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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Invention I, drawn to claims 1-7 in the reply filed on 5/19/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 8-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Inventions II and III, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 5/19/2026.
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Independent claim 1 recites, for example, the following abstract ideas: “…calculating raw impedance-based positions…”, “…determining whether a loop is formed by the distal feature…”, “…calculating a radius of the loop…” and “…and correcting the measured raw impedance-based positions…”, falls within mental process. The limitations have no specifics to the algorithmic foundation or dimensionality to perform the calculations, determination and correcting steps and as such can be considered vector(s) of minimal dimensions that can be “performed” by mental process or simple pen and paper computations.
The dependent claims 2-7 do not sufficiently link the subject matter to a practical application or recite element(s) which constitute significantly more than the abstract ideas identified. The depending claims are directed to additional limitations which encompass abstract ideas consistent with those identified above that are well-understood, routine and/or conventional activity. Further, dependent claims 2-7 merely include limitations that either further define the abstract idea (and thus don’t make the abstract idea any less abstract) or amount to no more than generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use because they’re merely incidental or token additions to the claims that do not alter or affect how the process steps are performed.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 3, limitation “…calculating a cross product of a first generated vector crossed a second generated vector…” is unclear what is entailed in the first and second vectors generation, it is unclear the connection, if any, to the vector generated from a centroid. It Is unclear the connection if any, to the electrodes and impedance of claim 1. The metes and bounds are unclear.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hauck et. al. U.S. 20130006137 teaches a catheter system that determines local impedance of electrode(s) to identify the electrode(s) relative position to a sheath.
Byrd et. al. U.S. 20190307500 teaches an electroporation system.
Panescu et. al. U.S. 20220233234 teaches an ablation catheter system with multiple loops.
Ebert et. al. U.S. 20220233235 teaches an ablation catheter system that measures the impedance of electrodes based on the peak current values.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMAL FARAG whose telephone number is (571)270-3432. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 5:30 M-F.
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, Keith Raymond can be reached at (571) 270-1790. 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.
/AMAL ALY FARAG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798
Prosecution Insights