches for a transition”).
The recitation of “a hue difference between the color and the changed color is more than 45° in a hue circle divided into 24 equal parts” also falls under rationale under “Aesthetic Design Changes MPEP 2144.04(I)”. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of invention to combine Ternes teaching with respect to the limitation that an angle of hue difference between color is consistence to receive predictable variation to modify the invention of Dascoli in order to provide a better visual.
Regarding Claim 10, Dascoli further teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, wherein during the time information is presented on the display, the display controller presents, on the display, notification that calls attention to a rescuer so as to prompt the rescuer to move away from the subject (see Figure 9A-9C; also see Para 102: “The instruction 900 can include one or more of pictorial instructions, textual instructions, and auditory instructions. The instruction 900 can appear on the display 120 … The user 910 is shown to be away from the adult patient 920 such that the user is not in contact with the adult patient. The user 910 can be advised not to contact the patient 920 while the patient's … is being analyzed.”).
Claims 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dascoli in view of
Ternes as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of YouTube Video “10 Second Countdown | After Effects” posted by Carl Angelo (weblink cited in PTO892; hereinafter “Angelo”).
PNG
media_image1.png
411
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
423
584
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Angelo Screenshot 1 (hereinafter “F1”) Angelo Screenshot 2 (hereinafter “F2”)
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Dascoli and Ternes teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of above, however fails to teach a display controller replaces a color of the time information presented on the display, and a background color of the display with each other.
However, Angelo teaches a 10 second countdown video on YouTube, where the color of the time information presented on the display, and the background color of the display with each other (see Angelo F1 - F2).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the filling
date of the invention to modify Dascoli in view of Ternes to be combined with the teaching of Angelo to have display controller to change color of time information and background color of display with each other to provide better visual of the display.
Claims 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dascoli in view of Ternes as applied to claim 1, and also in view of CN 1921906 A to Ohara et al. (hereinafter “Ohara”), further in view of US 20160328529 A1 to Kaib et al. (hereinafter “Kaib”).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Dascoli and Ternes teaches the modified automated external defibrillator of claim 1,
Dascoli further teaches a sound generator (see Para 30: “The AED 100 include a speaker 140.”) that outputs a timing sound expressing, by sound (see Para 69: “The speaker 140 can provide audio instructions and feedback to the user during treatment. The speaker 140 can provide audio of the instructions which are displayed on the screen so that the user does not have to read the display”), a timing until the electric shock is delivered (see Para 120: “FIG. 10A shows an example of an instruction 1000 displayed if an electric shock is recommended. The instruction can be shown on the display 120 and can include … auditory instructions … the instruction 1000 is skipped and the AED can automatically begin a countdown to electric shock.”), and
Dascoli also teaches capacitors to store charges for delivering voltage (see para 52: “A storage capacitor 20 (e.g., a single capacitor or multiple capacitors connected in series and/or parallel) may be charged to a maximum voltage according to the mode (e.g., pediatric, adult) set by the AED by a charging circuit 22”) and a speaker that can provide auditory instructions and/or other feedback to a user during treatment. (see para 30).
However, Dascoli, does not specifically teach a warning sound expressing a state in which an internal capacitor of the automated external defibrillator has been charged with high voltage and a sound controller that controls the sound generator, wherein the sound controller changes the warning sound in accordance with presence or absence of output of the timing sound.
Another reference, Ohara, teaches a warning sound expressing a state in which an internal capacitor of the automated external defibrillator has been charged with high voltage (see “After the high-voltage energy delivery system 19 is charged, the processor 74 starts the first electric shock sequence by initiating the sound prompt "stand aside, press the flash button to rescue" and the flashing illumination of the rescue switch light 19. Operator actuation of rescue switch 40 will then cause processor 74 to steer high voltage energy delivery system 19 into discharge mode and cause defibrillation pulses to be applied to the patient, completing the first series of analysis/charge/shock sequences.”);
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of the invention to combine above teaching of Ohara with the modified invention of Dascoli in order to indicate that the capacitor is charged via a warning sound expressing the state for safety.
Another reference, Kaib, teaches a wearable defibrillator (see para 62) and further teaches a sound controller that controls the sound generator (see Para 126: “a microphone associated with the speaker assembly 714 detects a background noise level (i.e., background sound pressure level), and, in cooperation with a processor, enables adaptation of a sound pressure level of an alarm (or other acoustic output) according to an urgency of the alarm.”), wherein the sound controller changes the warning sound in accordance with presence or absence of output of the timing sound (see Para 126: “more urgent alarms can have greater volumes that lower priority alarms. For example, … moderate priority alarms can be configured to have a volume level approximately 6 dB lower than a volume level for high priority alarm. In other examples, the volume level for a moderate priority alarm is from 0 dB to 12 dB lower than a volume level for a corresponding high priority alarm.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the time of Applicant’s effective filing date of the invention to combine above teaching of Kaib with the modified invention of Dascoli in order to prioritize more urgent alarms (Kaib Para 126).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISRAT JAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8895. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 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, Patel Niketa can be reached at (571) 272-4156. 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.
/I.J./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/NIKETA PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights