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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/31/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 5, 6, and 9A are blurry and unreadable. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park [PGPUB 2015/0382304] in view of Behera [USPAT 10,165,531].
Regarding claim 1, the Park reference discloses a method for wireless synchronization in an implantable system, the method comprising: receiving, by a first computing device, a first synchronization signal [Park; figure 5; paragraphs 0027 and 0030];
recording, by the first computing device, a first timestamp based on a time of receipt of the first synchronization signal [the terminology of “based on” is very broad and the first timestamp can be created when the second timestamp arrives; ie. N0 (“first timestamp”) based on receipt time of the first timestamp signal; Park; para 0026-0027];
receiving, by the first computing device, a synchronization request comprising a second timestamp [ie. beacon is the first synchronization signal with the request having a timestamp; Park; fig 5; para 0027 and 0030];
determining, by the first computing device, a synchronized time offset based on the first timestamp and the second timestamp [Park; para 0027 and 0029-0030];
transmitting, by the first computing device, a second synchronization signal [Park; para 0031];
generating, by the first computing device, a synchronization message comprising a third timestamp based on a time of transmission of the second synchronization signal and the synchronized time offset [ie. advertising; Park; fig 5; para 0034-0036 and 0042].
The Park reference does not specifically disclose “queuing, by the first computing device, the synchronization message during a non-accessible transmission time slot” and “wirelessly transmitting, by the first computing device, the synchronization message to a second computing device during an available signal transmission time slot”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Behera reference discloses queuing, by the first computing device, the synchronization message during a non-accessible transmission time slot and wirelessly transmitting, by the first computing device, the synchronization message to a second computing device during an available signal transmission time slot [ie. queuing and transmitting packet at first time slot; Behera; fig 5; column 14, lines 31-57 and col 15; lines 15-30]. The Park and Behera references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage communications between devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of available signal transmission time slot, taught by Behera, into the system, taught by Park. The motivation for doing so would have been to reduce packet interference.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Park-Behera further discloses receiving, by the first computing device, a synchronization acknowledgment signal from the second computing device [Park; col 14, lines 42-57].
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Park-Behera further discloses receiving, by the second computing device, the second synchronization signal; recording, by the second computing device, a fourth timestamp based on a time of receipt of the second synchronization signal; receiving, by the second computing device, the synchronization message; and determining, by the second computing device, a second synchronized time off set based on the synchronization message and the fourth timestamp [ie. TsTXOffset and TsRXOffset; Behera; col 9, line 60 – col 10, line 2 and col 10, lines 10-31].
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Park-Behera further discloses receiving, by the first computing device, a fresh synchronization signal after receiving the synchronization request, wherein queuing the synchronization message occurs after receiving the fresh synchronization signal, and wherein wirelessly transmitting the synchronization message occurs in the next available signal transmission time slot following receiving the fresh synchronization signal [ie. third beacon received; Park; para 0028-0030 and 0032-0033].
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park-Behera as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pare et al. (“Pare”) [PGPUB 2023/0082580].
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Park-Behera discloses wirelessly transmitting, by the first computing device, the synchronization message [Park; fig 5; para 0034-0036] [Behera; fig 5; column 14, lines 31] but does not specifically disclose “via a near field magnetic induction communications link”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Pare reference discloses wirelessly transmitting messages via a near field magnetic induction communications link [Pare; para 0034-0036 and 0048]. The Park-Behera and Pare references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage communications between devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of NFMI, taught by Pare, into the system, taught by Park-Behera. The motivation for doing so would have been to be utilizing “NFMI is generally preferable to RF due to reduced attenuation through body tissue and also due to a reduced electromagnetic far field profile [Pare; para 0046].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park-Behera as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Agarwal et al. (“Agarwal”) [PGPUB 2024/0163000].
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Park-Behera does not specifically disclose “storing, into memory of the first computing device, a time delay based on the first timestamp and the second timestamp and determining, by the first computing device, the synchronized time offset based on the time delay and previously stored time delays”.
However, in the same field of endeavor, the Agarwal reference discloses storing, into memory of the first computing device, a time delay based on the first timestamp and the second timestamp and determining, by the first computing device, the synchronized time offset based on the time delay and previously stored time delays [ie. using a time delay that would be stored; Agarwal; para 0064 and 0066-0068]. The Park-Behera and Agarwal references are analogous art, since they have similar problem solving area in being able to manage communications between devices. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the claimed invention, to combine the teaching of stored time delays, taught by Agarwal, into the system, taught by Park-Behera. The motivation for doing so would have been to be able to recalculate the offset.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest prior art of record does not disclose the combination of the implantable substrate in synchronization of the wearable device for sending EMG signal in a synchronized message (with the steps of synchronization), as within claims 10-15. Also, the closest prior art of record does not disclose the combination of the two wearable devices in synchronization of an implantable device for sending EMG signal in a synchronized message (with the steps of synchronization), as within claims 16-20.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 10-20 are allowed.
Claims 4, 6, and 7 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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tadi et al. [PGPUB 2021/0259563] describes synchronize biosensors with remote controller for data collection.
Kratz et al. [USPAT 10,833,840] describes synchronizing devices.
Wybo et al. [PGPUB 2020/0113485] describes synchronizing sensors for mechanomyography (MMG).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON D CARDONE whose telephone number is (571)272-3933. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 8am-4pmEST.
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, Umar Cheema can be reached at 571-270-3037. 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.
/JASON D CARDONE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2458
Prosecution Insights