Ex Parte Curran et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardJan 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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. Â§ 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 . .... ~ .... ~ .... ~ ' ~ ' :: : ~tÂ·Â· ~~ ... ~Â· "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 t0â€¢ 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