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 without traverse of group I claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 6/5/2026 is acknowledged.
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) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Teofilovic et al (Pub. No.: US 2014/0073/995)
Regarding claim 1, Teofilovic et al disclose a transducer array, comprising:
an array shell comprising a front emitting surface [see 0056, fig 2] by disclosing Each element can also have approximately the same surface area [see 0056];
a plurality of transducer elements disposed in a rear surface of the array shell and configured to transmit ultrasound energy through the front emitting surface towards a common focal point [see 0056] by disclosing such multi-element transducers used for Histotripsy can be targeted to a fixed focus [see 0056]
at least one interconnect assembly (matching network) facilitating a plurality of electrical connections from a signal generator to each of the plurality of transducer elements [see 0051];
the at least one interconnect assembly including one or more capacitors at each electrical connection configured to tune an operating parameter of the plurality of transducer elements to the signal generator [see 0051].
Regarding claim 2, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors are selected to tune the plurality of transducer elements to a desired operating frequency [see 0057-0058, 0060] by disclosing capacitor C are selected to bring the combined impedance of the matching network and transducer element down [see 0058]
Regarding claim 3, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors are selected to tune the plurality of transducer elements to achieve a desired operating frequency lower or higher than what is specified for the plurality of transducer elements based upon a thickness and material composition of the plurality of transducer elements [see 0058, 0060].
Regarding claim 4, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors are selected to achieve a desired acoustic pulse shape [see 0048] by disclosing matching network can include an inductor L and capacitor C (LC) circuit that oscillates the signal, and converts the square wave from the amplifier into a sinusoidal voltage that is significantly amplified [see 0049].
Regarding claim 5, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors have a capacitance ranging from 1 to 1000 pF [see 0067] by disclosing these capacitors can be 330 pF 1000V ceramic SMD1206 capacitors. The value of the capacitors should be very small (in pF, pico farads) so that output of the amplifier is not "loaded". Exact value can depend of operating frequency and level of noise that needs to be suppressed [see 0067].
Regarding claim 6, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors include more than one capacitance to produce a multi-frequency transducer array [see 0067].
Regarding claim 7, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the interconnect assembly comprises a printed circuit board (PCB) [see 0064].
Regarding claim 8, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the at least one interconnect assembly is disposed between a back cover of the transducer array and the array shell [see fig 2].
Regarding claim 9, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the one or more capacitors form a parallel connection between a positive connection [see 0017] and a ground (inherently disclosed, emphasis added)) connection to each transducer element.
Regarding claim 10, Teofilovic et al disclose wherein the plurality of transducer elements have the same surface area [see 0056] by disclosing each element can also have approximately the same surface area [see 0056].
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.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teofilovic et al (Pub. No.: US 2014/0073995) in view of Olson et al (Pub. No.: US 2011/0237953).
Regarding claim 11, Teofilovic et al don’t disclose wherein the plurality transducer elements have varying shapes.
Nonetheless, Olson et al disclose the plurality transducer elements have varying shapes [see 0036].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivated to combine Teofilovic et al and Olson et al by using plurality transducer elements have varying shapes; so they can adapt to different patient shapes.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL F BRUTUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat, 11:00 AM to 7:00 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, Anne Kozak can be reached at 571-270-0552. 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.
/JOEL F BRUTUS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights