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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-14, 17-20 & 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bongberg et al. (US 2021/0145487).
Bongberg teaches:
An automated external defibrillator comprising a shock-delivery circuit capable of delivering a defibrillation shock:
E.G. Bongberg describes an AED having a defibrillator controller, high-voltage shock-delivery capacitor, charging circuitry, discharge circuitry, and electrode pads for delivering a defibrillation shock to a patient [0072].
A receiver configured to wirelessly receive, from a monitor, a first incident notification indicating that the monitor detected a potential cardiac arrest in a monitored patient:
E.G. Bongberg describes monitors incorporating cardiac rhythm classifiers for detecting sudden cardiac arrest, and detecting devices broadcasting a local incident notification indicating a potential cardiac arrest using Bluetooth of Bluetooth Low Energy advertising. An AED receives and responds to that notification ([0037]-[0038], [0067]-[0068]). Selecting the disclosed monitor-based detection and broadcast implementation provides the notification from the detecting monitor itself.
In response to receiving the notification, generating a human-perceptible incident alert to inform individuals nearby both the monitor and AED and encourage use of the AED:
E.G. the receiving AED generates an audio and/or visual alert notifying nearby individuals of the cardiac-arrest incident and requesting that an individual take the AED to the incident location [0068]. The short-range notification arrangement alerts persons near the receiving AED to an incident within the detecting device’s local broadcast area ([0067]-[0070]).
Bongberg does not expressly state that the AED of [0067]-[0068] also sends a second incident notification to a remote server in real time relative to receipt of the monitor’s notification. However, Bongberg further teaches:
An AED producing both a local alert and a remote incident notification:
E.G. the connected AED emits an audio alert requesting bystander assistance and sends an electronic incident message to intelligent dispatch system 50 to alert emergency services and the AED/volunteer responder network. The AED includes communications circuitry supporting short-range reception and longer-range Wi-FI or cellular communications [0071].
Implementing the remote destinations as a server:
E.G. intelligent dispatch system 50 may be implemented on a physical server or incorporated into a responder-network server, monitoring-device network server, or AED-management server ([0058], [0078]).
Prompt notification to improve emergency response:
E.G. Bongberg describes the benefits of notifying responders in parallel with emergency services to reduce response time, and notifying emergency services and nearby responders almost immediately of the incident and its location ([0053], [0074]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to:
Configure the receiving AED of [0067]-[0068] with the remote incident-reporting functionality of [0071], such that receipt of the monitor-generated cardiac-arrest notification triggers both the local human-perceptible alert and transmission of an incident notification to the remote server. The reason for this modification would have been to supplement local bystander notification with activation of emergency services and the volunteer responder network, thereby increasing the available sources of assistance and reducing response time as taught in [0053] and [0074].
Use receipt of the monitor’s notification as the reporting trigger.
E.G. Bongberg expressly permits cardiac-arrest recognition within the monitor [0038] and already uses the resulting notification to trigger an AED response ([0067]-[0068]). Applying the remote-reporting response of [0071] to that received determination would permit the AED to communicate the detected emergency without requiring the AED to independently repeat the monitor’s cardiac-arrest analysis.
Transmit the second notification in real time relative to receipt of the first notification, as part of the AED’s event-triggered response.
E.G. Prompt transmission upon receipt would initiate remote assistance while nearby individuals are being alerted, implementing Bongberg’s stated objective of almost-immediate notification and faster emergency response ([0053], [0074]).
Expect the modification to succeed because Bongberg discloses both an AED that receives and acts upon a wireless cardiac-arrest notification and an AED equipped to send an electronic cardiac-arrest incident message to a remote dispatch system ([0067]-[0068], [0071]). The modification applies the disclosed reporting function to an already-recognized incident input, predictably providing local and remote notification of the same emergency.
Claim 2.
Bongberg further teaches:
The remote server being a volunteer responder-network server or an AED-management server.
E.G. intelligent dispatch functionality may be integrated with the responder-network server or an AED-management server ([0058], [0078]).
Claim 3.
Bongberg further teaches:
A BLE receiver receiving the first incident notification.
E.G. local incident notification are broadcast using Bluetooth/BLE advertising and received by listening AEDs ([0067]-[0068]).
Claim 4.
Bongberg further teaches:
The first incident notification being broadcast as a beacon or BLE advertisement.
E.G. [0067] expressly identifies BLE advertising for broadcasting the local incident notification.
Claim 5.
Bongberg further teaches:
Generating an auditory incident alert at the AED, including an audible request for assistance [0068], [0071].
It would have been obvious to provide a speaker at the AED to render the disclosed audible request because a speaker converts the alert signal into sound perceptible to nearby individuals, thereby implementing Bongberg’s disclosed auditory-alert function with a predictable result.
Claim 6.
Bongberg further teaches:
Providing a display screen an generating a visual incident alert on the screen, as disclosed by displaying a request that an individual take the AED to the incident and displaying associated directions [0068].
Claim 7.
Bongberg further teaches:
Configuring the AED as a repeater that rebroadcasts a received first incident notification, as disclosed by listening AEDs relaying received local incident notifications to extend their range [0069].
Transmitting local incident notifications using BLE advertising [0067].
It would have been obvious to implement the disclosed AED relay using a BLE transmitter to rebroadcast the notification in the disclosed BLE format. Doing so would enable additional BLE-listening devices to receive the notification and would achieve Bongberg’s state purpose of extending notification coverage.
Claim 8.
Bongberg teaches:
The monitor being a cardiac monitor, as disclosed by cardiac by cardiac-monitoring devices acquiring ECG or other cardiac parameters and determining whether a potential cardiac arrest has occurred ([0037]-[0038]).
Claim 9.
Bongberg teaches:
A cooperating arrangement comprising a monitor and a separate AED, including a wearable monitor used with a nearby connected AED ([0071], [0074]).
It would have been obvious to provide the monitor and the AED, modified as discussed for claim 1, together as a kit to facilitate deployment of Bongberg’s cooperating monitoring-and-response arrangement. The components would retain their respective monitoring, notification, and defibrillation functions.
Claim 10.
Bongberg teaches:
A monitor configured to detect a potential cardiac arrest and wirelessly transmit one or more incident notifications in response, as disclosed by monitor-based cardiac-arrest determination, local wireless incident broadcasts, and network incident reporting ([0038], [0059]-[0063], [0067]).
A separate AED associated with the monitor, as disclosed by the wearable-monitor, as disclosed by the wearable-monitor and nearby connected-AED arrangement ([0071], [0074]).
Remote and short-range communication capabilities at the AED, as disclosed by Bluetooth and Wi-Fi/cellular communications [0071].
Receiving a first incident notification wirelessly from the monitor through a short-range communication path, as disclosed by monitor-originated local incident broadcasts received by listening AEDs ([0067]-[0068]).
Receiving a second incident notification through a remote-server communication path, directly or indirectly triggered by the monitor, as disclosed by monitor incident reporting that initiates dispatch and responder-network processing, followed by transmission of incident notifications to selected nearby AEDs ([0048]-[0049], [0052], [0059]-[0061]).
Generating a human-perceptible incident alert encouraging nearby individuals to respond using the AED, as disclosed for both server-originated notifications and locally received notifications ([0054], [0068]).
Communicating with a remote server regarding the potential cardiac-arrest incident, as disclosed by AED-originated electronic incident reporting to intelligent dispatch system 50 [0071].
Bongberg describes the local and server-mediated notification capabilities in separate passages. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to configure the associated AED to support both incoming notification paths and to generate its incident alert upon reception through either path. The local path facilitates prompt recruitment of nearby assistance, while the server-mediated path supports coordinated network response ([0053], [0070]). Providing both capabilities at the associated AED would enable participation in both disclosed response mechanisms.
The disclosed short-range and remote communication capabilities would predictably receive the respective notifications through their corresponding interfaces. It further would have been obvious to configure the AED to transmit an incident report to the remote server upon receiving the monitor-originated notification for the reasons stated regarding claim 1. The resulting arrangement would provide the claimed dual reception capability, responsive local alerting, and remote incident communication. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 417-421.
Claim 11.
Bongberg teaches:
The monitor being a cardiac monitor, including a monitor acquiring ECG or other cardiac parameters and detecting potential cardiac arrest ([0037]-[0038]).
Claim 12.
Bongberg teaches:
The cardiac monitor being an ECG monitor ([0037]-[0038], [0071]).
E.G. the disclosed ECG monitor implementation satisfies the recited selection of monitor types.
Claim 13.
Bongberg teaches:
A monitor comprising a fall detector and using a fall-related information to identify potential cardiac arrest, including assessment of a fall in combination with pulse information ([0043]-[0044]).
It would have been obvious to employ this expressly disclosed monitoring implementation in the arrangement of claim 10 to generate incident notifications based on the disclosed fall-associated cardiac-arrest assessment.
Claim 14.
Bongberg teaches:
A monitor-management server receiving an incident notification from the monitor, as disclosed by cloud server 40 managing or communicating with the monitor and receiving its incident message ([0055]-[0056], [0059]).
The monitor-management server sending a further incident notification to another server, as disclosed by cloud server 40 forwarding the received incident message of a newly generated message to intelligent dispatch system 50 [0060].
Providing intelligent dispatch functionality within an AED-management server [0078]
Indirectly sending the incident notification to an AED, as disclosed by dispatch activation of the responder network and subsequent transmission of incident notifications to selected AEDs ([0052], [0061]).
It would have been obvious to implement the disclosed cloud-to-dispatch arrangement with dispatch functionality integrated into Bongberg’s expressly identified AED-management server. This would preserve the disclosed notification functions while providing incident coordination at the server managing the AED.
Applied to the associated AED of claim 10, the resulting arrangement forwards the incident notification from the monitor-management server to the AED-management server and then indirectly to the AED through the responder network. The intervening responder-network server is consistent with the claim’s express allowance for indirect transmission.
Claim 17.
Bongberg teaches:
Reception by an AED of a monitor-generated local incident notification ([0067]-[0068]).
AED-originated incident reporting to a remote server [0071].
Prompt activation of assistance to reduce emergency-response delay ([0053], [0070], [0074]).
For the reason stated regarding claim 1, it would have been obvious to configure the AED of claim 10 to transmit the recited third incident notification to the remote server promptly upon receiving the first notification from the monitor. Such event-triggered transmission would inform the server of the ongoing incident in real time relative to receipt of the first notification and facilitate timely activation of remote assistance.
Claim 18.
A BLE transmitter at the monitor transmitting the first incident notification and a BLE receiver at the AED receiving that notification, as disclosed by BLE advertising of local incident notifications by detecting monitoring devices and reception by listening AEDs ([0067]-[0068]).
Claim 19.
Bongberg teaches:
Broadcasting the first incident notification as a BLE advertisement [0067].
The BLE-advertisement implementation satisfies the recited alternative of a beacon of BLE advertisement.
Claim 20.
The rejection of claim 10 is incorporated herein.
The additional limitation associates the kit with an insurance reimbursement code. As recited, the code identifies administrative information concerning reimbursement. The limitation is directed to the informational content of that code and does not establish a functional or structural relationship between the code and the kit. In particular, the claim does not require the code to control or modify monitoring, incident detection, notification, or AED operation.
Accordingly, the informational content of the reimbursement code is accorded no patentable weight. The claimed kit remains unpatentablt for reasons stated regarding claim 10. See MPEP 2111.05.
Claim 23.
Bongberg teaches:
Wirelessly transmitting a second incident notification for direct reception by additional nearby AEDs
E.G. as disclosed by listening AEDs rebroadcasting received local incident notifications to extend notification range [0069].
The additional AEDs generating respective human-perceptible alerts,
E.G. as disclosed by listening AEDs producing audio or visual requests for assistance upon receiving local incident notifications ([0068]-[0069]).
It would have been obvious to apply the disclosed alerting functionality to additional AEDs receiving the rebroadcast notification to extend recruitment of nearby responders, consistent with the purpose stated in [0069]. The outgoing relay transmission constitutes the second incident notification; the claim does not require different incident content. See KSR, 550 U.S., 417-421.
Claim 24.
Bongberg teaches:
Monitor detection of potential cardiac arrest and transmission of a first incident notification to a monitor-management server.
E.G. as disclosed by monitor-based detection and incident reporting to managing cloud server 40 ([0038], [0055], [0059]).
Transmission of a second incident notification to an AED-management server
E.G. as disclosed by cloud server 40 forwarding an incident message to dispatch system 50, which may be integrated into an AED-management server [0060], [0078].
Indirect transmission of a third incident notification to an associated AED and responsive human perceptible alerting
E.G. as disclosed by dispatch activation of the responder network, notification of nearby AEDs and AED-generated requests for assistance associated nearby AED ([0052], [0054], [0061], [0071]).
It would have been obvious to implement the disclosed forwarding sequence with dispatch functionality integrated into the AED-management server and to notify the monitored person’s associated nearby AED, thereby coordinating assistance where the patient and AED are located. Initiating each transmission promptly upon the preceding detection or notification, during the ongoing incident, would provide the claimed real-time operation and reduce response delay, consistent with [0053], [0070], [0074]. KSR, 550 U.S. 417-421.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-22 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.
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest the combination of claim 21 in which an AED executes stored instructions to decode a cardiac monitor’s arrest-indicating beacon and trigger a nearby assistance alert. Claim 22 is considered allowable subject matter by dependency and further specifies BLE reception using an iBeacon and Eddystone format.
Response to Arguments
The amended claims have been reconsidered. The present rejection relies on Bongberg’s disclosure of monitor-originated incident notifications, responsive AED alerts, and remote incident reporting. Where the claimed arrangement is not expressly disclosed, the rejection identifies the proposed modification and explains why a person of ordinary skill I the art would have made the modification to facilitate timely, coordinated emergency assistance.
For claim 10, the rejection specifically addresses configuring the associated AED to receive both local monitor notifications and server-mediated notifications, with responsive alerting upon receipt through either communication path.
Claims 21-22 are not included in the present rejection. The basis for their allowable subject matter is set forth above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE F JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5040. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00am-5:00pm 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, David Hamaoui can be reached at 571-270-5625. 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.
/NICOLE F JOHNSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
