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 .
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 1-3, 8-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobowitz et al. (U. S. Patent 11,202,673) in view of KR 101620834.
As for claims 1 and 2, Jacobowitz et al. discloses a performance evaluation system (see Figs. 10-13) comprising:
a power source (102 in Fig. 10) for transmitting power to an electromagnetic radiation electrode (antenna with electrodes; col. 7, lines 37—col. 8, line 54);
an impedance matching circuit (401, 403, 405 in Fig. 11) for matching an impedance of the power source and an impedance of the electromagnetic radiation electrode;
the electromagnetic radiation electrode (antenna with electrodes) for irradiating a phantom (see phantom in col. 12, lines 58 and step 725 in Fig. 13) with electromagnetic waves using power of the power source;
the phantom (see phantom in col. 12, lines 58 and step 725 in Fig. 13) that simulates a subject which is a target of electromagnetic wave irradiation;
an instrument (power combiner and E field sensors/probes 602, 603 in Fig. 8) for measuring the power of the power source, a first power inside the phantom, and a first electric field inside the phantom; and
an analysis device (microprocessor 106 in Fig. 8 and also see 735 in Fig. 13) for calculating a power radiated to the phantom and evaluating performance of an electromagnetic radiation device using at least one of the power radiated to the phantom, a second power inside the phantom, and a second electric field inside the phantom (i.e., based on the power radiated to the phantom and the E field sensed by using probes 602, 603, the performance of the electromagnetic radiation device is evaluated, e.g. performance regarding the body penetration depth, or control of signal emission levels, see col. 9, lines 18-50).
Still referring to claims 1 and 2, Jacobowitz et al. does not specifically disclose that instrument or electric field sensors (i.e., E filed sensors 602, 603) are disposed inside the phantom for measuring the first electric field and first power inside the phantom.
KR101620834 discloses a human body simulating phantom containing electric field sensor disposed inside the phantom for measuring E filed and power inside the phantom.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jacobowitz et al. to use the conventional phantom with the electric field sensors disposed inside, as taught by KR101620834, for the purpose of accurately measuring the power and E field received inside the phantom instead of measuring at a location close to the phantom, e.g., at the base of the exam table in Jacobowitz.
As for claims 8 and 9, Jacobowitz et al. discloses a monitoring system comprising:
a power source (102 in Fig. 10) for transmitting power to an electromagnetic radiation electrode (antenna with electrodes; col. 7, lines 37—col. 8, line 54);
an impedance matching circuit (401, 403, 405 in Fig. 11) for matching an impedance of the power source and an impedance of the electromagnetic radiation electrode;
the electromagnetic radiation electrode (antenna with electrodes; col. 7, lines 37—col. 8, line 54) for irradiating a phantom (see phantom in col. 12, lines 58 and step 725 in Fig. 13) with electromagnetic waves using power of the power source;
the phantom (see phantom in col. 12, lines 58 and step 725 in Fig. 13) that replaces a subject which is a target of electromagnetic wave irradiation;
a detection unit (power combiner and E field sensors/probes 602, 603 in Fig. 8) configured to detect a power difference between a power signal of the power source and a measurement signal inside the phantom and a phase difference between the power signal of the power source and the measurement signal inside the phantom; and
an analysis device (microprocessor 106 in Fig. 8 and also see 735 in Fig. 13) for monitoring an operating state of an electromagnetic radiation device using at least one of the power differences and the phase difference.
Still referring to claims 8 and 9, Jacobowitz et al. does not specifically disclose that electric field sensors (i.e., E filed sensors 602, 603) are disposed inside the phantom for measuring the electric field and power inside the phantom.
KR101620834 discloses a human body simulating phantom containing electric field sensor disposed inside the phantom for measuring E filed and power inside the phantom.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jacobowitz et al. to use the conventional phantom with the electric field sensors disposed inside, as taught by KR101620834, for the purpose of accurately measuring the power and E field received inside the phantom instead of measuring at a location close to the phantom, e.g., at the base of the exam table in Jacobowitz.
As for claim 15, Jacobowitz et al. discloses a method performed by a performance evaluation system, the method comprising:
transmitting power of a power source (102 in Fig. 10) to an electromagnetic radiation electrode (antenna with electrodes; col. 7, lines 37—col. 8, line 54);
irradiating a phantom (see phantom in col. 12, lines 58 and step 725 in Fig. 13) with electromagnetic waves using the power of the power source;
measuring the power of the power source (102 in Fig. 10), a first power of the phantom, and a first electric field of the phantom (using electric field probes 602, 603 in Fig. 8);
calculating power (using microprocessor 106 in Fig. 8 and also see 735 in Fig. 13) radiated to the phantom, a second power inside the phantom, and a second electric field inside the phantom; and
evaluating (using microprocessor 106 in Fig. 8 and also see 735 in Fig. 13) performance of an electromagnetic radiation device using at least one of the power radiated to the phantom, the second power inside the phantom, and the second electric field inside the phantom(i.e., based on the power radiated to the phantom and the E field sensed by using probes 602, 603, the performance of the electromagnetic radiation device is evaluated, e.g. performance regarding the body penetration depth, or control of signal emission levels, see col. 9, lines 18-50).
Still referring to claim 15, Jacobowitz et al. does not specifically disclose that electric field sensors (i.e., E filed sensors 602, 603) are disposed inside the phantom for measuring the electric field and power inside the phantom.
KR101620834 discloses a human body simulating phantom containing electric field sensor disposed inside the phantom for measuring E filed and power inside the phantom.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Jacobowitz et al. to use the conventional phantom with the electric field sensors disposed inside, as taught by KR101620834, for the purpose of accurately measuring the power and E field received inside the phantom instead of measuring at a location close to the phantom, e.g., at the base of the exam table in Jacobowitz.
As for claims 3 and 10 and 20, Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834, wherein the phantom further includes a temperature sensor (the FBG sensor for measuring the temperature change, see abstract of KR101620834, for measuring a temperature inside the phantom, which is contained in a biomimetic solid specimen.
As for claims 11-14, Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834 discloses the monitoring system of claim 8, wherein the detection unit includes a combiner (see power combiner in Fig. 8) for transmitting the power signal to each of the electromagnetic radiation electrode and a comparator (comparator 728 in Fig. 13) for receiving the measurement signal inside the phantom and comparing the measurement signal and the power signal to detect the power difference and the phase difference, wherein the power signal is a signal for the power of the power source and a phase of the power of the power source, wherein the measurement signal is a signal for a power inside the phantom and a phase of the power inside the phantom.
As for claim 19, Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834 discloses the method of claim 15. wherein evaluating the performance of the electromagnetic radiation device comprises: graphing the second power inside the phantom and the second electric field inside the phantom (i.e., mapping the electric field values, see col. 10, lines 7-10).
Claim 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jacobowitz et al. (U. S. Patent 11,202,673) in view of KR 101620834, and further in view of Bomzon et al. (U. S. Pub. 2020/0023179).
As for claims 4 and 16, Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834 discloses the performance evaluation system and method of claims 2 and 15, as discussed above.
Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834 does not specifically disclose wherein the analysis device calculates a power loss density (PLD) using a conductivity of the phantom, calculates a relative power ratio using the first power inside the phantom, and calculates the power radiated to the phantom using the PLD and the relative power ratio.
Bomzon et al. discloses that the power loss density is related to the conductivity and electric field (see [0007]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify Jacobowitz et al. in view of KR101620834 to calculates a power loss density, as taught by Bomzon et al., using the conductivity of the phantom and the measured electric field inside the phantom, and the power radiated to the phantom can be later calculated using the PLD and a power ratio between the power applied and the power inside the phantom.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-7 and 17-18 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMY HE whose telephone number is (571)272-2230. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am--5:00pm.
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, Huy Phan can be reached at (571) 272-7924. 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.
/AMY HE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights