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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5, 6, 9, 16, 17 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites a pair of stimulation electrodes and claim 5 recites a pair of sensing electrodes. Claim 5 further recites “a surface area of the sensing electrode is larger than a surface area of the stimulation electrode”. This recitation makes it unclear as to which sensing electrode has an area larger than which stimulation electrode. the dependent claims inherit the deficiency.
Claim 9 recites inter alia “if a time of sensing the local excitation event falls into the specific event time window, determining that the local excitation event corresponds to the specific global excitation event.” This recitation raises the questions as to what happens when the conditional statement after “if” isn’t not met. It is suggested to amend the claim to recite “when” instead of “if”. Similar amendments are suggested for the term “if” in dependent claim 26.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 10-15,18-25 and 27-30 are allowed.
Claims 5, 6, 9, 16, 17 and 26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Demmer et al (U.S. Patent Application Publication Number: US 2020/0316386 A1, hereinafter “Demmer”) teaches an implantable heart failure treatment device (e.g. 10 Figs. 2-4), wherein the device comprises:
a housing (e.g. 30 Fig.1-3);
an anchoring member connected to the housing and configured to fix the housing to a heart of a patient (e.g. 20,40 Fig.2);
a pair of stimulation electrodes (e.g. 22, 24, Figs. 2,4, [0033],[0034]) coupled to the housing, configured to be in contact with a predetermined stimulation position of the heart of the patient, and configured to apply an electrical stimulation pulse for enhancing cardiomyocyte contractility of the heart of the patient to the predetermined stimulation position (e.g. [0026]-[0033]);
a pulse generation module (e.g. 84 Fig.4) accommodated within the housing, electrically coupled to the pair of stimulation electrodes, and configured to generate the electrical stimulation pulse; and
a control module (e.g. 80 Fig.4) accommodated within the housing, electrically coupled to the pair of stimulation electrodes and the pulse generation module. While Demmer teaches a sensing circuit configured to sense atrial signals and ventricular signals.
However no prior art was found teaching individually, or suggesting in combination, all of the features of the applicants' invention, specifically
“determine at least based on the far-field sense signal and the local sense signal, whether the local excitation event of the local position of the heart of the patient corresponds to a specific global excitation event, and when it is determined that the local excitation event corresponds to the specific global excitation event, determine a pulse delivery time and pulse deliverable time window (as claimed in independent claim 28) and
transmit the electrical stimulation pulse to the pair of stimulation electrodes during an absolute refractory period of the local excitation event” as claimed in independent claims 1, 25, 28-30 in combination with the recited limitations of the claimed invention.
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.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MALLIKA DIPAYAN FAIRCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-7043. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8 am-5pm EST.
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, BENJAMIN KLEIN can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/MALLIKA D FAIRCHILD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights