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 .
Amendment
This action is in response to the Amendment filed on 8/6/2026.
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 10-23 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph,
In view of the amendments, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101
Applicant’s arguments have been carefully reviewed, however they are not persuasive.
The amended claim 1 (and similarly amended claims 15 and 16) recite a method, an electronic device and a system that perform the steps of:
collecting an original electrocardiogram signal from a living body, and obtaining a first electrocardiogram signal by performing filtering processing on the original electrocardiogram signal, wherein the first electrocardiogram signal has a first duration;
calculating a peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal and a peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal, comprising:
performing segmentation processing on the first electrocardiogram signal to obtain a plurality of signal segments;
calculating a peak list and a peak number of each signal segment, wherein the peak list of each signal segment comprises N peaks, and N represents a respective peak number;
obtaining the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak lists of the plurality of signal segments; and
obtaining the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak numbers of the plurality of signal segments;
when the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a first threshold, and the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a second threshold, determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal, wherein the first threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak variability feature, the first threshold is determined based on peak variability features of a plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, the second threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak number variability feature, and the second threshold is determined based on peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
using the first electrocardiogram signal in subsequent processing in response to determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal; and
wherein the first threshold and the second threshold are determined by:
obtaining the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, wherein a duration of each of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples is the first duration;
calculating a peak variability feature and a peak number variability feature of each electrocardiogram signal sample of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples;
obtaining the first threshold based on the peak variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
obtaining the second threshold based on the peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples.
The step of collecting an original electrocardiogram signal and obtaining an electrocardiogram signal by performing filtering processing is interpreted as a pre-solution activity of data collection.
The abstract idea lies in the steps of calculation of the peak variability feature by performing segmentation of the signal, calculating a peak list and a peak number of each of the segments, obtaining the peak variability feature and the peak number variability feature and determining that the that the signal is a normal signal by comparing the features to a first and second threshold and continuing with subsequent signal processing when it is determined that the signal is a normal signal .
These are steps that can be performed using pen and paper and are therefore directed to an abstract idea.
Further while applicants argue that claim 1 integrates that exception into a practical application, the improvement lies in the abstract idea and not the technology.
Claims 1, 15 and 16 recite the additional elements of an “electronic device” and a “chip system” comprising a processor and a memory storing a computer program. However, these elements are recited at a high level of generality performing the function of generic data processing such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to simply implement the abstract idea using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(b) and (f). Applicant’s own specifications (e.g. [0079]) teaches that the method may alternatively be used in electronic devices such as a mobile phone connected to an electrocardiogram monitoring apparatus. A specific type of the electronic device is not limited in embodiments of this application.
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claims do not recite any additional steps of providing or adjusting any therapy based on the analysis performed by the processor.
Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 3, 5-8 and 10-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1, 15 and 16 recite a method, an electronic device, comprising a processor configured to run a computer program stored in a memory, to cause the electronic device to implement the method according to the method and a chip system, comprising a processor coupled to a memory to executes a computer program stored in the memory, to implement the method comprising:
collecting an original electrocardiogram signal from a living body, and obtaining a first electrocardiogram signal by performing filtering processing on the original electrocardiogram signal, wherein the first electrocardiogram signal has a first duration;
calculating a peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal and a peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal, comprising:
performing segmentation processing on the first electrocardiogram signal to obtain a plurality of signal segments;
calculating a peak list and a peak number of each signal segment, wherein the peak list of each signal segment comprises N peaks, and N represents a respective peak number;
obtaining the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak lists of the plurality of signal segments; and
obtaining the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak numbers of the plurality of signal segments;
when the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a first threshold, and the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a second threshold, determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal, wherein the first threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak variability feature, the first threshold is determined based on peak variability features of a plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, the second threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak number variability feature, and the second threshold is determined based on peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
using the first electrocardiogram signal in subsequent processing in response to determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal; and
wherein the first threshold and the second threshold are determined by:
obtaining the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, wherein a duration of each of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples is the first duration;
calculating a peak variability feature and a peak number variability feature of each electrocardiogram signal sample of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples;
obtaining the first threshold based on the peak variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
obtaining the second threshold based on the peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples.
To determine whether a claim satisfies the criteria for subject matter eligibility, the claim is evaluated according to a stepwise process as described in MPEP 2106(III) and 2106.03-2106.05. The instant claims are evaluated according to such analysis.
Step 1: Is the claim to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter?
Claim 1 is directed to a method, claims 15 and 16 are directed an electronic device and a chip system to perform the steps of the method, and thus meet the requirements for step 1.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomenon?
Claims 1, 15 and 16 recite a method, an electronic device, comprising a processor configured to run a computer program stored in a memory, to cause the electronic device to implement the method according to the method and a chip system, comprising a processor coupled to a memory to execute a computer program stored in the memory, to implement the method comprising:
calculating a peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal and a peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal, comprising:
performing segmentation processing on the first electrocardiogram signal to obtain a plurality of signal segments;
calculating a peak list and a peak number of each signal segment, wherein the peak list of each signal segment comprises N peaks, and N represents a respective peak number;
obtaining the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak lists of the plurality of signal segments; and
obtaining the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal based on peak numbers of the plurality of signal segments;
when the peak variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a first threshold, and the peak number variability feature of the first electrocardiogram signal is less than a second threshold, determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal, wherein the first threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak variability feature, the first threshold is determined based on peak variability features of a plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, the second threshold represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak number variability feature, and the second threshold is determined based on peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
using the first electrocardiogram signal in subsequent processing in response to determining that the first electrocardiogram signal is a normal signal; and
wherein the first threshold and the second threshold are determined by:
obtaining the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples, wherein a duration of each of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples is the first duration;
calculating a peak variability feature and a peak number variability feature of each electrocardiogram signal sample of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples;
obtaining the first threshold based on the peak variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples; and
obtaining the second threshold based on the peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples.
Claims 1, 15 and 16 recite the abstract idea of a mental process. The limitations as drafted in the claims, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the claimed steps in the mind or manually by a person, but for the recitation of a generic processor. Other than reciting a generic processor and memory, nothing in the elements of the claims precludes the step from practically being performed in the mind or manually by a clinician.
The step of collecting an original electrocardiogram signal from a living body, and obtaining a first electrocardiogram signal by performing filtering processing on the original electrocardiogram signal is interpreted as a pre-solution activity of data collection.
Further, dependent Claims 3, 5-8, 10-14, 17-23 merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they’re merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the process steps are performed.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Claims 1, 15 and 16 recite the additional elements of a “processor” and a “memory”. However, these elements are recited at a high level of generality performing the function of generic data processing such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to simply implement the abstract idea using generic computer components. See MPEP 2106.05(b) and (f).
Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
The additional elements when considered individually and in combination are not enough to qualify as significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, a “processor” and a “memory” as recited to perform the claimed steps amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. These additional elements are well‐understood, routine (For example Firoozabadi et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number: US 2018/0242872 A1, hereinafter “Firoozabadi”), Zhao et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number: US 2020/0107786 A1, hereinafter “Zhao”), Lv et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number: US 2019/0099103 A1, hereinafter “Lv”) and Ferdosi et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number: US 2014/0066795 A1, hereinafter “Ferdosi”) are all teachings that teach a processor coupled to a memory and execute a computer program stored in the memory to perform ECG data analysis on collected ECG data) and conventional limitations that amount to mere instructions or elements to implement the abstract idea. In addition, the end result of the system/method, the essence of the whole, is a patent-ineligible concept. Therefore, the claims are not patent eligible.
While no prior art rejection has been applied for the claims they cannot be indicated as allowable due to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 discussed above.
The closest prior art is
Lan et al (Foreign Patent Number: CN 112971797 A hereinafter “Lan”- APPLICANT CITED, Translation attached) which teaches an electrocardiogram signal quality evaluation method (e.g. Abstract), comprising:
obtaining a first electrocardiogram signal (e.g. Fig.2, page 4: continuous physiological signal quality evaluation method of the invention (example in ECG)); and extracting feature values (i.e. kurtosis page.5) and inputting them into a pre-training model (i.e. isolated forest model, claims 1,2) to obtain a scoring result and
comparing the score to a first and second threshold (i.e. L1 and L2 e.g. claims 1, 3).
Hu et al (Foreign Patent Number: CN 110226919 A hereinafter “Hu”- APPLICANT CITED, Translation attached) Hu teaches calculating a peak variability feature and a peak number variability feature of an electrocardiogram signal (e.g. page 3: determining intervals and obtaining statistical characteristics of the waveform and waveform intervals which are interpreted as peak variability features and peak number variability features).
The prior art does not teach that the first threshold that represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak variability feature is determined based on peak variability features of a plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples and the second threshold that represents an abnormal dividing point of the peak number variability feature is determined based on peak number variability features of the plurality of electrocardiogram signal samples.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALLIKA DIPAYAN FAIRCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-7043. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8 am-5pm EST.
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, BENJAMIN KLEIN can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/MALLIKA D FAIRCHILD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
