Ex Parte Curran et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Jan 7, 2019

15208436 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 7, 2019)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE
15/208,436 07/12/2016
55962 7590
Wiley Rein LLP
Patent Administration
1776 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
01/09/2019
FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
Timothy G. Curran
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
OB-146206US/82410.0661 5329
EXAMINER
MORALES, JON ERIC C
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
3792
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
01/09/2019 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
ptodocket@wileyrein.com
ASJM_Patents@abbott.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte TIMOTHY G. CURRAN
and ANTHONY D. HILL 1
Appeal2018-000535
Application 15/208,436
Technology Center 3700
Before JAMES P. CAL VE, MICHELLE R. OSINSKI, and
WILLIAM A. CAPP, Administrative Patent Judges.
CAL VE, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellant appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Office Action
rejecting claims 21, 27, 28, and 34. Appeal Br. 4. 2 Claims 1-20 have been
cancelled, and claims 22-26 and 29-33 are objected to because they depend
on a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent
form. Id. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b ).
We REVERSE.
1 St. Jude Medical, Atrial Fibrillation Division, Inc. is identified as the real
party in interest (Appeal Br. 2) and also is the Applicant pursuant to
37 C.F.R. § 1.46.
2 Unless otherwise noted, all citations to "Appeal Br." are to the Appeal
Brief that was filed on January 13, 2017.
Appeal2018-000535
Application 15/208,436
CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER
Claims 21, 27, and 34 are independent. Claim 21 is shown below.
21. A method of detecting a localization element/sheath state
change with a localization system, comprising:
establishing a localization field using a plurality of
localization field generators;
obtaining at least one localization signal from at least one
catheter-borne localization element positioned within the
localization field via an introducer sheath, the at least one
localization signal including an in-phase component and a
quadrature component; and
detecting a localization element/sheath state change for
the at least one catheter-borne localization element based on the
quadrature component of the at least one localization signal.
Amended Appeal Br. 3 (Claims App.), filed July 13, 2017.
REJECTION3
Claims 21, 27, 28, and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § I02(b) as
anticipated by Anderson (US 2007/0213616 Al, pub. Sept. 13, 2007).
ANALYSIS
The claimed methods and system determine whether a "localization
element" (i.e., electrode) is inside or outside of a sheath used to introduce
the localization element into a patient. Spec. ,r,r 6-11. Claim 21 recites
"detecting a localization element/sheath state change for the at least one
catheter-borne localization element," which is defined as "detecting when a
localization element, such as a localization electrode, emerges from and/or is
withdrawn into another device such as an introducer sheath." Id. ,r 28.
3 The Examiner withdrew the obviousness-type double patenting rejection of
claims 21, 27, 28, and 34--37 in response to Appellant's filing of a Terminal
Disclaimer on January 23, 2017. See Ans. 4; Non-Final Act. 3--4.
2
Appeal2018-000535
Application 15/208,436
Independent claim 27 recites a method for "detecting whether the at
least one localization element is within or outside of the introducer sheath."
Amended Appeal Br. 4. Independent claim 34 recites a system processor
configured to detect "whether the at least one localization element is within
an introducer sheath or outside of the introducer sheath." Id. at 5.
This determination is made by obtaining a localization signal from the
localization element. Id. at 3-5. The localization signal has an in-phase
component and a quadrature component. Id. The quadrature component of
the localization signal is used to determine whether the localization element
is inside or outside of the introducer sheath. Id.
When a localization element (electrode) is withdrawn into a sheath,
the quadrature component changes measurably due to impedance change in
the vicinity of the localization element. Spec. ,r 52. This change is used to
determine whether the localization element is withdrawn into the sheath as
Appellant illustrates in Figure 4, which is reproduced below. Id. ,r 54 .
.... ~ .... ~ .... ~
' ~ ' :: :
~t··
~~ ... ~·
"f'
}0 t1 t; t3 ~.:~ t~} tg
FiGA-
3
Appeal2018-000535
Application 15/208,436
Appellant's Figure 4 (above) shows quadrature components 200,202,
204, 206 of localization signals of electrodes 17, 52, 54, 56 in the bottom
window. Id. The quadrature component 200, 202, 204, 206 are non-zero,
relatively small, and substantially constant in the bottom window at time t0•
Id. When electrode 56 is withdrawn into sheath 35 at time t2, a measurable
change occurs in the quadrature component (line 206) for electrode 56. Id.
,r 56. When electrode 54 is withdrawn into the sheath at time t3, there is a
measurable change in the quadrature component (line 204) for electrode 54
and electrode 56 (line 206). Id. ,r 57. Similar change is seen at time t4 in the
quadrature component for electrode 52 (line 202) and for electrodes 54 and
56 (lines 204 and 206). Id. ,r 58. At time ts, the quadrature component of
electrode 17 (line 200) shows measurable change as electrode 17 re-enters
sheath 35 with further changes in quadrature lines 202, 204, 206. Id. ,r 59.
When electrodes 17, 52, 54 advance out of sheath 35 at time t6, their
quadrature lines 200, 202, 204 return to the initial, stable signals. Id. ,r 60.
The Examiner is correct that Anderson obtains localization signals
from catheter-borne localization element 36 when the catheter is removed
from sheath 26 and placed in an artery, and the signal includes in-phase and
quadrature components. Ans. 7-8. However, Anderson does not use the
quadrature component to determine the relationship between beacon 36/322
and introducer sheath 26 as claimed. Appeal Br. 10; Reply Br. 4--5. There
is no disclosure that Anderson determines whether beacon 36/322 is inside
or outside of sheath 36. Instead, Anderson uses the in-phase and quadrature
signals to identify the location of the beacon relative to an arteriotomy (hole
in an artery) that needs to be closed. Anderson ,r,r 119-125, 257, Figs. 11,
13; see Appeal Br. 10; Reply Br. 4.
4
Appeal2018-000535
Application 15/208,436
Accordingly, we do not sustain the rejection of claims 21, 27, 28,
and 34.
DECISION
We reverse the rejection of claims 21, 27, 28, and 34.
REVERSED
5