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 .
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 4-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thor (US 2007/0073233) in view of Sowards (US 2022/0101991).
Regarding claim 1, Thor discloses a thrombectomy system, the system comprising:
a console (12, [0094], figure 2) including a reader (86, [0094]);
a fluid inflow pump (56), the fluid inflow pump driven by the console ([0094]);
a thrombectomy catheter (14), the fluid inflow pump configured to provide fluid inflow through the thrombectomy catheter ([0094]); and
a tag (barcode, [0094]) coupled to a body portion of the fluid inflow pump ([0094]);
wherein when the fluid inflow pump is positioned within the console (figure 1-2).
Thor while disclosing a barcode, does not disclose a radiofrequency identification (RFID) reader, an RFID tag, the RFID reader is configured to receive one or more operating parameters from the RFID tag.
Sowards discloses RFID enabled medical devices relatively pertinent to problem posed by Applicant of communicating date between medical components. Sowards teaches a radiofrequency identification (RFID) reader (120, [0034], figure 1A) on a console (110), an RFID tag (140, [0034] attached to a medical device), the RFID reader is configured to receive one or more operating parameters from the RFID tag ([0034]).
Sowards provides the RFID in order to communicate data from the device to the console ([0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify by substituting the barcode in Thor with the RFID system in Sowards to functionally deliver the equivalent communication method of RFID instead of barcode. This does not appear to hinder the prior art device from functioning since the substitution would just replace the barcode and reader with RFID enabled barcode and reader.
Regarding claims 4-5, Thor does not teach the RFID, but Sowards further teaches wherein the RFID reader is configured to transfer the one or more operating parameters to a controller of the console ([0005], wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to control one or more components of the thrombectomy system according to the one or more operating parameters ([0005], [0040]),
Sowards provides the RFID in order to communicate data from the device to the console ([0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify by substituting the barcode in Thor with the RFID system in Sowards to functionally deliver the equivalent communication method of RFID instead of barcode. This does not appear to hinder the prior art device from functioning since the substitution would just replace the barcode and reader with RFID enabled barcode and reader.
Regarding claim 6, Thor discloses wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to vary an operational speed of a reciprocating linear actuator ([0124]).
Regarding claims 7-8, Thor does not disclose wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to display a menu on a user interface, the menu including one or more user selectable operating parameters (claim 7), wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to display a menu on a user interface, the menu including one more user selectable sounds and/or tones to be assigned by the user for a selected alert and/or notification (claim 8).
Sowards further teaches wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to display a menu on a user interface ([0058]), the menu including one or more user selectable operating parameters ([0058], user is prompted to enter additional information), wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to display a menu on a user interface [00548]), the menu including one more user selectable sounds and/or tones to be assigned by the user for a selected alert and/or notification ([0058], user is prompted to enter additional information including visual, audible, or tactile alert).
Sowards provides the RFID in order to communicate data from the device to the console ([0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify by substituting the barcode in Thor with the RFID system in Sowards to functionally deliver the equivalent communication method of RFID instead of barcode. This does not appear to hinder the prior art device from functioning since the substitution would just replace the barcode and reader with RFID enabled barcode and reader.
Regarding claim 9 and 13, Thor further discloses wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to display on a user interface information specific to the thrombectomy catheter and fluid inflow pump ([0039]), wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to authenticate the fluid inflow pump and thrombectomy catheter ([0039]).
Regarding claim 10-12, Thor further discloses wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to vary a stroke length of a reciprocating linear actuator of the console ([0039]), wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to intermittently activate a roller pump of the console ([0039]), wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to reverse an operational direction of a roller pump of the console ([0039], [0043], deceleration time).
Regarding claim 14, Thor does not disclose wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to log usage information within the controller and/or record and transmit operational data to a remote device.
Sowards further discloses wherein in response to receiving the one or more parameters the controller is configured to log usage information within the controller and/or record and transmit operational data to a remote device (170, [0046]).
Soward provides a remote device in order to record and ensure updated information on the patient to the user ([0046]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Thor with the system of Soward in order to maintain updated information on the patient.
Claim(s) 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thor (US 2007/0073233) in view of Sowards (US 2022/0101991) further in view of Culbert (US 2022/0257268).
Regarding claims 2-3, Thor and Sowards do not teach further comprising a proximity sensor (claim 2), wherein the proximity sensor is configured to detect the fluid inflow pump is positioned within the console and activate the RFID reader (claim 3).
Culbert discloses a thrombotic removal system and teaches a proximity sensor ([0030]), wherein the proximity sensor is configured to detect the fluid inflow pump is positioned within the console ([0030]) and activate the RFID reader ([0030]).
Culbert provides a sensor in order to detect whether the pump is connected to the system ([0030]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Thor and Sowards with the sensor in Culbert in order to detect the attachment of the pump and begin treatment.
Claim(s) 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thor (US 2007/0073233) in view of Sowards (US 2022/0101991) further in view of Forster (US 2009/0108993).
Regarding claim 15, Thor does not teach wherein the RFID tag is disposed within an adhesive label.
Forster discloses RFID tags relatively pertinent to problem posed by Applicant of communication using RFID and teaches RFID tags disposed within adhesive label ([0070]).
Forster provides an adherable RFID tag to allow attachment of the RFID to surfaces ([0053]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Thor and Sowards with the adhesive label to enable attachment since Thor already teaches the data plate but does not disclose how the label is attached.
Regarding claim 16, Thor discloses a thrombectomy system, the system comprising:
a console (12, [0094], figure 2) including a reader (86, [0094]);
a fluid inflow pump (56), the fluid inflow pump driven by the console ([0094]);
a thrombectomy catheter (14), the fluid inflow pump configured to provide fluid inflow through the thrombectomy catheter ([0094]); and
a data plate (113, figure 5) coupled to a body portion of the fluid inflow pump; the data plate comprising:
a tag (barcode, [0094]) coupled to a body portion of the fluid inflow pump ([0094]);
wherein when the fluid inflow pump is positioned within the console (figure 1-2).
Thor while disclosing a barcode, does not disclose a radiofrequency identification (RFID) reader, an RFID tag, the RFID reader is configured to receive one or more operating parameters from the RFID tag.
Sowards discloses RFID enabled medical devices relatively pertinent to problem posed by Applicant of communicating date between medical components. Sowards teaches a radiofrequency identification (RFID) reader (120, [0034], figure 1A) on a console (110), an RFID tag (140, [0034] attached to a medical device), the RFID reader is configured to receive one or more operating parameters from the RFID tag ([0034]).
Sowards provides the RFID in order to communicate data from the device to the console ([0034]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify by substituting the barcode in Thor with the RFID system in Sowards to functionally deliver the equivalent communication method of RFID instead of barcode. This does not appear to hinder the prior art device from functioning since the substitution would just replace the barcode and reader with RFID enabled barcode and reader.
Thor and Soward do not disclose the data plate comprising:
a base layer including an adhesive on a bottom surface thereof;
a top layer; and
the radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag disposed between the base layer and the top layer;
Forster discloses RFID tags relatively pertinent to problem posed by Applicant of communication using RFID and teaches a base layer including an adhesive on a bottom surface thereof (138), a top layer (130), and the RFID tags disposed between the base layer and top layer adhesive label (figure 15, [0074]).
Forster provides an adherable RFID tag to allow attachment of the RFID to surfaces ([0053]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Thor and Sowards with the adhesive label to enable attachment since Thor already teaches the data plate but does not disclose how the label is attached.
Claim(s) 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forster (US 2009/0108993).
Regarding claim 17, Forster discloses a data plate for a medical system, the data plate comprising:
a base layer including an adhesive on a bottom surface thereof (138), a top layer (130), and a RFID tags (140) disposed between the base layer and top layer adhesive label (figure 15, [0074]); and
identifying information formed on a top surface of the top layer ([0071]).
Forster does not specifically disclose a barcode as the identifying information printed on the top layer. However, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Forster by using a barcode to display identifying information as barcodes are a commonly used method of printing identifying information.
Regarding claim 18, Forster further discloses wherein the top layer is adhesively secured to the RFID tag (132, figure 15, [0071]) and a top surface of the base layer (figure 15).
Claim(s) 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Forster (US 2009/0108993) in view of Finn (US 2018/0123221).
Regarding claim 19, Forster does not teach wherein the base layer and the top layer are formed from a polyester label material.
Finn discloses a device for using RFID and teaches wherein the device including the base layer and the top layer are formed from a polyester label material ([0028]).
Finn states the material is commonly used in chip cards ([0028]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Forster with the material of Finn order to create and select a material desirable for use in creation of the RFID device.
Regarding claim 20, Forster does not teach, wherein the base layer includes an RFID compensation hole extending through a thickness thereof, the RFID compensation hole aligned with a chip of the RFID tag.
Finn further teaches wherein the base layer includes an RFID compensation hole (1130, figure 11A, [0298-0299] extending through a thickness thereof, the RFID compensation hole aligned with a chip of the RFID tag ([0299]).
Finn provides the slit in order to allow communication between the chip and the reader ([0299]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filling date to modify Forster with the hole in Finn to allow communication between reader and RFID.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAI H WENG whose telephone number is (571)272-5852. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at (571) 270-5879. 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.
/KAI H WENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights