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
Amendments to claims 1-7 of 6/5/2026 acknowledged and entered.
New claim 19-30 of 6/5/2026 acknowledged and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 23, 27 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.
Claims 23, 27 depend upon claim 22, which is drawn to a motorized actuation module. Dependent claims 23, 27 draw limitations to an endoscope with which the motorized actuation module is used, forming an endoscope system and not a motorized actuation module.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 22, 24-26, 28, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pereira (AU 2018298123 A1).
Regarding claim 22, Pereira teaches A motorized actuation module for an endoscopic instrument, comprising:
a mounting plate (fig. 1a, element 45, [0034], housing 45 has a flat face with mounting structure 47 attached) attached to an endoscopic handgrip (fig. 1a, element 16, [0035], mounting structure 47 may be engageable with second end 16 of the handle body 10, the handle body portion 16 being considered a zone of the handgrip that may be grasped);
said mounting plate including a median support having a hand-gripping surface and an extension, a backside of said median bearing surface contacting against said handgrip, and said extension outwardly projecting from said median support (fig. 1a, element 45, housing 45 has a thickness direction perpendicular to the mounting face);
an electrical actuator comprising at least one of: a sensor, switch or button, located adjacent an end of said extension configured to deliver a control signal operable to control movement of said endoscopic instrument (fig. 1a, [0036], data and power cable 52 controls motor 50); and
a motor located inside a block projecting from said mounting plate and spaced apart from said extension with said hand-gripper surface therebetween (fig. 1a, element 50, [0033], at least one motor 50).
Regarding claim 24, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
further comprising: a drive roller (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity of housing 45, [0036], motor actuates wire in a translational direction and/or a rotational direction, while it is unclear to examiner what a “drive roller” is, specification appears to disclose a mechanism for translating motorized force to linear translation) rotated by said motor, said driver roller being located within said block; and a pressure roller biased toward said drive roller, said driver roller being located within the block.
Regarding claim 25, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
further comprising an actuating or stop switch or button located on said block ([0036] A combined data and power cable 52 may extend between motor 50 and scope device interface 48, allowing power and/or control signals to be sent from processor 30 to motor 50).
Regarding claim 26, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
wherein said mounting plate is preassembled with said block, said motor, said extension and said electrical actuator, and said preassembled mounting plate is removably attachable to said endoscopic handgrip having a flexible tube extending therefrom, said endoscopic handgrip being a separate part from said preassembled mounting plate (fig. 1a, element 16, [0035], mounting structure 47 may be engageable with second end 16 of the handle body 10, the handle body portion 16 being considered a zone of the handgrip that may be grasped).
Regarding claim 28, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
wherein an end of said extension which has said electrical actuator thereon is upturned away from said block (fig. 1a, extension of the drive device is disposed in the upward direction).
Regarding claim 30, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
wherein said block has a port therein configured to receive a control mechanism of said endoscopic instrument which is one of: a scissor, a biopsy needle, forceps, or a puncture ([0034] End-effector 44 may include a self-expanding basket and/or any retrieval or capture device, such as a grasper, a hook, scissors, or the like.).
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) 1-7, 18-21, 23, 27, 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pereira in view of Yamada (US 20140221739 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Pereira teaches A motorized actuation module for an endoscopic instrument, comprising:
a mounting plate subassembly (fig. 1a, element 45, [0034], housing 45 has a flat face with mounting structure 47 attached) configured to be detachably attached to a grasping zone of an existing and separate handgrip of an endoscope (fig. 1a, element 16, [0035], mounting structure 47 may be engageable with second end 16 of the handle body 10, the handle body portion 16 being considered a zone of the handgrip that may be grasped);
said mounting plate having a subassembly including the heel (fig. 1a, element 45, housing 45 has a thickness direction perpendicular to the mounting face) extending in a direction forming an angle of 90 degrees ± 25° relative to a plane of said bearing surface,
said heel comprising an electromechanical sensor or switch configured to deliver a control signal operable to control movement of said endoscopic instrument (fig. 1a, [0036], data and power cable 52 controls motor 50);
a motor located inside a block attached to said mounting plate subassembly (fig. 1a, element 50, [0033], at least one motor 50);
said block outwardly projecting away from said median bearing surface (fig. 1a, motor is part of a block with a height);
Pereira does not explicitly teach said mounting plate subassembly including a median bearing surface and an extending heel, the median bearing surface contacting against said handgrip and said median bearing surface being configured to receive a hand of an endoscopist;
said median bearing surface of said mounting plate subassembly being located between said heel and said block; and said mounting plate subassembly having a substantially C-shape.
However, Yamada teaches said mounting plate subassembly including a median bearing surface (fig. 1b, element 330, [0069], support member 330) and an extending heel (fig. 1b, element 340, [0069], extension member 340), the median bearing surface contacting against said handgrip and said median bearing surface being configured to receive a hand of an endoscopist (a device may be held in any number of ways and construes intended use);
said median bearing surface of said mounting plate subassembly being located between said heel and said block (fig. 1b, support 330 is between the heel 330 and an actuating portion 950); and
said mounting plate subassembly having a substantially C-shape (fig. 1b, a c-shape is formed between the extended heel and the endoscope body).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the module of Pereira to include an extended heel and grip portion as taught in Yamada in order to provide a fixing point for the device (Yamada [0095]).
Regarding claim 2, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 1,
Further, Pereira teaches further comprising a drive roller rotated by the motor, said driver roller being located within said block (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity of housing 45, [0036], motor actuates wire in a translational direction and/or a rotational direction, while it is unclear to examiner what a “drive roller” is, specification appears to disclose a mechanism for translating motorized force to linear translation), and said drive roller being configured to contact against and move a filiform element (fig. 1a, element 50, [0034], motor 50) for connection with said instrument, a lower end of which opens into a flexible rod (fig. 1a, element 17, [0025], port 17 of endoscope accepts the wire element 42 of the motorized block) of said endoscope to ensure connection with said instrument.
Regarding claim 3, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 2,
Further, Pereira teaches a pressure roller (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity of housing 45, [0036], motor actuates wire in a translational direction and/or a rotational direction while it is unclear to examiner what a “pressure roller” is, specification appears to disclose a mechanism for translating motorized force to linear translation) biased toward said drive roller with said filiform element therebetween, the driver roller being located within the block
Regarding claim 4, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 1,
Further, Pereira teaches further comprising an actuating or stop switch or button located on the block ([0036] A combined data and power cable 52 may extend between motor 50 and scope device interface 48, allowing power and/or control signals to be sent from processor 30 to motor 50).
Regarding claim 5, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 1,
Further, Pereira teaches wherein said heel is formed by a protrusion (fig. 1a, element 45, housing shaped to protrude in the direction and hollow to have an internal compartment) having thickness of less than 3 millimeters having, at its end, and said switch or sensor whose actuating surface is defined by a generatrix forming an angle of 90 degrees ± 20° with a longitudinal axis of said handgrip (fig. 1a, element 49, [0035], scope device interface 49 extends perpendicularly to the housing).
Regarding claim 6, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 1,
Wherein said block (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity 46) includes a lower end which opens into a flexible rod (fig. 1a, element 17, [0025], port 17 of endoscope accepts the wire element 42 of the motorized block) of said endoscope to provide a connection with said instrument and further comprising a battery mounted to the block configured to supply power to the motor (A combined data and power cable 52 may extend between motor 50 and scope device interface 48, allowing power and/or control signals to be sent from processor 30 to motor 50 ).
Regarding claim 7, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 1,
wherein said block has a side actuating button controlling an emergency stop of movement of said instrument (fig. 1a, element 22, [0042], selection toggle 22 may switch on or off the motor 50).
Regarding claim 18, Pereira teaches A motorized actuation module for an endoscopic instrument, comprising:
a mounting plate (fig. 1a, element 45, [0034], housing 45 has a flat face with mounting structure 47 attached) configured to be attached to a grasping zone of a handgrip of an endoscope (fig. 1a, element 16, [0035], mounting structure 47 may be engageable with second end 16 of the handle body 10, the handle body portion 16 being considered a zone of the handgrip that may be grasped), said mounting plate having a bearing surface extended by a heel (fig. 1a, element 45, housing 45 has a thickness direction perpendicular to the mounting face) extending in a direction forming an angle of 90± 250 relative to a plane of said bearing surface, said heel comprising an electromechanical sensor or switch delivering a control signal operable to control movement of said endoscopic instrument;
wherein the grasping zone is a semi-tubular lateral surface of said handgrip that extends between two transverse front ends of the handgrip so that a palm of a hand is able to surround said grasping zone (fig. 1a, mounting section 38 is between the two ends of the handgrip on the side);
a motor located inside a block attached to said mounting plate subassembly (fig. 1a, element 50, [0033], at least one motor 50);
said block outwardly projecting away from said median bearing surface (fig. 1a, motor is part of a block with a height);
Pereira does not explicitly teach said mounting plate subassembly including a median bearing surface and an extending heel, the median bearing surface contacting against said handgrip and said median bearing surface being configured to receive a hand of an endoscopist;
said median bearing surface of said mounting plate subassembly being located between said heel and said block; and said mounting plate subassembly having a substantially C-shape.
However, Yamada teaches said mounting plate subassembly including a median bearing surface (fig. 1b, element 330, [0069], support member 330) and an extending heel (fig. 1b, element 340, [0069], extension member 340), the median bearing surface contacting against said handgrip and said median bearing surface being configured to receive a hand of an endoscopist (a device may be held in any number of ways and construes intended use);
said median bearing surface of said mounting plate subassembly being located between said heel and said block (fig. 1b, support 330 is between the heel 330 and an actuating portion 950); and
said mounting plate subassembly having a substantially C-shape (fig. 1b, a c-shape is formed between the extended heel and the endoscope body).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the module of Pereira to include an extended heel and grip portion as taught in Yamada in order to provide a fixing point for the device (Yamada [0095]).
Regarding claim 19, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 18,
Further, Pereira teaches further comprising a drive roller rotated by the motor, said driver roller being located within said block (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity of housing 45, [0036], motor actuates wire in a translational direction and/or a rotational direction, while it is unclear to examiner what a “drive roller” is, specification appears to disclose a mechanism for translating motorized force to linear translation), and said drive roller being configured to contact against and move a filiform element.
Regarding claim 20, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 19,
Further, Pereira teaches comprising a pressure roller (fig. 1a, element 46, [0035], interior cavity of housing 45, [0036], motor actuates wire in a translational direction and/or a rotational direction while it is unclear to examiner what a “pressure roller” is, specification appears to disclose a mechanism for translating motorized force to linear translation) biased toward said drive roller with said filiform element therebetween, said driver roller being located within said block.
Regarding claim 21, Pereira in view of Yamada teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 18,
Further, Pereira teaches further comprising an actuating or stop switch or button located on said block ([0036] A combined data and power cable 52 may extend between motor 50 and scope device interface 48, allowing power and/or control signals to be sent from processor 30 to motor 50).
Regarding claim 23, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
Wherein a flexible tube within which extends an elongated section of said endoscopic instrument, said flexible tube is coupled to said endoscopic handgrip, and said extension is positioned adjacent to water and suction hand-actuated buttons ([0040], program toggle 26 may be used to initiate the clearing program).
Pereira does not explicitly teach wherein said mounting plate has a substantially C-shape, with the block positioned adjacent to a flexible tube
However, Yamada teaches said mounting plate has a substantially C-shape, with the block positioned adjacent to a flexible tube (fig. 1b, a c-shape is formed between the extended heel and the endoscope body).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the module of Pereira to include an extended heel and grip portion as taught in Yamada in order to provide a fixing point for the device (Yamada [0095]).
Regarding claim 27, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22, wherein:
said motor is external to said endoscopic handgrip (fig. 1a, drive device 40 is external to the handgrip);
said endoscopic handgrip includes a water actuator button ([0040], program toggle 26 may be used to initiate the clearing program), and a rotatable knob (fig. 1a, element 13, [0047], lever 13 to move steerable portion 18S of catheter 18), all of which are located between said extension and a proximal end of said endoscopic handgrip; and
a flexible tube extends from a distal end of said endoscopic handgrip.
Pereira does not explicitly teach a suction actuator button
However, Yamada teaches a suction actuator button (fig. 1b, element 39, [0060], The switch portion 39 is operated during the operation of various functions of the endoscope such as air supply, water supply, suction, and photography)
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Pereira to include a suction button in order to operate supply of suction during a procedure (Yamada [0060]).
Regarding claim 29, Pereira teaches The motorized actuation module according to claim 22,
Pereira does not explicitly teach wherein an end of said extension which has said electrical actuator thereon is downturned toward said block.
However, Yamada teaches wherein an end of said extension which has said electrical actuator thereon is downturned toward said block (fig. 1b, support 330 is between the heel 330 and an actuating portion 950).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the module of Pereira to include an extended heel and grip portion as taught in Yamada in order to provide a fixing point for the device (Yamada [0095]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 TIMOTHY TUAN LUU whose telephone number is (703)756-4592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-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, Michael Carey can be reached at 5712707235. 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.
/TIMOTHY TUAN LUU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
