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
Claims filed July 22nd, 2024 have been entered. Claims 24- 31, and 42- 43, 47, 66- 74 are pending in the application. Claims 42- 43, 47, and 66- 74 are withdrawn for being drawn to an unelected invention.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I, Claims 24- 31, in the reply filed on July 22nd, 2024 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the technical feature linking the inventions is a special technical feature. This is not found persuasive because the technical feature linking the inventions in amended claim 24 is not a special technical feature as it was known in the art. See the newly cited prior art, Navarro et al. (US 2003/0028201), which teaches the linking limitations (see 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection below).
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 26, Line 4 states “symmetrical disposed”, it is suggested to change this to “symmetrically disposed” to correct an apparent typographical error.
Claim 26, Line 7 states “with near end of the transmission pipe, far end of the transmission pipe”, it is suggested to change this to “with a near end of the transmission pipe, a far end of the transmission pipe” to correct an apparent typographical error.
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 26 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 26, Lines 3-5 recites the limitation “connecting rods” and then the limitation “there are two connecting rods which are symmetrically disposed with each other”. It is unclear if the connecting rods comprise the two connecting rods set forth in Lines 4-5, or if the two connecting rods are intended to be different from the connecting rods. For the purposes of examination, claim 26 is interpreted as reciting “the connecting rods comprise two connecting rods.”
Likewise Claim 26, Line 9 recites the limitation “there are two movable members, and the two movable members are fixedly connected with the two booster arms in one-to-one correspondence”. It is unclear if the movable member set forth in claim 24 is intended to comprises the two movable members set forth in claim 26, or if the two movable members are intended to be different from the movable member claimed in claim 24. For the purposes of examination, claim 26 is interpreted as reciting “the movable member comprises two movable members.”
Regarding the format of the claims, it is suggested to add a separate line indentation for a plurality of elements to aid in clarifying the different elements, as set forth in section 608.01(m) of the MPEP, “Where a claim sets forth a plurality of elements or steps, each element or step of the claim should be separated by a line indentation.”)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 28- 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 28 recites the limitation “wherein the puncture core assembly also comprises” which fails to limit claim 27 as claim 27 is directed to the suture needle fixing mechanism and not the puncture core assembly. Furthermore, the puncture core assembly is directed towards an unelected invention. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 29 is rejected for being dependent on rejected claim 28.
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) 24, 25, 27 and 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Navarro et al. (US 2003/0028201). Navarro is cited in the IDS filed 4/08/24.
Regarding claim 24, Navarro (Navarro et al.) teaches a suture needle fixing mechanism (Figs. 1- 8)(Paragraphs 0028 and 0030) comprising a movable member (extraction means 15) with a slit (longitudinal slot 19) extending from an end of the movable member (see annotated Fig. 1 below), and a suture needle (7) removable connected to an end of a suture arm (strip 8, base 14; Paragraph 0035)(Paragraph 0037) that drives the needle (Paragraph 0033). Navarro further teaches wherein once the suture needle is held within in the slit, the suture needle is separated from the arm (Paragraph 0037).
Regarding the suture needle fixing mechanism being for a puncture core assembly, it is noted that the limitation is recited in the preamble and is intended use, and thus the structure required to perform the use has been considered. As Navarro teaches in Paragraphs 0007 and 0028 that the device can be used with a trocar after it has punctured tissue, the device can be used in conjunction with a puncture core assembly.
Regarding the movement of the suture needle being prevented by the moveable member, since Navarro teaches that the movement of the suture needle is controlled by the suture arm (Paragraphs 0032- 0033), and that when the suture needle is within the slot, it becomes separated from the arm (Paragraphs 0037 and 0050, see Figs. 4 and 5), Navarro therefore teaches that the movement of the suture needle is prevented by the moveable member, as it is disconnected from the arm and therefore unable to move without corresponding movement from the movable member.
PNG
media_image1.png
776
570
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 25, Navarro teaches the suture needle fixing mechanism as discussed above for claim 24.
Regarding the suture fixing transmission assembly, as Navarro teaches that the suture needle engages the slot of the movable member and is fixed to the movable member (Paragraph 0037, see Fig. 3), and that the lower part (5b) of the rod (5) and the spring (22)(Paragraphs 0038 and 0041) move or transmits the movable member (extraction means 15) in a straight line (Paragraph 0041), the lower part 5b and the spring 22 are considered a suture needle fixing transmission assembly.
Navarro further teaches that the movable member is fixedly connected to the lower part (5b) through a grooved engagement (Paragraph 0039) and to the spring (22) through an attachment (Paragraph 0041).
Regarding claim 27, Navarro teaches the suture needle fixing mechanism as discussed above for claim 24.
Regarding Navarro further teaching wherein the suture needle fixing mechanism further comprising a suture needle fixing operating assembly, as Navarro teaches that the suture needle is fixed within the movable member (extraction means 15)(Paragraph 0037), and then teaches that the upper part (5a) of the rod (5) and the external handle (6) operate the device (Paragraph 0047) and therefore aid in operating the moveable member, the upper part (5a) and the external handle are the suture needle fixing operating assembly.
Regarding wherein the suture needle fixing operating assembly is butted against the suture needle fixing transmission assembly after being pressed so as to drive the suture needle fixing transmission assembly to move in a straight line and the suture needle fixing operating assembly is separated from the suture needle fixing transmission assembly after being pulled, as Navarro teaches that the suture needle fixing transmission assembly (lower part 5b, spring 22) and the suture needle fixing operating assembly (upper part 5a, handle 6) are connected through a circular head (5a1) and a countersunk cavity (5b1)(Paragraph 0034). Therefore, when upper part (5a) is pressed down through the handle (6), the distal edge of the upper part (5a) contacts the proximal edge of the lower part (5b), and imparts movement onto the suture needle fixing transmission assembly (lower part 5b, spring 22)(Paragraph 0049). Likewise, when a pulling motion is exacted on the handle (6), a space is created between the two edges of the upper and lower parts, separating the two edges and therefore causing a separation between the upper part (5a) and the lower part (5b), between the suture needle fixing transmission assembly and the suture needle fixing operating assembly.
Regarding claim 30, Navarro teaches the suture needle fixing mechanism as discussed above for claim 24.
Regarding the blocking arm used to block the movable member holding the suture needle, Navarro teaches two lugs (11) which when positioned crosswise relative to an oblong hole (12), act as a locking mechanism against the wall of the cannula (3) after the suture needle is caught by the movable member (Paragraphs 0049 and 0051). Therefore, as the lugs act to lock the device and prevent further movement of the rod (Paragraph 0051) and therefore the movable member which is connected to the rod (Paragraph 0038), the lugs are blocking arms and block the movable member.
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.
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) 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Navarro in view of Gordon et al. (US 7033370).
Regarding claim 31, Navarro teaches the suture needle fixing mechanism as discussed above for claim 24.
Navarro does not teach wherein the suture needle fixing mechanism also comprises a receiving assembly, the receiving assembly comprises a receiving sheet, and the receiving sheet is an elastic grid sheet or an elastic hollow sheet used for holding the suture needle.
Gordon (Gordon et al.) teaches a receiving sheet (catch 266)(Fig. 5) for catching and holding a needle (234)(Column 15, Lines 31- 35), the receiving sheet being an elastic grid sheet (In Column 15, Lines 23- 25, Gordon teaches that the receiving sheet is made of a nylon woven mesh. Nylon is known in the art as an elastic material. Therefore, the receiving sheet is an elastic grid sheet.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the suture needle fixing mechanism as taught by Navarro to have a receiving assembly as taught by Gordon, in order to further secure the suture needle within the device, as Gordon teaches that the catch holds the needle within the device (Column 15, Lines 31- 35).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the claim informalities and 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:
No prior art, alone or in combination, could be found to teach or make obvious (Claim 26) wherein the suture needle fixing transmission assembly sequentially comprises an upper transmission ring, connecting rods, a transmission pipe, a lower transmission ring and two booster arms from top to bottom, the two booster arms are symmetrically disposed, wherein the connecting rods comprise two connecting rods which are symmetrically disposed with each other, the upper transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two connecting rods, far ends of the two connecting rods are fixedly connected with a near end of the transmission pipe, a far end of the transmission pipe is fixedly connected with the lower transmission ring, the lower transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two booster arms, wherein the movable member comprises two movable members, and the two movable members are fixedly connected with the two booster arms in one-to-one correspondence. The closest prior art is Navarro et al. (US 2003/028201) and Klein et al. (US 5,417,699).
Navarro (Navarro et al.) teaches a suture needle fixing mechanism (Figs. 1- 8)(Paragraphs 0028 and 0030) comprising a movable member (extracting means 15) with a slit (longitudinal slot 19) extending from an end of the movable member (see annotated Fig. 1 below), and a suture needle (7) removable connected to an end of a suture arm (strip 8, base 14; Paragraph 0035)(Paragraph 0037) that drives the needle (Paragraph 0033). Navarro further teaches wherein once the suture needle is held within in the slit, the suture needle is separated from the arm (Paragraph 0037). Navarro does not teach wherein the suture needle fixing transmission assembly sequentially comprises an upper transmission ring, connecting rods, a transmission pipe, a lower transmission ring and two booster arms from top to bottom, the two booster arms are symmetrical disposed, there are two connecting rods which are symmetrically disposed with each other, the upper transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two connecting rods, far ends of the two connecting rods are fixedly connected with near end of the transmission pipe, far end of the transmission pipe is fixedly connected with the lower transmission ring, the lower transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two booster arms, there are two movable members, and the two movable members are fixedly connected with the two booster arms in one-to-one correspondence.
Klein (Klein et al.) teaches a suture applying device (abstract)(Figs. 24- 27) with a needle (226), a capture target (240)(Column 10, Lines 10- 22), and a transmission assembly (needle advance and capture assembly 212)(Column 9, Lines 18- 22). Klein does not teach wherein the suture needle fixing transmission assembly sequentially comprises an upper transmission ring, connecting rods, a transmission pipe, a lower transmission ring and two booster arms from top to bottom, the two booster arms are symmetrical disposed, there are two connecting rods which are symmetrically disposed with each other, the upper transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two connecting rods, far ends of the two connecting rods are fixedly connected with near end of the transmission pipe, far end of the transmission pipe is fixedly connected with the lower transmission ring, the lower transmission ring is fixedly connected with near ends of the two booster arms, there are two movable members, and the two movable members are fixedly connected with the two booster arms in one-to-one correspondence.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSEY R. RIVERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0251. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday.
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, Kelly Bekker can be reached on (571) 272- 2739. 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.
/KANKINDI RWEGO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /L.R.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3771