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: Claim 14 recites “at least two selected a group consisting of…” This should read “at least two selected from a group consisting of…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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.
Claim(s) 1, 6 – 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Locke et al. (US PGPUB 2003/0201752).
Regarding claim 1, Locke discloses a defibrillator system (e.g. ABSTRACT) comprising:
a base defibrillator (e.g. 20) unit that is capable of operating independently as an automated external defibrillator (AED) the base defibrillator unit including a rechargeable battery and battery charging circuitry (e.g. ¶ 26; power source in the form of rechargeable cells); and
a supplemental battery pack (e.g. 60) configured to be electrically connected to the base defibrillator unit and stored with the base defibrillator unit to facilitate periodically recharging the base defibrillator unit's rechargeable battery via the battery charging circuitry while the base defibrillator unit is being stored (e.g. ¶ 26); and
wherein the defibrillator system is configured to charge the rechargeable battery using power supplied by the supplemental battery pack while the base defibrillator unit is being stored to thereby extend a shelf life of the base defibrillator unit (e.g. ¶ 26).
Regarding claim 6, Locke discloses the base defibrillator unit has a first connector electrically coupled to the battery charging circuitry; and the supplemental battery pack has a second connector configured to be directly or indirectly coupled to the first connector to facilitate recharging the rechargeable battery while the base defibrillator unit is being stored (e.g. ¶ 33).
Regarding claim 7, Locke discloses the supplemental battery pack is mounted on the base defibrillator unit to form at least a part of a unitary portable modular defibrillator system that combines the base defibrillator unit and the supplemental battery pack; and the first connector of the base defibrillator unit directly contacts the second connector of the supplemental battery pack (e.g. ¶ 26, 36).
Regarding claim 8, Locke discloses a connector cable that electrically connects the first connector of the base defibrillator unit to the second connector of the supplemental battery pack (e.g. ¶ 36; the electrical connectors read on the connector cable).
Regarding claim 10, Locke discloses the supplemental battery pack is mounted on the base defibrillator unit to form at least a part of a unitary portable modular defibrillator system that combines the base defibrillator unit and the supplemental battery pack (e.g. ¶ 26, 36).
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.
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(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lock et al.
Regarding claim 9, Locke discloses the first and second connectors as previously discussed but doesn’t explicitly recite USB connectors. However, USB connectors are well known in the art. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the connectors as taught by Lock with the USB connectors, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of using well known and readily available connectors to charge the rechargeable cells.
Claim(s) 2 – 5, 15, 16, and 18 – 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke in view of Stever et al. (US PGPUB 2014/0292534).
Regarding claims 2 – 5 and 18 – 25, Locke discloses the claimed invention except for the interface unit mounted on the base defibrillator as claimed. Stever teaches it is known to use a removable interface module mounted in operative relation to an AED, having its own rechargeable energy storage, a processor, and a communication receiver (e.g. ¶ 6, 37 – 41). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention as taught by Locke with the interface as taught by Stever, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of efficiently providing information to a user.
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Locke discloses the claimed invention except for
the defibrillator system is configured to automatically, periodically send status messages via the communications unit to a remotely located server, the status messages including an indication of a charge level of the rechargeable battery. Stever teaches it is known to use an AED that periodically sends status messages via the communications unit to a remotely located server, the status messages including an indication of a charge level of the rechargeable battery (e.g. ¶ 6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention as taught by Locke with the status messaging as taught by Stever, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of allowing a physician at a remote location to monitor the status of the AED in real time.
Claim(s) 11 – 14 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke et al. in view of Tamura et al. (US PGPUB 2004/0212344).
Regarding claims 11 – 14, Locke discloses the invention as described above but fails to explicitly recite a battery charging controller. Tamura teaches it is known to use an AED assembly comprising a defibrillator housing carrying a rechargeable power source, and a battery charging controller that manages charging and maintenance of the base unite battery which communicates battery status (e.g. ¶ 29-30 and 47). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention as taught by Locke with the battery charging controller as taught by Tamura, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of further extending readiness/shelf life.
Regarding claim 17¸ Locke discloses the claimed invention except for period self-tests. Tamura teaches it is known to use a shock discharge capacitor and capacitor charging circuitry suitable for charging the shock discharge capacitor to a level suitable for delivering a defibrillation shock; the defibrillator system is configured to execute periodic self-tests of the base defibrillator unit; and at least some of the periodic self-tests involve charging the shock discharge capacitor (e.g. ¶ 47). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention as taught by Locke with the self-tests as taught by Tamura, since such a modification would provide the predictable results of efficiently optimizing defibrillator performance.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH M DIETRICH whose telephone number is (571)270-1895. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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 McDonald can be reached at 571-270-3061. 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.
/JOSEPH M DIETRICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3796
