DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, and 18-20 are amended. A complete action on the merits of pending claims 1-20 appears below.
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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/6/26 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-17, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton US 20070175951 in view of Bales US 5176702 and Boone US 20190298437.
Regarding claim 1, Shelton teaches the surgical tool comprising: a surgical tool grasper operable to perform a surgical procedure (Fig. 2 12); and a handle coupled to the surgical tool grasper (Fig. 2 6) and having a lever operable to actuate the surgical tool grasper to perform the surgical procedure (Fig. 2 18), the lever configured to move about a first pivot point (par. [0056] and Fig. 7 pin 252) and coupled to a bi-stable latch assembly (Fig. 15 150) configured to move about a second pivot point (Fig. 15 151), and wherein a position of the bi-stable latch assembly relative to a boundary line intersecting the first pivot point and the second pivot point (Fig. 1) causes the bi-stable latch assembly to latch the lever in a closed position or unlatch the lever (par. [0066] and Fig. 15).
Shelton does not explicitly teach the second pivot point distal to the first pivot point and the latch assembly comprises an articulated joint.
Bales, in an analogous device, teaches where the pivot that moves the hook for locking the device is on the movable handle while the stationary handle has the portion the hook goes in (Fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to change the pivot and hook location of Shelton to be on the movable handle instead of the stationary handle, as in Bales. It has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. It is seen to preform equally as well and would yield the result of preventing movement when the hook is located within the notch. The boundary line would be through the pivots in Fig. 12 but with the combination the second pivot is moved onto the movable handle. It might be easier to visualize the boundary line from the first pivot through the moving handle.
Bales does not explicitly teach the latch assembly comprises an articulated joint.
Boone, in an analogous device, teaches where the latch mechanism 44 moves around in different locations causing the latching (Fig. 6A).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to change the latch of Shelton and Bales to be articulating, as in Boone. This presents the advantage of having a bias to the latching mechanism to guide in the pathway (Boone par. [0081]).
Regarding claim 2, Shelton teaches wherein moving the lever about the first pivot point in a clockwise direction moves the bi-stable latch assembly to a latched position that secures the lever in the closed position (Fig. 15 the clockwise motion of the lever depends on which side you are looking at the device when the lever is moving).
Regarding claim 3, Shelton teaches wherein the closed position actuates the surgical tool grasper to perform the surgical procedure (par. [0037] severing of tissue after 18 is locked in place).
Regarding claim 4, Shelton teaches wherein moving the lever about the first pivot point in a counterclockwise direction moves the bi-stable latch assembly to a non-latched position that unlatches the lever (par. [0066] and Fig. 15 the clockwise motion of the lever depends on which side you are looking at the device when the lever is moving).
Regarding claim 5, Shelton teaches wherein the lever is in an open position when unlatched that terminates the surgical procedure (par. [0037] severing of tissue after 18 is locked in place thus when not locked the sever tissue is released).
Regarding claim 6, Shelton teaches wherein the bi-stable latch assembly comprises a first segment coupled to a second segment at a joint, and wherein the movement of the lever causes the first segment to move about the joint relative to the second segment and moves the joint to a position over or under the boundary line (Fig. 12 and 14).
Regarding claim 7, Shelton teaches wherein a position of the joint above the boundary line causes the bi-stable latch assembly to latch the lever in the closed position (Fig. 12 and Fig. 15 150 moves up to go in or out of 154).
Regarding claim 8, Shelton teaches wherein a position of the joint below the boundary line causes the bi-stable latch assembly to unlatch the lever (Fig. 12 and Fig. 15 150 moves up to go in or out of 154).
Regarding claim 9, Shelton teaches wherein the lever is latched in the closed position only by the bi-stable latch assembly (Fig. 15 and par. [0066]).
Regarding claim 10, Shelton teaches wherein the surgical tool is an energy tool and the surgical procedure comprises an energy operation (par. [0037] severing of tissue after 18 is locked in place, par. [0035] RF can be used instead of stapling to sever).
Regarding claim 11, Shelton teaches the energy tool comprising: a tool grasper operable to perform an energy operation (Fig. 2 12); and a handle (Fig. 2 6) coupled to the tool grasper and comprising a lever that pivots about a first pivot point (Fig. 7 252) and is coupled to a latch assembly (Fig. 15 150) that pivots about a second pivot point (Fig. 15 151) and the latch assembly comprises a first segment that is movable relative to a second segment about the joint (Fig. 15 each side of the pin is a segment and it would teeter-totter so the segments would move relative to one another since one side moves down while the other moves up), the lever is operable to actuate the tool grasper to perform the energy operation in a first mode in which the lever is latched in a closed position and a second mode in which the lever is unlatched (par. [0037] severing of tissue after 18 is locked in place thus when not locked the sever tissue is released).
Bales, in an analogous device, teaches where the pivot that moves the hook for locking the device is on the movable handle while the stationary handle has the portion the hook goes in (Fig. 1B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to change the pivot and hook location of Shelton to be on the movable handle instead of the stationary handle, as in Bales. It has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. It is seen to preform equally as well and would yield the result of preventing movement when the hook is located within the notch.
Regarding claim 12, Shelton teaches wherein a position of the latch assembly relative to a boundary line intersecting the first pivot point and the second pivot point latches the lever in the first mode or unlatches the lever in the second mode (Fig. 12 and 15 150 moves up to go in or out of 154).
Regarding claim 13, Shelton teaches wherein positioning of the latch assembly over the boundary line latches the lever in the closed position and actuates the tool grasper to perform the energy operation (Fig. 12 and 15 150 moves up to go in or out of 154).
Regarding claim 14, Shelton teaches wherein positioning of the latch assembly under the boundary line unlatches the lever allowing the lever to transition between the closed position and an open position (Fig. 12 and 15 150 moves up to go in or out of 154).
Regarding claim 15, Shelton teaches further comprising a lever adjustor coupled to the handle that prevents the latch assembly from latching in the second mode (par. [0066] and Fig. 15 156 and 152 must be overcome to be in the first mode).
Regarding claim 16, Shelton teaches wherein the lever adjustor is a bar that is operable to translate between a first position that allows the latch assembly to latch the lever in the first mode and a second position that prevents the latch assembly from latching the lever in the second mode (Fig. 15 hook 156).
Regarding claim 17, Shelton teaches further comprising an energy application switch coupled to the handle that, when actuated, causes the tool grasper to perform the energy operation (Fig. 1 20).
Regarding claim 19, Shelton teaches further comprising a third mode in which the energy application switch is directly controlled by the user to cause the tool grasper to perform the energy operation when the lever is unlatched (par. [0037] stapling and severing).
Regarding claim 20, Shelton teaches further comprising a selection lever coupled to the housing to allow a user to select between the first mode and the second mode (Fig. 1 20).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton, Bales, and Boone as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Sakurai US 20040116952.
Regarding claim 18, Shelton, Bales, and Boone do not explicitly teach wherein the lever adjustor bar in the second position is aligned with the energy application switch and a movement of the lever about the pivot point to the closed position causes the lever adjustor bar to contact the energy application switch and actuate the tool grasper to perform the energy operation.
Sakurai, in an analogous device, teaches a bar that is between the movable trigger and the housing (Fig. 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to modify the device of Shelton, Bales, and Boone to have the bar contact a switch for energy application, as in Sakurai. The bar contacting the switch allows for the force of the closure to correlate to the power sent to the jaws (Sakurai par. [0175]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection. Regarding claim 11, it is simply an allegation of patentability. However, as seen in Fig. 15 of Shelton each side of the pin of 150 is a segment and it would teeter-totter. This makes the segments move relative to one another since one side moves down while the other moves up.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN T. CLARK whose telephone number is (408)918-7606. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7AM-3PM MT.
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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached on (571)272-1213. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/R.T.C./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights