DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on July 25, 2025 have been fully considered, but are partially not persuasive. Amongst applicant’s initial arguments, Applicant presents the argument that although Arts briefly discloses the possibility of “rotating” the working head in paragraph 0023, but stated this is done specifically by a rigid complete rotation of the whole device imparted by the hand of the surgeon within the operating cavity. The examiner respectfully disagrees. As can be seen in fig. 1 and in para 0023, Arts clearly shows that the working end (shown in fig. 1, 105 and explained in para 0023) is a separate component connected to the shaft and device which can be rotated independently by the surgeon.
Furthermore, Applicant next argues that Arts is not in the field of ophthalmic surgery, and therefore a person of ordinary skill in the art would have no indication to modify the device of Brennan according to the above feature (the rotatable drum) by looking at Arts because Arts does not disclose:
The rotatable drum
Is not a device suitable to be used in ophthalmic surgery (due to the full rigid rotation of the whole device) and never cites making the different instruments to pass through the same needle cannula.
The examiner respectfully disagrees (partially) with the above statements. First, the disclosure of a rotatable drum (a working end amongst the plurality of working ends) is clearly discussed in paragraph 0010 and in paragraph 0023 regarding the independent rotational motion of the rotatable drum/working end.
Moreover, as previously stated regarding the working end and the movement of the device, the working end (which can be moved independently or in tandem with the shaft as seen in para 0023) can accomplish the same function executed by the claimed invention, making the Arts reference reasonably pertinent to the problem addressed by the claimed invention. See MPEP 2141.01(a)(II)).
In regard to Applicant’s first argument regarding the Arts reference failing to teach the required“ at least one rotatable drum including at least a first receiving seat for receiving said first surgical instrument and at least a second receiving seat for receiving said second surgical instrument and selectively rotatable about said longitudinal axis between at least a first angular position, in which the first receiving seat is aligned with said needle or cannula, and at least a second angular position, in which the second receiving seat is aligned with said needle or cannula”, and applicant’s argument regarding the Arts reference not disclosing the different instruments passing through the same needle cannula have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, previous §103 rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new ground(s) of rejection have been made as seen below in response to applicant’s amendments.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 8, and 11-15 are rejected over 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0148615 A1 to Brennan et al. (hereinafter “Brennan”) in view of US 2010/0057078 A1 to Arts et al. (hereinafter “Arts”) and US 9,060,795 to Meenink.
Regarding claim 1, Brennan teaches:
A vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system (fig. 8A, para 0003 and para 0071, lines 1-3), comprising:
a main body having an elongated shape extending along a longitudinal axis thereof between a first and a second end portion and defining a receiving chamber therein (a main body (para 0083, lines 1-3 and annotated fig. 8B below)
PNG
media_image1.png
748
1295
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a needle or cannula (fig. 8A-8B, 805 and para 0083: “The handpiece 810 comprises a proximal end 806 adjacent a cable interface 807, and
a distal end 804 having a surgical tool 805, such as a needle, extending therefrom.”) departing away from said first end portion up to a free end thereof (see fig. 8A, fig. 8B below-805), and including an inner longitudinal cavity (para 0070: A handpiece may in some embodiments comprise one or more buttons and/or other user interfacing features that allow the surgeon to control the functions of that specific handpiece and/or possibly other functions as well (such as, for example, rates of
infusion or aspiration), wherein at least a first surgical instrument of elongated shape (para 0070 and claim 28-photocoagulation probes are of elongated shape in nature) and including an active end portion/control pressure sensitive buttons and tactile regions (fig. 8A and para 0085-812 and 814) thereof,
a selecting unit/ electrical processing unit operatively connected with said first and second surgical instruments/tools (para 0044), furthermore, Brennan teaches a device (fig. 8A-8B) containing an actuator/ linear actuator (para 0079) and a needle/cannula (fig. 8A-8B, 805 and para 0083), but does not disclose wherein the needle with the longitudinal cavity being in connection with said receiving chamber, and does not disclose wherein the selecting unit accommodated at least partially in said receiving chamber and is configured to arrange the first surgical instrument in the operating position and the second surgical instrument in the resting position, and vice versa, upon a command given by a user.
Furthermore, Brennan does not disclose wherein said first surgical instrument being reversibly movable between a resting position, in which the first surgical instrument is accommodated inside said receiving chamber,
and an operating position, in which the first surgical instrument is arranged crossing said inner longitudinal cavity with said active end portion protruding from the free end of the needle or cannula/shaft and;
at least a second surgical instrument of elongated shape and including an active end portion thereof; said second surgical instrument being reversibly movable between a resting position, in which the second surgical instrument is accommodated inside said receiving chamber, and an operating position, in which the second surgical instrument is arranged crossing said inner longitudinal cavity with said active end portion protruding from the free end of the needle or cannula;
at least a first actuator operatively connected with the first and the second surgical instruments to move said first and second surgical instruments parallel to said longitudinal axis between a retracted position/stored position, in which the first or the second surgical instrument is located within the relative first or second receiving seat of the rotatable drum, and an extracted position, corresponding to said operating position;
at least a second actuator configured to rotate the rotatable drum at least between the first and second angular positions to move each of the first and second surgical instruments between the resting position and an intermediate position, corresponding to said retracted position, or vice versa.
However, Arts discloses, an electrosurgical apparatus for performing a surgical procedure (abstract, line 1). The device/apparatus (fig. 1) discloses where said first surgical instrument (fig. 3, 335a) is reversibly movable between a resting position/stored position, in which it is accommodated inside said receiving chamber (see annotated fig. 3 below and para 0011), and an operating position/ “deployed” or “in use” position, in which it is arranged crossing said inner longitudinal cavity with said active end portion protruding from the free end of the needle or cannula/shaft (see annotated fig. 1 and 2-12, 135 below and para 0021). Furthermore, Arts discloses at least a second surgical instrument (fig. 3, 335c) of elongated shape and provided with an active end portion (fig. 4A-4B, 436a) thereof, and said second surgical instrument being reversibly movable between a resting position, in which it is accommodated inside said receiving chamber (see fig. 3 below-335c), and an operating position, in which it is arranged crossing said inner longitudinal cavity with said active end portion protruding from the free end of the needle/shaft or cannula/tube (fig. 4A, 402 and 436a and para 0032). Lastly, Arts teaches a selecting unit/working end and universal coupling (see fig. 3, 305 and 315, para 0028) associated with said first and second surgical instruments/plurality of surgical instruments (see fig. 1 and fig. 3-335a, 335c, and para 0028) accommodated at least partially in said receiving chamber (see annotated fig. 3 below) and configured to arrange the first surgical instrument in the operating position and the second surgical instrument in the resting position, and vice versa, upon a command given by a user (see para 0011 and see para 0023 (first sentence) and para 0023 sentence presented here: “Moreover, each instrument, e.g., instrument 125, may be rotated into place and deployed (via controllers 20 and actuators 115a and 115b) either separately or
in tandem as needed”).
PNG
media_image2.png
582
1012
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
600
1014
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
512
1218
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and wherein said selecting unit comprises at least one rotatable drum/working end (one working end/a different working end of a plurality of working ends) (see para 0020-0023, para 0036, and fig. 1, 105)
including at least a first receiving seat/channel for receiving said first surgical instrument (para 0021 and fig. 2, 107a) and at least a second receiving seat/channel for receiving said second surgical instrument (para 0021 and fig. 2, 107c) and, selectively rotatable about said longitudinal axis (see para 0023 and annotated fig. 2 below) in which the first receiving seat/channel is aligned with said needle or cannula/shaft (see fig. 1, 12, fig. 2, 107a, and para 0020), and at least a second position in which the second receiving seat/another receiving seat or channel (fig. 2, 107c) is aligned with said needle or cannula/shaft (fig. 1, 20 and fig. 2, 107c), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the drum is selectively rotatable about said longitudinal axis between at least a first angular position, and at least a second angular position. Furthermore, Arts teaches at least a first and second actuator (see fig. 2, 115b and para 0023) operatively connected with the first and the second surgical instruments to move said first and second surgical instruments parallel to said longitudinal axis between a retracted position/stored position (fig. 2, 115a-115b, fig. 4A-4C, para 0023, and para 0010-0011), in which the first or the second surgical instrument is located within the relative first or second receiving seat/channel of the rotatable drum (fig. 1, 105), and an extracted position, corresponding to said operating/deployed position (para 0011, para 0023, and 0025), but does not explicitly disclose at least a second actuator configured to rotate the rotatable drum at least between the first and second angular positions to move each of the first and second surgical instruments between the resting position and an intermediate position, corresponding to said retracted position, or vice versa.
PNG
media_image5.png
462
1449
media_image5.png
Greyscale
However, Meenink teaches a surgical robot for performing minimally invasive surgery to a patient’s eye (see abstract, fig. 2, and col. 5, lines 21-39). The system (fig. 2) contains an actuator system (see col. 5, lines 21-29) containing a motor and a gear (see fig. 4, 122, col. 5, lines 52-67, and col. 6, lines 1-16), and a plurality of surgical instruments angularly situated (see figs. 3-4, 30 and 42) in a rotatable drum/ container (see fig. 4, 30 and col. 5 “Instrument container 30 is part-cylindrical shaped and includes five container holders 32, 32' for receiving therein four surgical instruments 42 and one surgical instrument 42”), and wherein each of the first and second surgical instruments between resting position (unused surgical instrument) and an active position/used position (in which the surgical instrument is being used or about to be used) by moving in a revolver-like fashion (figs. 3-4, col. 6, lines 50-67 and col. 7, lines 1-4). Meenink does not explicitly disclose wherein the second actuator is configured to move the instrument from resting to intermediate position.
However, Price discloses an apparatus and method for subretinal delivery of a therapeutic agent (abstract and fig. 1). The device (fig. 1) contains a needle actuator configured to translate distal and proximal movements of a needle relative to the cannula in response to the turning of a rotary knob (para 000105). Furthermore, the device (fig. 1) also contains a multi-colored LED system operated through the use of a knob and pushbutton in order to confirm if the needle/surgical instrument located in the surgical assembly is first in a retracted/resting position, then in the second/intermediate position, or lastly in the advanced/active position within the cannula (para 00099).
Therefore, 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 combine the teachings of Brennan with the teachings of Arts, Meenink, and Price to arrive at the claimed invention. Such combination would improve the system by allowing the surgeon to effortlessly switch between two different surgical instruments (or more if needed) while maintaining focus on the surgical site, ultimately increasing the speed, accuracy, and safety of the surgical procedure.
Regarding claim 2, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 1 (fig. 8A-8B) configured to receive an input signal and output a control signal to control the surgical instrument following a command (button input command) given by a user/surgeon (claim 1: “the pressure-sensitive button further comprising a pressure detection device, the pressure detection device configured
to enable output of a signal for controlling a function of the surgical tool, the signal being proportional to a position of the actuation surface”, claim 12, and claim 15) , but does not disclose wherein said selecting unit is alternatively configured to:
move said first surgical instrument from the resting position to the operating position and the second surgical instrument from the operating position to the resting position upon receiving a first signal representative of a selection of said first surgical instrument;
move said second surgical instrument from the resting position to the operating position and the first surgical instrument from the operating position to the resting position upon receiving a second signal representative of a selection of said second surgical instrument.
However, Arts disclose moving a first surgical instrument from the resting position to the operating position and the second surgical instrument from the operating position/ “deployed” or “in use” position to the resting position/”stored” position upon receiving a first signal/feedback or indexing information representative of a selection of said first surgical instrument (para 0010-0011, para 0020, 0023, 0025, and 0030), and
moving a second surgical instrument from the resting/stored position to the operating/deployed position and the first surgical instrument from the operating/deployed position to the resting/stored position upon receiving a second signal/feedback or indexing information representative of a selection/operation of said second surgical instrument (para 0010-0011, para 0020, 0023, 0025, and 0030).
Therefore, 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 modify the system of Brennan with the teachings of Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would allow the surgeon/user to independently control which surgical instrument(s) are engaged/disengaged, ultimately reducing the time period of the surgical procedure while ensuring patient safety.
Regarding claim 3, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 2 (fig. 8A-8B) comprising a control element/ button arranged outside of the main body (fig. 8A-8B-808, para 0083, and claim 1: “the pressure-sensitive button further comprising a pressure detection device, the pressure detection device configured
to enable output of a signal for controlling a function of the surgical tool, the signal being proportional to a position of the actuation surface”), but does not disclose wherein said selecting unit comprising a control element arranged at least partially outside said main body and operable by the user is used to generate said first and said second signals for control of the surgical instruments.
However, Arts discloses wherein a selecting unit/working end comprises a control element/instrument controller (fig. 1, 20 and para 0020) arranged at least partially outside said main body (para 0028, lines 1-6 and fig. 1, 20) and operable by the user/surgeon to generate said first and said second signals/ indexing information for control of the surgical instruments (para 0020,0025,0028, and 0030).
Therefore, 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 modify the system of Brennan with the teachings of Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would enhance the system by allowing the user to have easily control over all surgical instruments, ultimately reducing the surgeon’s fatigue and reducing the time spent performing the surgical procedure.
Regarding claim 5, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 1 (fig. 8A-8B) containing an actuator/ linear actuator (para 0079) and a needle/cannula (fig. 8A-8B, 805 and para 0083), but does not disclose wherein said first actuator comprises at least one thrust element substantially aligned with a central axis of said needle or cannula.
However, Arts discloses a medical apparatus (fig. 1) containing an actuator/deployment actuator (para 0020- 320, para 0025, and para 0005: “An actuator is included and dimensioned for selective reciprocation within the shaft and configured to operably engage one or more of the corresponding plurality of surgical instruments and deploy the surgical instrument to an operating cavity as needed during a surgical procedure.”) comprising a thrust element/universal coupling (para 0028 and fig. 3, 315) substantially aligned with the central axis of the needle or cannula/tube ( see annotated fig. 3 below).
PNG
media_image6.png
294
709
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Brennan with Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such combination would improve the device by ensuring the surgical tool/instrument is properly and fully deployed prior to use during the surgical procedure.
Regarding claim 8, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 5 (fig. 8A-8B), wherein the device contains a needle located at the distal end of the handheld device (fig. 8A-8B, para 0083, 805), but does not disclose wherein:
in the operating position of the first surgical instrument, the rotatable drum is positioned in the first angular position and the thrust element operative with the first surgical instrument is arranged in an extracted position, at least partially accommodated inside said first receiving seat;
in the operating position of the second surgical instrument, the rotatable drum is positioned in the second angular position and the thrust element operative with the second surgical instrument is arranged in an extracted position, at least partially accommodated inside said second receiving seat.
However, Arts discloses wherein, in the position of the first surgical instrument (fig. 2, 125), the rotatable drum/working end (figs. 1-2, 105) is positioned so that the first receiving seat/ channel (fig. 2, 107a) is aligned with the shaft of the device (fig. 1, 14d and 12) and the thrust element (coupling and deployment tool) (fig. 3, 322 and 320, and para 0028) operative with the first surgical instrument/both surgical instruments (fig. 3, 307a and 322a) is arranged in an extracted position, at least partially accommodated inside said first receiving seat/channel (fig. 2 and fig. 5). Furthermore, Arts discloses that in the position of the second surgical instrument (fig. 2-135), the rotatable drum/working end is positioned so that the second receiving seat/channel (fig. 2, 107c) is aligned with the shaft of the device (fig. 1, 14b and 12) and the thrust element (universal coupling and deployment tool) (fig. 3, 322c and 320, and para 0028) operative with the second surgical instrument/both surgical instruments is arranged in an extracted position, at least partially accommodated inside said second receiving seat/channel (fig. 2). Arts does not disclose wherein the rotatable drum performs this function while being positioned in a first and second angular position.
However, Meenink teaches a surgical robot for performing minimally invasive surgery to a patient’s eye (see abstract, fig. 2, and col. 5, lines 21-39). The system (fig. 2) contains an actuator system (see col. 5, lines 21-29) containing a motor and a gear (see fig. 4, 122, col. 5, lines 52-67, and col. 6, lines 1-16), and a plurality of surgical instruments angularly situated (see figs. 3-4, 30 and 42) in a rotatable drum/ container (see fig. 4, 30 and col. 5 “Instrument container 30 is part-cylindrical shaped and includes five container holders 32, 32' for receiving therein four surgical instruments 42 and one surgical instrument 42”), and wherein each of the first and second surgical instruments between resting position (unused surgical instrument) and an active position/used position (in which the surgical instrument is being used or about to be used) by moving in a revolver-like fashion (figs. 3-4, col. 6, lines 50-67 and col. 7, lines 1-4). Due to the angular arrangement of the first and second instruments and the revolver-like movement of the rotatable drum/container (fig. 4, 30), the rotatable drum can be position in first and second angular position for control of the surgical instruments.
Therefore, 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 modify the system of Brennan with the teachings of Arts and Meenink to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would improve the system by allowing the surgeon to have proper control of each surgical instrument while maintaining contact with each instrument channel.
Regarding claim 11, Brennan as modified teaches a vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 1, wherein each first or second surgical instrument/ surgical instruments comprises an actuation member(s) (para 0114-0115) configured to drive/control the respective surgical instrument upon receiving a driving signal/ output signal (para 0113, para 0118, para 0127, and para 0136), but does not explicitly disclose wherein an actuation member is configured to drive/ control one of the first and second surgical instruments.
However, Arts discloses wherein an actuation member/controller is configured to drive/ control one of the first and second surgical instrument/instruments upon receiving a drive signal (see fig. 1, 20 and para 0023).
Therefore, 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 modify the modified system of Brennan with the teachings of Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would improve the system by allowing proper control of each surgical instrument during each specific step(s) of the surgical procedure.
Regarding claim 12, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 11, comprising one or more surgical instruments (0070) and a drive signal/ output signal and driving system/motor configuration and transmission drive system (para 0136, second sentence) for controlling a surgical instrument using an input/command by the user/surgeon (para 0081, first two sentences and claim 1: “ the pressure-sensitive button further comprising a pressure detection device, the pressure detection device configured to enable output of a signal for controlling a function of the surgical tool, the signal being proportional to a position of the actuation surface.”), but does not explicitly disclose wherein the drive system is operatively connected with an actuation member of the first and second surgical instruments, and configured to send a driving signal to the respective actuation member upon a command given by the user.
However, Arts discloses a drive system/actuator operatively connected with a drive member/coupling (see para 0028, last two sentences) configured to send a drive signal through an electrical connection or sensors in order to send a message to the couplings/actuation members (para 0028: The universal coupling 315 may be multifunctional and include one or more actuators, cables or electrical connections that enable the surgeon to engage, deploy, rotate, articulate, extend and otherwise operate the surgical instrument (or components thereof, e.g., various electrically-controlled operating components (motors, solenoids, gears, etc.) during use., para 0029, and 0031) upon a command given by a user/surgeon.
Therefore, 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 modify the modified system of Brennan with the teachings Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would improve the system by allowing proper deployment and retraction of the surgical instruments, ultimately ensuring the safety of both the patient and surgeon when performing the surgical procedure.
Regarding claim 13, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 12 (fig. 8A-8B), wherein said driving system (transmission driving systems or motor configuration) (para 0136) comprises at least one interface member/button (para 0115, para 0136 (piezoelectric material vibration)), and configured to detect a command by the user and to generate a representative signal of said command (claim 1: “the pressure-sensitive button further comprising a pressure detection device, the pressure detection device configured to enable output of a signal for controlling a function of the surgical tool”).
Regarding claim 14, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 12 (fig. 8A-8B), wherein said driving system (transmission driving systems or motor configuration) (para 0136) comprises a control unit (microcontroller or processor) configured to receive said representative signal/information and to generate said driving/control signal (para 0081, last two sentences, claim 12, and claim 15).
Regarding claim 15, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 1 (fig. 8A-8B), but does not disclose further comprising a third and/or fourth
However, Arts discloses a catheter/surgical instrument device containing four channels (107a-107d) within a main body (housing with shaft) (fig. 1, 16 and 12) used to house a corresponding number of surgical instruments (para 0021, lines 1-5). Furthermore, even though the device (fig. 1) only displays two instruments in two channels (fig. 2) the device (fig. 1) contains four channels to allow the user/surgeon to use four instruments at a time, or allows the surgeon to have more channels available in case new or unanticipated instruments may need to be introduced during the procedure (para 0023, last sentence).
Therefore, 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 modify the modified teachings of Brennan with the teachings of Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such modification would improve the present invention by allowing the surgeon to have easy access and control to a plurality of surgical instruments during surgery, allowing the surgeon to perform the surgical procedure at a faster rate.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Brennan, in view of Arts and Meenink, and further in view of WO 2020/101489 A1 to Dam-Huisman et al. (hereinafter “Dam”) and US 5,554,155 to Awh et al. (hereinafter “Awh”).
Regarding claim 10, Brennan as modified teaches the vitreoretinal surgery device/ophthalmic surgical system according to claim 1 (fig. 8A-8b), containing instruments (para 0070), wherein a plurality of instruments (said first and second surgical instruments) inside the handpiece could include the following:
endovitreal forceps/forceps of any type (para 0070, line 13-14);
back-flush cannula/tube, with silicone protection or without silicone protection (see para 0133-0134, para 0135-emphasis on last two sentences, and para 0140), and
endovitreal forceps (para 0070, line 13-14);
straight-laser endophotocoagulation probe/photocoagulation probe (0070: Handpieces in some embodiments may comprise one or more of vitreous cutters/aspirators, end illuminators, laser therapy/photocoagulation probes”), and an diathermy instrument (para 0030, first 3 sentences),
but does not disclose wherein the instruments include an endodiathermy coagulator, vitrectome of any cutting speed or aspect, and spatulas or hooks.
However, Arts discloses a device that can utilize a plurality of different surgical instruments (which can include coagulators) (para 0006), but does not disclose a vitrectome instrument and spatulas/hooks.
However, Dam discloses an ophthalmic cutting tool and actuator system (abstract). The system (fig. 3) is an actuator system used to control a vitrectome/vitrectomy ophthalmic cutting tool (page 1, para 5). Dam does not disclose wherein the instrument contains spatulas or hooks.
However, Awh discloses a multi-functional pick manipulator/ vitreoretinal pick instrument/hook that can be used during intraocular surgery (abstract and col. 1, lines 5-13).
Therefore, 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 combine the teachings/instruments or Dam and Awh with the modified system of Brennan and Arts to arrive at the claimed invention, since such combination would improve the system and would have led to a reasonable expectation for success, ultimately decreasing time of the surgical procedure by allowing the surgeon to have direct and easy access to many commonly used ophthalmic surgical instruments during the surgical procedure.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lo et al. (US 5, 275, 607) discloses intraocular scissors contained within a handpiece which supports a detachable assembly of elongated relatively reciprocable blade members used for intraocular surgery.
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 KARMEL J WEBSTER whose telephone number is (703)756-5960. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm.
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, NIKETA PATEL can be reached at 571-272-4156. 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.
/K.J.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/JOHN R DOWNEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792