DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 14 “a second signals” should be changed to “a second signal[[s]]” to fix the typographical error.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-10, and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the limitation “the enclosure”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. No enclosure has previously been set forth. For the purposes of examination claims 4 and 5 will be interpreted as referring the previously set forth housing rather than an enclosure as that appears to be the Applicant’s intent based on the context of the claims and the specification.
Regarding claim 4, claim 4 recites the limitation “the second temperature”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. No second temperature has previously been set forth. For the purposes of examination claims 4 will be interpreted as referring the previously set forth second temperature sensor as that appears to be the Applicant’s intent based on the context of the claims and the specification.
Regarding claim 8, the term “about 2 kg” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ about 2 kg” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Although paragraph 14 of the published specification provides an example of about 2kg as between about 0.5 kg and about 1 kg, this does not provide a clear scope because 1) it is merely exemplary and does not therefore necessarily fully encompass the definition of about 2 kg and 2) the definition itself uses the relative term “about” twice.
Regarding claim 9, the term “near” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites the limitation “the portable handheld ultrasound system”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. No ultrasound system has previously been set forth. For the purposes of examination claim 10 will be interpreted as referring the previously set forth imaging device as that appears to be the Applicant’s intent based on the context of the claims and the specification.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites the limitation “second location” in line 5. There is unclear antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear how this second location relates to the previously set forth second location. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as referring the previously set forth second location and recite “the second location” as that appears to be the Applicant’s intent based on the context of the claims and the specification.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 recites the limitation “second location” in line 5. There is unclear antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear how this second location relates to the previously set forth second location. For the purposes of examination the claim will be interpreted as referring the previously set forth second location and recite “the second location” as that appears to be the Applicant’s intent based on the context of the claims and the specification.
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 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, 9-11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu et al. (US20170020490, hereafter Ryu) and Davidsen et al., (US20140058270, hereafter Davidsen).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Ryu discloses, in Figures 1-3 (Ryu, Para 1; “The present invention relates to a heat dissipation structure of a portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus, and more particularly, to a heat dissipation structure of a portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus, capable of improving performance of a product by externally dissipating heat generated inside the portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus”), a portable handheld medical imaging device, comprising:
a housing (external housing 500) having a first end portion opposite a second end portion, wherein the first end portion is configured to be held in an operator's hand while the operator at least partially controls the device using the thumb on the operator's hand (See annotated Figure 3) (Ryu, Para 58; “As shown in the drawing, the heat dissipation structure of the portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus according to the embodiment of the present invention includes an external housing 500, a plurality of circuit boards 600, and a heat conducting pipe 700.”);
PNG
media_image1.png
351
514
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a heat sink (heat dissipation plate 900) attached to the frame and positioned at the second end portion of the housing (Ryu, Para 81; “As shown in the drawing, the heat dissipation plate 900 applied to the embodiment of the present invention may be formed in a longitudinal direction of the external housing 500 of FIG. 3 and may include a plurality of heat dissipation cells 901 which are arranged in parallel and have cross sections forming quadrangular hollow portions”) (Figure 3, showing the heat dissipation plate at the second end);
electronics (circuit boards 600) in the housing (Ryu, Para 58; “As shown in the drawing, the heat dissipation structure of the portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus according to the embodiment of the present invention includes an external housing 500, a plurality of circuit boards 600, and a heat conducting pipe 700.”), wherein the electronics comprise a heat-producing electronic component, and wherein the electronics are configured to receive signals from a medical imaging probe and process the signals to construct a medical image (Ryu, Para 43; “, the main circuit portion 200 generates the ultrasonic image by receiving and analyzing the echo signal and transmits the ultrasonic image to an external portable display device having a user screen. Also, the power control portion 400 includes a high voltage which drives the ultrasonic probe 100, generates and distributes a voltage necessary for an overall system, and reduces power consumption during an operation to provide a maximal use time while using the battery 300 having limited power as a power source.”); and
one or more heat pipes (heat conducting pipe 700) in the housing (Ryu, Para 58; “As shown in the drawing, the heat dissipation structure of the portable ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus according to the embodiment of the present invention includes an external housing 500, a plurality of circuit boards 600, and a heat conducting pipe 700.”) in thermal communication with the heat-producing electronic component (Ryu, Para 61; “One side of the heat conducting pipe 700 is disposed between the plurality of circuit boards 600”), wherein at least one of the one or more heat pipes has a first portion extending toward a second portion, wherein the first portion is positioned proximate the heat-producing electronic component, and wherein the second portion is positioned proximate the second end portion of the housing in thermal communication with the heat sink (Ryu, Para 78; “Also, as shown in the drawing, the heat dissipation structure according to the embodiment of the present invention may include a heat dissipation plate 900 disposed in contact with the bottom surface of the other side of the heat conducting pipe 700 and including aluminum or copper.”) (Ryu, Para 85; “First, primarily, the heat generated by the plurality of circuit boards 600 (refer to FIG. 3) may be quickly conducted by the heat conducting pipe 700 (refer to FIG. 4) with one side disposed between the plurality of circuit boards 600 (refer to FIG. 4) and the heat conducting pads 710 and 720 (refer to FIG. 4) and may be transferred to places where the vent 530 (refer to FIG. 3), the cooling fan 800 (refer to FIG. 3), and the heat dissipation plate 900 (refer to FIG. 3) are present”).
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose a frame in the housing.
In an analogous heat management of ultrasound electronics field of endeavor Davidsen discloses in Figures 3, 5, and 8, a frame (frame 16) in a housing (Davidsen, outer case 22) (Davidsen, Para 14; "frame 16 also mounts electrical components of the probe which themselves are mounted on two printed circuit boards and occupy the space inside the probe indicated by 18") (Davidsen, Para 14; "The probe 10 has an outer case 22 which forms the handle portion of the probe which is held by a sonographer when using the probe.").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu to include a frame in the housing in order to provide an effective mount for components as taught by Davidsen (Davidsen, Para 14-16).
Regarding claim 9, Ryu and Davidsen discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 as discussed above.
Ryu further discloses an aperture (air outlet 532) (Ryu, Para 76; “shown in FIG. 3 and may be formed in a structure in which the outside air vertically flows downward through the air inlet 531 and is circulated toward the air outlets 532 and 533”), extending on a surface of the housing near the second end portion of the housing, wherein the heat sink is positioned adjacent to the aperture (Ryu, Figure 3 showing this).
Regarding claim 10, Ryu and Davidsen discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 as discussed above.
Ryu further discloses wherein the one or more heat pipes includes a plurality of heat pipes (Ryu, Para 17; “The heat conducting pipe may further include one or more sub heat conducting pipes”).
Regarding claim 20, Ryu and Davidsen discloses all of the limitations of claims 11 as discussed above.
Ryu further discloses an aperture on a surface of the housing (air outlet 532) (Ryu, Para 76; “shown in FIG. 3 and may be formed in a structure in which the outside air vertically flows downward through the air inlet 531 and is circulated toward the air outlets 532 and 533”), wherein the heat sink is positioned adjacent to the aperture (Ryu, Figure 3 showing this).
Claims 2 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu and Davidsen as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Osawa (US20120150038).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Ryu and Davidsen discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose a thermally insulative material positioned between the heat sink and the frame.
In an analogous heat management of ultrasound electronics field of endeavor Osawa discloses in Figures 1a and 1b,a thermally insulative material (heat insulator 36) positioned between two thermally conductive members (Osawa, Para 80; "the illustrated probe 10 preferably uses the heat insulator 36 to achieve heat insulation between all the functional units and thermally conductive members").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu to include a thermally insulative material positioned between the heat sink and the frame in order to help prevent the power reduction or destabilized operation of the ultrasonic wave-generating unit due to heat (Osawa, Para 81).
Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Osawa above is interpreted as disclosing these limitations in the claims because Davidsen modifies Ryu to use a thermally conductive frame to mount components and Osawa modifies Ryu to use a thermally insulative material between the different thermally conductive members.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu and Davidsen as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Bestle (US20070296703).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Ryu and Davidsen discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 as discussed above.
Claims 3 and 13 recite the limitation wherein the heat sink and the one or more heat transfer pipes are configured to maintain a temperature of the first side of the first housing to less than 48 degrees Celsius. This limitation is interpreted as a recitation of an intended result. A recitation of intended result must result in some structural difference is imposed by the result on the structure or material recited in the claim, or some manipulative difference is imposed by the result on the action recited in the claim in order to be given patentable weight. Here, there does not appear to be any recited structural difference, so this limitation in not given patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein surface area of the first housing is less than 500 square centimeters.
In an analogous handheld electronic computing device field of endeavor Bestle discloses wherein a surface area of a housing of a handheld electronic device is less than 500 square centimeters (Bestle, Para 3; “The wireless communications devices 20, 40 are, respectively dimensioned at 113 mm. by 49 mm. and 100 mm. by 55 mm.”).
The use of the techniques of having a handheld device with a surface area less than 500 square centimeters taught by Bestle in the invention of a handheld computing device for an ultrasound probe would have comprised only application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of having a handheld device which is easy to wield; and similar modifications have previously been held to involve only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein surface area of the first housing is less than 500 square centimeters as taught by Bestle in order to make the device easy to hold for the user.
Claims 4, 14, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu and Davidsen as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Motoki et al. (US20170007213, hereafter Motoki).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Ryu as modified by Davidsen above discloses all of the limitations of claims 1 and 11 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose a first temperature sensor at a first location in the housing; and a second temperature sensor in the enclosure at a second location in the housing, wherein the first temperature sensor and the second temperature are configured to produce a first signal and a second signal corresponding to a temperature at the first location and the second location respectively.
In an analogous heat management of ultrasound electronics field of endeavor Motoki discloses a first temperature sensor at a first location in a housing; and a second temperature sensor in the enclosure at a second location in the housing, wherein the first temperature sensor and the second temperature are configured to produce a first signal and a second signal corresponding to a temperature at the first location and the second location respectively (Motoki, Para 66; "In this situation, the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 a in FIG. 3A is higher than the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 b. Therefore, based on this difference between the sensed temperatures of these two thermistors 64 a, 64 b, a temperature gradient can be assumed [...] This allows appropriate control, for example, by stopping transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves, even when only surface temperatures at some locations on the wave transmission/reception surface are higher than a predetermined temperature").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu to include a first temperature sensor at a first location in the housing; and a second temperature sensor in the enclosure at a second location in the housing, wherein the first temperature sensor and the second temperature are configured to produce a first signal and a second signal corresponding to a temperature at the first location and the second location respectively in order to allow for appropriate temperature control based on a plurality of data points as taught by Motoki (Motoki, Para 66).
Regarding claim 17, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cease operating, if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature.
Motoki further discloses wherein electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cease operating, if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature (Motoki, Para 66; "In this situation, the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 a in FIG. 3A is higher than the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 b. Therefore, based on this difference between the sensed temperatures of these two thermistors 64 a, 64 b, a temperature gradient can be assumed [...] This allows appropriate control, for example, by stopping transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves, even when only surface temperatures at some locations on the wave transmission/reception surface are higher than a predetermined temperature").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cease operating, if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature in order to allow for appropriate temperature control based on a plurality of data points as taught by Motoki (Motoki, Para 66).
Regarding claim 19, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cause the medical imaging device to shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature.
Motoki further discloses wherein electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cause the medical imaging device to shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature (Motoki, Para 66; "In this situation, the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 a in FIG. 3A is higher than the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 b. Therefore, based on this difference between the sensed temperatures of these two thermistors 64 a, 64 b, a temperature gradient can be assumed [...] This allows appropriate control, for example, by stopping transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves, even when only surface temperatures at some locations on the wave transmission/reception surface are higher than a predetermined temperature").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cause the medical imaging device to shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature in order to allow for appropriate temperature control based on a plurality of data points as taught by Motoki (Motoki, Para 66).
Claims 5-6, and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu, Davidsen, and Motoki as applied to claims 4 and 14 above, and further in view of Kossakovski et al. (US20150372356, hereafter Kossakovski).
Regarding claim 5, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 4 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cease operating if the first signal and the second signal indicate that a temperature gradient between the first location and the second location in the enclosure is greater than a threshold temperature.
In an analogous heat management of electronics field of endeavor Kossakovski discloses wherein electronics are configured to cease operating if signals indicate a temperature difference between first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature (Kossakovski, Para 12; “The system includes a controller comprising a control algorithm configured to monitor a thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region and to adjust electric power delivered to the thermoelectric device such that the thermal energy transferred to or away from the temperature-sensitive region of the electrical device reduces or eliminates the thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region”) (Kossakovski, Para 88; “In certain embodiments, the power source can be turned off (e.g., supply zero volts to the TE device).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to receive the first and second signals and to cease operating if the first and second signals indicate a temperature difference between the first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature in order to prevent diminishment of performance or degradation of parts, which improves reliability, service life, and efficiency as taught by Kossakovski (Kossakovski, Para 4-5).
Regarding claim 6, Ryu as modified by Davidsen, Motoki, and Kossakovski above discloses all of the limitations of claim 5 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the threshold temperature is less than or equal to 5 degrees Celsius.
Kossakovski further discloses wherein the threshold temperature is less than or equal to 5 degrees Celsius. (Kossakovski, Para 12; “The system includes a controller comprising a control algorithm configured to monitor a thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region and to adjust electric power delivered to the thermoelectric device such that the thermal energy transferred to or away from the temperature-sensitive region of the electrical device reduces or eliminates the thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region” emphasis added) (Kossakovski, Para 88; “In certain embodiments, the power source can be turned off (e.g., supply zero volts to the TE device).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the threshold temperature is less than or equal to 5 degrees Celsius in order to prevent diminishment of performance or degradation of parts, which improves reliability, service life, and efficiency as taught by Kossakovski (Kossakovski, Para 4-5).
Regarding claim 15, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and reduce processing operations if the first signal and the second signal indicate that a temperature difference between the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature.
In an analogous heat management of electronics field of endeavor Kossakovski discloses wherein electronics are configured to reduce processing operations if signals indicate a temperature difference between first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature (Kossakovski, Para 12; “The system includes a controller comprising a control algorithm configured to monitor a thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region and to adjust electric power delivered to the thermoelectric device such that the thermal energy transferred to or away from the temperature-sensitive region of the electrical device reduces or eliminates the thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region”) (Kossakovski, Para 88; “In certain embodiments, the power source can be turned off (e.g., supply zero volts to the TE device).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to receive the first and second signals and to reduce processing operations if the first and second signals indicate a temperature difference between the first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature in order to prevent diminishment of performance or degradation of parts, which improves reliability, service life, and efficiency as taught by Kossakovski (Kossakovski, Para 4-5).
Regarding claim 16, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and display a warning message that indicates the medical imaging device has faulted if the first signal and the second signal indicate that a temperature difference between the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature.
In an analogous heat management of electronics field of endeavor Kossakovski discloses wherein a system is at a faulty temperature if signals indicate a temperature difference between first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature (Kossakovski, Para 12; “The system includes a controller comprising a control algorithm configured to monitor a thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region and to adjust electric power delivered to the thermoelectric device such that the thermal energy transferred to or away from the temperature-sensitive region of the electrical device reduces or eliminates the thermal gradient created during operation of the electrical device across the temperature sensitive region”) (Kossakovski, Para 88; “In certain embodiments, the power source can be turned off (e.g., supply zero volts to the TE device).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein a temperature difference between the first and second locations greater than a threshold temperature is indicative that a temperature of a device is faulty in order to prevent diminishment of performance or degradation of parts, which improves reliability, service life, and efficiency as taught by Kossakovski (Kossakovski, Para 4-5).
Motoki further discloses wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal (Motoki, Para 66; "In this situation, the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 a in FIG. 3A is higher than the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 b. Therefore, based on this difference between the sensed temperatures of these two thermistors 64 a, 64 b, a temperature gradient can be assumed [...] This allows appropriate control, for example, by stopping transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves, even when only surface temperatures at some locations on the wave transmission/reception surface are higher than a predetermined temperature"); and display a warning message that indicates the medical imaging device has faulted if inappropriate temperature measurements have been measured (Motoki, Para 48-50; “The warning controller 30 controls to output a warning […] The warning may be displayed on a display 36 as a warning message, or issued as sound or light. Obviously, a combination of these means is also possible. […] In response to instructions from the warning controller 30, the display processor 34 also controls to display a warning message on the display 36. The display processor 34 further controls to display, on the display 36, ultrasonic images formed by the ultrasonic image former.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and display a warning message that indicates the medical imaging device has faulted if the first signal and the second signal indicate that a temperature difference between the first location and the second location is greater than a threshold temperature in order to allow for appropriate temperature control based on a plurality of data points as taught by Motoki (Motoki, Para 66) and to allow a user to prevent unnecessary damage to the device.
Ryu as modified by Davidsen, Motoki, and Kossakovski above is interpreted as disclosing these limitations in the claim because Kossakovski modifies Ryu such that a temperature difference between two different location is bad, and Motoki modifies Ryu to display a warning due to risky operation due to bad temperatures.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu, Davidsen, and Motoki as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Carlson et al. (US20090210190, hereafter Carlson) and Groningen et al. (US20110230794, hereafter Groningen).
Regarding claim 7, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 4 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the second location in the housing is adjacent to the heat sink and the first location in the housing is closer to the first side of the first housing than to the heat sink.
In an analogous heat management of electronics field of endeavor Carlson discloses wherein a temperature sensor is located adjacent to a heat sink (Carlson, Para 5; “A temperature sensor is located on the heat sink and another on the component or the attachment means, wherein a portion of the attachment means is disposed between the sensors”) (Carlson, Figure 1; showing temperature sensors 121-127 on or adjacent to the heat sink).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the second location in the first housing is adjacent to the heat sink in order to determine if there is a failure to conduct heat by the heat sink and thus prevent damage as taught by Carlson (Carlson, Para 3-5).
In an analogous heat management of electronics field of endeavor Groningen discloses detecting temperature of a handle portion of a device (Groningen, Para 21; “The detection system and control circuit may be configured to maintain the temperature of at least a portion of the surface of the applicator, preferably substantially the entire surface or even the entire applicator, below a predetermined temperature, e.g. about 45 or about 40 degrees Celsius, in particular the treatment head and a gripping portion of the handle. Skin contact to warmer surfaces is generally unpleasant or harmful.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the first location is at a gripping portion of the device in order to prevent unpleasant or harmful temperatures for a user as taught by Groningen (Groningen, Para 21).
Ryu as modified by Davidsen, Motoki, Carlson, and Groningen above is interpreted as disclosing these limitations above because Groningen modifies Ryu to check the temperature of the gripping portion and the gripping portion of Ryu is closer to the first side of the first housing than to the heat sink.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura, Ryu and Davidsen as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Chen (US20140006658).
Regarding claim 8, Ryu as modified by Davidsen above does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the housing weighs less than about 2 kg.
In an analogous handheld electronic computing device field of endeavor Chen discloses wherein a housing weighs less than 2kg (Chen, Para 4; “A handheld computer typically has a display screen with touch input and weighing less than 2 pounds (0.91 kg)”).
The use of the techniques of having a handheld device weight less than 2kg taught by Chen in the invention of a handheld computing device for an ultrasound probe would have comprised only application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of having a handheld device which is easy to wield; and similar modifications have previously been held to involve only routine skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the housing weighs less than about 2 kg as taught by Chen in order to make the device easy to hold for the user.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ryu, Davidsen, and Motoki as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Satsuka et al. (US20140323870, hereafter Satsuka).
Regarding claim 18, Ryu as modified by Davidsen and Motoki above discloses all of the limitations of claim 14 as discussed above.
Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and display a warning message that indicates the medical imaging device will shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature.
Motoki further discloses wherein electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cause the medical imaging device to shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature (Motoki, Para 66; "In this situation, the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 a in FIG. 3A is higher than the temperature sensed by the thermistor 64 b. Therefore, based on this difference between the sensed temperatures of these two thermistors 64 a, 64 b, a temperature gradient can be assumed [...] This allows appropriate control, for example, by stopping transmission and reception of ultrasonic waves, even when only surface temperatures at some locations on the wave transmission/reception surface are higher than a predetermined temperature").
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu wherein the electronics are configured to: receive the first signal and the second signal; and cause the medical imaging device to shut down if one or both of the first signal and the second signal indicate that the temperature at one or both of the first location and second location is greater than a threshold temperature in order to allow for appropriate temperature control based on a plurality of data points as taught by Motoki (Motoki, Para 66).
In an analogous ultrasound device field of endeavor Satsuka discloses displaying a warning message that indicates a medical imaging device will shut down before shutting down (Satsuka, Para 108; “At step S910, a warning message indicating that cart type ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus 20 is to be stopped is displayed on display section 10, and at step S911, system control section 07 stores the system setting and shuts down the apparatus such that cart type ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus 20 is safely stopped”) (Satsuka, Para 63; “system control section 07 displays on display section 10 a warning message indicating that the system of ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus main body 00 will be shutdown at step S510, and, at step S511, system control section 07 stores the current system setting of ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus main body 00, and then shuts down the system so as to safely stop ultrasonic diagnostic apparatus main body 00”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ryu does not clearly and explicitly disclose wherein the electronics are configured to: display a warning message that indicates the medical imaging device will shut down before shutting down in order to allow the device to be stopped in a safer manner as taught by Satsuka (Satsuka, Para 108) and to alert a user that the device has stopped.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John Li whose telephone number is (313)446-4916. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday; 5:30 AM to 3:30 PM Eastern.
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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached on (571) 272-2714. 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.
/JOHN D LI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights