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
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 09/22/2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-11, 14, 16-36, 39, 41-47, 49, 50, and 52-53 have been amended, claims 55-56 have been cancelled, claim 57 has been added, and claims 6-7, 31-32, and 53-54 remain withdrawn. Thus, claims 1-54 and 57 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the drawing objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The applicant’s to the claims to remove limitations not shown in the drawings overcomes the objection. The examiner agrees with the applicant that the subject matter of “two or more backstops” is shown in Figs. 53A-57. The drawing objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the issues of multiple dependencies. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 12, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The applicant has not amended claim 49 to result in a single claim dependency. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-13, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the USC 112b rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The applicant’s amendments to the claims overcome the issues of clarity within the claims. The USC 112b rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 12-16, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view Meade (US 20180242967 A1), herein referenced to as “Meade” have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The applicant has amended claim 1 to further recite “a cable having a pawl, wherein the cable and the pawl comprise a unitary cable pawl”. The examiner agrees with the applicant that the combination of Shelton in view of Meade does not explicitly teach the cable and pawl comprise a unitary cable pawl, wherein the cable and pawl are combined to form a single unit.
In response to applicant's argument that due to Shelton disclosing a multi-component drive mechanism replacing this deliberately modular design with a single rotating cable-pawl structure would fundamentally alter the mechanics of the system and eliminate the controlled radial and arcuate path that is central to Shelton’s operation, the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Hence the examiner does not agree that it would not be obvious to modify Shelton because Shelton discloses a device in which the pawl and cable are separate elements rather than a unitary cable pawl.
Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Shelton in view of Ainslie (US 1822330 A), herein referenced to as “Ainslie”.
Applicant's arguments, see page 15, filed 09/22/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 26 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view Meade have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues Shelton alone or in combination fails to teach “an arcuate needle guide cover, wherein the arcuated needle guide cover removably attaches to the arcuate needle guide, and wherein the arcuate needle guide cover comprises a backstop”. The applicant argues that Shelton discloses an “anti-backup mechanism” but does not disclose a backstop built into a removably attached arcuate needle guide cover.
The previous rejection however was of Shelton in view of Meade. See Office Action mailed 09/22/2025, and provided herein: Shelton teaches an the arcuate needle guide cover 614 comprises a backstop 672 (see Fig. 18, [0102]-[0103]); and wherein the backstop 672 and the needle 628 engage to prevent the arcuate needle 628 from rotating within the arcuate needle guide the needle guide 628 is within (see Fig. 18) by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction the clockwise direction (see [0103], specifically the direction opposite to the needle’s actuation movement is stopped by the anti-backup device, meaning it stops rotation of at least more than 0 degrees, hence the needle doesn’t rotate more than 270 degrees in the second rotational direction).
This in combination with Meade’s teaching of a removable arcuated needle guide cover teaches the claimed limitation, see rejection of claim 26 in the Office Action mailed 09/22/2025.
As such the rejection of claim 26 will be maintained.
The applicant did not address claim 25 in the response and as such the rejection of claim 25 will be maintained as well.
Claim Objections
Claims 49 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(c) as being in improper form because a multiple dependent claim cannot depend from any other multiple dependent claim. See MPEP § 608.01(n).
Claim 50 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim #
Line #
Current
Suggested change
50
2
the endoscopic suturing platform
the endoscopic suturing system
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.
Claims 19 and 41 are 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 19 recites the limitation "the second housing" in line 1. The actuator is not positively claimed in claim 19 or in claim 1 which claim 19 is dependent on. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of prior art examination this will be interpreted as “a second housing”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 41 recites the limitation "the actuator" in line 3. The actuator is not positively claimed in claim 41 or in claim 26 which claim 41 is dependent on. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of prior art examination this will be interpreted as “an actuator”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 57 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shelton et al (US 20060282098 A1), herein referenced to as “Shelton”.
Claim 57
Shelton discloses: An endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising: an endoscope fastener 17 (see [0072], 17 is a clamp which fastens to the endoscope 18), wherein the endoscope fastener 17 is configured to couple to an endoscope 18 (see Figs. 1-2, [0072]); an arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-4,[0068]); an arcuate needle guide cover 20 functions as a needle guide cover for needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) coupled to the arcuate needle guide 26; an arcuate needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) comprising a notch 56 (see Figs. 1-10, [0088]) and a suture attachment 12 (see Fig. 1, [0087]), wherein the arcuate needle 28 has a center axis the axis that 28 rotates about in the space 44 (see Figs. 1-10), and wherein the arcuate needle 28 is disposed within the arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-4); and a cable 42 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070]) and a pawl 38 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070], the cable 42 is connected to 40 which is connected to 38, 38 is a pawl as it frictionally engages the needle 28 with teeth), the cable 42 and pawl 38 wherein the cable 42 and pawl 38 are rigidly coupled (see [0089], 42 is rigidly coupled to 40 which is coupled to 38, hence 42 is rigidly coupled to 38) and rotate together about a shared axis (see Figs. 3-10, 42 and 38 rotate together about a shared axis within 44), wherein the notch 56 and the pawl 38 engage (see [0089]-[0093], the engagement member 58 is moved into and out of engagement with the needle as the radial position of 60 is altered) when the pawl translates in a first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal) about the center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates, wherein the notch and the pawl disengage when the pawl translates in a second direction (distal/counter-clockwise) opposite the first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton et al (US 20060282098 A1), herein referenced to as “Shelton”.
Claim 25
Shelton discloses: An endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising:(a) a distal assembly the assembly comprising 14 + 17 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising:(i) an arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-10) and an endoscope fastener 17 (see [0072], 17 is a clamp which fastens to the endoscope 18), wherein the endoscope fastener 17 configured to attach to an endoscope 18 (see Figs. 1-2, [0072]); (ii) an arcuate needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) comprising a notch 56 (see Figs. 1-10) and a suture attachment 12 (see Fig. 1, [0087]), wherein the arcuate needle 28 has a center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates (see Figs. 1-10), and wherein the arcuate needle 28 is disposed within the arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-4); and (b) a cable 42 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070]) having a pawl 38 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070], the cable 42 is connected to 40 which is connected to 38, 38 is a pawl as it frictionally engages the needle 28 with teeth); wherein the notch 56 and the pawl 38 engage (see [0089]-[0093], the engagement member 58 is moved into and out of engagement with the needle as the radial position of 60 is altered) when the pawl translates in a first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal) about the center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates, wherein the notch and the pawl disengage when the pawl translates in a second direction (distal/counter-clockwise) opposite the first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal).
Shelton (Figs. 1-10 and 47-51) does not explicitly disclose: (iii) a backstop; and wherein the backstop and the needle engage to prevent the arcuate needle from rotating within the arcuate needle guide by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction.
However, a variant embodiment (Fig. 18) of Shelton teaches an endoscopic suturing system 510 with an arcuate needle 628 (see Fig. 18) and an arcuate needle guide the needle guide 628 is within (see Fig. 18), a first rotational direction (counter-clockwise or proximal), and a second rotational direction (clockwise or distal). Shelton further teaches: (iii) a backstop 672 (see Fig. 18, [0102]-[0103]); and wherein the backstop 672 and the needle 628 engage to prevent the arcuate needle 628 from rotating within the arcuate needle guide the needle guide 628 is within (see Fig. 18) by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction the clockwise direction (see [0103], specifically the direction opposite to the needle’s actuation movement is stopped by the anti-backup device, meaning it stops rotation of at least more than 0 degrees, hence the needle doesn’t rotate more than 270 degrees in the second rotational direction).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment (Fig. 18) of Shelton and have an endoscopic suturing device with a backstop; and wherein the backstop and the needle engage to prevent the arcuate needle from rotating within the arcuate needle guide by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this creates frictional impendent to movement of the needle and prevents the needle from backing up unintentionally (see [0101]-[0103]).
Claim(s) 26-41, 43-45, and 50-52 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view Meade (US 20180242967 A1), herein referenced to as “Meade”.
Claim 26
Shelton discloses: An endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising:(a) a distal assembly the assembly comprising 14 + 17 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising: (i) an arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-10) and an endoscope fastener 17 (see [0072], 17 is a clamp which fastens to the endoscope 18), wherein the endoscope fastener 17 is configured to attach to an endoscope 18 (see Figs. 1-2, [0072]); (ii) an arcuate needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) comprising a notch 56 (see Figs. 1-10, [0088]) and a suture attachment 12 (see Fig. 1, [0087]), wherein the arcuate needle 28 has a center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates (see Figs. 1-10), and wherein the arcuate needle 28 is disposed within the arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-4); and (iii) an arcuate needle guide cover 20 functions as a needle guide cover for needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10); and (b) a cable 42 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070]) having a pawl 38 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070], the cable 42 is connected to 40 which is connected to 38, 38 is a pawl as it frictionally engages the needle 28 with teeth); wherein the notch 56 and the pawl 38 engage (see [0089]-[0093], the engagement member 58 is moved into and out of engagement with the needle as the radial position of 60 is altered) when the pawl translates in a first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal) about the center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates, wherein the notch and the pawl disengage when the pawl translates in a second direction (distal/counter-clockwise) opposite the first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal).
Shelton (Figs. 1-10 and 47-51) does not explicitly disclose: wherein the arcuated needle guide cover removably attaches to the arcuate needle guide and wherein the arcuate needle guide cover comprises a backstop; and wherein the backstop and the needle engage to prevent the arcuate needle from rotating within the arcuate needle guide by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction.
However, a variant embodiment (Fig. 18) of Shelton teaches an endoscopic suturing system 510 with an arcuate needle 628 (see Fig. 18) and an arcuate needle guide the needle guide 628 is within (see Fig. 18), an arcuate needle guide cover 614 (see Fig. 18), a first rotational direction (counter-clockwise or proximal), and a second rotational direction (clockwise or distal). Shelton further teaches: wherein the arcuate needle guide cover 614 comprises a backstop 672 (see Fig. 18, [0102]-[0103]); and wherein the backstop 672 and the needle 628 engage to prevent the arcuate needle 628 from rotating within the arcuate needle guide the needle guide 628 is within (see Fig. 18) by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction the clockwise direction (see [0103], specifically the direction opposite to the needle’s actuation movement is stopped by the anti-backup device, meaning it stops rotation of at least more than 0 degrees, hence the needle doesn’t rotate more than 270 degrees in the second rotational direction).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment (Fig. 18) of Shelton and have an endoscopic suturing device with a backstop; and wherein the backstop and the needle engage to prevent the arcuate needle from rotating within the arcuate needle guide by at most about 270 degrees in the second rotational direction. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this creates frictional impendent to movement of the needle and prevents the needle from backing up unintentionally (see [0101]-[0103]).
Sheldon does not explicitly teach: wherein the arcuated needle guide cover removably attaches to the arcuate needle guide.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system 50 (see Fig. 1) with a distal assembly 56 comprising an arcuate needle guide 92 (see Fig. 3A), an arcuated needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A). Meade further teaches: wherein the arcuated needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A) removably attaches (see [0096], [0098], and [0109] 110 can be removed via 108 and away from 88 to remove the disposable cartridge 88) to the arcuate needle guide 92.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and have an endoscopic suturing system with wherein the arcuated needle guide cover removably attaches to the first housing. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as this allows for a disposable needle cartridge that can be replaced when needed and be manufactured to be low-cost (see [0098] and [0169]).
Claim 27
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the pawl 38 comprises a spring (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), a flexure (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), a dual spring gate (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), a cushion (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), a piston (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), a rod 40 (see Figs. 1-4, [0070], a pin is a rod), a pin 40 (see Figs. 1-4, [0070], a pin is a rod), a tooth 62 (see Figs. 1-4, 62 are teeth that engage grooves), or any combination thereof.
Claim 28
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the pawl 38 is engagement biased (see Figs. 1-10, [0089], described as a friction camming member, and engages via friction and biased towards engagement).
Claim 29
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the notch 56 is ramped in a direction (see Figs. 1-4, the notches 56 are ramped in the direction opposite the first direction being the proximal/counter-clockwise rotational direction) opposite the first direction proximal/counter-clockwise rotational direction.
Claim 30
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the notch is located on an inner surface of the arcuate needle.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system 50 (see Fig. 1) with an arcuate needle 120 (see Figs. 15 and 18) with a notch 132 (see Figs. 15 and 18). Meade further teaches: wherein the notch 132 is located on an inner surface inner surface of 120 (see Figs. 15 and 18, [0111]) of the arcuate needle 120.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and teach a suturing system with wherein the notch is located on an inner surface of the arcuate needle. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as notches from an opposite side of which the pawl functions can be used for anti-rotation and/or backstop mechanisms (see [0111]).
Claim 33
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the arcuate needle 28 comprises two or more notches 56 (see Figs. 1-4, there are a plurality of notches, 2 and more).
Claim 34
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the endoscope fastener 17 comprises a press-fit fastener (the alternatives to “a clamp” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a clamp (see Figs. 1-2, [0072], clamp), an adhesive, a tape, a strap, a set screw, a hook and loop fastener, a magnet, or any combination thereof.
Claim 35
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Shelton to have the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Shelton would not operate differently with the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, see ([0007]-[0008]) of the applicant’s patent application publication, which lists several ranges as acceptable alternatives, such as 5 mm to about 16 mm, which excludes diameters from about 17 mm to about 156, hence the range of 5 mm to about 156 mm is not critical.
Claim 36
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: further comprising a cable sheath (see [0070] and Figs. 47-52, a sheath covers the drive cable, 42/2542) surrounding at least a portion of the cable 42.
Claim 37
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 36, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: further comprising a cable fastener 2184 + 2186 (see Fig. 40, [0137]) that removably couples (see Fig. 40, 2184 is attached to 2170, which is removably coupled to the endoscope as in Fig. 1) at least a portion of the cable the drive cable within 2182 (see Fig. 40 as with Figs. 1-10) to the endoscope 2174.
Claim 38
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 36, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the cable fastener 2184 + 2186 comprises a press-fit fastener (the alternatives to “a set screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tie, a string, a band, a hook and loop fastener, a tape, a strap, a magnet, a cinch, a press fit, a set screw (see [0137], screw threads), an adhesive, or any combination thereof.
Claim 39
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein an angle between a center axis (see annotated Fig. 2 below) of the arcuate needle guide 26 plane (see annotated Fig. 2 below) and a distal axis of the endoscope 16 (see Fig. 2, [0067]) is about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees.
PNG
media_image1.png
648
975
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 40
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 39, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the angle between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees.
However, Shelton in a variant embodiment (see Figs. 41-42) teaches an endoscopic suturing system 2210 (see Figs. 41-42) with an endoscope 2272 (see Figs. 41-42) and an arcuate needle guide 2214 (see Figs. 41-42). Shelton (Figs. 41-42) further teaches: wherein the angle the angle between 2272 and 2214 between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees (see [0142], 2282a is flexible, allowing 2214 to deflect off axis from the endoscope, hence the angle is adjustable).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment of Shelton (Figs. 41-42) and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the angle between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this allows improving visualization of the suturing apparatus while still allowing it to deflect against the endoscope during insertion and extraction, reducing its overall profile during these activities (see [0142]).
Claim 41
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein at least one of the endoscope fastener, arcuate needle guide, arcuate needle guide cover 110, the arcuate needle, and a actuator (the alternatives to “arcuate needle guide cover” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations) are composed of plastic (see [0097], plastic material), metal (the alternatives to “plastic” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), fiberglass, carbon fiber, wood, or any combination thereof.
Claim 43
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the arcuate needle 28 further comprises a suture attachment fastener (see [0087], the blunt end fastens to the suture 12, hence it is a suture attachment fastener).
Claim 44
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: further comprising a proximal assembly 2570 (see Figs. 47-48, [0147]) comprising: (i) a second housing 2580 (see Figs. 47-51, [0149]) ; and(ii) an actuator 2574 (see Figs. 47-51, [0149]) connected to the second housing 2580; wherein the second housing 2580 removably couples to the endoscope (see [0148], quick handle disconnect).
Claim 45
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further teaches: wherein the backstop 672 comprises a flexure (the alternatives to “clasp” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a snap, a magnet, a clasp (see [0102], 672 is a lever that clasps onto the needle, preventing movement in clockwise rotation, meets the definition according to the online Merriam-Webster dictionary as “a device (such as a hook) for holding objects or parts together”), or any combination thereof.
Claim 50
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: the endoscopic suturing system (see claim objection above) of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: an endoscopic suturing platform (see Fig. 3A) comprising: a needle replacement mount 108 (see Fig. 3A, [0098]) removably coupled to the arcuate needle 120 and the endoscope fastener (will not be examined due to being an optional claim limitation), arcuate needle guide 88 (see Fig. 3A, [0098]), or arcuate needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A, [0098]).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and teach an endoscopic suturing platform with needle replacement mount removably coupled to the arcuate needle and the arcuate needle guide, or arcuate needle guide cover. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as this allows for a disposable needle cartridge that can be replaced when needed and be manufactured to be low-cost (see [0098] and [0169]).
Claim 51
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: The platform of claim 50, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein the needle replacement mount 108 removably couples to the arcuate needle 120 by a screw (see [0098], shoulder screw), a nut (the alternatives to “screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
Claim 52
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: The platform of claim 50, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein the needle replacement mount 108 removably couples to the endoscopic fastener (will not be examined here due to being an optional claim limitation), arcuate needle guide 88, or arcuate needle guide cover 110 by a screw (see [0098], shoulder screw), a nut (the alternatives to “screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
Claim(s) 42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton and Meade as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Faraz et al (US 5766186 A), herein referenced to as “Faraz”.
Claim 42
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: The system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Meade does not explicitly teach: wherein the endoscope fastener, arcuate needle guide, or arcuate needle guide cover further comprises a cable pulley that guides the cable.
However, Faraz in a similar field of invention teaches an endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-5) with an arcuate needle guide 16 (see Figs. 1-5), an arcuate needle guide cover 18 (see Figs. 1-5), and a cable 20 (see Figs. 1-5). Faraz further teaches: wherein the endoscope fastener (will not be examined here due to being an optional claim limitation), arcuate needle guide 16, or arcuate needle guide cover 20 further comprises a cable pulley 22 + 24 (see Figs. 1-5, col. 2, lines 63-67 and col. 3, lines 1-7) that guides the cable 20.
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 combination of Shelton and Meade to incorporate the teachings of Faraz and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the arcuate needle guide or arcuate needle guide cover further comprises a cable pulley that guides the cable. Motivation for such can be found in Faraz they ensure the cable to be in frictional contact with the needle and prevent slippage of the needle (col. 3, lines 40-50).
Claim(s) 46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton and Meade as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Montgomery (US 20190350584 A1), herein referenced to as “Montgomery”.
Claim 46
The combination of Shelton and Meade teaches: The system of claim 26, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Meade does not explicitly teach: comprising two or more backstops.
However, Montgomery in a similar field of invention teaches an endoscopic suturing system 130 (see Figs. 8-15) with an arcuate needle guide cover 190 + 183 (see Figs. 8-15), an arcuate needle 170 (see Figs. 8-15), an arcuate needle guide 184 (see Figs. 8-15), and the arcuate needle guide cover 190 having a backstop 200A (see Figs. 8-15). Montgomery further teaches: comprising two or more backstops 200A-200D (see Figs. 8-15, [0051], [0054]-[0057]).
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 combination of Shelton and Meade to incorporate the teachings of Montgomery and teach an endoscopic suturing system with two or more backstops. Motivation for such can be found in Montgomery as multiple backstops assist to retain the orbiting arcuate needle in its needle track while the suture thread can pass through (see [0054]).
Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 8-16, 18-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view of Ainslie (US 1822330 A), herein referenced to as “Ainslie”.
Claim 1
Shelton discloses: An endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-2, [0067]) comprising: an endoscope fastener 17 (see [0072], 17 is a clamp which fastens to the endoscope 18), wherein the endoscope fastener 17 is configured to couple to an endoscope 18 (see Figs. 1-2, [0072]); an arcuate needle guide 26 (see Figs. 3-10, [0068]), an arcuate needle guide cover 20 functions as a needle guide cover for needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) coupled to the arcuate needle guide 26; an arcuate needle 28 (see Figs. 1-10, [0068]) comprising a notch 56 (see Figs. 1-10, [0088]) and a suture attachment 12 (see Fig. 1, [0087]), wherein the arcuate needle 28 has a center axis the axis that 28 rotates about in the space 44 (see Figs. 1-10), and wherein the arcuate needle 28 is disposed within the arcuate needle guide 26; 42 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070]) having a pawl 38 (see Figs. 3-10, [0070], the cable 42 is connected to 40 which is connected to 38, 38 is a pawl as it frictionally engages the needle 28 with teeth), wherein the notch 56 and the pawl 38 engage (see [0089]-[0093], the engagement member 58 is moved into and out of engagement with the needle as the radial position of 60 is altered) when the pawl translates in a first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal) about the center axis center axis that goes through 14 about which the needle 12 rotates, wherein the notch and the pawl disengage when the pawl translates in a second direction (distal/counter-clockwise) opposite the first rotational direction (clockwise/proximal).
Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the cable and the pawl comprise a unitary cable pawl.
However, Ainslie in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system (see Figs. 11-13) with an arcuate needle 12 (see Figs. 11-13), a cable 10 (see Figs. 11-13), and a pawl adjacent portion of 10 (see page 3, lines 1-5, this portion of 10 connects to a notch 12a in the arcuate needle 12, acts as a pawl by controlling the motion of the needle via a contact force). Ainslie further teaches: wherein the cable 10 and the pawl adjacent portion of 10 comprise a unitary cable pawl 10 (see Figs. 11-13, page 3, lines 1-5).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Ainslie and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the cable and the pawl comprise a unitary cable pawl. Motivation for such can be found in Ainslie as this limits the amount of space needed within the arcuate needle guide cover to allow placing of suture within a limited working space (see page 3, lines 1-10).
Claim 3
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the pawl 38 is engagement biased (see Figs. 1-10, [0089], described as a friction camming member, and engages via friction and biased towards engagement).
Claim 4
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the notch 56 is ramped in a direction (see Figs. 1-4, the notches 56 are ramped in the direction opposite the first direction being the proximal/counter-clockwise rotational direction) opposite the first direction proximal/counter-clockwise rotational direction.
Claim 8
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the arcuate needle 28 comprises two or more notches 56 (see Figs. 1-4, there are a plurality of notches, 2 and more).
Claim 9
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the endoscope fastener 17 comprises a press-fit fastener (the alternatives to “a clamp” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a clamp (see Figs. 1-2, [0072], clamp), an adhesive, a tape, a strap, a set screw, a hook and loop fastener, a magnet, or any combination thereof.
Claim 10
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Shelton to have the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Shelton would not operate differently with the endoscope has a distal outer diameter of about 5 mm to about 156 mm. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, see ([0007]-[0008]) of the applicant’s patent application publication, which lists several ranges as acceptable alternatives, such as 5 mm to about 16 mm, which excludes diameters from about 17 mm to about 156, hence the range of 5 mm to about 156 mm is not critical.
Claim 11
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: further comprising a cable sheath (see [0070] and Figs. 47-52, a sheath covers the drive cable, 42/2542) surrounding at least a portion of the cable 42.
Claim 12
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 11, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: further comprising a cable fastener 2184 + 2186 (see Fig. 40, [0137]) that removably couples (see Fig. 40, 2184 is attached to 2170, which is removably coupled to the endoscope as in Fig. 1) at least a portion of the cable the drive cable within 2182 (see Fig. 40 as with Figs. 1-10) to the endoscope 2174.
Claim 13
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 12, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the cable fastener 2184 + 2186 comprises a press-fit fastener (the alternatives to “a set screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tie, a string, a band, a hook and loop fastener, a tape, a strap, a magnet, a cinch, a press fit, a set screw (see [0137], screw threads), an adhesive, or any combination thereof.
Claim 14
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: The system of claim 11, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein an angle between a center axis (see annotated Fig. 2 below) of the arcuate needle guide 26 plane (see annotated Fig. 2 below) and a distal axis of the endoscope 16 (see Fig. 2, [0067]) is about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees.
PNG
media_image1.png
648
975
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 15
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 14, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the angle between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees.
However, Shelton in a variant embodiment (see Figs. 41-42) teaches an endoscopic suturing system 2210 (see Figs. 41-42) with an endoscope 2272 (see Figs. 41-42) and an arcuate needle guide 2214 (see Figs. 41-42). Shelton (Figs. 41-42) further teaches: wherein the angle the angle between 2272 and 2214 between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees (see [0142], 2282a is flexible, allowing 2214 to deflect off axis from the endoscope, hence the angle is adjustable).
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment of Shelton (Figs. 41-42) and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the angle between the center axis of the arcuate needle guide and a proximal axis of the endoscope is adjustable within about 5 degrees to about 85 degrees. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this allows improving visualization of the suturing apparatus while still allowing it to deflect against the endoscope during insertion and extraction, reducing its overall profile during these activities (see [0142]).
Claim 16
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein at least one of the arcuate needle and an actuator are composed of plastic, metal, fiberglass, carbon fiber, wood, or any combination thereof.
However, a variant embodiment of Shelton (Fig. 39) teaches in the same field of invention an endoscopic suturing system 2010 (see Fig. 39) with an arcuate needle 2028 (see Fig. 39). Shelton (Fig. 39) further teaches: wherein at least one of the arcuate needle 2028 and an actuator (will not be examined here due to being an optional claim limitation) are composed of plastic (the alternatives to “metal” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), metal (see [0132], steel, which is a metal), fiberglass, carbon fiber, wood, or any combination thereof.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment (Fig. 39) of Shelton and have an endoscopic suturing system with an arcuate needle composed of metal. This is due to metal being used for arcuate needle (see [0132]) is common in the art, thus it would be obvious to combine. See in re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (2100).
Claim 18
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the arcuate needle 28 further comprises a suture attachment fastener (see [0087], the blunt end fastens to the suture 12, hence it is a suture attachment fastener).
Claim 19
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein a second housing 2580 (see Figs. 47-51, [0149]) removably couples to the endoscope (see [0148], quick handle disconnect).
Claim 20
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the arcuate needle guide removably couples to the endoscope fastener by a screw, a nut, a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
However, a variant embodiment of Shelton (see Figs. 41-43) teaches in the same field of invention an endoscopic suturing system (see Figs. 41-43) with an arcuate needle guide 2214 (see Figs. 41-43) and an endoscopic fastener 2270 (see Figs. 41-43). Shelton (Figs. 41-43) further teaches: wherein the arcuate needle guide 2214 removably couples to the endoscope fastener 2270 by a screw 2282 + 2286 (see Figs. 41-43, [0139] and [0137], the same members 2184 + 2186 are screws), a nut (the alternatives to “a screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment (Figs. 41-43) of Shelton and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the arcuate needle guide removably couples to the endoscope fastener by a screw. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this allows the suturing apparatus to move away from the endoscope when the suturing apparatus reaches its desired location (see [0140]).
Claim 21
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: wherein the arcuate needle 28 is contained between (see Figs. 1-3, 28 is between 20 and 26, when 20 is covering 26 and coupled to 17) the arcuate needle guide 26 and the arcuate needle guide cover 20 when the needle guide cover 20 is coupled to the endoscope fastener 17.
Claim 22
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton does not explicitly disclose: wherein the arcuate needle guide cover removably couples to the endoscope fastener by a screw, a nut, a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
However, a variant embodiment of Shelton (see Figs. 41-43) teaches in the same field of invention an endoscopic suturing system (see Figs. 41-43) with an arcuate needle guide cover the cover of 2214 (see Figs. 41-43) and an endoscopic fastener 2270 (see Figs. 41-43). Shelton (Figs. 41-43) further teaches: wherein the arcuate needle guide the cover of 2214 removably couples to the endoscope fastener 2270 by a screw 2282 + 2286 (see Figs. 41-43, [0139] and [0137], the same members 2184 + 2186 are screws), a nut (the alternatives to “a screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of a variant embodiment (Figs. 41-43) of Shelton and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the arcuate needle guide cover removably couples to the endoscope fastener by a screw. Motivation for such can be found in Shelton as this allows the suturing apparatus to move away from the endoscope when the suturing apparatus reaches its desired location (see [0140]).
Claim(s) 2, 5, 23-24, 47-49 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view of Ainslie as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Meade.
Claim 2
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Ainslie does not explicitly teach: wherein the pawl is welded to the cable.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system (see Figs. 38-43) with a cable drive rod (see [0144]) and a pawl 302 (see Figs. 38-43). Meade further teaches: wherein the pawl 302 is welded to the cable drive rod (see [0144], weld joint).
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 combination of Shelton and Ainslie to incorporate the teachings of Meade and teach an endoscopic suturing system with the pawl is welded to the cable. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as this allows for connection such that the lateral elastic flexibility but minimal longitudinal compressibility of the cable can be maintained to allow for actuation and rotation of the needle (see [0144]).
Claim 5
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Ainslie does not explicitly teach: wherein the notch is located on an inner surface of the arcuate needle.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system 50 (see Fig. 1) with an arcuate needle 120 (see Figs. 15 and 18) with a notch 132 (see Figs. 15 and 18). Meade further teaches: wherein the notch 132 is located on an inner surface inner surface of 120 (see Figs. 15 and 18, [0111]) of the arcuate needle 120.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and teach a suturing system with wherein the notch is located on an inner surface of the arcuate needle. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as notches from an opposite side of which the pawl functions can be used for anti-rotation and/or backstop mechanisms (see [0111]).
Claim 23
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Ainslie does not explicitly teach: wherein the arcuate needle guide cover further removably couples to the arcuate needle guide.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system 50 (see Fig. 1) with a distal assembly 56 comprising an arcuate needle guide 92 (see Fig. 3A), an arcuated needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A). Meade further teaches: wherein the arcuated needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A) further removably couples (see [0096], [0098], and [0109] 110 can be removed via 108 and away from 88 to remove the disposable cartridge 88) to the arcuate needle guide 92.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and have an endoscopic suturing system with the arcuate needle guide cover further removably couples to the arcuate needle guide. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as this allows for a disposable needle cartridge that can be replaced when needed and be manufactured to be low-cost (see [0098] and [0169]).
Claim 24
The combination of Shelton, Ainslie, and Meade teaches: the system of claim 23, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein the arcuate needle guide cover 110 removably ocuples to the arcuate needle guide 92 by a screw 108 (see Figs. 3A-3B, [0098]), a nut (the alternatives to “a screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
Claim 47
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the endoscopic suturing system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. Shelton further discloses: an endoscopic suturing platform (see Figs. 1-10).
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie does not explicitly teach: and a (b) a needle replacement mount removably coupled to the arcuate needle and the needle guide cover.
However, Meade in a similar field of invention teaches a suturing system 50 (see Fig. 1) with a distal assembly 56 comprising an arcuate needle guide 92 (see Fig. 3A), an arcuate needle 120 (see Fig. 3A), and an arcuated needle guide cover 110 (see Fig. 3A). Meade further teaches: a needle replacement mount 108 (see Fig. 3A, [0098]) removably coupled to the arcuate needle 120 and the needle guide cover 110.
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 Shelton to incorporate the teachings of Meade and teach an endoscopic suturing platform with a needle replacement mount removably coupled to the arcuate needle and the needle guide cover. Motivation for such can be found in Meade as this allows for a disposable needle cartridge that can be replaced when needed and be manufactured to be low-cost (see [0098] and [0169]).
Claim 48
The combination of Shelton, Ainslie, and Meade teaches: the endoscopic suturing platform of claim 47, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein the needle replacement mount 108 removably couples to the arcuate needle 120 by a screw 108 (see Fig. 3A, [0098], shoulder screw), a nut (the alternatives to “a screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
Claim 49
The combination of Shelton, Ainslie, and Meade teaches: the endoscopic suturing platform of claim 47 or 48, see 103 rejection above. Meade further teaches: wherein the needle replacement mount 108 removably couples to the arcuate needle guide cover 110 by a screw 108 (see Fig. 3A, [0098], shoulder screw), a nut (the alternatives to “a screw” will not be examined here due to being optional claim limitations), a tongue, a groove, a clip, a knob, a cam, or any combination thereof.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton in view of Ainslie as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Faraz.
The combination of Shelton and Ainslie teaches: the system of claim 1, see 103 rejection above. The combination of Shelton and Ainslie does not explicitly teach: further comprising a cable pulley that guides the cable.
However, Faraz in a similar field of invention teaches an endoscopic suturing system 10 (see Figs. 1-5) with an arcuate needle guide 16 (see Figs. 1-5), an arcuate needle guide cover 18 (see Figs. 1-5), and a cable 20 (see Figs. 1-5). Faraz further teaches: further comprising a cable pulley 22 + 24 (see Figs. 1-5, col. 2, lines 63-67 and col. 3, lines 1-7) that guides the cable 20.
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 combination of Shelton and Meade to incorporate the teachings of Faraz and teach an endoscopic suturing system with a cable pulley that guides the cable. Motivation for such can be found in Faraz they ensure the cable to be in frictional contact with the needle and prevent slippage of the needle (col. 3, lines 40-50).
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 RAIHAN R KHANDKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6174. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00 PM - 3:00 PM.
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 571-272-4695. 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.
RAIHAN R. KHANDKER
Examiner
Art Unit 3771
/RAIHAN R KHANDKER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/KATHERINE H SCHWIKER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771