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 .
Acknowledgment
Claims 1-18 are amended and filed on 1/2/2026.
Claims 19, 20 are newly added.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houde et al. (US. 20030125673A1) (“Houde”) in view of Uber, III et al. (US. 20070106208A1) (“Uber”).
Re Claim 1, Houde discloses a fluidics control system (abstract, Figs. 1,31-34, ¶0062), comprising: a paths’ system (10 in Fig. 1 is replaced with 10j in Fig. 31-34) comprising: a housing (housing of 41a); a saline flow path within the housing (54j to 55j, ¶0092) and configured to receive saline from a source of saline (12, Fig. 1, ¶0094), the saline flow path configured to be in fluid communication with a first catheter (15, ¶0094); a contrast flow path (57j to 58j, ¶0092) within the housing (Fig.33) and configured to receive contrast from a source of contrast media (13, Fig. 1, ¶0093), the contrast flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter (15, ¶0093) and a vacuum flow path (47j to 48j, ¶0092) within the housing (Fig. 33) and configured to receive vacuum from a source of vacuum (14, ¶0095), the vacuum flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter (15, ¶0095);
a valve system (18, 22, 25, 23 , 26, 17) comprising a first valve (18) configured for connection between the first catheter (15, ¶0062) and the source of vacuum (14, waste, ¶0095), and a second valve (22) configured for connection between the first catheter and the source of contrast media (¶0062); and a first control (handle 61j Figs. 31-34, ¶0093, ¶0092); and further discloses that adjusting one or more of the first valve and the second valve in response to actuation of the first control (¶0093) so that the source of contrast and the first catheter are in fluid communication and communication between the source of the vacuum and the first catheter is blocked, but it fails to disclose that paths’ housing is a cassette and a first processor is configured to adjust one or more of the first valve and the second valve in response to actuation of the first control .
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises cassette (unit 80 ¶0127) for the fluid paths (50, 52, 54), a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is capable to adjust the first valve, and the second valve and (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90, the valve can be close or open as desired so that vacuum source can be blocked and contrast can be opened) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the system is comprising a paths’ housing is a cassette and a first processor is configured to adjust one or more of the first valve and the second valve in response to actuation of the first control as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of fluid by controlling the valves (Uber, ¶0127).
Re Claim 2, Houde discloses further comprising the first catheter, the first catheter comprising a first catheter hub (right side of 15, Fig. 1 of Houde), in fluid communication with the first contrast valve, the first valve, and the second valve (Fig. 1, ¶0062).
Re Claim 14, Houde discloses wherein the valve system comprises a valve manifold carried by the first catheter hub (branches 17, 26, 23 is considered as a manifold ).
Re Claim 15, Houde discloses wherein the first valve and the second valve are remote from the first catheter hub (Fig, 1), and in communication with the first catheter hub by way of a tubing (lines 16, 21, 24, ¶0062).
Claim(s) 3-10, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houde in view of Uber and further in view of Lampropoulos et al. (US. 20090259200A1) (“Lampropoulos”).
Re Claim 3, Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose further comprising a first hemostasis valve on the first catheter hub.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-7b) comprises further comprising a first hemostasis valve on the first catheter hub (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first hemostasis valve on the first catheter hub as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Re Claim 4, Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose further comprising a second catheter configured to axially movably receive the first catheter therethrough.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-7b) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second catheter (44, ¶0043) configured to axially movably receive the first catheter therethrough (Fig. 4, ¶0043).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a second catheter configured to axially movably receive the first catheter therethrough as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Re Claim 5, Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose wherein the second catheter comprises a second catheter hub, the second catheter hub comprising a second hemostasis valve.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second catheter (44, ¶0043) and wherein the second catheter comprises a second catheter hub ( top end of the catheter 44), the second catheter hub comprising a second hemostasis valve (10 can be coupled to a sheath and another valve like 10 can be coupled to catheter Fig. 4, ¶0025).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second catheter comprises a second catheter hub, the second catheter hub comprising a second hemostasis valve as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Re Claim 6, Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose wherein the second hemostasis valve is adjustable between a low compression state and a high compression state against the first catheter.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025)9 is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and a high compression state against the first catheter ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve is adjustable between a low compression state and a high compression state against the first catheter as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Re Claim 7, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor or a second processor is configured to adjust the second hemostasis valve into the high compression state against the first catheter, in response to actuating the first control.
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is capable adjust the valve, and close the first saline valve and the first vacuum valve (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the first processor is configured adjust a valve in response to actuation of the first control as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of the valve system (Uber, ¶0127).
Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose that the valve is the second hemostasis valve and adjusted into the high compression state against the first catheter.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and a high compression state against the first catheter ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve so that the valve can be adjusted into the high compression state against the first catheter as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025 wherein the first processor of Uber is capable to adjust the second hemostasis valve of Lampropoulos into the high compression state against the first catheter, in response to actuating the first control ).
Re Claim 8, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor is configured to adjust the second hemostasis valve into the high compression state against the first catheter, in response to actuating the first control.
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is capable adjust the valve, and close the first saline valve and the first vacuum valve (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the first processor is configured to adjust a valve in response to actuation of the first control as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of the valve system (Uber, ¶0127).
Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose that the valve is the second hemostasis valve and adjusted into the high compression state against the first catheter.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and a high compression state against the first catheter ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve so that the valve can be adjusted into the high compression state against the first catheter as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025 wherein the first processor of Uber is capable to adjust the second hemostasis valve of Lampropoulos into the high compression state against the first catheter, in response to actuating the first control ).
Re Claim 9, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor is configured to introduce contrast media into the first catheter in response to actuation of the first control and when the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state against the first catheter.
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is capable to introduce contrast media into the first catheter in response to actuation of the first control (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the first processor is configured to introduce contrast media into the first catheter in response to actuation of the first control as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of the valve system (Uber, ¶0127).
Houde in view of Uber fails to disclose that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state against the first catheter
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and a high compression state against the first catheter ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state against the first catheter as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025 wherein the first processor of Uber is configured to introduce contrast media into the first catheter in response to actuation of the first control when the second hemostasis valve of Lampropoulos into the high compression state against the first catheter).
Re Claim 10, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor is configured to activate a first contrast media pump in response to actuation of the first control .
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is configured to activate a first contrast media pump in response to actuation of the first control (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the first processor is configured to activate a first contrast media pump in response to actuation of the first control as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of the valve system (Uber, ¶0127).
Re Claim 20, the modified Houde discloses wherein the saline flow path, the contrast flow path, and the vacuum flow path are configured to be in fluid communication with the second catheter ( the path are capable to be connected to the catheter and or sheath (Lampropoulos, ¶0043).
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Houde in view of Uber and further in view of Lampropoulos and further in view of Blacker (US. 20140066900A1).
Re Claim 11, Houde fails to disclose further comprising a drive circuit configured to adjust the compression state of the second hemostasis valve between the high compression state and the low compression state in response to a signal from the first processor.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and a high compression state against the first catheter ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve between the high compression state and the low compression state as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Houde in view of Uber and Lampropoulos fails to discloses a drive circuit configured to adjust hemostasis valve in response to a signal from the first processor.
However, Blacker discloses a catheter control system (Figs. 1-22) comprises a catheter (122, ¶0054, Fig, 11), a hemostasis valve (34) and a drive circuit (60, 58, and 116, ¶0056, ¶0059) configured to adjust hemostasis valve from unengaged to engaged status in response to a signal from the first processor (¶0056, ¶0059).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a drive circuit configured to adjust hemostasis valve in response to a signal from the first processor as taught by Blacker for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument robotically (Blacker, ¶0059).
Re Claim 12, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
The modified Houde fails to disclose that the first processor is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter.
However, Blacker discloses a catheter control system (Figs. 1-22) comprises a catheter (122, ¶0054, Fig, 11), a hemostasis valve (34) and a first processor (16) is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in engaged state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter (¶0056, ¶0059).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde so that the first processor is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter as taught by Blacker for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument robotically (Blacker, ¶0059).
Re Claim 13, Houde fails to disclose wherein the first processor is additionally configured to adjust the second hemostasis valve into the low compression state in response to actuation of the first control to stop introduction of contrast media into the first catheter.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
The modified Houde fails to disclose that the first processor is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter.
However, Blacker discloses a catheter control system (Figs. 1-22) comprises a catheter (122, ¶0054, Fig, 11), a hemostasis valve (34) and a first processor (16) is configured to adjust the second hemostasis valve into release status in response to actuation of the first control to stop introduction of contrast media into the first catheter (¶0056, ¶0059).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde so that the first processor is additionally configured to confirm that the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state in response to actuation of the first control to introduce contrast media into the first catheter as taught by Blacker for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument robotically (Blacker, ¶0059).
Claim(s) 16-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blacker in view of Lampropoulos and further in view of Houde and Uber.
Re Claim 16, Blacker discloses a fluidics control system for multi catheter procedures (Figs. 1-22), comprising: a first catheter (122, ¶0054) comprising a hemostasis valve (34, ¶0035); a second catheter (142, ¶0058) extendable through the hemostasis valve and through the first catheter (¶0058, Fig. 11), and a processor (16, 18, ¶0057) capable to, in response to human instruction (¶0057), and further discloses that the homeostasis valve is adjustable between engaging mode and disengaging mode (¶0059), but it fails to disclose that the homeostasis valve is adjustable between a low compression mode and a high compression mode and a source of saline solution in communication with the first catheter through a saline valve; a source of contrast media in communication with the first catheter through a contrast valve; a cassette comprising: a housing and a contrast flow path within the housing and configured to receive contrast from the source of contrast media, the contrast flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter and the first control signal is to place the hemostasis valve into the high compression mode, and send a second control signal to open the contrast valve.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065, a low compression mode is disengaging mode and a high compression mode is engaging mode).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the hemostasis valve of Blacker so that the hemostasis valve is adjustable between a low compression mode and a high compression mode and the first control signal is to place the hemostasis valve into the high compression mode as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
The modified Blacker fails to discloses a source of saline solution in communication with the first catheter through a saline valve; a source of contrast media in communication with the first catheter through a contrast valve; and the processor configured to send a second control signal to open the contrast valve, a cassette comprising: a housing and a contrast flow path within the housing and configured to receive contrast from the source of contrast media, the contrast flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter.
However, Houde discloses a fluidics control system (abstract, Figs. 1,31-34, ¶0062), comprising: a valve system (18, 22, 25, 23 , 26, 17) comprising a first vacuum valve (18) configured for connection between a first catheter (15, ¶0062) and a first source of vacuum (14, waste, ¶0095), a first saline valve (25) configured for connection between the first catheter (15) and a first source of saline (12, ¶0062), and a first contrast valve (22) configured for connection between the first catheter and a first source of contrast media (¶0062); and a first control (handle 61j in Figs. 31-34, ¶0093) for initiating introduction of contrast media into the first catheter (¶0093, as 91j is connecting contrast injection to the contrast output); and further discloses that a control open the first contrast valve, and close the first saline valve and the first vacuum valve in response to actuation of the first control (¶0093), paths’ system (10j) comprising: a housing (housing of 41a); a saline flow path within the housing (54j to 55j, ¶0092) and configured to receive saline from a source of saline (12, Fig. 1, ¶0094), the saline flow path configured to be in fluid communication with a first catheter (15, ¶0094); a contrast flow path (57j to 58j, ¶0092) within the housing (Fig.33) and configured to receive contrast from a source of contrast media (13, Fig. 1, ¶0093), the contrast flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter (15, ¶0093) and a vacuum flow path (47j to 48j, ¶0092) within the housing (Fig. 33) and configured to receive vacuum from a source of vacuum (14, ¶0095), the vacuum flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter (15, ¶0095) and the contrast flow path is capable to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter ( catheter and sheath).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Blacker to a source of saline solution in communication with the first catheter through a saline valve; a source of contrast media in communication with the first catheter through a contrast valve and a cassette comprising: a housing and a contrast flow path within the housing and configured to receive contrast from the source of contrast media, the contrast flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter as taught by Houde for the purpose of controlling delivering type of fluid from many types within the catheter (Houde, ¶0062-¶0063).
Blacker in view of Lampropoulos and Houde fails to discloses a cassette and the processor configured to send a second control signal to open the contrast valve.
However, Uber discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-3) comprises cassette has a housing (80 contain the paths’ system (50, 52, 54) and a first processor (200) and wherein the first processor is capable to open the first contrast valve, and close the first saline valve and the first vacuum valve (¶0126, 50, 52, 54, 90) in response to actuation of the first control (¶0036, ¶0127).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify valve system of Houde to include a first processor so that the system is further comprising a cassette and the first processor is configured to send a second control signal to open the contrast valve as taught by Uber for the purpose of automatically control the operation of the valve system (Uber, ¶0127).
Re Claim 17, Blacker discloses wherein the processor is further configured to, in response to human instruction (¶0059), send a third control signal (¶0059) to place the hemostasis valve into disengaging (¶0059) mode the low compression mode, and to send a fourth control signal to a robotic catheter drive system (¶0059) to axially adjust the second catheter (140) with respect to the first catheter (Fig. 11)., but it fails to disclose that the disengaging mode is mode the low compression mode.
However, Lampropoulos discloses a valve control system (Figs. 1-4) comprises a first catheter (sheath, ¶0025) and a second hemostasis valve (10 in Fig. 4 or 100 in Fig, 7a-b can be coupled to a sheath hub, ¶0025) is adjustable between a low compression state (Fig. 7a, ¶0063) and the second hemostasis valve is in the high compression state ( Fig. 7b, ¶0065).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the hemostasis valve of Blacker so that disengaging mode is mode the low compression mode as taught by Lampropoulos for the purpose of sealing the hub with another medical instrument (Lampropoulos, ¶0025).
Re Claim 18, Blacker discloses wherein the processor is further capable to, in response to human instruction (¶0057), send a fifth control signal to a robotic catheter drive system to axially proximally withdraw a guidewire from the second catheter prior to opening the contrast valve (¶0060).
Re Claim 19, the modified Blacker discloses wherein the cassette further comprises: a saline flow path within the housing (see Houde 54j to 55j, ¶0092) and configured to receive saline from a source of saline (see Houde, 12, Fig. 1, ¶0094), the saline flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter (it is capable to be connected to first catheter and second catheter of Blacker); and a vacuum flow path (see Houde, 47j to 48j, ¶0092) within the housing (see Houde, Fig. 33) and configured to receive vacuum from a source of vacuum (see Houde, 14, ¶0095), the vacuum flow path configured to be in fluid communication with the first catheter and the second catheter (it is capable to be connected to first catheter and second catheter of Blacker).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/6/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The applicant argues with regards to the newly added limitation “a cassette ..” this is found not persuasive as Houde disclose the fluidic paths as clamed and Uber disclose that the fluid paths can be in unit 80 for maintenance which considered to be cassette see the rejection.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 HAMZA A. DARB whose telephone number is (571)270-1202. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F (EST).
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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/HAMZA A DARB/Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /CHELSEA E STINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783