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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected below.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 10 and 17 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 9 of U.S. Patent No. 9,889,257. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant applicant is a broader version of the patented claims.
Current claims
Patent 9,889,257
Claim 10 - A system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more processor-readable storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, cause performance of: receiving, at an intermediate device from a remote device, a request to initiate a first communication session; responsive to receiving the request, establishing a second communication session between the intermediate device and a medical device; responsive to establishing the second communication session, automatically transmitting, by the intermediate device to the remote device, an acknowledgement that establishes the first communication session between the intermediate device and the remote device;
and streaming updated control parameters to the medical device via the second communication session.
Claim 17 - wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session.
Claim 1 …autonomously initiate establishment of a first peer-to-peer communication session with the intermediate device over the second communications network by transmitting a connection request to the intermediate device via the second communications network, and automatically transmit the updated control information to the intermediate device via the first peer-to-peer communication session in response to receiving an acknowledgment from the intermediate device in response to establishing a second peer-to-peer communication session with the medical device over the first communications network.
Claim 9 - wherein the intermediate device streams the updated control information from the remote device via the first peer-to-peer communication session to the medical device via the second peer-to-peer communication session.
Claims 1, 8-9, 10, and 17-18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 12-14 of U.S. Patent No. 9,889,257. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant applicant is a broader version of the patented claims.
Current claims
U.S. Pat. 12,033,737
Claim 1. A method comprising: receiving, at an intermediate device from a remote device, a request to initiate a first communication session; responsive to receiving the request, establishing a second communication session between the intermediate device and a medical device; responsive to establishing the second communication session, automatically transmitting, by the intermediate device to the remote device, an acknowledgement that establishes the first communication session between the intermediate device and the remote device; and streaming updated control parameters to the medical device via the second communication session.
Claim 12. A processor-implemented method, the method comprising: receiving an acknowledgement from the intermediate device that a communication session has been established between the intermediate device and a monitoring device, wherein the intermediate device automatically provides the acknowledgement responsive to a second communication session being established between the intermediate device and the medical device; and in response to receiving the acknowledgement from the intermediate device. Naturally, when creating a session an initiating must occur.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, from the remote device, a request to terminate the first communication session; transmitting, to the remote device, a confirmation indicating that the first communication session will be terminated; and terminating the first communication session.
14. The method of claim 12, wherein streaming the updated control information to the medical device based on communicating the updated control information to the intermediate device comprises: establishing a first communication session with the intermediate device; transmitting, via the first communication session, the updated control information to the intermediate device for the automatic retransmission to the medical device; and after transmitting the updated control information, terminating the first communication session with the intermediate device.
10. - A system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more processor-readable storage media storing instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, cause performance of: receiving, at an intermediate device from a remote device, a request to initiate a first communication session; responsive to receiving the request, establishing a second communication session between the intermediate device and a medical device; responsive to establishing the second communication session, automatically transmitting, by the intermediate device to the remote device, an acknowledgement that establishes the first communication session between the intermediate device and the remote device;
and streaming updated control parameters to the medical device via the second communication session.
1. A system comprising: one or more processors; and one or more processor-readable storage media storing instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause performance of: receiving an acknowledgement from the intermediate device that a communication session has been established between the intermediate device and a monitoring device, wherein the intermediate device automatically provides the acknowledgement responsive to a second communication session being established between the intermediate device and the medical device; and in response to receiving the acknowledgement from the intermediate device,
streaming the updated control information to the medical device based on communicating the updated control information to the intermediate device
17. - wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session.
18. The system of claim 10, wherein the instructions further cause performance of: receiving, from the remote device, a request to terminate the first communication session; transmitting, to the remote device, a confirmation indicating that the first communication session will be terminated; and terminating the first communication session.
3. The system of claim 1, wherein streaming the updated control information to the medical device based on communicating the updated control information to the intermediate device comprises: establishing a first communication session with the intermediate device; transmitting, via the first communication session, the updated control information to the intermediate device for the automatic retransmission to the medical device; and after transmitting the updated control information, terminating the first communication session with the intermediate device.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-14, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lalonde U.S. PG Pub 2009/0058635 in view of Soliman (U.S. PG Pub. 2009/0146822).
As to claims 1, 10 and 19 Lalonde teaches a method comprising: receiving, at an intermediate device (element 14) from a remote device (element 18), a request to initiate a first communication session; responsive to receiving the request[0129 Operationally, the APM server 16A may direct a command to the PPC 14 via an SMS-based command 300. If the APM server 16A was in fact the source of the SMS message, it enters a wait state 302 or otherwise notes that it has initiated the message], establishing a second communication session between the intermediate device and a medical device[ 0127, 0128 As described above, commands may be sent from the APM server 16A to the PPC 14 using messaging services supported by the mobile network 20 infrastructure. One embodiment of the invention involves using Short Message Service (SMS) or "text messages" to direct commands to the PPC 14 for ultimate delivery to the PIMD 13. Such a handshaking embodiment enables the PPC 14 to verify that the command originated at an APM server 16A or other authorized source before forwarding the command to the PIMD 13.]; responsive to establishing the second communication session, automatically transmitting, by the intermediate device to the remote device, an acknowledgement that establishes the first communication session between the intermediate device and the remote device [0130 When the ACK 308 arrives at the APM server 16A, it verifies 310 that it was in a wait state, waiting to receive an ACK message from the PPC 14. If it was not, it can be assumed that the SMS message received at the PPC 14 was not issued by the APM server 16A, and the APM server 16A can notify the PPC 14 as such.]; and updated control parameters to the medical device via the second communication session [0087 Generation of these command signals may result from programmed instructions residing in a memory of the PPC 14 or the medical device, execution of which may be triggered by the PPC 14, medical device or remote server. The programmed instructions may be modified by the physician, typically via the remote server or by an interface to the PPC 14 or medical device,].
Lalonde teaches most of the claimed invention, but fail to teach all of the invention. It is noted that Lalonde does teach that steaming is possible [0174, 0185, 0277], however, this stream s not commands, however, this is an obvious variation as taught by Soliman.
As to claim 1, Soliman teaches streaming parameters to a medical device [0285].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to include the teachings of Soliman unto the system and methods of Lalonde. The motivation to combine is that Soliman teaches that stream data can allow a life saving event to occur when necessary [0285].
As to claims 2, and 11, Lalonde teaches further comprising, receiving, from the medical device and via the second communication session, measurement data [0277].
As to claims 3, and 12, Lalonde teaches wherein the measurement data comprises data obtained from a sensing arrangement configured to obtain glucose measurement values[0151].
As to claims 4, and 13, Lalonde teaches further comprising transmitting, from the intermediate device to the remote device via the first communication session, the measurement data [0174].
As to claims 5, and 14, Lalonde teaches wherein transmitting the measurement data to the remote device occurs automatically responsive to receiving the measurement data from the medical device [0174 – streaming].
As to claims 7, and 16, Lalonde teaches wherein the medical device and the remote device communicate using different types of communication networks, and wherein the intermediate device is configured to serve as an interface between the medical device and the remote device[0074, 0213, 0080].
As to claims 8, and 17, Lalonde teaches wherein the intermediate device and the medical device communicate via a peer-to-peer communication session[0097, 0217].
As to claims 9, and 18, Lalonde teaches further comprising: receiving, from the remote device, a request to terminate the first communication session[0410]; transmitting, to the remote device, a confirmation indicating that the first communication session will be terminated; and terminating the first communication session[0410].
As to claim 20 Lalonde teaches wherein the delivery data is obtained at the intermediate device from the medical device via the second communication session [0080].
Claim(s) 6 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lalonde U.S. PG Pub 2009/0058635 in view of Soliman (U.S. PG Pub. 2009/0146822) in view of Lee (U.S. PG Pub. 2012/0323170).
Lalonde teaches most of the claimed invention, but fail to teach all of the invention, but does not teach the limitations of claims 6 and 15, however, this is an obvious variation as taught by Lee.
As to claims 6, and 15, Lee teaches further comprising transmitting, from the intermediate device to the remote device via the first communication session, delivery data indicating amounts and/or timing of fluid delivered by the medical device[0040, 0041, 0055].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date to include the teachings of Lee unto the system and methods of Lalonde modified by Soliman. The motivation to combine is that Lee teaches that measurement such as flow rate include, for example, problems detected in the delivery of the drug, for example, by sensors 42 described above with respect to FIG. 1, the activation of alarm conditions or the like [0055].
Other Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Galasso (U.S. Pat. 10,022,499) teaches monitoring a patient and sending information to a remote user.
Brockway (U.S. Pat 8,478,389) teaches a remote monitoring facility that monitors for arrhythmia events.
Mayou (U.S. PG Pub. 2013/0035575) teaches a glucose monitor.
Karan (U.S. PG Pub. 2012/024447) teaches monitoring and displaying analytes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHAN L LAUGHLIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1042. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8AM-4PM.
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, Mohammad Ali can be reached at 571-272-4105. 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.
/NATHAN L LAUGHLIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2119