Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because of the following analysis:
1 – statutory category: Claims 1-10 recite a system, and therefore, falls under the statutory category of being a thing or products. See MPEP 2106.03. Claim 11-20 recite a series of steps and therefore, falls under the statutory category of being a process. See MPEP 2106.03.
2A – Prong 1: The independent claims 1 and 11 recite a judicial exception by reciting the limitations of “receive physiologic information of the patient; determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on a signal metric derived from the received physiologic information; and determine an arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level as a first confidence level of AT corresponds to a first arrhythmia detection duration”. These limitations, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in mind or by a person using a pen and paper. Therefore, an abstract idea is involved.
2A – Prong 2: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements when considered both individually and as an ordered combination do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The independent claims 1 and 11 recite the additional limitations of “ambulatory medical device”, “detection circuit”, etc. The mentioned limitations are recited at a high level of generality and are considered to be data gathering/processing which are mere extra-solution activity. The elements amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(f)). Accordingly, each of the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limitations on practicing the abstract idea.
2B: The emphasized elements cited above do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because these limitations are simply appending well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known in the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known in the industry (see Electric Power Group, 830 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2016); Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’I, 110 USPQ2d 1976 (2014)).
In view of the above, the additional elements individually do not amount to significantly more than the above-judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination (that is, as a whole) adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer, for example, or improves any other technology. There is no indication that the combination of elements permits automation of specific tasks that previously could not be automated. There is no indication that the combination of elements includes a particular solution to a computer-based problem or a particular way to achieve a desired computer-based outcome. Rather, the collective functions of the claimed invention merely provide conventional computer implementation, i.e., the computer is simply a tool to perform the process. Simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry, as discussed in Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 225, 110 USPQ2d at 1984 (see MPEP § 2106.05(d)).
Claims 2-10 and 12-20 depend on claims 1 and 11. The mentioned dependent claims recite the same abstract idea as the independent claims. Furthermore, these claims only contain recitations that further limit the abstract idea (that is, the claims only recite limitations that further limit the mental process). For example, the dependent claim recites the limitations “arrhythmia detector circuit”, “therapy circuit”, etc., are recited at a high level of generality and are mere extra-solution activity, and recited as performing generic computer functions. i.e., data processing. The elements amount to mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(f)).
The additional elements individually do not amount to significantly more than the above-judicial exception (the abstract idea). Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination (that is, as a whole) adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer, for example, or improves any other technology. There is no indication that the combination of elements permits automation of specific tasks that previously could not be automated. There is no indication that the combination of elements includes a particular solution to a computer-based problem or a particular way to achieve a desired computer-based outcome. Rather, the collective functions of the claimed invention merely provide conventional computer implementation, i.e., the computer is simply a tool to perform the process.
Thus, claims 1-20 are directed to an abstract idea and are therefore rejected.
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 (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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5-12, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20080051843 to Li et al. (hereinafter “Li”).
Regarding claims 1 and 11. Li discloses a system/method for optimizing ambulatory cardiac arrhythmia monitoring resources (abstract, para 0005, fig. 1), comprising: an ambulatory medical device having a limited battery life for long-term patient monitoring over an extended period (para 0034, “IMD” including a “battery”), the ambulatory medical device including: a detection criterion circuit configured to: receive physiologic information of the patient (para 0040 “senses at least one cardiac signal”); determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on a signal metric derived from the received physiologic information (para 0030 “arrhythmia is detected, verified”, para 0033 “patient's hemodynamic performance”, para 0040 “Tachyarrhythmia detector 332 detects a tachyarrhythmia using the heart rate”); and determine an arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level as a first confidence level of AT corresponds to a first arrhythmia detection duration (para 0040 “arrhythmia detection duration include the tachyarrhythmia detection window, the tachyarrhythmia verification duration, the verification window, the tachyarrhythmia reconfirmation window”, para 0042 “duration controller, duration timer, duration adjuster”, etc.), wherein a second confidence level of AT corresponds to a second arrhythmia detection duration (continuing monitoring would provide second levels using adjusted durations), the first confidence level of AT is higher than the second confidence level of AT (it is understood that the levels could be higher or lower, which reads over the claimed limitation as recited), and the first arrhythmia detection duration is shorter than the second arrhythmia detection duration (para 0026 “dynamically adjusts the one or more arrhythmia detection durations”, para 0042-0046, “reinitializes the base value of the SRD when the value of at least one of the one or more indication parameters has changed”) to optimize power consumption of the ambulatory medical device (This limitation is a non-functional descriptive material and is the result of adjusting the timer).
Regarding claims 2 and 12. Li discloses the system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein to determine the confidence level, the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the first confidence level of AT at a first time and the second confidence level of AT at a second time, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to transition from the second arrhythmia detection duration to the first arrhythmia detection duration in response to a transition of the determined confidence level from the second confidence level of AT to the first confidence level of AT (para 0026 “dynamically adjusts the one or more arrhythmia detection durations”, para 0042-0046).
Regarding claims 5 and 15. Li discloses the system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, comprising: an arrhythmia detector circuit configured to detect an AT episode using the physiologic information during the determined arrhythmia detection duration, wherein the arrhythmia detector circuit is configured to: identify the AT episode as a sustained AT when the physiologic information satisfies a detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration (para 0027 “if at least six out of the ten heart beats in the verification window are fast beats []”);determine that no AT episode is present when the physiologic information fails to satisfy the detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration (para 0027 “fails to be satisfied”); and identify the AT episode as a non-sustained AT when the physiologic information inconsistently satisfies the detection criterion during the determined arrhythmia detection duration (para 0027 “If this verification window fails to be satisfied”).
Regarding claims 6 and 16. Li discloses the system of claim 5 and method of claim 15, wherein the ambulatory medical device includes a therapy circuit configured to deliver a therapy to the patient in response to the detected AT episode (para 0026 “delivering a ventricular anti-tachyarrhythmia therapy”).
Regarding claims 7 and 17. Li discloses the system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the first arrhythmia detection duration for the first confidence level reduces power consumption by reducing at least one of processing burden or communication burden of the ambulatory medical device (para 0008, 0026, etc. “classification process is terminated”).
Regarding claims 8 and 18. Li discloses the system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein to determine the arrhythmia detection duration comprises to dynamically determine the arrhythmia detection duration as a function of the determined confidence level (para 0033 “dynamically adjusted using a sensed signal indicative of the patient's hemodynamic performance”, para 0037, 0043, etc.).
Regarding claims 9 and 19. Li discloses system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein a third confidence level of AT corresponds to a third arrhythmia detection duration, wherein the second confidence level of AT is higher than the third confidence level of AT, and the second arrhythmia detection duration is longer than the third arrhythmia detection duration (see rejection of claim 1; continuing with the system would provide third values).
Regarding claims 10 and 20. Li discloses system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the signal metric includes at least one of: an atrial heart rate; a ventricular heart rate variability; a ventricular rate cluster; a Wenckebach score; a double-decrement ratio; or a cardiac signal morphology (para 0029, 0040, etc.).
Claim(s) 3-4 and 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li as applied to claims above, and further in view of US Pat Pub 20100317984 granted to McCarthy et al. (hereinafter “McCarthy”).
Regarding claims 3 and 13. Li discloses the system of claim 1 and method of claim 11, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to: measure the signal metric using a first portion of the received physiologic information; and determine the confidence level based on an amount of deviation of the measured signal metric from at least one reference detection threshold (para 0040, 0059). Li fails to explicitly disclose using “amount of deviation”.
McCarthy, from a similar field of endeavor teaches having various detection rate zone thresholds (abstract, para 0006, etc.) and adjust a specified detection duration threshold accordingly (para 0006). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the disclosure of Li with the teachings of McCarthy to provide the predictable result of adjusting the detection duration according to the thresholds.
Regarding claims 4 and 14. Li as modified by McCarthy renders obvious the system of claim 3 and method of claim 13, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the arrhythmia detection duration to be inversely proportional to the deviation of the measured signal metric from the reference detection threshold (McCarthy, para 0067).
Double Patenting
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.
Claim 1-2 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. US12295735B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Regarding 1. A system for optimizing ambulatory cardiac arrhythmia monitoring resources, comprising: an ambulatory medical device having a limited battery life for long-term patient monitoring over an extended period, the ambulatory medical device including: a detection criterion circuit configured to: receive physiologic information of the patient; determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on a signal metric derived from the received physiologic information; and determine an arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level as a first confidence level of AT corresponds to a first arrhythmia detection duration, wherein a second confidence level of AT corresponds to a second arrhythmia detection duration, the first confidence level of AT is higher than the second confidence level of AT, and the first arrhythmia detection duration is shorter than the second arrhythmia detection duration to optimize power consumption of the ambulatory medical device.
1. A system for optimizing ambulatory cardiac arrhythmia monitoring resources, comprising: an ambulatory medical device having a limited battery life for long-term patient monitoring over an extended period, the ambulatory medical device having different first and second arrhythmia detection durations, the first arrhythmia detection duration shorter than the second arrhythmia detection duration to optimize resources of the ambulatory medical device, including: a detection criterion circuit configured to: receive physiologic information of the patient; measure a first signal metric using a first portion of the received physiologic information; determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on an amount of deviation of the measured first signal metric from at least one reference detection threshold; and transition between the first arrhythmia detection duration and the second arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level of the presence of AT, including to transition from the first arrhythmia detection duration to the second arrhythmia detection duration in response to a detected reduction in the determined confidence level of the presence of AT; and an arrhythmia detector circuit configured to detect an AT episode using a second portion of the received physiologic information in the second arrhythmia detection duration separate from and occurring subsequent to the first portion of the received physiologic information in the first arrhythmia detection duration.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein to determine the confidence level, the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the first confidence level of AT at a first time and the second confidence level of AT at a second time, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to transition from the second arrhythmia detection duration to the first arrhythmia detection duration in response to a transition of the determined confidence level from the second confidence level of AT to the first confidence level of AT.
1 [] and transition between the first arrhythmia detection duration and the second arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level of the presence of AT, including to transition from the first arrhythmia detection duration to the second arrhythmia detection duration in response to a detected reduction in the determined confidence level of the presence of AT;
3. The system of claim 1, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to:measure the signal metric using a first portion of the received physiologic information; and determine the confidence level based on an amount of deviation of the measured signal metric from at least one reference detection threshold.
1 [] determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on an amount of deviation
4. The system of claim 3, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the arrhythmia detection duration to be inversely proportional to the deviation of the measured signal metric from the reference detection threshold.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the arrhythmia detection duration to be inversely proportional to the deviation of the measured first signal metric from the reference detection threshold.
5. The system of claim 1, comprising: an arrhythmia detector circuit configured to detect an AT episode using the physiologic information during the determined arrhythmia detection duration,wherein the arrhythmia detector circuit is configured to:identify the AT episode as a sustained AT when the physiologic information satisfies a detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration;determine that no AT episode is present when the physiologic information fails to satisfy the detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; andidentify the AT episode as a non-sustained AT when the physiologic information inconsistently satisfies the detection criterion during the determined arrhythmia detection duration.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the arrhythmia detector circuit is configured to: identify the AT episode as a sustained AT when the second portion of the physiologic information satisfies a detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; determine that no AT episode is present when the second portion of the physiologic information fails to satisfy the detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; and identify the AT episode as a non-sustained AT when the second portion of the physiologic information inconsistently satisfies the detection criterion during the determined arrhythmia detection duration.
6. The system of claim 5, wherein the ambulatory medical device includes a therapy circuit configured to deliver a therapy to the patient in response to the detected AT episode.
12. The system of claim 1, wherein the ambulatory medical device further includes a therapy circuit configured to deliver a therapy to the patient in response to the detected AT episode.
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the first arrhythmia detection duration for the first confidence level reduces power consumption by reducing at least one of processing burden or communication burden of the ambulatory medical device.
1 [] the ambulatory medical device having different first and second arrhythmia detection durations, []
8. The system of claim 1, wherein to determine the arrhythmia detection duration comprises to dynamically determine the arrhythmia detection duration as a function of the determined confidence level.
20. The method of claim 14, comprising dynamically determining, via the detection criterion circuit, a length of the second arrhythmia detection duration as a function of the first signal metric and a reference signal metric value.8. The system of claim 6, wherein the plurality of detection zones further include a third detection zone characterized by a third value range that lies between the first value range and the second value range, the third detection zone having a third ZDur longer than the first ZDur and the second ZDur.
9. The system of claim 1, wherein a third confidence level of AT corresponds to a third arrhythmia detection duration,wherein the second confidence level of AT is higher than the third confidence level of AT, and the second arrhythmia detection duration is longer than the third arrhythmia detection duration.
1 [] determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT)
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the signal metric includes at least one of:an atrial heart rate;a ventricular heart rate variability;a ventricular rate cluster;a Wenckebach score;a double-decrement ratio; or a cardiac signal morphology.
11. The system of claim 9, wherein the first and second signal metrics each include one of: an atrial heart rate; a ventricular heart rate variability; a ventricular rate cluster; a Wenckebach score; a double-decrement ratio; and a cardiac signal morphology.
11. A method for optimizing ambulatory cardiac arrhythmia monitoring resources, comprising:receiving physiologic information of a patient using a detection circuit of an ambulatory medical device having a limited battery life for long-term patient monitoring over an extended period,determining, using the detection circuit, a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on a signal metric derived from the received physiologic information; anddetermining, using the detection circuit, an arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level as a first confidence level of AT corresponds to a first arrhythmia detection duration, wherein a second confidence level of AT corresponds to a second arrhythmia detection duration, the first confidence level of AT is higher than the second confidence level of AT, and the first arrhythmia detection duration is shorter than the second arrhythmia detection duration to optimize power consumption of the ambulatory medical device.
1. A system for optimizing ambulatory cardiac arrhythmia monitoring resources, comprising: an ambulatory medical device having a limited battery life for long-term patient monitoring over an extended period, the ambulatory medical device having different first and second arrhythmia detection durations, the first arrhythmia detection duration shorter than the second arrhythmia detection duration to optimize resources of the ambulatory medical device, including: a detection criterion circuit configured to: receive physiologic information of the patient; measure a first signal metric using a first portion of the received physiologic information; determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on an amount of deviation of the measured first signal metric from at least one reference detection threshold; and transition between the first arrhythmia detection duration and the second arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level of the presence of AT, including to transition from the first arrhythmia detection duration to the second arrhythmia detection duration in response to a detected reduction in the determined confidence level of the presence of AT; and an arrhythmia detector circuit configured to detect an AT episode using a second portion of the received physiologic information in the second arrhythmia detection duration separate from and occurring subsequent to the first portion of the received physiologic information in the first arrhythmia detection duration.
12. The method of claim 11, wherein determining the confidence level comprises determining the first confidence level of AT at a first time and the second confidence level of AT at a second time,wherein the method comprises transitioning, using the detection circuit, from the second arrhythmia detection duration to the first arrhythmia detection duration in response to a transition of the determined confidence level from the second confidence level of AT to the first confidence level of AT.
1 [] and transition between the first arrhythmia detection duration and the second arrhythmia detection duration based on the determined confidence level of the presence of AT, including to transition from the first arrhythmia detection duration to the second arrhythmia detection duration in response to a detected reduction in the determined confidence level of the presence of AT;
13. The method of claim 11, comprising:measuring the signal metric using a first portion of the received physiologic information; anddetermining the confidence level based on an amount of deviation of the measured signal metric from at least one reference detection threshold.
1 [] determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) based on an amount of deviation
14. The method of claim 13, comprising:determining the arrhythmia detection duration to be inversely proportional to the deviation of the measured signal metric from the reference detection threshold.
3. The system of claim 2, wherein the detection criterion circuit is configured to determine the arrhythmia detection duration to be inversely proportional to the deviation of the measured first signal metric from the reference detection threshold.
15. The method of claim 11, comprising:detecting, using an arrhythmia detector circuit, an AT episode using the physiologic information during the determined arrhythmia detection duration, comprising:identifying the AT episode as a sustained AT when the physiologic information satisfies a detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; determining that no AT episode is present when the physiologic information fails to satisfy the detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; and identifying the AT episode as a non-sustained AT when the physiologic information inconsistently satisfies the detection criterion during the determined arrhythmia detection duration.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the arrhythmia detector circuit is configured to: identify the AT episode as a sustained AT when the second portion of the physiologic information satisfies a detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; determine that no AT episode is present when the second portion of the physiologic information fails to satisfy the detection criterion through the determined arrhythmia detection duration; and identify the AT episode as a non-sustained AT when the second portion of the physiologic information inconsistently satisfies the detection criterion during the determined arrhythmia detection duration.
16. The method of claim 15, comprising delivering a therapy to the patient in response to the detected AT episode using a therapy circuit.
12. The system of claim 1, wherein the ambulatory medical device further includes a therapy circuit configured to deliver a therapy to the patient in response to the detected AT episode.
17. The method of claim 11, wherein determining the first arrhythmia detection duration for the first confidence level reduces power consumption by reducing at least one of processing burden or communication burden of the ambulatory medical device.
1 [] the ambulatory medical device having different first and second arrhythmia detection durations, []
18. The method of claim 11, wherein determining the arrhythmia detection duration comprises dynamically determining the arrhythmia detection duration as a function of the determined confidence level.
20. The method of claim 14, comprising dynamically determining, via the detection criterion circuit, a length of the second arrhythmia detection duration as a function of the first signal metric and a reference signal metric value.8. The system of claim 6, wherein the plurality of detection zones further include a third detection zone characterized by a third value range that lies between the first value range and the second value range, the third detection zone having a third ZDur longer than the first ZDur and the second ZDur.
19. The method of claim 11, wherein a third confidence level of AT corresponds to a third arrhythmia detection duration,wherein the second confidence level of AT is higher than the third confidence level of AT, and the second arrhythmia detection duration is longer than the third arrhythmia detection duration.
1 [] determine a confidence level of a presence of atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT)
20. The method of claim 11, comprising determining the signal metric including at least one of:an atrial heart rate;a ventricular heart rate variability;a ventricular rate cluster;a Wenckebach score; a double-decrement ratio; or a cardiac signal morphology.
11. The system of claim 9, wherein the first and second signal metrics each include one of: an atrial heart rate; a ventricular heart rate variability; a ventricular rate cluster; a Wenckebach score; a double-decrement ratio; and a cardiac signal morphology.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANA SAHAND whose telephone number is (571)272-6842. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30 am -5:30 pm; F 9 am-3 pm.
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 S 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.
/SANA SAHAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights