Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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 pre-AIA 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 –
(b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of application for patent in the United States.
Claims 2 - 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by McGrath et al. (US 20040204743).
Regarding claim 2, McGrath discloses a defibrillator system (Fig. 1; [0016]; [0021]), comprising:
a computer tablet comprising a user interface configured to receive information input by a rescuer during a rescue event and to provide feedback to the rescuer about treatment of the patient during the rescue event (Fig. 1, remote device 12; [0057] discloses “…selection made by an operator via a user interface 62. User interface 62 may include input-output devices, such as a keyboard, keypad, pointing device, touchscreen, CRT, LED display, LCD display, or speaker. In some embodiments, user interface 62 presents a graphical user interface via a display that resembles the interface of an external medical device to which remote device 12 is connected via a wireless communication session”);
and a defibrillator configured for bi-directional wired or wireless communication with the computer tablet [0022] discloses “In the example of FIG. 1, remote device 12 is a computer such as a tablet computer.”; [0053] discloses “Remote device 12 wirelessly controls an external medical device, such as defibrillator 14 by sending one or more of control commands 48 to defibrillator 14 via a wireless communication medium.”; [0064] discloses two-way communication), the defibrillator comprising:
at least one therapy electrode configured to provide a therapeutic shock to the patient ([0004] discloses “An external defibrillator applies a defibrillation pulse via electrodes placed upon the chest of the patient. When a switch is closed, the defibrillator delivers at least some of the stored energy to the patient. In some cases, the patient may need multiple shocks, and different quantities of energy may be delivered with each shock”);
a shock generator in electrical communication with the at least one therapy electrode that generates the therapeutic shock ([0004], as above);
and at least one defibrillator controller in communication with the shock generator (Fig. 2, processor 22 communicates with therapy delivery 28; [0042] discloses “Therapy delivery program instructions 28 cause processor 22 to monitor patient 16, evaluate the hear rhythm of patient 16 and, when appropriate, deliver defibrillation pulses to patient 16.”) configured to:
establish the bi-directional communication between the defibrillator and the computer tablet (Fig. 1);
receive the information input by the rescuer from the computer tablet (Fig. 2, remote commands 29; [0042] discloses “Remote commands 29 comprise one or more commands received from computer 12 via an established wireless communication session. Remote commands 29 cause processor 22 to perform one or more of the actions discussed above, such as delivering a therapy.”; [0050] discloses “The operator may also interact with defibrillator 14 via remote device 12. The operator may use remote device 12 to send one or more commands to defibrillator 14 via a wireless communication session. Defibrillator 14 receives the commands and stores the received commands in memory 24 as remote commands 29.”);
and control at least one operation of the defibrillator based, at least in part, on the received information input by the rescuer via the user interface of the computer tablet ([0050] discloses “Processor 22 generally executes or carries out the commands. For example, an operator may use remote device 12 to send a command to defibrillator 14, directing defibrillator 14 to begin charging. In response, processor 22 controls charging circuit 40 to begin charging energy storage circuit 38. As another example the operator may use remote device 12 to send commands to defibrillator 14 to configure a therapy, such as commands to set an energy level for a patient based upon the patient's size.”).
Regarding claim 3, McGrath discloses during startup of the defibrillator, the at least one defibrillator controller is configured to generate an initiation signal identifying the defibrillator and transmit the generated initiation signal to the computer tablet ([0023] discloses “In some embodiments, when both remote device 12 and defibrillator 14 are turned on and proximate to one another such that wireless communication is possible, one of remote device 12 or defibrillator 14 detects the other via a wireless communication medium and initiates wireless communication.”; [0062]).
Regarding claim 4, McGrath discloses the computer tablet is configured to request that the rescuer provide the input information upon receiving the generated initiation signal from the defibrillator ([0067], wherein the request is done by presenting the graphical user interface).
Regarding claim 5, McGrath discloses the computer tablet is configured to delay transmitting the input information to the defibrillator until the generated initiation signal is received by the computer tablet (inherent in Fig. 5 since blocks 82 and 90 are done after block 80; [0066] – [0067]).
Regarding claim 6, McGrath discloses the information input via the user interface of the computer tablet comprises information contained in an electronic patient care record (Fig. 5, block 66; [0063] discloses age, weight etc.).
Regarding claim 7, McGrath discloses the information input via the user interface comprises information about a physiological condition of the patient ([0063]).
Regarding claim 8, McGrath discloses the information input via the user interface comprises information about at least one physical parameter of the patient ([0063]).
Regarding claim 9, McGrath discloses the information input via the user interface comprises information about operation of the defibrillator ([0042] discloses “Communication program instructions 26 may further cause processor 22 to detect the presence of a proximate remote device. Therapy delivery program instructions 28 cause processor 22 to monitor patient 16, evaluate the hear rhythm of patient 16 and, when appropriate, deliver defibrillation pulses to patient 16. Remote commands 29 comprise one or more commands received from computer 12 via an established wireless communication session. Remote commands 29 cause processor 22 to perform one or more of the actions discussed above, such as delivering a therapy.” ).
Regarding claim 10, McGrath discloses the at least one defibrillator controller is configured to control the defibrillator by causing the shock generator to provide the therapeutic shock to the patient in accordance with shock parameters determined based, at least in part, on the received information input by the rescuer ([0042], as in claim 9 above).
Regarding claim 11, McGrath discloses the computer tablet comprises a short range wireless transmitter and/or a long range wireless transmitter for wirelessly transmitting information to and receiving information from the defibrillator ([0024] discloses short range: Bluetooth; [0027] discloses long range: cellular).
Regarding claim 12, McGrath discloses the defibrillator is configured to transmit patient treatment data documenting defibrillation therapy provided to the patient to the computer tablet ([0013]; [0035]; [0043]; [0044]).
Regarding claim 13, McGrath discloses at least one physiological sensor for detecting physiological signals of the patient ([0013]; [0035]; [0043]; [0044]), and wherein the computer tablet is configured to receive physiological signals detected by the at least one physiological sensor (Fig. 5, block 94; [0068]; [0013]; [0035]) and display visual indicia representative of the received physiological signals on a visual display of the computer tablet (Fig. 3, user interface 63; [0057] discloses use of LED, LCD displays etc. for displaying results).
Regarding claim 14, McGrath discloses the at least one physiological sensor is configured to detect signals representative of at least one of patient blood pressure, heart rate, circulatory flow, perfusion, cardiac output, oxygen saturation, or thoracic impedance (0013]; [0035]; [0043]; [0044]).
Regarding claim 15, McGrath discloses recording ECG information ([0005]; [ 0043]; [0044]). Transmitting information detected by the at least one ECG electrode from the defibrillator to the computer tablet is disclosed as in claim 12. Displaying a visual indication representative of the information is disclosed as in claim 13.
Regarding claim 16, McGrath discloses the at least one defibrillator controller is configured to control operation of the defibrillator by modifying a type, intensity, or frequency of the therapeutic shock provided to the patient, the modification being based, at least in part, on the received information input by the rescuer via the user interface of the computer tablet ([0030] discloses “Remote device 12 receives the selection and sends a command to defibrillator 14 to apply a therapy, such as a defibrillation pulse. Defibrillator 14 carries out the command.”; [0031] discloses “A command may also instruct defibrillator 14 to configure a therapy by, for example, setting an amplitude, a width, a shape, and a period of the defibrillation pulse.”).
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 pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 17 – 19, 22 – 23 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over McGrath et al. (US 20040204743).
Regarding claim 17, McGrath does not disclose the defibrillator further comprises at least one chest compression sensor configured to be positioned on a chest of the patient for measuring signals representative of chest compressions applied to the patient during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
However, McGrath discloses electrodes and other sensors that can be placed on the chest to measure physiological parameters ([0004]; [0005]; [0043]; [0044]; e.g. electrodes and ECG).
Under Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E & F), using a chest compression sensor is obvious to try or an obvious variation of these.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use chest compression sensors, because these would allow for chest compressions to be monitored.
Regarding claim 18, McGrath does not disclose the at least one defibrillator controller is configured to transmit information about the chest compressions applied to the patient determined based on signals measured by the at least one chest compression sensor to the computer tablet.
However, McGrath discloses the defibrillator is configured to transmit patient treatment data documenting defibrillation therapy provided to the patient to the computer tablet ([0013]; [0035]; [0043]; [0044]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to also transmit the chest compression sensor data as this would allow the data to be monitored by a remote caregiver.
Regarding claim 19, McGrath does not disclose the information about the chest compressions applied to the patient comprises at least one of downstroke velocity of the chest compressions, upstroke velocity of the chest compressions, depth of the chest compressions, or rate of the chest compressions.
Under Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E & F), obtaining any of these chest compression parameters id obvious to try or an obvious variation of obtaining chest compression data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to obtain additional chest compression data as above, because these would provide the caregiver with more information to monitor the patient and make a decision.
Regarding claim 22, McGrath does not disclose at least one chest compression unit configured to provide automated chest compressions to the patient, which is configured to be in wired or wireless communication the defibrillator and/or computer tablet.
However, discloses electrodes that can be placed on the chest to provide shocks ([0004]).
Under Rationales for Obviousness (MPEP 2143, Rationales E & F), using a chest compression unit is obvious to try or an obvious variation of this.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to use a chest compression unit, because these would allow for chest compressions to be performed.
Regarding claim 23, McGrath does not disclose the at least one chest compression unit is configured to: receive input information and/or physiological information for the patient from the computer tablet and/or defibrillator; and provide automated chest compressions to the patient according to a protocol determined based, at least in part, on the received input information and/or physiological information.
However, McGrath discloses the information input via the user interface comprises information about operation of the defibrillator ([0042] discloses “Communication program instructions 26 may further cause processor 22 to detect the presence of a proximate remote device. Therapy delivery program instructions 28 cause processor 22 to monitor patient 16, evaluate the hear rhythm of patient 16 and, when appropriate, deliver defibrillation pulses to patient 16. Remote commands 29 comprise one or more commands received from computer 12 via an established wireless communication session. Remote commands 29 cause processor 22 to perform one or more of the actions discussed above, such as delivering a therapy.” ).
One of ordinary skill in the art can use the same methodology for the chest compression unit as for the defibrillator unit.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to obtain chest compression input data as above, because this would provide the compression unit the necessary data to operate based on the condition of the patient.
Claim 21 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over McGrath et al. (US 20040204743) in view of GB2462304A.
Regarding claim 21, McGrath discloses transmitting sensor data to the computer tablet, wherein the feedback about treatment of the patient provided via the user interface of the computer tablet is based, at least in part, on the sensor data ([0013]; [0035]; [0043]; [0044]; ([0042]).
McGrath does not disclose using at least one flow sensor configured to detect airflow data for ventilation breaths provided to the patient during cardiopulmonary resuscitation.
In the same field of endeavor, however, GB2462304A discloses using at least one flow sensor configured to detect airflow data for ventilation breaths provided to the patient during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (page 1, lines 17 - 18).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, at the time the invention was filed, to use flow sensors, as taught by GB2462304A in the system of McGrath because this can be used to detect ventilation activity by a patient, as disclosed by GB2462304A (page 1, lines 14 – 18).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 20 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Other Prior Art Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Freeman et al. (US 10667717) discloses Impedance Measuring Devices and Methods for Emergency Cardiovascular Care.
McMahon et al. (US 10413742) discloses Defibrillator Patient Monitoring Pod.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADOLF DSOUZA whose telephone number is (571)272-1043. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9 AM - 5 PM.
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, Chieh M Fan can be reached at 571-272-3042. 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.
/ADOLF DSOUZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2632
Prosecution Insights