DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 § 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.
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, “close to” is indefinite because it is unclear as to how close is “close” referring to.
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamauchi (JP 2010/119484 A, English translation, of record) in view of Solomon (US 2006/0058680).
Regarding claims 1-8, Yamauchi discloses an ultrasound probe comprising an ultrasound transducer that radiates an ultrasound wave, a case that accommodates the ultrasound transducer ([0025]: “ultrasound probe”), wherein the case includes one or more range markers that are provided at positions visible from an outside and that indicate a radiation range of the ultrasound wave ([0026]…[0028]); wherein a radiation surface of the ultrasound wave is elongated in an axial direction of the case, and the one or more range markers include a range marker that is disposed close to the radiation surface of the ultrasound wave, wherein the one or more range markers include a pair of range markers that are disposed on both sides in the lateral direction, respectively with the radiation surface of the ultrasound wave interposed therebetween, wherein at least one of the one or more range markers also function as a direction marker that has a surface parallel or orthogonal to a radiation surface of the ultrasound wave and that indicates a radiation direction of the ultrasound wave (Figs. 2 and 3 show a downward pointing arrow symbol which indicates the direction of the ultrasound wave), wherein at least one of the one or more range markers is a strip-shaped pattern that extends in the same range in an axial direction as the radiation range of the ultrasound wave (Figs. 2 and 3 shows pairs of range markers on both sides of a central marker, extending in a ‘strip-shape’). Yamauchi does not explicitly disclose that the case is substantially cylindrical and that the markers are arranged circumferentially around the case, visible from a 360-degree view, including a scale and color markings. However, Solomon teaches a substantially cylindrical laparoscopic ultrasound imaging probe for guiding a medical tool to an anatomical object of interest (Figs. 4 and 5A-5D) that comprises visible markers used for alignment to ultrasound transducers ([0020]). The addition of a generic scale and color selection would have been obvious modifications to enhance the visualization and understanding of Yamauchi’s markers. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to combine the marker guide of Yamauchi to the cylindrical endoscopic device of Solomon, as to provide robust visual guidance to an in vivo ultrasound imaging device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason Ip whose telephone number is (571) 270-5387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9a-5p PST.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached on (571) 272-7230. 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.
/JASON M IP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3793