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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 10/23/2025 has been entered. Claims 18-23 and 25-34 are pending in the application. Claims 1-17 and 24 are cancelled. Claims 29-34 are new. The amendments to the claims overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed on 7/24/2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 18, 23, 25, 28, 31, and 33 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 18, line 13: please correct “more pressurized readings” to “more pressure readings”
-Claim 18, line 14: please correct “of outside of” to “outside of”
-Claim 23, line 2: please correct “pressurized gas source” to “the pressurized gas source”
-Claim 25, lines 1-2: please correct “the one or more readings” to “the one or more pressure readings”
-Claim 25, line 3: please correct “the one or more readings” to “the one or more pressure readings”
-Claim 28, line 2: please correct “the one or more readings” to “the one or more pressure readings”
-Claim 31, line 5: please correct “pole-mount” to “pole-mounted”
-Claim 31, lines 6-7: please correct “pole-mount” to “pole-mounted”
-Claim 33, line 1: please correct “the curative” to “the one or more curative”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 23 recites the limitation “further comprising a pressure relief valve”. Claim 18, from which claim 23 depends, previously recites “a controller, wherein the controller is configured to…obtain one or more overcurrent readings associated with a valve or a regulator”. It is unclear whether the pressure relief valve in claim 23 is intended to refer to the same valve introduced in claim 18. Since the valve in claim 18 is only functionally recited and not positively recited, is claim 23 intending to now positively recite the valve of claim 18 and further limit that the valve is a pressure relief valve? Or is the pressure relief valve in claim 23 referring to an entirely different valve than the valve of claim 18? The Specification does not appear to further clarify this matter, as any valve that is expressly linked to overcurrent readings (such that it would correspond to the valve of claim 18) appears to be referred to as a “valve”, an “irrigation valve”, or a “dump valve” (see par. [0068]-[0069], [0072], [0076], [0078], [0082], [0089], [0091]-[0092]). A “pressure relief valve” is only mentioned in par. [0099] and is not expressly linked to overcurrent readings. For examination purposes, the Examiner interprets that the pressure relief valve of claim 23 is not the same valve as the valve of claim 18. However, clarification is needed regarding the scope of claim 23.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-22 and 25-34 are allowable.
Claim 23 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regards to independent claim 18, the prior art of record fails to disclose or render obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the surgical system as claimed, specifically including wherein the controller is configured to, during a self-test for determining an availability of the pressurized gas source prior to a surgical procedure: obtain one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas; obtain one or more overcurrent readings associated with a valve or a regulator; enable an operation of the pressurized gas source if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are within a first predetermined range and the one or more overcurrent readings are within a second pre-determined range; disable the operation of the pressurized gas source if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are an amount outside of the first predetermined range that causes a critical error or the one or more overcurrent readings are an amount outside of the second pre-determined range that causes the critical error; and iteratively modify the surgical system, if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are between the first pre-determined range and the amount outside of the firs pre-determined range that causes the critical error, until one or more subsequent readings associated with the pressurized gas are brought within the first pre-determined range.
The closest prior art of record is Klomp (US 2016/0100981 A1) and Lin (US 2018/0228962 A1). Klomp teaches a surgical system (see Figs. 1-2, par. [0016]) comprising: a spike (connecting element 9) suitable for insertion into a fluid reservoir (container 10) containing a surgical fluid (fluid 5) and a gas pressure pocket (gas phase 12) (see Figs. 1-2, par. [0016] and [0018]), the spike (connecting element 9) comprising a first port (second channel 18) configured to provide the surgical fluid (fluid 5) from the fluid reservoir (container 10) to a surgical pack (fluid container 7) associated with the surgical system (see Figs. 1-2, par. [0018]-[0019]) and a second port (first channel 17) configured to provide pressurized gas from a pressurized gas source (gas pressure device 14) to the fluid reservoir (container 10) (see Figs. 1-2, par. [0018]-[0019]). Lin further teaches a surgical system (see Figs. 1-3) comprising a controller (surgical console 210) configured to obtain pressure readings and operate the system in a closed loop manner based on the pressure readings to keep the pressure within a target range (see par. [0033]-[0034]). However, neither Klomp nor Lin teach the combination of all of the controller functions of wherein the controller is configured to, during a self-test for determining an availability of the pressurized gas source prior to a surgical procedure: obtain one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas; obtain one or more overcurrent readings associated with a valve or a regulator; enable an operation of the pressurized gas source if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are within a first predetermined range and the one or more overcurrent readings are within a second pre-determined range; disable the operation of the pressurized gas source if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are an amount outside of the first predetermined range that causes a critical error or the one or more overcurrent readings are an amount outside of the second pre-determined range that causes the critical error; and iteratively modify the surgical system, if the one or more pressure readings associated with the pressurized gas are between the first pre-determined range and the amount outside of the firs pre-determined range that causes the critical error, until one or more subsequent readings associated with the pressurized gas are brought within the first pre-determined range.
Claims 19-22 and 25-34 are allowable by virtue of their dependency on allowable claim 18.
Claim 23 would be allowable by virtue of its dependency on allowable claim 18 if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVERY SMALE whose telephone number is (571)270-7172. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 8-4 ET.
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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at (571) 272-4965. 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.
/AVERY SMALE/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/KAMI A BOSWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783