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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Claim 4,
“one or more beamforming circuit configured to”
Claim 6
“power management module”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3, 5, 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zoellner et al (Pub. No.: US 2024/0277315).
Regarding claim 1, Zoellner et al disclose a wearable ultrasound system comprising:
an ultrathin (thin, see 0031) ultrasound device comprising an array of piezoelectric elements disposed on a backing layer and coupled to a flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) [see abstract, 0022, 0031-0032, 0039 and fig 1] by disclosing ultrasound device 100 is thin to facilitate portability and application ease on the patient 110 [see 0031];
an adjustable patch attachable to a region of a subject, the adjustable patch operably holds
the ultrathin ultrasound device therein so that the ultrathin ultrasound device is adjustably coupled to the region of the subject through coupling fluid in the adjustable patch [see 0039, 0047];
a portable control system (116) communicatively coupled to the ultrathin ultrasound device [see 0007, fig 1] by disclosing wearable ultrasound device may include a controller which may include one or more processors [see 0008];
the portable control system (116) comprising one or more circuits configured to:
control the ultrathin ultrasound device to emit ultrasound waves into the region of the subject, and receive echoes from the region of the subject in response to the ultrasound waves [see 0028-0029] by disclosing ultrasound device 100 enables captured medical data to be viewed and/or manipulated by a user [see 0028-0029];
receive electrical signals from the ultrathin ultrasound device in response to the ultrathin ultrasound device receiving the echoes from the region of the subject [see 0029, 0047];
generate one or more ultrasound images or waveform signals based on the electrical signals [see 0021, 0029].
Regarding claim 3, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the one or more circuits comprise a primary circuit board and a secondary circuit board [see 0054-0055].
Regarding claim 5, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the primary circuit board comprises at least one of:
a field programmable gated array (FPGA) [see 0054];
a graphic processing unit (GPU),
or
an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) [see 0054-0055].
Regarding claim 7, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the portable control system is connected to the ultrathin ultrasound device via a cable or flexible printed circuit (FPC) over which the portable control system (116) operates the ultrathin ultrasound device and receives the electrical signals [see 0029, fig 1].
Regarding claim 8, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the cable or FPC is wired to the flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) [see 0029, fig 1].
Regarding claim 9, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the portable control system (116) is wirelessly connected to the ultrathin ultrasound device so that the portable control system wirelessly operates the ultrathin ultrasound device for each transmission event and wirelessly receives the electrical signals resulting from each transmission event [see 0029] by disclosing the controller 116 is configured to communicate with external processing devices, e.g., computers, through wired or wireless communication. In the example of FIG. 1, the ultrasound device 100 is in wired communication with the user device 114, which receives the image data compiled by the controller 116 [see 0029].
Regarding claim 10, Zoellner et al disclose wherein the portable control system (116) is wirelessly connected to one or more external devices (114) so that the one or more ultrasound images are streamed to the one or more external devices for real-time display [see 0029, fig 1].
Regarding claim 11, Zoellner et al disclose a method to operate a wearable ultrasound system, the method comprising:
assembling a wearable ultrasound patch [see abstract, 0022, 0031-0032, 0039 and fig 1] by disclosing ultrasound device 100 is thin to facilitate portability and application ease on the patient 110 [see 0031] that includes:
an ultrathin ultrasound device comprising an array of piezoelectric elements disposed on a backing layer and coupled to a flexible printed circuit board (FPCB) [see abstract, 0022, 0031-0032, 0039 and fig 1] by disclosing ultrasound device 100 is thin to facilitate portability and application ease on the patient 110 [see 0031];
an adjustable patch attachable to a region of a subject, the adjustable patch operably holds the ultrathin ultrasound device therein [see 0039, 0047];
affixing the wearable ultrasound patch on the region of the subject using medical tapes of the adjustable patch so that the ultrathin ultrasound device is adjustably coupled to the region of the subject through coupling fluid held in the adjustable patch [see 0023];
operating a portable control system communicatively coupled to the ultrathin ultrasound
device [see 0007, fig 1] by disclosing wearable ultrasound device may include a controller which may include one or more processors [see 0008];
wherein the portable control system is activated to:
control the ultrathin ultrasound device to emit ultrasound waves into the region of the subject, and receive echoes from the region of the subject in response to the ultrasound waves [see 0028-0029] by disclosing ultrasound device 100 enables captured medical data to be viewed and/or manipulated by a user [see 0028-0029];
receive electrical signals from the ultrathin ultrasound device in response to the ultrathin ultrasound device receiving the echoes from the region of the subject [see 0021, 0023, 0028-0029, 0047];
generate one or more ultrasound images or waveform signals based on the electrical signals [see 0021, 0023, 0028-0029, 0047].
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) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zoellner et al (Pub. No.: US 2024/0277315) in view of Lewis et al (Pub. No.: US 2022/0176163)
Regarding claim 2, Zoellner et al disclose wearable ultrasound system of claim 1, wherein the portable control system further comprises: a rechargeable battery module.
Nonetheless, Lewis et al disclose a rechargeable battery module [see 0071-0072, 0079, 0125]
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivate to combine Zoellner et al and Lewis et al by using a rechargeable battery module; Rechargeable batteries can be used hundreds or even thousands of times, which significantly reduces the need to purchase disposable batteries repeatedly, saving money over time.
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zoellner et al (Pub. No.: US 2024/0277315) in view of Law et al (Pub. No.: US 20170080255).
Regarding claim 4, Zoellner et al don’t disclose wherein the primary circuit board comprises one or more beamforming circuit configured to:
adaptively control a focal depth of each transmission event of the ultrathin ultrasound device to insonify a region inside the subject,
dynamically generate one or more receive beams based on echo signals in response to each transmission event.
Nonetheless, Law et al disclose one or more beamforming circuit [see 0014, 0015, 0021, 0049] configured to:
adaptively control a focal depth of each transmission event of the ultrathin ultrasound device to insonify a region inside the subject [see 0158-0159];
dynamically generate one or more receive beams based on echo signals in response to each transmission event [see 0013, claim 38].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivate to combine Zoellner et al and Law et al by adaptively controlling a focal depth of each transmission event of the ultrathin ultrasound device to insonify a region inside the subject; so that the sound can be steered and focused to the desired location to achieve the goal of the prescription (micro-positioning by beam-steering and focusing) [see 0159].
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zoellner et al (Pub. No.: US 2024/0277315) in view of Rood et al (US Pat: 9, 579, 055).
Regarding claim 6, Zoellner et al don’t disclose wherein the secondary circuit board comprises a power management module managing at least one of:
charging of the rechargeable battery,
regulating a voltage being supplied to the primary circuit board or the ultrathin ultrasound device,
negotiating a power being distributed to the primary circuit board or the ultrathin ultrasound device.
Nonetheless, Rood et al disclose charging of the rechargeable battery [see column 10 lines 48-50].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivate to combine Zoellner et al and Rood et al by charging of the rechargeable battery; to avoid costly replacement of the entire system.
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