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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Egorov (US 20130144191 A1).
With respect to claim 1, Egorov discloses a pelvic organ prolapse pressure measuring device (see paragraph 0005, 0008, 0015, 0025, a transvaginal probe that measures vaginal tactile profiles to assess pelvic tissues and detect disease), comprising:
a pelvic organ prolapse pressure sensing system and a data acquisition system (see paragraph 0075-0077 and Fig. 12, 15: probe #10 has tactile sensor array #11 and data acquisition electronics #93, wherein the pelvic organ prolapse pressure sensing system comprises a support body, and pressure sensors are distributed outside of the support body (see paragraph 0025: probe has hand-held housing with tactile sensor array equipped on it; and see paragraph 0075-0077: probe #10 has multiple tactile sensors #11 on the probe’s tissue contacting surfaces).
With respect to claim 2, all limitations of claim 1 apply in which Egorov further discloses wherein the data acquisition system comprises a power supply (see paragraph 0076-0078: data acquisition electronics #93 with rechargeable battery #92 arranged inside of probe), a data collector (see paragraph 0078: data processor #100 collects data in data acquisition mode), a data receiver (see paragraph 0078: a computer may be used as data processor where a computer acts as a data receiver and data transmitter), and a data transmitter (see paragraph 0078: a computer may be used as data processor where a computer acts as a data receiver and data transmitter)arranged inside the support body.
With respect to claim 3, all limitations of claim 2 apply in which Egorov further discloses wherein the data collector is electrically connected to the pressure sensors (see paragraph 0078 and Fig. 12: communication and data transfer between probe with tactile sensors and data processor may be wireless), and the data collector collects analog power signals from a measured unit of each of the pressure sensors (see paragraph 0078 and Fig. 12: data processor collects signals from tactile sensors of probe) the data transmitter sends the analog power signals to a server workstation according to a communication protocol (see paragraph 0078-0082: data processor communicates with external data processor such as a computer and wireless transmits data via a communication protocol); and after a data format conversion and data structure processing, a data analysis is performed, at the same time, the data receiver receives an instruction of the server workstation according to the communication protocol for a data acquisition and a data operation (see paragraph 0078-0082: data is processed and analyzed and can further be told to be in data acquisition mode, data management mode and/0r device management mode).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egorov in view of Hoffman (US 20070112284 A1).
With respect to claim 4, all limitations of claim 3 apply in which Egorov does not disclose wherein a side of the support body is spirally connected to a gripper, the gripper comprises a spiral connector, a first side of the spiral connector is connected to an elastomer, a side of the elastomer is provided with an elastic plate, a second side of the spiral connector is connected to a handle, the handle is provided with a power switch and a detection controller, and a side of the handle is provided with a holding rod.
Hoffman teaches a gripper (see paragraph 0057, O ring seal #56), the gripper comprises a spiral connector (see paragraph 0056: threads #54, #52), a first side of the spiral connector is connected to an elastomer (see paragraph 0069: probe has external silicone coating), a side of the elastomer is provided with an elastic plate (see paragraph 0067: internal spring washer), a second side of the spiral connector is connected to a handle (see paragraph 0057: handle #50 is fitted with threads #52 engagement mating threading #54 that are formed on proximal side of probe),the handle is provided with a power switch and a detection controller (see paragraph 0068: probe has on/off switch on handle with processor as controller detection), and a side of the handle is provided with a holding rod (see paragraph 0058: the handle itself is grasped).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egorov with the teachings of Hoffman to have added structure to the support body because it would have resulted in the predictable result of having a biologically inert coating layer to improve biocompatibility of a probe (Hoffman: see [0069]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egorov in view of Hoffman as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Thomas (US 20170095207 A1).
With respect to claim 5, all limitations of claim 4 apply in which Egorov and Hoffman do not teach wherein there is a sturdy pin set on a screw-in end of the gripper and there is a corresponding pin anchoring slot set at an interface of the support body, and the sturdy pin is engaged in the corresponding pin anchoring slot.
Thomas teaches a sturdy pin set on a screw-in end of the gripper and there is a corresponding pin anchoring slot set at an interface of the support body, and the sturdy pin is engaged in the corresponding pin anchoring slot (see paragraph 0055: screws as frame fasteners are utilized to attach flexible membrane to base portion of pressure sensing device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egorov and Hoffman with the teachings of Thomas to have utilized screws because it would have resulted in the predictable result of attaching something to a base securely (Thomas: see [0055]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egorov in view of Hoffman and Thomas as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Folkerts (US 20090082830 A1).
With respect to claim 6, all limitations of claim 5 apply in which Egorov, Hoffman and Thomas do not teach wherein an isolator is provided outside the pressure sensors.
Folkerts teaches an isolator outside of pressure sensors (see paragraph 0099-0120: digital signal isolators are placed outside of pressure sensors).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egorov, Hoffman and Thomas with the teachings of Folkerts to have added an isolator because it would have resulted in the predictable result of providing isolation between patient connected electronics to allow better communication (Folkerts: see [0016]-[0120]).
With respect to claim 7, all limitations of claim 6 apply in which Egorov further discloses wherein the data transmitter and the data receiver communicate data through the communication protocol (see paragraph 0078-0082: data processor communicates with external data processor such as a computer and wirelessly transmits data between data processor and probe via a communication protocol).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egorov in view of Hoffman, Thomas, and Folkerts as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Maier (US 20200128383 A1).
With respect to claim 8, all limitations of claim 7 apply in which Egorov, Hoffman, Thomas and Folkerts do not disclose wherein the data transmitter adopts a transmission control protocol (TCP) data uninterrupted communication heartbeat packet, the analog power signals are timely sent to the server workstation according to the communication protocol, and the communication protocol is a 5G mobile communication technology.
Maier teaches a transmission control protocol (TCP) data uninterrupted communication heartbeat packet (see paragraph 0108: data communications network #18 includes TCP), the analog power signals are timely sent to the server according to the communication protocol (see paragraph 0108: data communication network #18 is how data is transmitted and received), and the communication protocol is a 5G mobile communication technology (see paragraph 0111: wireless network includes 5G).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egorov, Hoffman, Thomas and Folkerts with the teachings of Maier to have utilized a TCP communication protocol with 5G technology because it would have resulted in providing a connection-oriented, end-to-end reliable protocol designed to fit into a layered hierarch of protocols that support multi-network applications (Maier: see [0156]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NIDHI PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-2379. The examiner can normally be reached Mondays to Fridays 9AM-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, Jennifer Robertson can be reached at (571) 272-5001. 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.
/N.N.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JENNIFER ROBERTSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights