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
Claims 1, 10-11 and 13 are amended and claim 17 is new.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 7, filed 02/03/2026, with respect to 112b rejections of claims 10-15 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 112b rejections of claims 10-15 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 13 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 § 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 and 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JP
HO7275185 A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168) and Bayer et al. (US 20080130108 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kobayashi discloses in at least figures 1-5, Sterile cover (sheath device 2 fig.
1) for a medical imaging device (endoscope 1 fig. 1), comprising:
a frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 1) configured to cover an imaging front side (distal end 25 fig. 1) of the medical imaging device (endoscope 1 fig. 1),
wherein a side (rear surface paragraph [0022] of translation) configured to face the imaging
front side (the tip cover 32 has a rear surface with protrusions 37 fig. 4 paragraph [0022] of translation)
which faces distal end 25 fig. 2) of the medical device (endoscope 1 fig. 1) is a facing side (rear surface
paragraph [0022] of translation) of the frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 3b),
and at least one transparent cover portion (window 33 fig. 3b is transparent paragraph [0028])
within the frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 1) arranged to allow at least imaging by the medical imaging
device (the endoscope 1 also incorporates an observation image transmitting optical system that
transmits an image of the observation field formed by the objective lens of the observation window the
image transmitted through the transmission optical system can be observed through the eyepiece 3
paragraph [0018]] of translation) when the frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 1) is attached to the medical
imaging device (endoscope 1 fig. 1),
wherein the frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 5) comprises at least two attachment portions
(protrusions 37 fig. 5) configured to provide a positive-fit connection (the tip cover member 32 is
connected to the plurality of notched recesses 38 corresponding to the projections 37 that fit together
paragraph [0024] of translation) with corresponding attachment portions (notched recesses 38 fig. 5) of
the medical imaging device (notched recesses 38 are part of sheath insertion portion 12 of endoscope 1
fig. 1).
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the frame member further comprises at least one guiding
member protruding from the facing side of the frame member configured to be received by a recess on
the imaging front side of the medical imaging device in the direction of which the guiding member
protrudes from the facing side of the frame member,
wherein at least one of the at least two attachment portions and the at least one guiding member is configured to provide only one positional relationship with respect to the medical imaging device to be attached.
However Jetton discloses in at least figure 6, wherein the frame member (cover 2 fig. 6) further
comprises at least one guiding member (side surface 25 as shown below in fig. 6) protruding from (the
side surface 25 is protruding from the edge of inner surface 45 fig. 6) the facing side (inner surface 45
fig. 6) of the frame member (cover 2 fig. 6) configured to be received by a recess (recessed lips 60 fig. 6)
on the imaging front side (depression 16 fig. 6 is the imaging front side because it faces the cover as
described in the current application pg. 9 para. 8) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously
disclosed a medical imaging device above).
PNG
media_image1.png
481
951
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the snap fit members as taught by Jetton with the guiding member on the
medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The surfaces and ridges provide a continuous connection between
the cover and the threshold paragraph [0035]).
Additionally Bayer discloses in at least figure 2, wherein at least one of the at least two attachment portions (the polarizing filter 46 can be placed in the recessed lip and fixed there by a mechanical snap fit paragraph [0028] and the ring 58 may be attached the inner perimeter of the cap 38 by any suitable means such as plastic snap features paragraph [0031]) and the at least one guiding member (openings 50, 52, 54 and 56 fig. 2) is configured to provide only one positional relationship (the openings 50, 52, 54, 56 preferably correspond to the locations, configurations and sizes of the main imaging device 32, light sources 34, channels 16, and clean liquid channel 40, respectively paragraph [0030]) with respect to the medical imaging device (main imaging device 32 fig. 2) to be attached (the main imaging device 32 is attached to the insertion tube 12 fig. 2 and the ring 58 helps secure the cap 38 to the distal end region of the insertion tube 12 paragraph [0031]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use one positional relationship as taught by Bayer with the guiding member and attachment potions on the medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The end wall 44 preferably has an opening 54 for each of the instrument channels 16 so that the cap 38 does not block the channels 16 (paragraph [0029]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and Kobayashi further discloses, wherein the at least two attachment portions (protrusions 37 fig. 5) are provided on two opposing positions (notched recesses 38 fig.5) on the facing side (rear surface
paragraph [0022] of translation) of the frame member (tip cover 32 fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the at least two attachment portions are configured as
resilient snap-fit members.
However Jetton further discloses, wherein the at least two attachment portions (locking members 51 and 52 from the cover 2 and locking members 34 and 36 from the threshold 4 fig. 6) are
configured as resilient snap-fit members (the connection shown in fig. 6 is the resilient snap-fit connection between the cover 2 and the threshold 4 paragraph [0006] using the locking members 34
and 36 and/or the locking members 51 and 52 which resiliently return towards the undeformed state
after the flanges 55 on the skirt 50 snap over the flanges 44 paragraph [0039]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the snap fit members as taught by Jetton on the medical imaging device of Kobayashi. A positive interlock is formed which prevents any relative movement between the cover and the threshold paragraph [0039]).
Regarding claim 6, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein a ratio of a protruding length of the at least one guiding
member and a protruding length for engagement of the resilient snap-fit members protruding from the
facing side of the frame member to the respective ends of snaps opposite to the facing side is less than
1.
Jetton further discloses, wherein a ratio of a protruding length of the at least one guiding
member (side surface 25 fig. 6) and a protruding length for engagement of the resilient snap-fit
members (cover 2 and the threshold 4 fig. 6) protruding from the facing side (inner surface 45 fig. 6) of
the frame member (cover 2 fig. 6) to the respective ends of snaps (locking members 51 and 52 fig. 6)
opposite to the facing side (inner surface 45 fig. 6) is less than 1 (the length of the guiding member
surface 25 is less than the length of the locking members 51 and 52 resulting in a ratio of less than 1 fig.
6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the snap fit members as taught by Jetton as the attachment portions on the
medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The snap fit connection allows for a connection to occur when
there is pressure applied in the insertion direction paragraph [0006]).
Regarding claim 7, The combination of Kobayashi, and Jetton discloses all the limitations of
claim 1.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein a ratio of a cross section perpendicular to the protruding
length of the at least one guiding member and a corresponding cross-section of the recess on the imaging front side of the medical imaging device is less than 1
However Jetton further discloses, a cross section perpendicular to the protruding length (L1 as
shown below in fig. 6) of the at least one guiding member (surface 25 fig. 6) and a corresponding cross section (L2 as shown below in fig. 6) of the recess (recessed lips 60 fig. 6) on the front side (extending
recesses 12 fig. 6) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging
device above).
PNG
media_image2.png
520
927
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the guiding members as taught by Jetton in the medical imaging device of
Kobayashi. The cover 2 is aligned with the threshold 4 when the side portion 25 is fit into the
corresponding recess 60 to form ridge 14 (fig. 5).
Additionally, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claimed invention to make a ratio of Ll to L2 less than 1, since it has been held that
where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or
workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A. 1955). In the
current instance, the ratio of L1 to L2 is an art recognized results effective variable. Thus one would have
been motivated to optimize the convergence angle because it is an art-recognized result-effective
variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves
only routine skill in the art, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA1977). See MPEP
§2144.05(11)(B) "after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the
only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable
product or process."
Claims 4 and 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JP HO7275185 A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168) and Bayer et al. (US 20080120108 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 2 above and in further view of Fago (WO 2007027567 Al).
Regarding claim 4, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the resilient snap-fit members are configured to provide a
gap between respective snaps of the resilient snap-fit members and the imaging front side of the
medical imaging device in parallel to the facing side of the frame member, when the medical imaging
device extends outwardly with an outward convergence angle measured from a perpendicular to the
imaging front side.
However Fago discloses in at least figure 2, wherein resilient snap-fit members (the cover
assembly 15 may be attached to the container by a snap-fit engagement of the cap with the flange
paragraph [0015]) are configured to provide a gap (gap between flange 11 and bent edge 31 as shown
by the arrow below in fig. 2) between respective snaps (flange 11 and bent edge 31 of cap 17 fig. 2) of
the resilient snap-fit members (the cover assembly 15 may be attached to the container by a snap-fit
engagement of the cap with the flange paragraph [0015]), when the medical imaging device (medical
imaging device taught above by Kobayashi) extends outwardly (tapered neck portion 7 extends from
flange 11 which is facing the cover in the same direction as opposing inner surface 65 fig. 2) with a
outward convergence angle (angle as shown below in fig. 6) from the imaging front side (opposing inner
surface 65 fig. 2) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device
above).
PNG
media_image3.png
621
840
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the snap fit members as taught by Fago as the attachment portions on the
medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The snap fit connection is a way to attach the cap to a container
using resilient materials paragraphs [0015-0016]).
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1, and Kobayashi further discloses, sterile medical imaging system (endoscope 1 and sheath device 2 fig. 1), comprising:
a medical imaging device (endoscope 1 fig. 1) and a sterile cover (sheath device 2 fig. 1)
according to claim 1 (see claim 1 rejection above).
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein an outer portion of the medical imaging device extends
outwardly with an outward convergence angle measured from a perpendicular to the imaging front side of the medical imaging device, and
wherein the outer portion of the medical imaging device extending outwardly from the imaging
front side of the medical imaging device comprises at least two attachment portions, configured to make a positive fit connection corresponding attachment portions of the sterile cover.
However Fago discloses in at least figure 2, wherein an outer portion (tapered neck portion 7 fig.
2) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device above)
extends outwardly (tapered neck portion 7 extends from flange 11 which is facing the cover in the same
direction as opposing inner surface 65 fig. 2) with an outward convergence angle (angle as shown below in fig. 6) measured from a perpendicular to the imaging front side (opposing inner surface 65 fig. 2) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device above), and
wherein the outer portion (tapered neck portion 7 fig. 2) of the medical imaging device
(Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device above) extending outwardly from the imaging
front side (opposing inner surface 65 fig. 2) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously
disclosed a medical imaging device above) comprises at least two attachment portions (flanges 11 create a recess with tapered neck portion 7 for bent edge 31 to fit as shown below in fig. 2), configured to provide a positive fit connection with (a bent edge 31 that engages the flange 11 by a snap fit engagement paragraph [0015] which is a positive fit connection described as “resilient snap-fit members may be easily implemented and may only require corresponding recesses and/or projections provided by the medical imaging device for a positive-fit connection” in current application page 3 lines 10-15), corresponding attachment portions of the sterile cover (bent edge 31 fig. 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
621
840
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the snap fit members as taught by Fago as the attachment portions on the
medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The snap fit connection is a way to attach the cap to a container
using resilient materials paragraphs [0015-0016]).
Regarding claim 11, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton, Bayer and Fago discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the outward convergence angle is equal to or less than 15°.
However, Fago further discloses the outward convergence angle (angle as shown below in fig. 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
621
840
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Additionally It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the convergence angle less than or equal to 15°, since it has
been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the
optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art, In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (C.C.P.A.
1955). In the current instance, the gap is an art recognized results effective variable. Thus one would
have been motivated to optimize the convergence angle because it is an art-recognized result-effective
variable and it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves
only routine skill in the a rt, In re Antonie, 559 F.2d 618, 195 USPQ 6 (CCPA1977). See M PEP
§2144.05(11)(B) "after KSR, the presence of a known result-effective variable would be one, but not the
only, motivation for a personal of ordinary skill in the art to experiment to reach another workable
product or process."
Regarding claim 12, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Fago discloses all the limitations
of claim 10 and Kobayashi further discloses, wherein the surface of transparent cover portion (widow 33 fig. 2) facing at least one imaging component (illumination window at distal end 25 paragraph [0018])
forms an angle of about 90° (90° angle as shown below in fig. 2) with the optical axis of the at least one
imaging component (optical axis of transmission optics and eyepiece 3 fig. 1).
PNG
media_image4.png
439
392
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose, the angle to be 84° to 87°.
However It is a well-established proposition that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where
the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals
Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper
a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron,
balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of 0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum,
balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close
that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). In the instant case, the prior art teaches a value of 90° which is so close to the claimed range of 84° to 87° that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties.
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose the angle of the cover window such that it is 84° to 87° since it has been held that a prima facie case of obviousness exists where the claimed ranges or amounts do not overlap with the prior art but are merely close. Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985) (Court held as proper a rejection of a claim directed to an alloy of "having 0.8% nickel, 0.3% molybdenum, up to 0.1% iron, balance titanium" as obvious over a reference disclosing alloys of0.75% nickel, 0.25% molybdenum, balance titanium and 0.94% nickel, 0.31% molybdenum, balance titanium. "The proportions are so close that prima facie one skilled in the art would have expected them to have the same properties."). See MPEP §2144.05.
Regarding claim 13, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton, Bayer and Fago discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the at least two attachment portions of the sterile cover and the at least two attachment portions of the medical imaging device, respectively, and/or the guiding member of the sterile cover are configured to provide only one positional relationship with respect to the medical imaging device to be attached.
However Bayer further discloses wherein the at least two attachment portions (the polarizing filter 46 can be placed in the recessed lip and fixed there by a mechanical snap fit paragraph [0028] and the ring 58 may be attached the inner perimeter of the cap 38 by any suitable means such as plastic snap features paragraph [0031]) of the sterile cover (polarizer cap 38 fig. 2) and the at least two attachment portions (the polarizing filter 46 can be placed in the recessed lip and fixed there by a mechanical snap fit paragraph [0028] and the ring 58 may be attached the inner perimeter of the cap 38 by any suitable means such as plastic snap features paragraph [0031]) of the medical imaging device (main imaging device 32 fig. 2), respectively, and/or the guiding member (openings 50, 52, 54 and 56 fig. 2) of the sterile cover (polarizer cap 38 fig. 2) are configured to provide only one positional relationship (the openings 50, 52, 54, 56 preferably correspond to the locations, configurations and sizes of the main imaging device 32, light sources 34, channels 16, and clean liquid channel 40, respectively paragraph [0030]) with respect to the medical imaging device (main imaging device 32 fig. 2) to be attached (the main imaging device 32 is attached to the insertion tube 12 fig. 2 and the ring 58 helps secure the cap 38 to the distal end region of the insertion tube 12 paragraph [0031]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use one positional relationship as taught by Bayer with the guiding member and attachment potions on the medical imaging device of Kobayashi. The end wall 44 preferably has an opening 54 for each of the instrument channels 16 so that the cap 38 does not block the channels 16 (paragraph [0029]).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JPHO7275185 A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168 Al) and Bayer et al. (US 20080130108) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Murata (JP HO4329510 A).
Regarding claim 8, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein at least one of the at least two attachment portions of the
frame member is configured to open or close an electric circuit of the medical imaging device,
preferably to function as a limit switch or to establish an electrical contact.
However Murata discloses in at least figure 6, wherein at least one attachment portion (contact
60 fig. 6) of the frame member (endoscope tip portion 51 fig. 6) is configured to open or close an electric
circuit (contact 60 on the attachment portion of adapter 17 and tip side contact 61 on attachment
portion of tip portion 51 close the circuit when connected fig. 6) of the medical imaging device
(endoscope paragraph [0073] of translation), preferably to function as a limit switch or to establish an
electrical contact (the adapter 17 is attached to the endoscope tip 51 and is provided with a contact 60
formed on the other end of the piezoelectric element drive signal line 14 from the piezoelectric element
13 is freely connectable to one of the tip side contacts 61 provided on the endoscope tip 51 to establish
electrical contact paragraph [0073] of translation). (Although based on 112(b) interpretation, the
limitations after the term "preferably'' are not required for this rejection, Murata still teaches the
limitations).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the attachment portion of Kobayashi to open or close a circuit as taught by
Murata. The piezoelectric element constitutes a vibration means to fix the cover glass paragraph [0072]
of translation).
Additionally It is obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to modify the device of Murata, to duplicate the attachment portion, in order to
provides a second connection point. In addition, absent any criticality, the duplicate the attachment point is only obvious modification of Murata since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. In this case, the more attachment points, the more connections it provides for reliability of the system, but the functionality of the circuit does not change.
Regarding claim 16, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein at least one of the at least two attachment portions of the
frame member and the at least one guiding member, or the at least one guiding member are/is
configured to open or close an electric circuit of the medical imaging device.
However Murata discloses in at least figure 6, wherein at least one attachment portion (contact
60 and tip side contact fig. 6) of the frame member (endoscope tip portion 51 fig. 6) is configured to
open or close an electric circuit portions (contact 60 on the attachment portion of adapter 17 and tip
side contact 61 on attachment portion of tip portion 51 close the circuit when connected fig. 6 ).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the attachment portion of Kobayashi to open or close a circuit as taught by
Murata. The piezoelectric element constitutes a vibration means to fix the cover glass paragraph [0072] of translation).
Additionally It is obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to modify the device of Murata, to duplicate the attachment portion, in order to
provides a second connection point. In addition, absent any criticality, the duplicate the attachment point is only obvious modification of Murata since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. In this case, the more attachment points, the more connections it provides for reliability of the system, but the functionality of the circuit does not change.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JPH0O7275185
A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168 Al) and Bayer et al. (US 20080130108 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in view of Komukai (US 20140296638 Al).
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 1.
Kobayashi does not explicitly disclose, wherein the transparent cover portion has a thickness in
an imaging direction of 0.4 to 0.6 mm and/or a refraction index of about 1.49.
However Komukai discloses in at least figure 3, wherein the transparent cover portion
(protective cover 11 fig. 2) has a thickness in an imaging direction of 0.4 to 0.6 mm (thickness t1 is 0.4-
0.59mm paragraph [0036]) and/or a refraction index of about 1.49 (protective cover 11 has a refractive
index of 1.883 paragraph [0040)]).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the transparent cover portion of Komukai as the cover of Kobayashi. The lower
thickness of the cover increase light emission efficiency (paragraph [0037]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JPHO7275185
A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168 Al), Bayer et al. (US 20080130108 A1) and Fago (WO 2007027567 Al) as applied to claim 10 above and in further view of Murata (JP HO4329510 A).
Regarding claim 14, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton, Bayer and Fago discloses all the limitations of claim 10.
Kobayashi does not disclose wherein the medical imaging device comprises an electric circuit
closable by at least one of the at least two attachment portions of the sterile cover and/or the at least
one guiding member of the sterile cover.
However Murata discloses in at least figure 6, wherein the medical imaging device (endoscope
paragraph [0073] of translation) comprises an electric circuit processing circuit paragraph [0071] of
translation) closable by at least one attachment portion (contact 60 on the attachment portion of
adapter 17 and tip side contact 61 on attachment portion of tip portion 51 close the circuit when
connected fig. 6).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the attachment portion of Kobayashi to open or close a circuit as taught by
Murata. The piezoelectric element constitutes a vibration means to fix the cover glass paragraph [0072]
of translation).
Additionally It is obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the
claimed invention to modify the device of Murata, to duplicate the attachment portion, in order to
provides a second connection point. In addition, absent any criticality, the duplicate the attachment point is only obvious modification of Murata since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8. In this case, the more attachment points, the more connections it provides for reliability of the system, but the functionality of the circuit does not change.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JPHO7275185
A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168), Bayer et al. (US 20080130108 A1) and Fago (WO 2007027567 Al) as applied to claim 10 above and in further view of Wakizaka (JP 2010088552 A).
Regarding claim 15, The combination of Kobayashi, Jetton, Bayer and Fago discloses all the limitations
of claim 10.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein the medical imaging device is a microscope.
However, Wakizaka discloses in at least figure 1, wherein the medical imaging device isa
microscope (thin walled cap 11 can be cover for a microscope paragraph [0036)).
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the
claimed invention to use the cover of Kobayashi on a microscope as taught by Wakizaka. The cap is used
in a contaminated environment that requires cleaning (paragraph [0036]).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kobayashi (JPHO7275185 A) in view of Jetton (US 20180266168), Bayer et al. (US 20080130108 A1) as applied to claim 3 above and in further view of Law et al. (US 20170273539 A1).
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Kobayashi, Jetton and Bayer discloses all the limitations of claim 3.
Kobayashi does not disclose, wherein a distance between opposing snaps of the at least two attachment portions configured as resilient snap-fit members is greater than a corresponding dimension of the imaging front side of the medical imaging device, such that the resilient snap-fit members are configured to be elastically undeformed when initially positioned against the imaging front side and to elastically deform only upon movement beyond the imaging front side toward corresponding attachment portions of the medical imaging device.
However Law discloses in at least figure 1, wherein a distance between opposing snaps (snap distance as shown below in fig. 1) of the at least two attachment portions (attachment features 124 fig. 1) configured as resilient snap-fit members (the endoscope body 120 is connected with attachment element 122 including attachment features 124 which can wrap and either slidingly fit around the electronic device 102, deform to snap-fit over the device fig. 1) is greater than (the snap distance is greater than the length f the electronic device as shown below in fig. 1) a corresponding dimension (length of the inside of the ecteronic device as shown below in fig. 1) of the imaging front side (inside of ecteronic device 102 as shown below in fig. 1) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device above), such that the resilient snap-fit members (the endoscope body 120 is connected with attachment element 122 including attachment features 124 which can wrap and either slidingly fit around the electronic device 102, deform to snap-fit over the device fig. 1) are configured to be elastically undeformed when initially positioned against (the attachment features 124 are not initially deformed when against the inside of ecteronic device 102 as shown below in fig. 1) the imaging front side (inside of ecteronic device 102 as shown below in fig. 1) and to elastically deform only upon movement beyond (the attachment features 124 deform to snap fit over the device paragraph [0022]) the imaging front side (inside of ecteronic device 102 as shown below in fig. 1) toward corresponding attachment portions (the attachment features 124 features will fit around the outside of the ecteronic device 102 to hold it in place as shown below in fig. 1) of the medical imaging device (Kobayashi previously disclosed a medical imaging device above).
PNG
media_image5.png
736
852
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Therefore it would be obvious for one skilled in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have the attachment portions be deformable and have a longer length between them than the length of the surface they are being attached too as taught by Law in the of endoscope of Kobayashi. The attachment portions allow for the endoscope to be modular and the device to be portable (paragraph [0026]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cox et al. (US 20130116571 A1) discloses an ultrasound hydrogel insert with a snap fit cover.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW R WRIGHT whose telephone number is (703)756-5822. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30-5 Friday 8-12.
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, Pinping Sun can be reached at 1-571-270-1284. 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.
/ANDREW R WRIGHT/Examiner, Art Unit 2872 /PINPING SUN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2872