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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claim 8, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claims 8 and 12 refer to “a second flexible support” which has a second proximal end is positioned within the third cassette. Claim 8 does not depend from a claim that recites “a first flexible support” or a third cassette. It appears that applicant intended to make claim 5 dependent from claim 4 and claim 8 dependent from claim 5.
Claim 11 refers to a second guide but there is no first guide in claim 4 from which it depends. Apparently, applicant intended to make claim 11 dependent from claim 10.
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)(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) 1, 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. US 20220313962.
Regarding claim 1,
Kim et al. teaches a robotic drive system 100 (fig. 2) for positioning one or more elongated medical devices comprising;
A robotic drive module including
A first drive module (132), and
A second drive module (134) proximal to the first drive module (134), each of the first module and the second drive module being configures to move independently along a longitudinal axis of the robotic drive; (see figure 1. Longitudinal axis x and discussion re translation module with slider 816 (figure 9a) coupled to arm 818.
and
a sterile cassette assembly including
a first cassette (142), and
a second cassette 144 is coupled to the first cassette via a coupler (the coupler including first drive module assembly, including slide 816, base 202 and drive module (132), and second drive module assembly including a second slide 816, second base 202 and drive module (134), each assembly being coupled to element 818, and each drive module of each assembly being in turn coupled to the cassettes via clasps 206-2. 208-2 and hooks 204 (para. [0049]) , wherein
the first cassette and the second cassette are removably attached together, as the result of:
the first cassette is removably attached to the first drive module (para. [0065] last sentence), and
the second cassette removably attached to the second drive module (para. [0065] last sentence).
the first cassette and the second cassette are no longer attached together when one or both of the cassettes are removed from their respective drive modules.
Regarding claim 13, Kim shows that the first and second cassettes have a portion that rests upon a surface of the corresponding of the drive module drive wherein at least cassette pins 314-8 (fig. 7D) rest upon the surface of hooks 204-4 (fig, 4B) during attachment of the cassettes to the drive module
Regarding claim 14, Kim teaches the first cassette comprises a clasp 322 configure to releasably (see buttons 344) engage a tab ( forming a latch between ribs 208 and 328) in the first drive module.
Regarding claim 15, Kim teaches a cassette cylindrical cavity 420 on the cassette for receiving an encoder on the drive unit for rotating the elements of the cassette.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-7, 9-10, and 16-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK W. BOCKELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4941. The examiner can normally be reached Monday -Friday 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Unsu Jung can be reached at (571)272-8506. 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.
/MARK W. BOCKELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792