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 Arguments
In view of the Appeal Brief filed on4/3/2025, PROSECUTION IS HEREBY REOPENED. New grounds
of rejection are set forth below.
To avoid abandonment of the application, appellant must exercise one of the following two options:
(1) file a reply under 37 CFR 1.111 (if this Office action is non-final) or a reply under 37 CFR 1.113 (if this Office action is final); or,
(2) initiate a new appeal by filing a notice of appeal under 37 CFR 41.31 followed by an appeal brief under 37 CFR 41.37. The previously paid notice of appeal fee and appeal brief fee can be applied to the new appeal. If, however, the appeal fees set forth in 37 CFR 41.20 have been increased since they were previously paid, then appellant must pay the difference between the increased fees and the amount previously paid.
A Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) has approved of reopening prosecution by signing below:
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 1-5, filed 9/15/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of
claim(s) 1-32 under 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Korakianitis.
35 U.S.C. 103:
Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Chen, alone or in combination with the prior art, does
not teach “imprint a high frequency sinusoidal signal into at least one of the plurality of motor coils.” After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on Korakianitis to teach this limitation (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 298-300). It is disclosed that “The controller 760 may comprise power electronic switches for converting a fixed AC or DC power source to an appropriate power level and wave shape, depending on the motor type. Higher frequencies are disclosed.” Furthermore, in brushless AC (BLAC) motors, all of the waveforms may be sinusoidal.”
Applicant further argues that Chen does not teach that “the excitation currents are imprinted on
a plurality of motor coils.” After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on Korakianitis to teach this limitation (fig. 43A and 44A-D; paragraph 298-300). It is disclosed that the controller 760 may be used control the power and speed applied to the electromagnetic coils 714 or the stator 710. The stator 710 acts as a motor actuator for the pump.
Regarding claim 4, applicant argues that Allaire, alone or in combination with the prior art, does
not teach, “wherein the high frequency sinusoidal signal is added to the filtered motor driver output.” After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on Korakianitis to teach this limitation (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 229-230 and 298-300). The MCS 100 may include any suitable means for minimizing the electromagnetic interference from other sources, including but not limited to, optimizing the voltage and current for a constant power, modifying the frequency of the signals, and using filters, shields, and/or snubber circuits. This includes high frequency sinusoidal signal.
Regarding claim 13, applicant argues that Hsu does not change the fact that the Allaire’s and
Chen’s motors are not ironless. After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on Korakianitis to teach the limitation, “wherein the motor is an ironless axial flux motor (fig. 8A-E; paragraph 210).” It is disclosed that “The blood contacting surfaces, including casing 300 and the impeller 200, may comprise one or more biocompatible materials, including but not limited to polyether ether keytone (PEEK), for example PEEK OPTIMA, biocompatible titanium, and/or biocompatible titanium coated with biocompatible alloys.”
Regarding claim 32, applicant argues that Schoeb does not disclose “the control unit is further
configured to measure the rotor position using an eddy current measured by detecting the conductive target by means of at least one of the plurality of motor coils.” After further search and consideration, the examiner will now rely on Korakianitis to teach the limitation (paragraph 218 and 221). It is disclosed that “the impeller 200 can be magnetically suspended in the radial direction via various combinations of passive and active electromagnets (e.g., conductive coils wrapped around a metal core). One or more eddy current sensors 336, described elsewhere herein, may be positioned adjacent to each impeller ring magnet 230 (e.g., behind the internal surface of the casing 300).
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.
Claims 1-3 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Korakianitis
et al. US Pub.: US 20190321529 A1, hereinafter Korakianitis.
Regarding claim 1, Korakianitis teaches a blood pump system comprising:
a blood pump (500), a drive line (702), and a control unit (760) for controlling operation of the pump (500), the pump comprising (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265):
a housing (300), including an inlet (102) and an outlet (104) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
a motor actuator (710), wherein the motor actuator (710) includes a plurality of motor coils (714) for driving an impeller (fig. 43A and 44A-D; paragraph 298-300); It is disclosed that the controller 760 may be used control the power and speed applied to the electromagnetic coils 714 or the stator 710. The stator 710 acts as a motor actuator for the pump.
and a rotor (240) including the impeller (200), wherein the impeller (200) is located in the housing (300) and includes a plurality of rotor magnets (magnet holders 402, 404, 406, and 408) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
wherein the control unit (760) is configured to: operate the motor (700), such that the impeller (200) rotates around an axis (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265):
imprint a high frequency sinusoidal signal into at least one of the plurality of motor coils (714) (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 298-300). It is disclosed that “The controller 760 may comprise power electronic switches for converting a fixed AC or DC power source to an appropriate power level and wave shape, depending on the motor type. Higher frequencies are disclosed.” Furthermore, in brushless AC (BLAC) motors, all of the waveforms may be sinusoidal.”
and measure the rotor (240) position in a direction along the axis using at least one of the plurality of the motor coils (714) based on an interaction of the high frequency sinusoidal signal with the rotor (fig. 5A and 43A; paragraph 285 and 298-300). The MCS device 500 may include sensors to measure outputs such as angular position of the rotor and/or angular velocity of the rotor 710.
Regarding claim 2, Korakianitis teaches wherein the control unit (760) is configured to reduce or
eliminate switching noise from a motor driver (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 229-230 and 298-300). The MCS 100 may include any suitable means for minimizing the electromagnetic interference from other sources, including but not limited to, optimizing the voltage and current for a constant power, modifying the frequency of the signals, and using filters, shields, and/or snubber circuits. This includes switching noise.
Regarding claim 3, Korakianitis teaches wherein an output stage of the motor driver includes
filter elements for filtering out high frequency signals (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 229-230 and 298-300). The MCS 100 may include any suitable means for minimizing the electromagnetic interference from other sources, including but not limited to, optimizing the voltage and current for a constant power, modifying the frequency of the signals, and using filters, shields, and/or snubber circuits. This includes high frequency sinusoidal signal.
Regarding claim 4, Korakianitis teaches wherein the high frequency sinusoidal signal is added to
the filtered motor driver output (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 229-230 and 298-300). The MCS 100 may include any suitable means for minimizing the electromagnetic interference from other sources, including but not limited to, optimizing the voltage and current for a constant power, modifying the frequency of the signals, and using filters, shields, and/or snubber circuits. This filtering is applied to the controller 760 to output an optimize power level and wave shape for the motor.
Regarding claim 5, Korakianitis teaches wherein measurement of the motor currents includes a
measurement of the motor coil impedance, preferably the high frequency motor coil impedance (paragraph 218 and 221). It is disclosed that “the impeller 200 can be magnetically suspended in the radial direction via various combinations of passive and active electromagnets (e.g., conductive coils wrapped around a metal core). One or more eddy current sensors 336, described elsewhere herein, may be positioned adjacent to each impeller ring magnet 230 (e.g., behind the internal surface of the casing 300). Measuring eddy current of coils equates to measuring impedance.
Regarding claim 6, Korakianitis teaches wherein a motor internal back-electromotive force is
replicated outside the motor, preferably using inductive shunt voltage measurement (paragraph 272-273 and 300). Positioning the stator 710 and rotor 510 on opposite sides of the blood vessel wall may increase the gap size between the rotor 510 and the stator 710, reducing the efficiency of transferring power from the stator 710 to the rotor 510 via electromotive force. A number of means, discussed herein, may be used individually or together to improve the efficiency of the electromotive force transfer across the gap.
Regarding claim 7, Korakianitis teaches wherein a magnetic field strength is replicated in an
electrical or digital signal outside the motor, preferably using a back-electromotive force replica and a matched pair of high-pass and low-pass filter elements (paragraph 229-230, 272-273, and 284-285). Digital filtering and the modulation of frequencies using different filters are disclosed. This is not limited to high-pass or low-pass filters. A number of means, discussed herein, may be used individually or together to improve the efficiency of the electromotive force transfer across the gap between the rotor and the stator. The force from the electric motors produces the magnetic field strength.
Regarding claim 8, Korakianitis teaches wherein the control unit is configured to reduce voltage
transients in the driveline or is configured to reduce trapezoidal or triangular current wave-forms with respect to the sinusoidal current waveforms (fig. 44D; paragraph 300). Brushless AC (BLAC) motors, all of the waveforms may be sinusoidal. FIG. 44D depicts ideal waveforms of current, flux density, and back-EMF for BLAC motors with no phase advancing. Figures 44B-C depicts trapezoidal. These three waveforms may be controlled depending on the power requirement and switching frequency.
Regarding claim 9, Korakianitis teaches wherein the control unit (710) includes a DC-DC
converter, or includes class AB amplifiers, and/or passive filter elements (fig. 44A-D; paragraph 228). An internal DC-DC converter may be used to stabilize the DC voltage supplied to the controller.
Regarding claim 10, Korakianitis teaches wherein the driveline (702) includes no more than four
wires, preferably three wires and one redundant wire (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265). The driveline comprise one wire, which is no more than four wires.
Regarding claim 11, Korakianitis teaches wherein the blood pump includes a passive magnetic
radial bearing and/or a passive magnetic tilt bearing (paragraph 221-222). The MCS 100 may rely on one or more other types of bearings to suspend and stabilize the impeller, including ball bearings, roller bearings, and/or needle bearings. These examples equate to a passive magnetic radial bearing. Passive magnet 332.
Regarding claim 12, Korakianitis teaches wherein the blood pump includes an active axial
magnetic bearing (paragraph 221-222). The active magnets 334 may be positioned on the same side of the impeller 200. The MCS 100 may rely on one or more other types of bearings to suspend and stabilize the impeller, including ball bearings, roller bearings, and/or needle bearings. These examples equate to an active magnetic axial bearing.
Regarding claim 13, Korakianitis teaches wherein the motor (700) is an ironless axial flux motor
(fig. 8A-E; paragraph 210). It is disclosed that “The blood contacting surfaces, including casing 300 and the impeller 200, may comprise one or more biocompatible materials, including but not limited to polyether ether keytone (PEEK), for example PEEK OPTIMA, biocompatible titanium, and/or biocompatible titanium coated with biocompatible alloys.” The impeller is part of the motor.
Regarding claim 32, Korakianitis teaches wherein the rotor comprises a conductive target; and
the control unit (760) is further configured to measure the rotor (240) position using an eddy current measured by detecting the conductive target by means of at least one of the plurality of motor coils (714) (paragraph 218 and 221). It is disclosed that “the impeller 200 can be magnetically suspended in the radial direction via various combinations of passive and active electromagnets (e.g., conductive coils wrapped around a metal core). One or more eddy current sensors 336, described elsewhere herein, may be positioned adjacent to each impeller ring magnet 230 (e.g., behind the internal surface of the casing 300).
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.
Claims 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korakianitis in view
of Zajac et al. US Pat.: US 3644807 A, hereinafter Zajac.
Regarding claim 14, Korakianitis teaches a blood pump system comprising (fig. 29A-30A;
paragraph 261-265): a blood pump (500), a drive line (702), and a control unit (760) for controlling operation of the pump (500), the pump comprising: a housing (300), including an inlet (102) and an outlet (104) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
a motor actuator (710), wherein the motor (700) includes a plurality of motor coils (714) for driving an impeller (200) (fig. 43A and 44A-D; paragraph 298-300); It is disclosed that the controller 760 may be used control the power and speed applied to the electromagnetic coils 714 or the stator 710. The stator 710 acts as a motor actuator for the pump.
and a rotor (240) including the impeller (200), wherein the impeller (200) is located in the housing (300) and includes a plurality of rotor magnets (magnet holders 402, 404, 406, and 408) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
wherein the control unit (760) is configured to: operate the motor (700), such that the impeller (200) rotates around an axis (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265);
and measure the rotor (240) position in a direction along the axis using at least one of the plurality of the motor coils (714) (fig. 5A and 43A; paragraph 285 and 298-300). The MCS device 500 may include sensors to measure outputs such as angular position of the rotor and/or angular velocity of the rotor 710.
However Korakianitis does not teach further comprising a capacitor electrically parallel connected to a motor coil, wherein the motor coil and the capacitor form a resonant circuit having a resonance frequency and an electrical impedance with a magnitude and a phase.
Zajac, in the same field of endeavor, teaches a capacitor electrically parallel connected to a motor coil (88 and 90), wherein the motor coil (88 and 90) and the capacitor (94 and 96) form a resonant circuit having a resonance frequency and an electrical impedance with a magnitude and a phase (fig. 1; col. 3, lines 23-27)). A pair of capacitors 94 and 96 are connected in parallel with motor coils 88 and 90 to absorb switching transients and control the slope of the decaying voltage across the coils so as to assure the obtention of proper motor starting characteristics.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the motor coils or Korakianitis to attach a capacitor to the motor coils from Zajac for the benefit of evaluating the change in the current flowing through the coil and to determine rotor position within the blood pump through resonance frequency.
Regarding claim 15, Korakianitis in view of Zajac discloses “wherein the motor coil includes a
first coil and wherein a first capacitor is electrically parallel connected to the first coil and both forming a first resonant circuit,” but does not disclose expressly the “wherein a second capacitor is electrically parallel connected to the second coil and both forming a second resonant circuit, wherein a capacitance of the first capacitor is different from a capacitance of the second capacitor and the resonance frequency of the first resonant circuit is different from the resonance frequency of the second resonant circuit.” It would have been an obvious matter of duplication of parts to a person of ordinary skill
in the art to modify the system as taught by Korakianitis in view of Zajac with “a second capacitor is electrically parallel connected to the second coil and both forming a second resonant circuit,” because the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced.) In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960).
Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to modify Chang to obtain the
invention as specified in the claim(s).
Regarding claim 16, Korakianitis in view of Zajac teaches the claimed invention and Korakianitis
further teaches a measurement unit configured to determine the electrical impedance of one or more of the resonant circuits (paragraph 193). The resistance and impedance may be adjusted. Therefore, electrical impedance must be measured to make that adjustment accurate.
Regarding claim 17, Korakianitis in view of Zajac teaches the claimed invention and Korakianitis
further teaches an estimation unit configured to estimate a translational and/or a rotational position of the rotor based on the electrical impedance of one or more of the resonant circuits (fig. 5A and 43A; paragraph 285 and 298-300). The MCS device 500 may include sensors to measure outputs such as angular position of the rotor and/or angular velocity of the rotor 710.
Claims 18-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korakianitis in view
of Forsell US Pub.: US 20110201870 A1.
Regarding claim 18, Korakianitis teaches a blood pump system comprising: a blood pump (500),a drive line (720), and
a control unit (760) for controlling operation of the pump (500),the pump comprising (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265): a housing (300), including an inlet (102) and an outlet (104) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
a motor actuator (710), wherein the motor (700) includes a plurality of motor coils (714) for driving an impeller (200) (fig. 43A and 44A-D; paragraph 298-300); It is disclosed that the controller 760 may be used control the power and speed applied to the electromagnetic coils 714 or the stator 710. The stator 710 acts as a motor actuator for the pump.
and a rotor (240) including the impeller (200), wherein the impeller (200) is located in the housing (300) and includes a plurality of rotor magnets (magnet holders 402, 404, 406, and 408) (fig. 5A-6E; paragraph 203-206);
wherein the control unit (760) is configured to: operate the motor (700), such that the impeller (200) rotates around an axis (fig. 29A-30A; paragraph 261-265);
measure the rotor (240) position in a direction along the axis using at least one of the plurality of the motor coils (714) (fig. 5A and 43A; paragraph 285 and 298-300). The MCS device 500 may include sensors to measure outputs such as angular position of the rotor and/or angular velocity of the rotor 710.
However, Korakianitis does not teach to feed a test signal into a motor coil, wherein the test signal includes a component which is at least one of amplitude modulated, frequency modulated, phase modulated, code modulated, wherein the code modulated component preferably includes a random code modulated component or a pseudo random code modulated component.
Forsell, in the same field of endeavor, teaches to feed a test signal into a motor coil, wherein the test signal includes a component which is at least one of amplitude modulated, frequency modulated, phase modulated, code modulated, wherein the code modulated component preferably includes a random code modulated component or a pseudo random code modulated component (paragraph 168-169 and 182-183). The wireless control signal may include a frequency, amplitude, or phase modulated signal or a combination thereof. Energy received by coils at different test points is disclosed, which equates to test signals.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Korakianitis with the test signal step from Forsell for the benefit of obtaining feedback information and impedance information. This will help determine energy balance of the device.
Regarding claim 19, Korakianitis in view of Forsell teaches the claimed invention and Forsell
further teaches further comprising a detector unit, preferably including a correlator or a synchronous detector, configured to detect the test signal in a voltage measured across the motor coil and/or in a signal derived thereof (paragraph 187-194).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Korakianitis with the detector from Forsell for the benefit of detecting the change in energy balance to control the transmission of wireless energy based on the detected energy balance change.
Regarding claim 20, Korakianitis in view of Forsell teaches the claimed invention and Forsell
further teaches wherein the detector unit is configured to estimate the motor coil impedance based on the detected test signal (paragraph 169-169) The feedback information is also related to the charging of the first coil is received by the external energy transmitter in the form of an impedance variation in the load of the external second coil
Regarding claim 21, Korakianitis in view of Forsell teaches the claimed invention and Forsell
further teaches wherein the motor coil impedance is continuously estimated during operation of the blood pump system (paragraph 169-169) The impedance variation in the load of the external second coil is measured continuously within the blood pump.
Regarding claim 22, Korakianitis in view of Forsell teaches the claimed invention and Korakianitis
further teaches wherein the back-electromotive force replica is calculated with the estimated motor coil impedance (paragraph 229-230, 272-273, and 284-285). Digital filtering and the modulation of frequencies using different filters are disclosed. A number of means, discussed herein, may be used individually or together to improve the efficiency of the electromotive force transfer across the gap between the rotor and the stator. The force from the electric motors produces the magnetic field strength. The motor acts as a generator, which is essential for back-electromotive force.
Regarding claim 23, Korakianitis in view of Forsell does not teach wherein the estimated motor
coil impedance is estimated by minimizing the high frequency signal component within the back-electromotive force replica (paragraph 189, 229-230, 272-273, and 284-285). Digital filtering and the modulation of frequencies using different filters are disclosed. This is not limited to high-pass or low-pass filters. A number of means, discussed herein, may be used individually or together to improve the efficiency of the electromotive force transfer across the gap between the rotor and the stator. The force from the electric motors produces the magnetic field strength.
Claims 24-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korakianitis in view
of Allaire et al. US Pub.: US 20140314597 A1, hereinafter Allaire.
Regarding claim 24, Korakianitis does not teach wherein a magnetic field strength is replicated
in an electrical or digital signal outside the motor, preferably by integrating a back-electromotive force replica with an integrator, wherein the integrator is numerically stabilized by feeding back an output signal of the integrator via a moving average filter, which produces an averaged signal, to an input of the integrator.
Allaire, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein a magnetic field strength is replicated in an electrical or digital signal outside the motor, preferably by integrating a back-electromotive force replica with an integrator, wherein the integrator is numerically stabilized by feeding back an output signal of the integrator via a moving average filter, which produces an averaged signal, to an input of the integrator (fig. 13-15; paragraph 61-69). It is disclosed in [68] that “Filters 45 operate on the current signal obtained from the switching amplifier 35, resulting in the envelope and average value waveforms. The envelope, average value, and applied voltage are fed into the digital sampling system 46 where the variation in current waveform envelope relative to the average current and the applied voltage is used to determine the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify one of the filters from Korakianitis to add the averaging filter from Allaire for the benefit of determining the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator.
Regarding claim 25, Korakianitis does not teach wherein the averaging time of the moving
average filter is one rotation period or an integer multiple of one rotation period of the rotor.
Allaire, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the averaging time of the moving average filter is one rotation period or an integer multiple of one rotation period of the rotor (fig. 13-15; paragraph 61-69). It is disclosed in [64] that “The controller algorithm may consist of a proportional-integer-derivative controller, where the control signal G(t) has three components: one being proportional to the time integral of the translational or angular displacements with constant K.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify one of the filters from Korakianitis to add the averaging filter from Allaire for the benefit of determining the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator.
Regarding claim 26, Korakianitis does not teach wherein the back-electromotive force replica is
an input signal of the integrator and wherein the averaged signal is subtracted from the input signal of the integrator.
Allaire, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the back-electromotive force replica is an input signal of the integrator and wherein the averaged signal is subtracted from the input signal of the integrator (fig. 13-15; paragraph 61-69). It is disclosed in [68] that “average value, and applied voltage are fed into the digital sampling system 46 where the variation in current waveform envelope relative to the average current and the applied voltage is used to determine the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator.” Further it is disclosed in [69] that envelope and average values of the current and voltage signals are used to reduce digital sampling requirements.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify one of the filters from Korakianitis to add the averaging filter from Allaire for the benefit of determining the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator and reduce digital sampling requirements.
Regarding claim 27, Korakianitis does not teach wherein the averaged signal is low pass filtered
before being subtracted from the input signal of the integrator.
Allaire, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the averaged signal is low pass filtered before being subtracted from the input signal of the integrator (fig. 13-15; paragraph 61-69). It is disclosed in [68] that “average value, and applied voltage are fed into the digital sampling system 46 where the variation in current waveform envelope relative to the average current and the applied voltage is used to determine the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator.” Further it is disclosed in [69] that envelope and average values of the current and voltage signals are used to reduce digital sampling requirements.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify one of the filters from Korakianitis to add the averaging filter from Allaire for the benefit of determining the electrical time constant of the resistance-inductance circuit in the actuator and reduce digital sampling requirements.
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korakianitis in view
of Ott et al. US Pub.: US 20040087986 A1, hereinafter Ott.
Regarding claim 28, Korakianitis does not teach further including a connection system for use in
medical applications comprising: a cannula made of a flexible material, a claw ring disposed on the cannula and having at least two claws, wherein the claw ring encompasses an outer surface of the cannula and is arranged on a cannula end of the cannula for rotation and axial displacement on the cannula to a stop, the stop comprising a collar on the cannula end on the outer surface of the cannula; and a tube comprising a locking ring attached to a tube end and a nipple attached to the tube, wherein the claw ring is capable to be joined with the locking ring by an axial movement of the claw ring with respect to the cannula towards the locking ring and by latching of the at least two claws on the locking ring in a position in which this axial movement is limited by the stop.
Ott, in the same field of endeavor, teaches further including a connection system for use in medical applications comprising: a cannula made of a flexible material, a claw ring disposed on the cannula and having at least two claws, wherein the claw ring encompasses an outer surface of the cannula and is arranged on a cannula end of the cannula for rotation and axial displacement on the cannula to a stop, the stop comprising a collar on the cannula end on the outer surface of the cannula (fig. 1; paragraph 67-69); It is disclosed in [61] that “a connection between a cannula 7 and a tube 5.” Further disclosed in [69] “Holding faces 32 and sloped faces 33 are disposed behind the end face 36, with the claws 11 of the claw ring 1 disposed on the cannula snapping into the faces 32 and 33, thereby connecting the cannula 7 with the tube 5.”
and a tube comprising a locking ring attached to a tube end and a nipple attached to the tube, wherein the claw ring is capable to be joined with the locking ring by an axial movement of the claw ring with respect to the cannula towards the locking ring and by latching of the at least two claws on the locking ring in a position in which this axial movement is limited by the stop (fig. 1; paragraph 67-69). It is disclosed in [61] that “a connection between a cannula 7 and a tube 5.” Further disclosed in [69] “Holding faces 32 and sloped faces 33 are disposed behind the end face 36, with the claws 11 of the claw ring 1 disposed on the cannula snapping into the faces 32 and 33, thereby connecting the cannula 7 with the tube 5.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Korakianitis to include the connector system of Ott for the benefit of providing stable connection between the cannula and blood pump. The modification will also allow for multiple degrees of movement due to the flexible cannula.
Regarding claim 29, Korakianitis does not teach further including a device for connecting a
cannula with a heart, wherein a cannula tip of the cannula has an opening which, for the prevention of complete occlusion and retention of blood flow from the heart into the cannula, is waved at its upper edge and provided with recesses.
Ott, in the same field of endeavor, teaches further including a device for connecting a cannula
with a hollow organ, in particular with a heart, characterized in that a cannula tip of the cannula has an opening which, for the prevention of complete occlusion and retention of blood flow from the hollow organ into the cannula, is waved at its upper edge and provided with recesses (fig. 1; paragraph 83). It is disclosed that “the device can be utilized in particular with a blood pump 8 which is implanted in the body and has to be connected with inlet and outlet cannula 82 and 81. Both the inlet and the outlet cannula 82 and 81 are connected to the pump system with the snap connector according to the invention. Blood coming from the heart is supplied to the blood pump 8 via the inlet cannula 82 and then flows from the blood pump 8 via the outlet cannula 82 to the aorta (not shown).”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Korakianitis to include the connector system of Ott for the benefit of providing stable connection between the cannula and blood pump. The modification will also allow for multiple degrees of movement due to the flexible cannula.
Claims 30-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korakianitis in view
of Ott in view of Botterbusch et al. US Pub.: US 20170290967 A1, Botterbusch.
Regarding claim 30, Korakianitis in view of Ott does not teach wherein the cannula is combined
with a suture ring suturable at the heart.
Botterbusch, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the cannula is combined with a
suture ring suturable at the heart (paragraph 44). It is disclosed that “Implantable pump 20 may be affixed to the heart using a ring-suture or other conventional technique.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Korakianitis in view of Ott to include the suture rings of Botterbusch for the benefit of providing stable connection between the pump and the hollow heart organ.
Regarding claim 31, Korakianitis in view of Ott does not teach wherein the cannula has a suture
flange.
Botterbusch, in the same field of endeavor, teaches teach wherein the cannula has a suture
Flange (paragraph 79). It is disclosed that “Stator assembly 72 comprises tapered section 83, flanged portion 87 and suspension ring platform 69 which connects tapered section 83 to flanged portion 87.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Korakianitis in view of Ott to include the suture flange of Botterbusch for the benefit of providing stable connection between the pump and the hollow heart organ.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THIEN J TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0486. The examiner can normally be reached M-F. 8:30 am - 5:30 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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/T.J.T./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/
Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792