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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/24/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendments to claims 1, 3 in the response filed on 03/24/2026 are acknowledged.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, 12-15, and 17-26 remain pending in the application
Claims 5-7, 10-11, and 16 are cancelled.
Claims 1-4, 8-9, 12-15, and 17-26 are examined.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the applicant’s amendments to the claims. The applicant has modified claim 1 to require “adjacent body joint components are positioned to abut with one another and form a body joint comprising a rolling joint formed from the abutted adjacent body joint components wherein the adjacent and abutted body joint components rotate with respect to each other along a circular trajectory defined by a curvature of the respective body joint components”, limitations heretofore not presented for examination in this application. As such, the scope of the claims was substantially changed and new grounds for rejection are presented.
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) 1-4, 8, 9, 12-15, 17-22, 24, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 8,347,754 to Veltri et al. (hereinafter “Veltri”).
Regarding claim 1, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint (108, 110, Fig. 1, Col. 2, lines 49-60) having a proximal end (see proximal end of 108, 110 in Fig. 1), a distal end (see distal end of 108, 110 in Fig. 1) and an axis (see central longitudinal axis going through 108, 110 in Fig. 1),(i) the resiliently deformable joint comprising a helical structure (204, 208, Fig. 2, Col. 3, lines 10-15) comprising a plurality of integrally formed body portions (212, 214, 216, 218), each of which body portions comprising a 360 degree turn of the helical structure and being moveable relative to adjacent body portions (Fig. 2, Fig. 3, Col. 3, lines 10-67 – Col. 4, lines 1-65) ,(ii) the resiliently deformable joint further comprising a plurality of body joint components (502, 504, Fig. 5, Col. 4, lines 53-67), each of which body joint components is formed on a respective body portion (Col. 4, lines 53-67-The bumper element 502 and the socket element 504 are machined onto the surface of the coil turn 224 as a single piece element) such that adjacent body joint components are positioned to abut with one another (Col. 4, lines 53-67- The bumper element 502 of the bumper and socket arrangement 208 can buttress against the socket element 504 of an adjacent bumper and socket arrangement when the helix section 204 is actuated) and form a body joint comprising a rolling joint formed from the abutted adjacent body joint components (Fig. 2), wherein the adjacent and abutted body joint components rotate with respect to each other along a circular trajectory defined by a curvature of the respective body joint components (Col. 3, lines 5-55),(iii) the resiliently deformable joint further comprising first and second guides extending axially from the distal end to the proximal end of the resiliently deformable joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col, 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 2, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 1 wherein the pitch of the helical structure varies along the length of the resiliently deformable joint (Col. 2, lines 59-67-Col. 3, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 3, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 2 wherein the helical structure has a varying pitch along the length of the resiliently deformable joint (Col. 2, lines 59-67-Col. 3, lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 4, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 1 wherein: (a) the joint is formed from more than one material (Col. 2, lines 59-67-Col. 3, lines 1-5); (b) the helical structure comprises a multiple helix structure; (c) the first and second guides comprise first and second channels respectively, each channel extending from the distal end to the proximal end of the resiliently deformable joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col, 3 lines 57-67); and/or (d) each body portion comprises two body joint components radially spaced apart from one another by substantially 180 degrees.
Regarding claim 8, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 4 wherein the first and second channels are spaced apart radially from each of the body joint portions by substantially 90 degrees (300, 302, 304, 306, Col, 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 9, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 1 wherein: (a) the first and second guides extending generally parallel to the body joint portions (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67); and/or (b) each body joint portion is cylindrical, with the axis of the body joint portion being substantially perpendicular to the axis of the resiliently deformable joint.
Regarding claim 12, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 1 further comprises third and fourth guides, which guides extend through a neutral bending line of the resiliently deformable joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 13, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 12 whereas the third and fourth guides comprise third and fourth channels respectively (300, 302, 304, 306, Col3 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 14, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure comprising first and second resiliently deformable joints as claimed in claim 1 (202, 204) wherein the first and second resiliently deformable joints are serially connected to one another (Fig. 2) with the proximal end of the first resiliently deformable joint being connected to the distal end of the second resiliently deformable joint to form a connecting portion (206, Fig. 2, Col. 3, lines 23-39),the connecting portion comprising first and second connecting guides which connect the first and second guides of the first flexible portion with the first and second guides of the second flexible portion respectively to form first and second structure guides respectively (Fig. 3), which first and second structure guides extend from the distal end of the first resiliently deformable joint to the proximal end of the second resiliently deformable joint (Fig. 3), and wherein the second resiliently deformable joint comprises third and fourth guides which guides extend through a neutral bending line of the second resiliently deformable joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 15, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure as claimed in claim 14 wherein: (a) the first and second resiliently deformable joints are integrally formed (Fig. 1, Fig. 3); or (b) the first resiliently deformable joint is offset from the second resiliently deformable joint radially by 90 degrees.
Regarding claim 17, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure as claimed in claim 15 wherein the first and second guides of the first resiliently deformable joint are offset radially from the first and second guides of the second resiliently deformable joint by approximately 90 degrees joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67), and wherein the first and second guides of the first resiliently deformable joint are substantially colinear with the third and fourth guides of the second resiliently deformable joint respectively joint (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 18, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure as claimed in claim 15 wherein the first and second connecting guides extend substantially axially (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 19, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure as claimed in claim 14 wherein the first resiliently deformable joint is axially aligned with the second resiliently deformable joint (202, 204).
Regarding claim 20, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 19 wherein the first and second connecting guides extend helically within the connecting portion (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 21, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure as claimed claim 14 comprising more than two resiliently deformable joints (Col. 4, lines 19-30), and a plurality of connecting portions connecting the distal end of each of which connecting portions connects the distal end of one resiliently deformable joint with the proximal end of an adjacent resiliently deformable joint (102, 104, 106).
Regarding claim 22, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 14 wherein the first resiliently deformable joint comprises third and fourth guides extending through neutral bending lines of the first resiliently deformable joint portion (300, 302, 304, 306, Col. 3 lines 57-67).
Regarding claim 24, Veltri discloses a surgical instrument comprising a proximal end and a distal end and a resiliently deformable joint according to claim 1 positioned at the distal end of the instrument (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 25, Veltri discloses a surgical instrument comprising a proximal end and a distal end and a resiliently deformable joint structure according to claim 14 positioned at the distal end of the instrument (Fig. 1).
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) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of U.S. Patent No. 8,347,754 to Veltri and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2017/0202545 to Nicholas.
Regarding claim 23, Veltri discloses a resiliently deformable joint structure according to claim 14.
Veltri, fails to expressly teach further comprising a gimbal serially connected to a resiliently deformable joint.
However, Nicholas teaches of a resiliently deformable joint structure (Nicholas: Fig. 7A)
further comprising a gimbal (Nicholas: 460, Fig. 7A, [0042]) serially connected to a resiliently
deformable joint (Nicholas: 470, Fig. 7A, [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Veltri, to utilize a gimbal serially connected to a resiliently deformable joint, as taught by Nicholas. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of increasing the maximum angle of articulation (Nicholas: [0042]).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,347,754 to Veltri and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2018/0242958 to Dayton et al. (hereinafter "Dayton").
Regarding claim 26, Veltri teaches a method of manufacturing a resiliently deformable joint as claimed in claim 1.
Veltri, fails to expressly teach using additive manufacturing techniques.
However, Dayton teaches of a method of manufacturing a resiliently deformable joint (Dayton: Fig. 6 joint 650) using additive manufacturing techniques (Dayton: [0051]- Articulation joint 650 may include a biocompatible material that will bend but will not collapse. Suitable materials include polyurethane, polyethylene, polypropylene, or other biocompatible polymers. In another aspect, articulation joint 650 may be formed by 3D-printing or other additive manufacturing techniques).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Veltri, to manufacture the joint using additive manufacturing techniques, as taught by Dayton. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of preventing the joint from collapsing ([0051] of Dayton).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTEN A. SHARPLESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 6:00 AM - 2:00 PM, and Friday 6:00 AM - 10:00 AM.
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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/C.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights