Ex Parte Pelissier et alDownload PDFPatent Trial and Appeal BoardOct 18, 201712188191 (P.T.A.B. Oct. 18, 2017) Copy Citation United States Patent and Trademark Office 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 APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 12/188,191 08/07/2008 Laurent PELISSIER ANA1202-US 4519 (ULT-10-7506) 23266 7590 10/20/2017 DRIGGS, HOGG, DAUGHERTY & DEL ZOPPO CO., L.P.A. 38500 CHARDON ROAD DEPT. DLBH WILLOUGBY HILLS, OH 44094 EXAMINER COOK, CHRISTOPHER L ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3737 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 10/20/2017 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): usptocommunications@driggslaw.com carole@driggslaw.com mwheeler @ driggslaw. com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte LAURENT PELISSIER, KRIS DICKIE, and KWUN-KEAT CHAN1 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 Technology Center 3700 Before DONALD E. ADAMS, ERIC B. GRIMES, and TIMOTHY G. MAJORS, Administrative Patent Judges. GRIMES, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This is an appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134 involving claims to a hand held ultrasonic imaging device, which have been rejected as obvious. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We affirm. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The Specification discloses a “[h]and-held ultrasound unit 10 [that] may be used in either hand.” (Spec. 115.) “Apparatus 10 has a control. . . 1 Appellants identify the Real Party in Interest as Analogic Corporation. (Appeal Br. 2.) Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 which permits an operator to select between a right-handed operational mode and left-handed operational mode.” (Id. 116.) The Specification’s Figures 2A and 2B are reproduced below: to _ io _ 'I Figures 2A and 2B show the display of a hand-held ultrasound unit in left-handed and right-handed modes. (Id. 1 5.) In the embodiment illustrated in Figures 2A and 2B, there are three controls 25A, 25B and 25C lined up along the edge of display 14 closest to transducer 20. . . . In one embodiment, the order of controls 25A, 25B and 25C is reversed upon switching from the left-handed mode to the right-handed mode, as illustrated in Figures 2A and 2B. This permits the operator to comfortably use apparatus 10 in either hand. Claims 1—3, 5, 6, 9, and 11—26 are on appeal. Claim 1 is illustrative and reads as follows: 1. A hand-holdable ultrasonic imaging device comprising: an elongate housing with a longitudinal axis, a first end region and a second end region, which opposes the first end region along the longitudinal axis; a transducer array disposed at the first end region and supported by the housing; a display supported on the housing, wherein the display concurrently displays an ultrasound image and a plurality of touchscreen graphical user controls in a predetermined layout; a mode selection control; and, control circuits comprising a programmable data processor in the housing, the control circuits configured to FIG.2A FIG.2B (Id. 116.) 2 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 control operation of the ultrasonic imaging device based at least in part on a user input corresponding to a first function; a first mode and a second mode, the mode selection control is operable to switch the ultrasonic imaging device between the first mode and the second mode; wherein in the first mode the first function is assigned to a first touchscreen graphical user control of the pluralities of touchscreen graphical user controls, which are positioned on the display at a first location, wherein the first location is between the first end region and the displayed ultrasound image and in the second mode the first function is assigned to a second different touchscreen graphical user control of the plurality of touchscreen graphical user controls, which are positioned on the display at the same location between the displayed ultrasound image and the first end region, wherein a spatial arrangement and order of the plurality of touchscreen graphical user controls is reversed between the first mode and the second mode; and wherein the ultrasonic imaging device is configured to switch the control to which the first function is assigned from the first touchscreen graphical user control to the second touchscreen graphical user control upon switching from the first mode to the second mode and to switch the control to which the first function is assigned from the second touchscreen graphical user control to the first touchscreen graphical user control upon switching from the second mode to the first mode. The claims stand rejected as follows: Claims 1—3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 19, 21, and 24 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang,2 Davis,3 Goren,4 and Gilley5 (Final Action6 2); 2 Hwang et al., US 2004/0138564 Al, published July 15, 2004. 3 Davis et al., US 2004/0036680 Al, published Feb. 26, 2004. 4 Goren, US 7,190,351 Bl, issued Mar. 13, 2007. 5 Gilley et al., US 2008/0077881 Al, published Mar. 27, 2008. 6 Office Action mailed Sept. 30, 2015. 3 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 Claims 12 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, Gilley, and Franttila7 (Final Action 6); Claim 15 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, Gilley, and Jones8 (Final Action 7); Claims 16, 17, and 20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, Gilley, and Pallakoff9 (Final Action 8); Claim 18 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, Gilley, Pallakoff, and Grunwald10 (Final Action 10); and Claims 22, 23, 25, and 26 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, Gilley, and Grunwald (Final Action 11). DISCUSSION The Examiner has rejected claims 1—3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 19, 21, and 24 as obvious based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, and Gilley. The Examiner has rejected the remaining claims on appeal as obvious based on the same references, combined with one or more of Franttila, Jones, Pallakoff, and Grunwald. The same issue is dispositive for all of the rejections. The Examiner finds that Hwang discloses a handheld ultrasound imaging device that includes much of the hardware recited in claim 1, but does not disclose that its device “includes a touch screen display including touch screen icons/buttons which may change position(s) depending on the orientation of the handheld ultrasound probe.” (Ans. 3.) 7 Franttila, US 2006/0022953 Al, published Feb. 2, 2006. 8 Jones et al., US 2004/0167402 Al, published Aug. 26, 2004. 9 Pallakoff, US 2009/0303187 Al, published Dec. 10, 2009. 10 Grunwald et al., US 7,022,075 B2, issued Apr. 4, 2006. 4 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 The Examiner finds that Davis discloses handheld devices that include “a touch screen display that may be oriented in a portrait mode, a left handed landscape mode or a right handed landscape mode.” {Id.) The Examiner finds that Davis’ touch screen “includes a movable ‘active input area’ comprising, at least in some embodiments, active icons positioned at locations within the active input area.” {Id. at 3 4.) The Examiner finds that Goren teaches “with respect to handheld devices (Abstract) [that] touch screen controls may be arranged in various patterns (e.g. horizontal/vertical rows).” {Id. at 4.) The Examiner finds that the various embodiments depicted by Davis appear to read on the first and second modes now claimed where a first control assigned to a first function at a first location is reversed when the hand held device is switched from the left handed landscape mode to the right handed landscape mode or vice versa. That is to say, it appears active icons would follow the well-known “positive Y” reconfiguration of inputs. For example, Gilley teaches from within a similar field of endeavor with respect to hand-held electronic devices wherein the electronic device can “. . . automatically re-orient images shown on a display and re configure user input components based on the orientation of the electronic device” (emphasis added-Abstract; see also Figs. 5A- D and 6A-B). While Gilley describes the “positive Y” rule with hard buttons, one skilled in the art would readily understand how the reconfiguration processing instructions could be applied to active touchscreen icons. {Id. at 4—5.) The Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to have modified the display area and control buttons as described by Hwang with a touch screen display with reconfigurable icon orientations as described by Davis and Goren in order to provide quick and efficient input for selecting ultrasound imaging parameters as such a modification requires 5 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 nothing more than the mere combination of known prior art elements to yield predictable results. (Id. at 4.) Appellants do not dispute the Examiner’s findings that Hwang, Davis, Goren, and Gilley teach or would have made obvious most of the limitations of claim 1. (See Appeal Br. 3—7.) Appellants argue, however, that in the device of claim 1 “a function is assigned to a touchscreen graphical user control at a location between the first end region and the displayed ultrasound image, and the function is assigned to a different touchscreen graphical user control at the location between the first end region and the displayed ultrasound image.” (Id. at 5.) Appellants argue that “Figs. 7B-D of Davis expressly shows the opposite of what is claimed. In Figs. 7B/D, the ‘home’ icon is located at the bottom, and in Fig. 7C the ‘home’ icon is located at the top. Hence, the ‘home’ icon does not remain at the same a location between the first end region and the displayed ultrasound image.” (Id.) 6 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 We agree with the Examiner, however, that Davis discloses the first and second modes recited in claim 1. Davis’ Figures 7C and 7D are reproduced below: Figures 7C and 7D show a display in left-handed landscape orientation and right-handed landscape orientation, respectively. (Davis 176.) Figure 7C, the left-handed orientation, shows a column of icons on the left edge of the display, with a “home” icon (i.e., a house) in the upper left- 7 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 hand comer. Figure 7C also shows a “handwriting recognition area 112” immediately to the right of the column of icons that includes the home icon. {Id.) The handwriting recognition area includes three cells labeled 112A, 112B, and 112C, “with the cell 112A being in the top position . . . and the cell 112C [sic, 112B] being in the bottom most position.” {Id.) Each of cells 112A, 112B, and 112C includes a label in the upper-right comer; cell 112A is labeled “abc,” cell 112B is labeled “123,” and cell 112C is labeled “ABC.” Davis states that cell 112A interprets gestures as “small cap characters,” cell 112B interprets gestures as numbers, and cell 112C interprets gestures as capitalized letters. {Id. 133.) Figure 7D, the right-handed orientation, shows the column of icons on the right edge of the display, with the home icon in the bottom right-hand comer of the display. In Figure 7D, the handwriting recognition area is immediately to the left of the column of icons that includes the home icon, with the top cell labeled “abc,” the middle cell labeled “ABC,” and the bottom cell labeled “123.” Thus, in Figure 7C, the “abc” handwriting recognition cell (112A) is closest to the home icon, while in Figure 7D the “abc” cell is farthest from the home icon. In other words, Davis discloses that in the left-handed orientation, the “abc” function is assigned to the cell closest to the home icon, while in the right-handed orientation, the abc function is assigned to the cell farthest from the home icon. In the words of claim 1, Davis discloses that, “in the first [left-handed] mode the first [“abc”] function is assigned to a first touchscreen graphical user control [handwriting recognition area closest to the home icon] of the pluralities of touchscreen graphical user controls” and “in the second [right- 8 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 handed] mode the first [“abc”] function is assigned to a second different [handwriting recognition area farthest from the home icon] touchscreen graphical user control of the plurality of touchscreen graphical user controls,” “wherein a spatial arrangement and order of the plurality of touchscreen graphical user controls is reversed between the first mode and the second mode.” As the Examiner pointed out, Appellants’ focus on the “home” icon in the Appeal Brief is misplaced, because “the Examiner does not rely on the ‘home’ icon to address any claim limitation,” but rather the handwriting recognition areas 112A, 112B, and 112C. (Ans. 3—4.) In the Reply Brief, Appellants point to the Specification’s Figures 2A and 2B, which show the graphical user controls 25A, 25B and 25C are re-arranged from top to bottom in Fig. 2A (from 25A going down to 25C) to bottom to top in Fig. 2B (from 25C going down to 25A, the opposite or reversed direction). The assignment of the first function FI is reassigned from the graphical user control 25A to the graphical user control 25C. (Reply Br. 4.) Appellants argue that, in Davis, “the spatial arrangement and order of the cells ‘ 112A,’ ‘ 112B,’ and ‘ 112C’ are NOT reversed in FIGS. 7C and 7D.” (Id.) This argument is not persuasive. As Appellants themselves acknowledge, the functions shown in the Specification’s Figures 2 A and 2B are indicated by the notations FI, F2, and F3. The reference numbers 25A, 25B, and 25C simply indicate which control area is which. Davis’ Figures 7C and 7D show the same reorientation as is shown in the Specification’s Figures 2A and 2B. That is, in the Specification’s Figure 2A, the function FI is assigned to area 25A; in Davis’ Figure 7C, the 9 Appeal 2016-008741 Application 12/188,191 function “abc” is assigned to the handwriting recognition cell closest to the home icon. In the Specification’s Figure 2B, the function FI is instead assigned to area 25C, and is still at the top of the column of functions FI— F3; in Davis’ Figure 7D, the function “abc” is instead assigned to the handwriting recognition cell farthest from the home icon, and is still at the top of the column of handwriting recognition cells. Thus, the reassignment of functions shown in Davis’ Figures 7C and 7D is the same as that shown in the Specification’s Figures 2A and 2B. We therefore affirm the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) based on Hwang, Davis, Goren, and Gilley. Claims 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 14, 19, 21, and 24 have not been argued separately and therefore fall with claim 1. 37 C.F.R. § 41.37(c)(l)(iv). Appellants have waived arguments addressing the additional rejections, which are therefore affirmed for the reasons discussed above. SUMMARY We affirm all of the rejections on appeal. TIME PERIOD FOR RESPONSE No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with this appeal may be extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a). AFFIRMED 10 Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation