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 Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim limitation “the second parameter” in line 4 should be amended to read –the second parameter configuration--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5, 8-11 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoseit et al. (US 2014/0275844; hereinafter Hoseit).
Regarding claim 1, Hoseit discloses an universal patient interface module and associated devices, systems and method. Hoseit shows an intraluminal ultrasound system (see abstract; fig. 1-3), comprising: a first intraluminal imaging device comprising a first ultrasound imaging component (see 108 in fig. 1, 216 in fig. 2 and 906 in fig. 9; par. [0040]); a patient interface module (see par. [0035], [0062]; 114 in fig. 1, 300 in fig. 3, 800 in fig. 4 & 8 and 900 in fig. 8-9) configured for communication with the first intraluminal imaging device (see fig. 1, 2 and 9) and a different, second intraluminal imaging device comprising a second ultrasound imaging component (see 110 in fig. 1, 218 in fig. 2, and 908 in fig. 9; par. [0040]); wherein the PIM comprises: a controller (see fig. 4 and 8; par. [0043]-[0045], [0057]); and a memory (see fig. 4 and 8; par. [0043]-[0045], [0057]) configured to store a first parameter configuration specific to the first ultrasound imaging component (see “first configuration” in par. [0061], [0071], [0076]) and a different, second parameter configuration specific to the second ultrasound imaging component (see “second configuration” in par. [0061], [0071]); wherein, when the PIM is in communication with the first intraluminal imaging device, the controller of the PIM is configured to: read first device information from the first intraluminal imaging device, wherein the first device information is representative of the first ultrasound imaging component (see par. [0044], [0061], [0071]); retrieve, based on the first device information, the first parameter configuration from the memory of the PIM (see par. [0044], [0057], [0059], [0060], [0061], [0071]); and control, using the first parameter configuration, the first ultrasound imaging component to produce first ultrasound wave emissions (see par. [0044], [0057], [0059], [0060], [0061], [0071]), wherein, when the PIM is in communication with the second intraluminal imaging device, the controller of the PIM is configured to: read second device information from the second intraluminal imaging device, wherein the second device information is representative of the second ultrasound imaging component (see par. [0044], [0061], [0071]); retrieve, based on the second device information, the second parameter configuration from the memory of the PIM (see par. [0044], [0058], [0059], [0060], [0061], [0071]); and control, using the second parameter configuration, the second ultrasound imaging component to produce second ultrasound wave emissions (see par. [0044], [0058], [0059], [0060], [0061], [0071]).
Regarding claim 2, Hoseit shows a host system separate from and configured for communication with the PIM (see 106 and 116 in fig. 2; par. [0037]); the host system is configured to generate a first ultrasound image associated with the first ultrasound wave emissions (see par. [0032], [0033], [0036], [0060], [0061]); and generate a second ultrasound image associated with the second ultrasound wave emissions ((see par. [0032], [0033], [0036], [0060], [0061]).
Regarding claim 3, Hoseit shows further comprising a display configured for communication with the host system (see par. [0030], [0035]; fig. 1-3), wherein the display is configured to display the first and second ultrasound image (see par. [0030], [0035]; fig. 1-3).
Regarding claim 4, Hoseit shows wherein the first intraluminal imaging device comprising a first IVUS catheter (see par. [0040]); and wherein the second intraluminal imaging device comprises a second IVUS catheter (see par. [0040]).
Regarding claim 5, Hoseit shows wherein the first IVUS catheter comprising an array IVUS catheter (see par. [0048]); and the second IVUS catheter comprises a rotational IVUS catheter (see par. [0048]).
Regarding claim 8, Hoseit shows further comprising the second intraluminal imaging device (see fig 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 9, Hoseit shows wherein, to control the first ultrasound imaging component to produce first ultrasound wave emissions, the PIM is configured to generate a first trigger signal based on the first parameter configuration (see fig. 11-12; par. [0060], [0061], [0073]-[0076]), wherein, to control the second ultrasound imaging component to produce second ultrasound wave emissions, the PIM is configured to generate a different, second trigger signal based on the second parameter configuration (see fig. 11-12; par. [0060], [0061], [0073]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 10, Hoseit shows wherein the first ultrasound wave emissions comprise a first waveform (see fig. 11-12; par. [0036], [0060], [0061] [0073]-[0076]), and wherein the second ultrasound wave emissions comprise a different, second waveform (see fig. 11-12; par. [0036], [0060], [0061], [0073]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 11, Hoseit shows wherein the PIM is configured to: detect whether the first intraluminal imaging device or the second intraluminal imaging device is attached (see par. [0044], [0061], [0071]); and determine whether to retrieve the first parameter configuration or the second parameter from the memory of the PIM based on the detection (see par. [0044], [0061], [0071]).
Regarding claim 13, Hoseit shows wherein the first parameter configuration is specific to operation of the first ultrasound imaging component to produce the first ultrasound wave emissions (see fig. 11-12; par. [0036], [0060], [0061], [0073]-[0076])., and wherein the second parameter configuration is specific to operation of the second ultrasound imaging component to produce the second ultrasound wave emissions (see fig. 11-12; par. [0036], [0060], [0061], [0073]-[0076]).
Regarding claim 14, Hoseit shows wherein the first parameter configuration and the second parameter configuration comprise at least one of an ultrasound center frequency (see par. [0053], [0059], [0071).
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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoseit et al. (US 2014/0275844), in view of Hubbard et al. (US 2013/0303910).
Regarding claim 6, Hoseit discloses the invention substantially as described in the 102 rejection above, furthermore, Hoseit shows an array of transducer elements (see par. [0048], but fails to explicitly state a single transducer element ultrasound imaging component.
Hubbard discloses an ultrasound flow imaging. Hubbard teaches a single transducer element ultrasound imaging device (see par. [0053], [0061]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing of the claimed invention, to have utilized the teaching of a single transducer element ultrasound imaging device in the invention of Hoseit, as taught by Hubbard, to be able to prove an image of the vessel with just one transducer element which would save cost by avoiding needing to an array of transducer elements.
Regarding claim 7, Hoseit discloses the invention substantially as described in the 102 rejection above, furthermore, Hoseit shows IVUS catheter configured for imaging a peripheral vessel (see par. [0028]), but fails to explicitly state IVUS catheter configured to image a coronary vessel.
Hubbard discloses an ultrasound flow imaging. Hubbard teaches imaging coronary vessel (see par. [0090], [0091]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing of the claimed invention, to have utilized the teaching of imaging coronary vessel in the invention of Hoseit, as taught by Hubbard, to be able to detect disease in coronary artery.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoseit et al. (US 2014/0275844), in view of Elbert (US 2014/0343434).
Regarding claim 12, Hoseit discloses the invention substantially as described in the 102 rejection above, furthermore, Hoseit teaches memory storing first device information (see fig. 3) and second device information (see fig. 3).
But, Hoseit fails to explicitly state that the first and second intraluminal imaging device comprising the memory devices.
Elbert discloses a catheter with embedded memory in IVUS system. Elbert teaches that processor configured to read device information from a memory of the imaging device (see par. [0020], [0026], [0027]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have utilized the processor configured to read device information from a memory of the imaging device in the invention of Hoseit, as taught by Elbert, to be able to access transducer information such as usage time, date, duration, and other transducer-specific information which is useful for cather operation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHDEEP MOHAMMED whose telephone number is (571)270-3134. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 9am to 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, Anne M Kozak can be reached at (571)270-0552. 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.
/SHAHDEEP MOHAMMED/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797