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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 1-5 (Group I) in the reply filed on 11/25/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 6-10 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/5/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of obtaining ventricular electrical activation parameters without significantly more.
Claim 1 is directed to a method, which is one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
The claim 1 recites a series of steps, e.g., pre-processing the electrocardiogram signal to remove baseline wandering, to normalize the signal, and optionally to amplify oscillations, feeding the pre-processed electrocardiogram signal to a neural network trained to estimate ventricular electrical activation parameters from electrocardiogram signals pre-processed in the same manner, and obtaining the ventricular electrical activation parameters as an output from the trained neural network. These limitations (with the exception of italicized limitations) describe the abstract idea of obtaining ventricular electrical activation parameters which may correspond to a certain method of organizing human activity (Collecting, analyzing, and displaying data. Examiner interprets electrocardiogram signal to be merely a data) and thus the claim recites an abstract idea. The additional elements of a neural network does not restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. Thus, the claim 1 recites an abstract idea (Step 2A, Prong One: YES).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements of a neural network results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements of a neural network is recited at a high level of generality and under their broadest reasonable interpretation comprises a generic computer arrangement. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention by applying the exception using a generic computer element (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional element does not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus, the claim 1 is directed to an abstract idea (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO).
The claim 1 does not include additional element that is sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the claim recites the additional element of a neural network is recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer element. The additional element when considered separately and as an ordered combination does not amount to add significantly more as the element provides nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment (Step 2B: NO). Thus, the claim 1 is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2-5 further define the abstract idea that is present in the independent claim 1, thus correspond to a certain method of organizing human activity, and hence are abstract in nature for the reason presented above. Dependent claims do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, the claims 1-5 are not patent-eligible.
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.
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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jurak, et al., US Patent No. 11,517,243 in view of Engebretsen et al., US Patent Application No. 2024/0120112.
Regarding claim 1, Jurak discloses a method of obtaining ventricular electrical activation parameters from an electrocardiogram signal, said method comprising the steps of:
- pre-processing the electrocardiogram signal to remove baseline wandering, to normalize the signal, and optionally to amplify oscillations (col. 2, lines 1-49, performing baseline correction, remove noise background; col. 3, lines 56-67),
- feeding the pre-processed electrocardiogram signal to a neural network trained to estimate ventricular electrical activation parameters from electrocardiogram signals pre-processed in the same manner (col. 2, lines 1-49; col. 3, lines 56-67), and
- obtaining the ventricular electrical activation parameters as an output from the trained neural network (col. 1, lines 7-11; col. 1, lines 30-52; col. 2, lines 1-49; col. 3, lines 56-67; col. 9, lines 50-65).
Jurak does not specifically disclose
a neural network trained.
However, Engebretsen discloses
a neural network trained ([0012]-[0019]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the above-noted disclosure of Jurak to include the above-noted disclosure of Engebretsen. The motivation for combining these references would have been to estimate ventricular electrical activation parameters.
Regarding claim 2, Jurak discloses wherein the ventricular electrical activation parameters include at least one of: Ventricular Electrical Dyssynchrony (VED), Ventricular Activation Duration (VDn), and Ventricular Activation Index (ACTn) (col. 1, lines 30-52).
Regarding claim 3, Jurak discloses wherein the electrocardiogram signal has a sampling frequency from 0.1 kHz to 1.1 kHz (col. 1, lines 15-29; col. 7, lines 55-59).
Regarding claim 4, Jurak discloses wherein the step of pre-processing the electrocardiogram signal includes subtracting consecutive samples, wherein the resultant pre-processed signal consists of differences between consecutive samples of the original signal (col. 2, lines 38-44, difference between the first and last intersection of the signal average or median envelope).
Regarding claim 5, Jurak discloses wherein the step of pre-processing the electrocardiogram signal includes computing a standardized signal which is computed for all samples in a signal from each lead, such that a signal mean is calculated from all samples in a signal from a lead, the signal mean is subtracted from each sample, and the result is divided by standard deviation for the lead signal, and/or the step of pre-processing the electrocardiogram signal includes normalization of the signal from each lead to a scale between 0 and 1 or between -1 and 1 (col. 2, lines 1-49; col. 3, lines 5-24).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure are listed on the attached PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAJESH KHATTAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7981. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Shahid Merchant can be reached at 571-270-1360. 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.
RAJESH KHATTAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3684
/RAJESH KHATTAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3684