DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The Information Disclosure Statements submitted on 17 January 2025 have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Medema et al. (US 2018/0221645 A1) in view of Fuhrmann (US 2016/0173424 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Medema (US 2018/0221645 A1) teaches a wearable medical system (the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) system [0025, 0027, FIG. 1]), comprising:
a support structure configured to be worn by a patient (support structure 170 [0027]);
a plurality of electrodes configured to sense electrical activity and to be positioned about a body of the patient by the support structure (the sensing electrodes 209 are coupled to the support structure 170 [0046]. Specifically, the sensing electrodes 209 are configured to sense electrical activity (e.g., ECG signals) [0046]);
a processor (the processor 230 [0050, 0056, 0064, 0098]) comprising:
an event detection module configured to detect an occurrence of a notifiable event based at least in part on the electrical activity sensed by the plurality of electrodes (the event detection or assistance request module 374 is configured to determine whether one or more responders should be notified in response to a detected arrythmia (e.g., VF, VT, or Bradycardia) [0046, 0052, 0075]. Specifically, the processor 230 comprises a detection module 232 that is configured to detect the arrhythmia by analyzing the ECG signals from the measurement circuit 220 which is coupled to the sensing electrodes 209 [0046, 0049, 0052, 0075]);
a notification module (the notification module 378 [0075]) that includes information used to identify a first subset of the patient information to transmit to a first recipient, and to identify a second subset of patient information to transmit to a second recipient, wherein the first subset and the second subset of patient information are based in part on the notifiable event (“the communication module 390 is configured to transmit at least some of the information obtained by the notification module 378 to one or more respondents using the responder contact information” [0075-0076]. Specifically, the transmitted information may include the patient emergency information, patient identification information, patient location information, and/or that the patient requires CPR in response to the unsuccessful shocks [0075-0076, 0105-0106]. Furthermore, the “responder” can be a family member, a spouse, relative, neighbor, caregiver, co-worker, paramedic, or anybody who can provide assistance during an emergency [0075-0077, 0097]. Alternatively, the patient’s information can be sent to a computer-aided dispatch (CAD) server 887 which transmits the information to the devices 990 of nearby responders [0095-0097]. The Examiner respectfully submits that each of the individual responders and the dispatch server 887 can be considered as a recipient [0075-0076, 0096-0097]); and
a communication module configured to transmit the first subset of patient information to the first recipient and the second subset of patient information to the second recipient based on a type of the notifiable event (the communication module 390 is configured to transmit the patient’s information obtained by the notification module 378 to one or more respondents using the responder contact information [0075-0076]. Alternatively, the patient’s information can be communicated to a computer-aided dispatch (CAD) server 887 which transmits the information to the devices 990 of nearby responders [0095-0097]), wherein the transmission includes an indication that the patient requires treatment based on the type of the notifiable event (the notification module 378 will indicate the patient’s emergency event and that the patient requires treatment (e.g., CPR) by a first responder [0074-0075, 0077]).
Although Medema teaches the claimed elements of wearable medical system, Medema does not explicitly teach a single embodiment that encompasses all of the claimed elements. The Examiner respectfully submits that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine all of the elements from the different embodiments to arrive at an overall wearable medical system similar to the one claimed. The advantage of such modification will provide a wearable medical system with sensing electrodes, an event detection module, notifications, and a communication module (see the citations above which describe each of these features). This modification may also improve the convenience for the user, as all the features would be implemented into one wearable medical system.
Medema does not explicitly teach a notification table that includes information used to identify the first subset of patient information to transmit to the first recipient, and to identify the second subset of patient information to transmit to the second recipient.
The prior art by Fuhrmann is analogous to Medema, as they both teach a system that is configured to communicate a patient’s information to a recipient ([0041]).
Fuhrmann teaches a notification table that includes information used to identify the first subset of patient information to transmit to the first recipient, and to identify the second subset of patient information to transmit to the second recipient (the database comprises patient charts (e.g., notification table) that includes a plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information which can be used to generate an electronic message (e.g., notification) to one or more intended recipients (e.g., first recipient or second recipient) [0028, 0041]. Specifically, the intended recipient is automatically identified based on the information that is selected from the patient charts [0041]. In this case, the user may enter or select a first set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., first recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0028, 0041]. Furthermore, the user may enter or select a second set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., second recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify the Medema’s processor to comprise a notification table that includes information used to identify the first subset of patient information to transmit to the first recipient, and to identify the second subset of patient information to transmit to the second recipient, as taught by Fuhrmann. This modification is beneficial, as the notification table (e.g. patient charts) will be used to identify the intended recipients based on the selected information from the notification table (see paragraphs [0028, 0041] by Fuhrmann).
Regarding claim 3, Medema teaches a mobile communication device ([0065, claim 3]), separate from the processor, configured to be coupled to the processor and to implement at least a part of the communication module ([0065, claim 3]).
Regarding claim 4, Medema teaches wherein the patient information comprises a location of the mobile communication device (the mobile communication device implements the location module 386 (e.g., GPS) to track the location [0065, 0067]).
Regarding claim 5, Medema teaches a location module configured to determine a location of the patient; wherein to determine the location of the patient, the location module is configured to obtain the location of the patient using a location service ([0065, 0067]).
Regarding claim 6, Medema teaches wherein the first subset of patient information includes medical data (the patient’s medical data may consist of a detected arrhythmia (e.g., VF, VT, or Bradycardia) based on the ECG signals [0049, 0075, 0113]), and the second subset of patient information includes non-medical data (the patient information may consist of non-medical data, such as the patient’s identification (ID) information or the patient’s location information [0075, 0113]).
Regarding claim 7, Medema teaches wherein the transmission of the first subset of patient information to the first recipient comprises information indicating that the patient requires cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) responsive to the patient suffering from a medical condition (the notification module 378 will indicate the patient’s identification information, the patient’s emergency event, and that the patient requires treatment (e.g., CPR) by a first responder [0074-0075, 0077]).
Regarding claim 8, Medema teaches a system server configured to be communicatively coupled to the processor, wherein the system server includes information used to determine the first subset of patient information to transmit to the first recipient and to identify the second subset of patient information to transmit to the second recipient (the server is configured to communicate the different types of patient’s information to the one or more responders using SMS, email, voice (cellular and POTS), and client apps [0075-0076]. This information may include the patient emergency information, patient identification information, patient location information, and/or that the patient requires CPR in response to the unsuccessful shocks [0075-0076, 0105-0106]).
Regarding claim 9, Fuhrmann teaches wherein the notification table comprises one or more profile tables in which the first subset of patient information and the second subset of patient information are identified, and wherein the one or more profile tables include information that associates particular subsets of patient information with subscribed recipients, at least two of the subscribed recipients having substantially different corresponding subsets of patient information (the database comprises patient charts or tables that includes a plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information which can be used to generate an electronic message (e.g., notification) to one or more intended recipients (e.g., first subscribed recipient or second subscribed recipient) [0028, 0041]. Specifically, the intended or subscribed recipient is automatically identified based on the information that is selected from the patient charts or tables [0041]. In this case, the user may enter or select a first set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts or tables to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., first subscribed recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0028, 0041]. Furthermore, the user may enter or select a second set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts or tables to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., second subscribed recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0041]. The Examiner respectfully submits that the intended recipients are considered to be “subscribed recipients”, as their information is registered in the database to receive notifications concerning the patient’s medical records [0028, 0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify the notification table suggested by Medema in view of Fuhrmann to comprise one or more profile tables include information that associates different subsets of patient information with subscribed recipients, as further taught by Fuhrmann. This modification is beneficial, as different sets of medical information from the patient charts or tables will be used to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., subscribed recipients) to receive the electronic message (see paragraphs [0028, 0041] by Fuhrmann).
Regarding claim 10, Medema teaches wherein the communication module is further configured to transmit the patient information and a notification of the notifiable event to a system server (the WCD server 685 receives the patient information and events from the communication module 480 [0089, 0091-0092]), and wherein the system server is configured to implement a notification module (the WCD server 685 generates the notification messages to the responders [0092, 0094, claim 6]. Specifically, the WCD server 685 is coupled to the notification module 378 [claim 6]).
Meanwhile, Fuhrmann teaches wherein the system server is configured to implement the one or more profile tables to facilitate the transmission of the first subset of patient information to the first recipient and the second subset of patient information to the second recipient (the database comprises patient charts or tables that includes a plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information which can be used to generate an electronic message (e.g., notification) through a server (e.g., email server or messaging server) to one or more intended recipients (e.g., first subscribed recipient or second subscribed recipient) [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126]. Specifically, the intended or subscribed recipient is automatically identified based on the information that is selected from the patient charts or tables [0041]. In this case, the user may enter or select a first set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts or tables to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., first subscribed recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126]. Furthermore, the user may enter or select a second set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts or tables to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., second subscribed recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify the system server suggested by Medema in view of Fuhrmann to implement the one or more profile tables to transmit the different subsets of patient information to the first and second recipients, as further taught by Fuhrmann. This modification is beneficial, as different sets of medical information from the patient charts or tables will be used to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., subscribed recipients) to receive the electronic message through a server (e.g., email server or messaging server) (see paragraphs [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126] by Fuhrmann).
Regarding claim 11, Fuhrmann teaches wherein the notification table is hosted on a remote server accessible using the communication module (the server (e.g., email server or messaging server) is configured to access the database comprising the patient charts (e.g., notification table) that includes the plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126]. For example, the patient charts or tables including the plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information may be used to generate an electronic message (e.g., notification) through a server (e.g., email server or messaging server) to one or more intended recipients (e.g., first subscribed recipient or second subscribed recipient) [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify the notification table suggested by Medema in view of Fuhrmann to be hosted on a remote server accessible using the communication module, as further taught by Fuhrmann. This modification is beneficial, as different sets of medical information from the patient charts or tables will be used to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., subscribed recipients) to receive the electronic message through a server (e.g., email server or messaging server) (see paragraphs [0028, 0041, 0098, 0126] by Fuhrmann).
Regarding claim 12, Medema teaches a method for use in a wearable medical system (the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) system [0025, 0027, FIG. 1]) comprising a support structure configured to be worn by a patient (the support structure 170 [0027]), and a plurality of electrodes configured to be positioned about a body of the patient by the support structure (the sensing electrodes 209 are coupled to the support structure 170 [0046]. Specifically, the sensing electrodes 209 are configured to sense electrical activity (e.g., ECG signals) [0046]), the method comprising:
monitoring by at least one processor (the processor 230 [0050, 0055]) of the wearable medical system, one or more parameters comprising electrical activity sensed by the plurality of electrodes (the processor 230 comprises a detection module 232 that is configured to detect the arrhythmia by analyzing the ECG signals from the measurement circuit 220 which is coupled to the sensing electrodes 209 [0046, 0049, 0052, 0075]);
determining by the wearable medical system a location of the patient (the location module 386 is coupled to a component of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator system (WCD) to track the location of the patient [0065, 0067]);
determining by the wearable medical system that a notifiable event has occurred, the notifiable event implicating at least one of the one or more parameters (the event detection or assistance request module 374 is configured to determine whether one or more responders should be notified in response to a detected arrythmia (e.g., VF, VT, or Bradycardia) [0046, 0052, 0075]. As stated previously above, the processor 230 comprises a detection module 232 that is configured to detect the arrhythmia by analyzing the ECG signals from the measurement circuit 220 which is coupled to the sensing electrodes 209 [0046, 0049, 0052, 0075]);
responsive to a determination by the wearable medical system that the notifiable event has occurred, identifying a first recipient and a second recipient (the first and second recipient can be various responders such as a spouse, relative, neighbor, coworker, paramedic, or anybody that can provide assistance to the patient [0075-0077]. Specifically, the communication module 390 may send the notifiable event to the responder by accessing the responder’s contact information [0075-0077]. Furthermore, the first or second recipient may be a computer-aided dispatch (CAD) server 887 which transmits the patient’s information to the devices 990 of nearby responders [0095-0097]), and further identifying a first subset of the patient information associated with the first recipient and a second subset of the patient information associated with the second recipient (the first and second recipients may receive the patient emergency information, patient identification information, patient location information, and/or that the patient requires CPR in response to the unsuccessful shocks [0075-0076, 0105-0106]. The Examiner further submits that the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) system server 685 can provide preference information for each recipient and generates the appropriate notification message for that recipient [0092]. This allows each recipient to selectively choose the type of patient information that is being received in the notification message [0092]), wherein identifying the first and second recipients comprises querying a notification that associates profile information with a plurality of recipients, the first and second recipients being within the plurality of recipients (the WCD server 685 is configured with a profile and preference information for each recipient and generates the appropriate notification message for that recipient [0092]. Furthermore, this allows each recipient to selectively choose the type of patient information that is being received in the notification message [0092]); and
initiating, by the wearable medical system, a transmission of the first subset of the patient information to the first recipient and a transmission of the second subset of the patient information to the second recipient based on a type of the notifiable event (the communication module 390 is configured to transmit the patient’s information obtained by the notification module 378 to one or more respondents using the responder contact information [0075-0076]. For example, the notification module 378 will indicate the patient’s emergency event and that the patient requires treatment (e.g., CPR) by a first responder [0074-0075, 0077]. Alternatively, the WCD system server 885 may process the patient’s information to the dispatch server 887 which further transmits the information to the devices 990 of nearby recipients [0097]).
Although Medema teaches the claimed elements of the wearable medical system, Medema does not explicitly teach a single embodiment that encompasses all of the claimed elements. The Examiner respectfully submits that it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine all of the elements from the different embodiments to arrive at an overall wearable medical system similar to the one claimed. The advantage of such modification will provide a wearable system that can sense electrical activity, monitor events, send location updates, and provide notifications to a recipient or responder if necessary (see the citations above which describe each of these features). This modification may also improve the convenience for the user, as all the features would be implemented into one wearable medical system.
Medema does not explicitly does not explicitly teach wherein identifying the first and second recipients comprises querying a notification table that associates profile information with the plurality of recipients.
The prior art by Fuhrmann is analogous to Medema, as they both teach a system that is configured to communicate a patient’s information to a recipient ([0041]).
Fuhrmann teaches wherein identifying the first and second recipients comprises querying a notification table that associates profile information with the plurality of recipients (the database comprises patient charts (e.g., notification table) that includes a plurality of patient medical records and/or patient contextual information which can be used to generate an electronic message (e.g., notification) to one or more intended recipients (e.g., first recipient or second recipient) [0028, 0041]. Specifically, the intended recipient is automatically identified based on the information that is selected from the patient charts [0041]. In this case, the user may enter or select a first set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., first recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0028, 0041]. Furthermore, the user may enter or select a second set of the patient’s medical records from the patient charts to identify to identify one or more intended recipients (e.g., second recipient) to receive the electronic message (e.g., notification) [0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was effectively filed to modify the Medema’s processor to comprise a notification table that includes information used to identify the first subset of patient information to transmit to the first recipient, and to identify the second subset of patient information to transmit to the second recipient, as taught by Fuhrmann. This modification is beneficial, as the notification table (e.g. patient charts) will be used to identify the intended recipients based on the selected information from the notification table (see paragraphs [0028, 0041] by Fuhrmann).
Regarding claim 13, Medema teaches wherein the one or more parameters further comprise one or more system parameters of the wearable medical system that reflect a status of the wearable medical system (the system parameters that reflect a status of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) system are the system identification, battery status, system date and time, reports of self-testing, records of data entered, or records of episodes and intervention [0043]).
Regarding claim 14, Medema teaches determining, by the wearable medical system, a location of a component of the wearable medical system (the location module 386 determines the location of a component of the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) to indicate a location of the patient [0065, 0067]), wherein the first and second subsets of patient information further include the location of the component of the wearable medical system (during an emergency event, the notification module 378 may provide the patient’s location information to the one or more first responders [0065, 0067, 0075]), and wherein determining the location of the patient comprises obtaining the location of the patient using a location service (the location module 386 determines the location of the patient using a location service such as Google Location Services [0065, 0067, 0075]).
Regarding claim 15, Medema teaches wherein the wearable medical system further comprises a mobile communication device separate from the at least one processor ([0065, 0067, 0115, claim 3, claim 13]), wherein the mobile communication device is used, at least in part, in determining the location of the component of the wearable medical system ([0065, 0067, 0115, claim 2, claim 3, claim 13]), and wherein the mobile communication device assists with the transmission of the first and second subsets of patient information (the mobile communication device or smartphone may be used to transmit the patient’s information [0076, 0113, claims 13-14]).
Regarding claim 16, Medema teaches wherein the transmission includes an indication that the patient requires cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (the notification module 378 will indicate the patient’s emergency event and that the patient requires treatment (e.g., CPR) by a first responder [0074-0075, 0077]).
Regarding claim 17, Medema teaches wherein the first subset of patient information is different, at least in part, from the second subset of patient information (as stated previously in claim 12, the first and second recipients may receive the patient emergency information, patient identification information, patient location information, and/or that the patient requires CPR in response to the unsuccessful shocks [0075-0076, 0105-0106]. The Examiner further submits that the WCD system server 685 can provide preference information for each recipient and generates the appropriate notification message for that recipient [0092]. This allows each recipient to selectively choose or filter the type of patient information that is being received in the notification message [0092]. The Examiner respectfully submits that preference information can allow each of the recipients to receive different types of patient information [0092]).
Regarding claim 18, Medema teaches wherein the notifiable event comprises a medical event associated with the patient (a recipient may be notified if the patient is experiencing an arrythmia such ventricular fibrillation (VF), ventricular tachycardia (VT), bradycardia, and/or asystole [0075-0077]).
Regarding claim 19, Medema teaches wherein identifying the first and second recipients is performed by a remote server (the WCD server 685 can identify and send notifications to the recipients [0091-0092]), and wherein the remote server is configured to participate in the transmission of the first and second subsets of patient information (the WCD server 685 can send the patient information to the recipients through the notification messages [0091-0092]. Alternatively, the WCD server 885 can communicate the patient emergency information and the patient location information to the computer-aided dispatch server 887 [0097]. In response, the dispatch server 887 can forward the patient emergency information and the patient location information to the devices 990 of nearby recipients [0097]).
Regarding claim 20, Medema teaches wherein the first recipient comprises a dispatch server, and wherein the dispatch server is configured to communicate, at least a portion of, the first subset of patient information received from a system server to one or more responders (the WCD server 885 can communicate the patient emergency information and the patient location information to the computer-aided dispatch server 887 [0095-0097]. Furthermore, the dispatch server 887 is configured to the send patient’s location to the devices 990 of the nearby recipients or responders [0095-0097]. As stated previously in claim 12, the patient’s location is tracked through the location module 386 that is coupled to the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) [0065, 0067, claim 2]).
Regarding claim 21, Medema teaches wherein to communicate at least the portion of the first subset of patient information, the dispatch server is configured to send an alert to devices associated with the one or more responders respectively in vicinity of a location of the patient (the WCD server 885 can communicate the patient emergency information and the patient location information to the computer-aided dispatch server 887 [0095-0097]. Furthermore, the dispatch server 887 is configured to the send patient’s location to the devices 990 of the nearby recipients or responders [0095-0097]. As stated previously in claim 12, the patient’s location is tracked through the location module 386 that is coupled to the wearable cardioverter defibrillator (WCD) [0065, 0067, claim 2]).
Double Patenting
5. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
6. Claims 2-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,904,176 B1. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both sets of claims recite a wearable system comprising a support structure, a plurality of electrodes, a processor, an event detection module, a notification table, and a communication module. Specifically, both sets of claims recite the notification table being used to identify a first subset of patient information to transmit to a first recipient, and to identify a second subset of patient information to transmit to a second recipient. Furthermore, both sets of claims recite the communication module being configured to transmit the first subset of patient information to the first recipient and to transmit the second subset of patient information to the second recipient.
Although not exhaustive, a brief matching of the pending claims to those of U.S. Patent No. 11,904,176 B1 is provided below.
Application No. 19/028,934
U.S. Patent No. 11,904,176 B1
2
1, 11, 20
3
1, 3, 11, 14
4
3, 4, 14
5
1, 3, 4, 10, 14
6
1, 11, 16, 17
7
1, 11, 20
8
1, 2, 7
9
1, 6
10
1, 7, 8
11
9
12
1, 11, 17
13
12
14
10, 11, 13, 14
15
14
16
20
17
16
18
17
19
18
20
19
21
8, 19
Conclusion
7. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA BRENDON SOLOMON whose telephone number is (571)270-7208. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am -4:30pm.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached on (571)272-4156. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOSHUA BRENDON SOLOMON/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Prosecution Insights