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.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) further in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Abraham teaches the limitation below except where underlined:
a communication assembly comprising (the audio system comprising different components, e.g. an array microphone system, a control device, and a wireless communication device etc. is a communication assembly, see [0059]: “audio system 1000 comprising an array microphone system 1030 and a control device 1032… the array microphone system 1030 (e.g., within the control device 1032) may be in wired or wireless communication with the audio component 1036”, also see Fig. 10):
“a cover plate having a…exterior surface extending along a first direction, the cover plate comprising a plurality of audio openings” (a sound-permeable screen is a cover plate, the exterior surface of the cover plate is the exterior surface, any lateral in-plane direction within the 360 degrees of the plane defined by the cover plate’s surface can be a first direction, the screen is perforated with small openings and sound-permeable, therefore comprises a plurality of audio openings, see [0033]: “… a first or front face of the housing 102 includes a sound-permeable screen or grill 108…the screen 108 can have a perforated surface comprising a plurality of small openings, and can be made of aluminum, plastic, wire mesh”, also see Fig. 1; the housing can be mounted in a ceiling, therefore the screen i.e. the cover plate faces people below and is people-facing , see [0034]:”… a boardroom where microphones are utilized to capture sound from audio sources or human speakers. In the exemplary environment of FIG. 6, human speakers (not shown) may be seated in chairs at a table below the ceiling 600”, also see Fig. 6.)
a circuit board coupled to the cover plate and spatially separated from the cover plate by a gap that extends along a second direction (at least the LED PCB is part of a circuit board, which is part of the assembly with the cover plate and spatially separated from the cover plate by a gap filled with at least a foam membrane, Element 111 in Fig. 3, in the rear face of the cover plate along a second direction, which is the depth or thickness direction between the PCB and the cover plate and substantially vertical to the cover plate, see [0042]: “… the indicator 126 includes at least one LED (not shown) mounted to a PCB 126a (also referred to herein as “LED PCB”)…as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig.3);
one or more point light sources electrically coupled to the circuit board and disposed between the circuit board and the cover plate (at least one LED is the one or more light sources electrically couple to a PCB, i.e. the circuit board. Abraham is silent about which side of the circuit board the LED(s) is/are mounted. However, the light guide is placed between the circuit board and the cover plate, suggesting the LED(s) is/are mounted on the face side of the circuit board towards the cover plate, therefore disposed between the circuit board and the cover plate; see [0042]: “… the indicator 126 includes at least one LED (not shown) mounted to a PCB 126a (also referred to herein as “LED PCB”) and a light guide 126b configured to optically direct the light from the LED to outside the screen 108, as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig.3; Abraham is silent about the light is a point LED light. However, official notice is taken that Point LED lights are well-known compact, high-intensity light sources that emit light from a single point, offering energy efficiency, long lifespan, and design versatility compared to traditional LED light. Thus it would have been obvious for Abraham to have used point LED light for its well-known benefits as set forth above);
a light guide disposed at least partially between the circuit board and the cover plate, the light guide comprising at least one light path to direct and diffuse light emitted by the one or more point light sources to the exterior surface, the at least one light path extending along the first direction and the second direction within the gap (a light guide is placed between the circuit board and the cover plate and direct light to the exterior surface, i.e. along the second direction within the gap, see [0042]: “… a light guide 126b configured to optically direct the light from the LED to outside the screen 108, as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig. 3; Official notice is taken that it is well-known in the art that a light guide can have some textured or patterned surfaces or prisms that can scatter light in multiple directions besides directing the light in multiple directions. Thus it would have been obvious that the surface(s) of the light guide of Abraham could have been the type of surface which can direct and diffuse light in one or multiple directions to achieve a well-known benefit which is to achieve uniform or targeted illumination);
“A plurality of microphone sets electrically coupled to the circuit board and disposed between the circuit board and the cover plate, each microphone set of the plurality of microphone sets including a first microphone and a second microphone spaced along the first direction outwardly of the first microphone" (the microphones are surface mounted on and electrically coupled to, the microphone PCB; the microphones receive sound through the audio openings in the cover plate, suggesting microphones are mounted on the face side of the PCB towards the cover plate; therefore microphones are between the PCB board and the cover plate; the microphones can be configured into different subsets, i.e. sets; a microphone of a microphone set in inner ring can be a first microphone, a microphone in outer ring of the same microphone set can be a second microphone and spaced apart from the first microphone, see Fig. 9; the microphone PCB Is electrically connected to the LED PCB, therefore is part of the circuit board, see [0032]: “The microphones 106 can be coupled to, or included on, a substrate 107… the microphones 106 are surface mounted to the microphone PCB 107 ”, also see Fig. 9, the microphone configuration include a number of microphone subsets, i.e. sets, see [0051]:”the microphone configuration 900 may be mounted on a plurality of printed circuit boards (not shown),… the microphones 906 may include (i) a first subset of the microphones 902 mounted on the central PCB 107a to form a first ring 910 surrounding the central microphone 906, (ii) a second subset of the microphones 906 mounted on the central PCB 107a to form a second ring 912 surrounding the first ring 910…” );
Abraham teaches microphones in a microphone set is arranged along a circumference of a ring and does not teach the underlined limitation, wherein “A plurality of microphone sets electrically coupled to the circuit board and disposed between the circuit board and the cover plate, each microphone set of the plurality of microphone sets including a first microphone and a second microphone spaced along the first direction outwardly of the first microphone" (see [0048]: “…each ring contains a different subset of the remaining microphones 106b, and each subset of microphones 106b can be positioned at predetermined intervals along a circumference of the corresponding ring”, also see Fig. 5 and 9). However, official notices is taken wherein, there are a finite number of choices that microphones in a microphone set can be configured either hardware-independent, such as the ring pattern across the seven peripheral circuit boards, see Element 107b in Fig. 5, or hardware-dependent, i.e. on each individual peripheral circuit board. When microphone sets are arranged in a single peripheral circuit board, an outer microphone can be a first microphone which is spaced along the first direction outwardly relative to an inner microphone, i.e. a second microphone (see [0055]: ”… the microphone PCB 107 includes seven peripheral PCBs 107b so that each of the peripheral PCBs 107b can include eight microphones in uniform locations”, also see Fig. 5). At the time of invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious for a designer to pick one that suits their needs the most, and neither of these choices produces unexpected results.
Abraham also does not teach a medical system, “patient-facing” , and a plurality of gaskets, each gasket of the plurality of gaskets comprising an audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of the plurality of audio openings.
Whitehurst teaches it is well-known in the art that an audio communication system is used in a medical environment such as an operating room (the communication system comprises a cushion to receive patient’s face, see “A communication system is provided for a patient featuring a cushion with an opening for receiving the face of the patient. The cushion includes a microphone for receiving audible signals from the patient…”, Abstract, see Fig. 5, further see [0001]: ” The present invention relates methods and apparatus to facilitate communication between a patient and medical personnel in an operating room”).
Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art that the audio communication system of Abraham could have been used in a medical environment such as an operating room so that the communication between medical staff and the patient can be enhanced as taught by Whitehurst. Abraham also teaches the audio communication system can be mounted on top of a table and humans (see [0005]: “microphones may be mounted to a ceiling…of the conference room to free up table space and provide human speakers ”), it would have been obvious, when the audio communication system as taught by Abraham is used in a medical operating room, the exterior surface of the cover plate could have been put on top of an operating table where the patient lies on, therefore, the cover plate is patient-facing. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to allow “patients to accurately guide their physicians” (Whitehurst: [0004]).
Abraham in view of Whitehurst does not teach a plurality of gaskets, each gasket of the plurality of gaskets comprising an audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of the plurality of audio openings.
Isaacson teaches each gasket of the plurality of gaskets comprising an audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of the plurality of audio openings (one gasket forms a sealed audio path across the gap from the microphone, i.e. a first seal, to around the audio opening for the microphone, i.e. a second seal, see [0053]: “The microphone gasket, in addition to being formed from a substantially flexible material configured to mechanically isolate the microphone from vibrations delivered to the housing and to create an acoustic seal between the microphone and the housing, has associated optical properties so as to provide a path for light emitted from the sub-surface LED to reach the outer surface of the housing”, also see Element 246 in Fig.2)
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the light diffuser and gasket as taught by Isaacson in the medical system including the light sources and microphones as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “allow for the manufacture of a more discrete/space efficient sound processing unit” (Isaacson: [0028]).
Regarding claim 2, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches the plurality of microphone sets are disposed in an array having a spoked configuration (microphones in the array can be arranged in a spoked pattern therefore the microphone sets are also configured in a spoked pattern, see Fig. 9).
Regarding claim 3, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches the plurality of microphone sets comprise at least four microphone sets (the subset of microphones are microphone sets, see [0051]: “the microphones 906 may include (i) a first subset of the microphones… (vii) a seventh subset of the microphones…”)
Regarding claim 7, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Isaacson also teaches for each microphone, a screen disposed between a gasket and the cover plate, the screen being audio transparent and resistant to fluid intrusion (the acoustically transparent membrane is a screen and is water, i.e. fluid, resistant. It is mounted between the gasket and the outer shell, i.e. the cover plate, see [0061]: “As shown in FIG. 3, a membrane 348 is disposed between the interior cavity 360 of the microphone gasket 346 and the acoustic port 342. The membrane 348 is sometimes referred to herein as being acoustically transparent (e.g., penetrable by sound waves/energy without altering frequency response) and contaminant-proof (e.g., impenetrable by water, dust, and other contaminants).”, also see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches a control system operably coupled to the plurality of microphone sets, the control system configured to analyze sound received from the plurality of microphone sets for beam forming (The audio component 1036 receives and processes audio signals from the array microphone to which it is coupled to, i.e. analyzes sound from microphone sets. At least the audio component 1036 is part of a control system. the audio component 1036 is also capable of directionality adjustment, i.e. beam forming, see [0059-0060]: “…audio system 1000 comprising an array microphone system 1030 and a control device 1032… The array microphone system 1030 may also include an audio component 1036 that receives audio signals from the array microphone 1034 and is configured as an audio recorder, audio mixer, amplifier, and/or other component for processing of audio signals captured by the microphone array 1034… The control device 1032 may be in wired or wireless communication with the array microphone system 1030 to control the audio component 1036, the microphone array 1034, and/or the indicator 1038. Controls on the control device 1036 may further enable the adjustment of parameters of the microphone array 1034, such as directionality…”, also see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 15, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 14’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches the control system is further operably coupled to the one or more point light sources, the control system configured to energize the one or more point light sources as a status indicator to a user ( the control device controls LEDs, i.e. point light indicator(s), see [0060]:”…the control device 1036 may include controls to activate or deactivate the microphone array 1034 and/or the indicator 1038.”, also see Fig. 10; the light indicators indicate the operating mode, i.e. status, see [0063]: “The first light source 1046 may be configured to indicate a first operating mode or status of the microphone array 1034 by turning the light on or off… LED(s), or other forms of indication are assigned to each operating mode”, the operating mode is presented to a user, see [0042]: “…indicate the operating mode of the microphone array 104 to human speakers or others”).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Michel et al. (US 20120250897 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson does not teach gaskets configured for each microphone set.
Michel teaches one gasket configured for each microphone set (transducers are microphones, and one gasket is configured for one microphone set comprising two microphones, see [0061] : “PCB 1101 is mechanically coupled to application housing 1105 using gasket 1117… to transducers 101”, also see Fig. 11).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the gasket configuration as taught by Michel in microphone sets as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “increase electro-acoustical sensitivity” (Michel: [0002]).
Regarding claim 5, Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Michel teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 4’s 103 rejection.
Michel also teaches each of the gaskets define cavities configured to receive the first microphone and the second microphone (transducers are microphones, one microphone set comprises two microphones, and one gasket corresponds to, i.e. defines, cavities for two microphones, i.e. the first microphone and the second microphone, see [0061] : “PCB 1101 is mechanically coupled to application housing 1105 using gasket 1117… to transducers 101”, also see Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 6, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson does not teach the cover plate
defines recesses in an interior surface, the recesses configured to key the plurality of gaskets relative to the plurality of audio openings.
Michel teaches the cover plate defines recesses in an interior surface, the recesses configured to key the plurality of gaskets relative to the plurality of audio openings (each microphone assembly can be attached to the interior surface of the cover plate as part of the cover plate, therefore the cap 115 will be a recess in the cover plate, which holds the gasket 1117 to audio openings 1113, see Fig. 1).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the microphone assembly as taught by Michel in the system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “increase electro-acoustical sensitivity” (Michel: [0002]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Shen et al. (US 20150029717 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson does not specifically teach the one or
more point light sources are oriented to emit light in the first direction; and the at least one light path of the light guide directs the light from the first direction to the second direction to the exterior surface.
Shen teaches the one or more point light sources are oriented to emit light in the first direction; and the at least one light path of the light guide directs the light from the first direction to the second direction to the exterior surface (lights emit in one hemisphere, which includes the first direction, i.e. theta = -90 or 90 degrees, and the second direction, i.e. theta = 0 degree, see [0163]: "Many lights emit substantially in one hemisphere, and thus theta will often be measured from -90 to 90 degrees”, also see Fig. 4; the lateral light path before entering the prism on either side directs the light laterally, i.e. from the first direction to substantially vertically, i.e. the second direction to the exterior surface, see Fig. 3B).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the diffusers as taught by Shen in system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “ reduces the intensity at nadir (directly under the light source) and increases the intensity at angles up to some maximum angle” (Shen: [0003]).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 1’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches exposed the exterior surface of the cover plate of the communication
Assembly (see Element 108, Figs 6-8)
Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson does not teach an orienting platform
having a patient-facing surface.
Itkowitz teaches an orienting platform having a patient-facing surface (the downward horizontal plane of the arms attached to the orienting platform is the patient-facing surface, see [0031]: “The patient side cart 12 includes a drivable base 58…Each of the arms 54 may be connected to an orienting platform 53”, also see Fig. 1B).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated an orienting platform as taught by Itkowitz in system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to reduce “patient recovery time, discomfort, and harmful side effects” (Itkowitz: [0003]).
Regarding claim 10, Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 9’s 103 rejection.
Itkowitz also teaches one or more manipulator arms coupled to the orienting platform (multiple manipulator arms are connected to the orienting platform via arms, see [0032]: “…each of the arms 54 connects to a manipulator arm 51… the arms 54 connecting to the orienting platform…”,also see Fig. 1B).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated an orienting platform as taught by Itkowitz in system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to reduce “patient recovery time, discomfort, and harmful side effects” (Itkowitz: [0003]).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) further in view of Lilienthal, II et al. (US 6239359 B1).
Regarding claim 11, Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 9’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches the circuit board is on an opposite side of the cover plate (see [0044]: “…the one or more peripheral PCBs 107b …”, also see Element 107b in Fig. 3)
Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz does not teach an electromagnetic shield disposed on an opposite side of the circuit board as the cover plate.
Lilienthal, II teaches an electromagnetic shield (an EMI shield is an electromagnetic shield on the top of the PWB, i.e. the circuit board, see “…an EMI shield, such as the shield 22 shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, is provided for being removably but firmly mechanically and electrically secured to the PWB”, col. 3, ln. 62-65, see Fig. 3 and 4)
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated an electromagnetic shield as taught by Lilienthal, II on an opposite side of the circuit board as the cover plate as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst further in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “reduces the cost and complexity of the shields… providing greater space for, and access to, the components for mounting, testing and adjustment procedures” (Lilienthal, II: col.5, ln.5-14).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) in view of Lilienthal, II et al. (US 6239359 B1) further in view of Kelly (EP 1072884 A2) .
Regarding claim 12, Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson in view of Itkowitz further in view of Lilienthal, II teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 11’s 103 rejection.
Lilienthal, II also teaches the electromagnetic field comprises a gasket encircling the opening of the electromagnetic shield structure’s rear side for ground path protection (An electrically conductive O-ring gasket is disposed in a groove in the flange, which is enclosing the box-like the electromagnetic shield, the side with the grove where the gasket is attached to is the rear side of the electromagnetic shield, see “An EMI shield for use on a printed wiring board (PWB) of a circuit pack includes an open-ended box-like structure having a laterally extending flange completely encircling the opening into the box-like structure. The box is of an EMI impervious material, preferably stainless steel. An electrically conductive O-ring gasket is disposed in a groove in the flange. Both the groove and the flange completely encircle the box opening”, Abstract, also see Fig. 5; because the electromagnetic shield is connected to the ground of the PWB, i.e. circuit board, the electrically conductive O-ring gasket that’s in contact with the electromagnetic shield is also part of the ground path, see “The shields are each firmly, completely and electrically engaged with a grounded metal surface of the PWB”, see col. 4, ln. 18-20).
Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson in view of Itkowitz further in view of Lilienthal, II does not teach the one or more point light sources include a circular array coupled along a perimeter of the circuit board; the light guide includes an unbroken circular perimeter portion defining radial light paths for the circular array.
Kelly teaches the one or more point light sources include a circular array coupled along a perimeter of the circuit board; the light guide includes an unbroken circular perimeter portion defining radial light paths for the circular array (a circular light array comprises LED light sources (6) along a printed circuit board (5), see “An illuminator (1) has a printed circuit board (5) supporting a ring of light emitting diodes (LEDs) (6)”, Abstract, also see Fig. 1, 4, and 5(b); an annular lens is the unbroken circular light guide defining radial light paths for the circular light array, see [0048]: “Referring to Fig. 3(a) an annular lens 20 of circular cross-section may be used ”, also see Fig. 3(a) ).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the circular array, the circuit board, the light guide as taught by Kelly in the system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson in view of Itkowitz further in view of Lilienthal, II, wherein the grounded gasket is disposed rearwardly of the circular perimeter of the light guide as part of the electromagnetic shield. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for an easily “scaleable” illuminator design (Kelly: Abstract).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Whitehurst et al. (US 20110019858 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) further in view of Hajmousa et al. (US 20090067461 A1).
Regarding claim 13, Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 9’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz does not teach a targeting laser for positioning the orienting platform relative to a patient; and wherein the cover plate and circuit board define central openings therethrough for the targeting laser.
Hajmousa teaches a targeting laser for positioning objects, and wherein the cover plate and circuit board define central openings therethrough for the targeting laser (A laser source is a targeting laser for spatial positioning, i.e. relative positions between different objects, see [0027]: “A laser source, including laser diode 52…”, also see [0003]: “…laser transmitters of the type that are useful for…spatial positioning…”; Element 61 in Fig. 4 is the light path of the laser beam, passing through the central openings of the cover plate Element 60 in Fig. 2 and the circuit board, Element 68 in Fig. 4, see Fig. 2 and 4).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the laser positioning system as taught by Hajmousa in the system as taught by Abraham in view of Whitehurst in view of Isaacson further in view of Itkowitz for positioning the orienting platform relative to a patient. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to eliminate “the need for costly angle sensors”(Hajmousa: [0035] ).
Claims 16-17, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) further in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Abraham teaches the limitation below except where underlined:
“a communication assembly extending within the orienting platform along a second direction transverse to the first direction” (the audio system comprising different components, e.g. an array microphone system, a control device, and a wireless communication device etc. is a communication assembly; any lateral in-plane direction within the 360 degrees of the plane defined by the cover plate’s surface can be a first direction; the substantially vertical direction to the cover plate’s surface is a second direction see [0059]: “audio system 1000 comprising an array microphone system 1030 and a control device 1032… the array microphone system 1030 (e.g., within the control device 1032) may be in wired or wireless communication with the audio component 1036”, also see Fig. 10);
“a cover plate having an exterior surface exposed along the distal surface of the orienting platform, the cover plate defining a plurality of audio openings” (a sound-permeable screen is a cover plate, the exterior surface of the cover plate is the exterior surface, the screen is perforated with small openings and sound-permeable, therefore comprises a plurality of audio openings, see [0033]: “… a first or front face of the housing 102 includes a sound-permeable screen or grill 108…the screen 108 can have a perforated surface comprising a plurality of small openings”, also see Fig. 1);
a circuit board spaced proximally from the cover plate along the second direction by a gap (at least the LED PCB is part of a circuit board, which is part of the assembly with the cover plate and spatially separated from the cover plate by a gap filled with at least a foam membrane Element 111 in Fig. 3, see [0042]: “… the indicator 126 includes at least one LED (not shown) mounted to a PCB 126a (also referred to herein as “LED PCB”)…as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig.3);
a plurality of microphone sets electrically coupled to the circuit board and disposed within the gap between the circuit board and the cover plate, each microphone set of the plurality of microphone sets including a first microphone and a second microphone spaced from one another in the first direction (the microphones are surface mounted on and electrically coupled to, the microphone PCB; the microphones receive sound through the audio openings in the cover plate, suggesting microphones are mounted on the face side of the PCB towards the cover plate; therefore microphones are within the gap between the PCB board and the cover plate; the microphones can be configured into different subsets, i.e. sets; any two microphones of a microphone set can be a first microphone, and a second microphone, they are spaced laterally from each other in the first direction, i.e. a lateral in-plane direction defined by the cover plate’s surface, see Fig. 9; the microphone PCB Is electrically connected to the LED PCB, therefore is part of the circuit board, see [0032]: “The microphones 106 can be coupled to, or included on, a substrate 107… the microphones 106 are surface mounted to the microphone PCB 107 ”, also see Fig. 9, the microphone configuration include a number of microphone subsets, i.e. sets, see [0051]:”the microphone configuration 900 may be mounted on a plurality of printed circuit boards (not shown),… the microphones 906 may include (i) a first subset of the microphones 902 mounted on the central PCB 107a to form a first ring 910 surrounding the central microphone 906, (ii) a second subset of the microphones 906 mounted on the central PCB 107a to form a second ring 912 surrounding the first ring 910…” );
“a plurality of audio passageways isolated from each other, each audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of the plurality of audio openings defined in the cover plate” (each spaced microphone in the microphone array has its own audio passageway, the screen, i.e. cover plate, is sound-permeable and can have many openings, i.e. audio openings, see [0033]:”… the microphone array 104… a sound-permeable screen or grill 108… the screen 108 can have a perforated surface comprising a plurality of small openings…”);
one or more point light sources electrically coupled to the circuit board and disposed within the gap between the circuit board and the cover plate (at least one LED is the one or more light sources electrically couple to a PCB, i.e. the circuit board. Abraham is silent about which side of the circuit board the LED(s) is/are mounted. However, the light guide is placed between the circuit board and the cover plate, suggesting the LED(s) is/are mounted on the face side of the circuit board towards the cover plate, therefore disposed between the circuit board and the cover plate; see [0042]: “… the indicator 126 includes at least one LED (not shown) mounted to a PCB 126a (also referred to herein as “LED PCB”) and a light guide 126b configured to optically direct the light from the LED to outside the screen 108, as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig.3; Abraham is silent about the light is a point light source, however official notice is taken that Point LED lights are well-known compact, high-intensity light sources that emit light from a single point, offering energy efficiency, long lifespan, and design versatility compared to traditional LED light. Thus it would have been obvious for Abraham to have used point LED light for its well-known benefits as set forth above);
a light guide disposed at least partially within the gap between the circuit board and the cover plate, the light guide comprising at least one light path to direct and diffuse light emitted by the one or more point light sources to the exterior surface (a light guide is placed in the gap between the circuit board and the cover plate and direct light to the exterior surface, see [0042]: “… a light guide 126b configured to optically direct the light from the LED to outside the screen 108, as shown in FIG. 3”, also see Fig. 3; Official notice is taken that it is well known in the art that a light guide can have some textured or patterned surfaces or prisms that can scatter light in multiple directions besides directing the light in multiple directions. Thus it would have been obvious that the surface(s) of the light guide of Abraham could have been the type of surface which can direct and diffuse light in one or multiple directions to achieve a well-known benefit which is to achieve uniform or targeted illumination);
Abraham does not teach:
an orienting platform having a patient-facing, distal surface extending along a first direction, and the underlined limitation, wherein “a communication assembly extending within the orienting platform along…”, “a cover plate having an exterior surface exposed along the distal surface of the orienting platform…”, “a plurality of audio passageways isolated from each other, each audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of…”.
Itkowitz teaches an orienting platform having a patient-facing, distal surface extending along a first direction (the downward horizontal plane of the arms attached to the orienting platform is the patient-facing surface, any lateral in-plane direction within the 360 degrees of the plane defined by the patient-facing surface can be a first direction, see [0031]: “The patient side cart 12 includes a drivable base 58…Each of the arms 54 may be connected to an orienting platform 53”, also see Fig. 1B; the surgical system is teleoperational allowing operators to control in separate, i.e. remote, locations, therefore the patient-facing surface is a distal surface relative to the remote operator(s), see [0008]:”…a teleoperational surgical system comprises an operator input system, a teleoperational manipulator configured for operation by the operator input system…The operator input systems…may be positioned in separate locations. Multiple operator input systems allow more than one operator to control one or more manipulator assemblies in various combinations.”).
Abraham does not mention the communication assembly has been used for medical staff to communicate with a patient in an operating room. However, Itkowitz shows there’s such a need for the medical staff to effectively communicate with the patient in the operating room (see [0025]: “The speech recognition system 27 includes one or more microphones for receiving voice communications from personnel in the surgical environment, particularly the surgeon S”). Therefore, at the time of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the orienting platform as taught by Itkowitz to the audio communication system as taught by Abraham in an arrangement that Abraham is an extension of Itkowitz and the people-facing cover plate of Abraham, see [0034]:”… a boardroom where microphones are utilized to capture sound from audio sources or human speakers. In the exemplary environment of FIG. 6, human speakers (not shown) may be seated in chairs at a table below the ceiling 600”, can be patient-facing, including the cover plate plane of Abraham is substantially aligned with the distal surface of the orienting platform of Itkowitz. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to reduce “patient recovery time, discomfort, and harmful side effects” (Itkowitz: [0003]).
Abraham in view of Itkowitz does not teach the underlined limitation, wherein “a plurality of audio passageways isolated from each other, each audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening of…”.
Isaacson teaches one gasket for each microphone comprising an audio passageway extending across the gap from a first seal that seals to one of the first microphone and second microphone to a second seal that seals around an audio opening (one gasket forms a sealed audio path across the gap from the microphone, i.e. a first seal, to around the audio opening for the microphone, i.e. a second seal, see [0053]: “The microphone gasket, in addition to being formed from a substantially flexible material configured to mechanically isolate the microphone from vibrations delivered to the housing and to create an acoustic seal between the microphone and the housing, has associated optical properties so as to provide a path for light emitted from the sub-surface LED to reach the outer surface of the housing”, also see Element 246 in Fig.2)
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the light diffuser and gasket as taught by Isaacson in the medical system as taught by Abraham in view of Itkowitz. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “allow for the manufacture of a more discrete/space efficient sound processing unit” (Isaacson: [0028]).
Regarding claim 17, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 16’s 103 rejection.
Isaacson also teaches each of the audio passageways can be defined by one or more gaskets compressed between the circuit board and the cover plate (Gasket 446 seals or is compressed between PCB 452, i.e. the circuit board, and housing 440, housing can be the cover plate; acoustic port 442 is the audio passageway, see “Also shown in FIG. 4 is a microphone gasket 446 that provides mechanical support for the microphone 408 and creates an acoustic seal between the microphone and the housing 440”, also see Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 22, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 16’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches:
a control system operably coupled to the plurality of microphone sets (The audio component 1036 receives and processes audio signals from the array microphone to which it is coupled to, the array microphone comprise microphone sets; At least the audio component 1036 is part of a control system, see [0059]: “…audio system 1000 comprising an array microphone system 1030 and a control device 1032… The array microphone system 1030 may also include an audio component 1036 that receives audio signals from the array microphone 1034 and is configured as an audio recorder, audio mixer, amplifier, and/or other component for processing of audio signals captured by the microphone array 1034…”, also see Fig. 10).
the one or more point light sources (LED(s) are point light sources, see [0063]: “…LED(s), or other forms of indication are assigned to each operating mode”).
the control system configured to analyze sound received from the plurality of microphone sets for beam forming (The audio component 1036 receives and processes audio signals from the array microphone to which it is coupled to, i.e. analyzes sound from microphone sets. At least the audio component 1036 is part of a control system. the audio component 1036 is also capable of directionality adjustment, i.e. beam forming, see [0059-0060]: “…audio system 1000 comprising an array microphone system 1030 and a control device 1032… The array microphone system 1030 may also include an audio component 1036 that receives audio signals from the array microphone 1034 and is configured as an audio recorder, audio mixer, amplifier, and/or other component for processing of audio signals captured by the microphone array 1034… The control device 1032 may be in wired or wireless communication with the array microphone system 1030 to control the audio component 1036, the microphone array 1034, and/or the indicator 1038. Controls on the control device 1036 may further enable the adjustment of parameters of the microphone array 1034, such as directionality…”, also see Fig. 10).
energize the one or more point light sources as a status indicator to a user (the control device controls LEDs, i.e. point light indicator(s), see [0060]:”…the control device 1036 may include controls to activate or deactivate the microphone array 1034 and/or the indicator 1038.”, also see Fig. 10; the light indicators indicate the operating mode, i.e. status, see [0063]: “The first light source 1046 may be configured to indicate a first operating mode or status of the microphone array 1034 by turning the light on or off…LED(s), or other forms of indication are assigned to each operating mode”, the operating mode is presented to a user, see [0042]: “…indicate the operating mode of the microphone array 104 to human speakers or others”).
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Michel et al. (US 20120250897 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 17’s 103 rejection.
Abraham also teaches the plurality of microphone sets are disposed in an array having a spoked configuration (microphones in the array can be arranged in a spoked pattern therefore the microphone sets are also configured in a spoked pattern, see Fig. 9).
Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson does not teach one or more gaskets comprise a plurality of gaskets for the plurality of microphone sets.
Michel teaches one gasket configured for each microphone set (transducers are microphones, and one gasket is configured for one microphone set comprising two microphones, see [0061] : “PCB 1101 is mechanically coupled to application housing 1105 using gasket 1117… to transducers 101”, also see Fig. 11).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the gasket configuration as taught by Michel in the system as taught by Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “increase electro-acoustical sensitivity” (Michel: [0002]).
Regarding claim 19, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 17’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson does not teach the cover plate defines one or more recesses in an interior surface configured to key the one or more gaskets relative to the plurality of audio openings; and the one or more gaskets define cavities configured to receive the plurality of microphones.
Michel teaches the cover plate defines one or more recesses in an interior surface configured to key the one or more gaskets relative to the plurality of audio openings (each microphone assembly can be attached to the interior surface of the cover plate as part of the cover plate, therefore the cap 115 will be a recess in the cover plate, which holds the gasket 1117 to audio openings 1113, see Fig. 1);
Michel also teaches one or more gaskets define cavities configured to receive the plurality of microphones (transducers are microphones, one microphone set comprises two microphones, and one gasket corresponds to, i.e. defines, cavities for two microphones, i.e. the first microphone and the second microphone, see [0061] : “PCB 1101 is mechanically coupled to application housing 1105 using gasket 1117… to transducers 101”, also see Fig. 11).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the recess structure and gasket configuration as taught by Michel in the system as taught by Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “increase electro-acoustical sensitivity” (Michel: [0002]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Shen et al. (US 20150029717 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 16’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson does not specifically teach the one or more point light sources are oriented to emit light in the first direction; and the at least one light path of the light guide directs the light from the first direction to the exterior surface.
Shen teaches the one or more point light sources are oriented to emit light in the first direction; and the at least one light path of the light guide directs the light from the first direction to the exterior surface (lights emit in one hemisphere, which includes the first direction, i.e. theta = -90 or 90 degrees, and the second direction, i.e. theta = 0 degree, see [0163]: "Many lights emit substantially in one hemisphere, and thus theta will often be measured from -90 to 90 degrees”, also see Fig. 4; the lateral light path before entering the prism on either side directs the light laterally, i.e. from the first direction to substantially vertically, i.e. the second direction to the exterior surface, see Fig. 3B).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated the diffusers as taught by Shen in system as taught by Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “ reduces the intensity at nadir (directly under the light source) and increases the intensity at angles up to some maximum angle” (Shen: [0003]).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Abraham et al. (US 20160323668 A1) in view of Itkowitz et al. (US 20200152190 A1) in view of Isaacson et al. (US 20210243539 A1) further in view of Lilienthal, II et al. (US 6239359 B1).
Regarding claim 21, Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson teaches all the claim elements previously stated in claim 16’s 103 rejection.
Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson does not teach an electromagnetic shield disposed proximally of the circuit board.
Lilienthal, II an electromagnetic shield disposed proximally of the circuit board (an EMI shield is an electromagnetic shield on the PWB, i.e. the circuit board, see “…an EMI shield, such as the shield 22 shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, is provided for being removably but firmly mechanically and electrically secured to the PWB”, col. 3, ln. 62-65, see Fig. 3 and 4).
At the time of the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have integrated an electromagnetic shield as taught by Lilienthal, II on the circuit board as taught by Abraham in view of Itkowitz further in view of Isaacson. It would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to “reduces the cost and complexity of the shields… providing greater space for, and access to, the components for mounting, testing and adjustment procedures” (Lilienthal, II: col.5, ln.5-14).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIN LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-1460. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8-5 pm ET.
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, Vivian Chin can be reached at 571-272-7848. 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.
/SHIN LEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2695
/VIVIAN C CHIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2695
Prosecution Insights