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
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed 11 December 2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-6 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 2 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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ashiya et al. (US 5,947,925).
Regarding claim 1, Ashiya discloses a catheter (Fig. 2, 3) comprising a shaft (Fig. 2, 4), the shaft comprising:
a first lumen (Fig. 2, 34) configured to communicate from a proximal end to a distal end of the shaft and having an opening area (Col. 5, lines 3-12); and
a second lumen (Fig. 2, 32) positioned on an outer periphery side of the first lumen (Fig. 2, where 32 and 34 run parallel to each other and 32 is located on an upper side of the catheter), configured to communicate from a proximal end side to a distal end side of the shaft (Fig. 2, where 32 runs from the proximal end towards the balloon 36), and having an opening area that is smaller than the opening area of the first lumen in a transverse section of the shaft (Fig. 4-5, where the lumen 32 is smaller than the lumen surrounding the guidewire 2, see annotated figure below),
PNG
media_image1.png
694
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein a dimension in a first direction in which the first lumen and the second lumen are aligned at a distal end portion of the shaft is less than a dimension in the first direction in a proximal end portion that is closer to the proximal side than the distal end portion of the shaft (Fig. 2, where the lumen 32 is aligned at a proximal end and the lumen 32 turns and is shorter than the lumen 34 at the distal end),
an opening width in the first direction of the second lumen in a transverse section of the distal end portion of the shaft is smaller than an opening width in the first direction of the second lumen in a transverse section of the proximal end portion of the shaft (Fig. 2 & 4, where the opening of 32 is smaller than the diameter of the lumen 34 that surrounds guidewire 2, see annotated figure below), and
PNG
media_image1.png
694
596
media_image1.png
Greyscale
in the distal end portion of the shaft, a thickness on the first lumen side in the first direction is larger than a thickness on the second lumen side in the first direction (Fig. 2, where the shaft 4 is thicker on a top portion than a bottom portion where 34 is located).
Regarding claim 2, Ashiya discloses the catheter according to Claim 1, wherein an opening width in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction of the second lumen in the transverse section of the distal end portion of the shaft is larger than an opening width in the second direction of the second lumen in the transverse section of the proximal end portion of the shaft (Fig. 5-6, where the opening of 32 has a smaller width in figure 5 and in figure 6 the opening 32 has a larger width in another section, additionally, the width of the lumen 32 is not limited to a specific range at a point, col. 5, lines 35-38).
Regarding claim 3, Ashiya discloses the catheter according to Claim 2, wherein an opening area of the second lumen in the transverse section of the distal end portion of the shaft is substantially the same as an opening area of the second lumen in the transverse section of the proximal end portion of the shaft (Fig. 2, 32, where the opening area is substantially the same and the width of the opening is not limited, col 5, lines 35-38, meaning the opening can be shaped accordingly to be “substantially” the same).
Regarding claim 4, Ashiya discloses the catheter according to Claim 1, further comprising a balloon (Fig. 2, 36) joined to the distal end portion of the shaft and configured to communicate with the second lumen (Fig. 2, where 36 is connected with 32).
Regarding claim 5, Ashiya discloses the catheter according to Claim 2, further comprising a balloon joined to the distal end portion of the shaft and configured to communicate with the second lumen (Fig. 2, where 36 is connected with 32).
Regarding claim 6, Ashiya discloses the catheter according to Claim 3, further comprising a balloon joined to the distal end portion of the shaft and configured to communicate with the second lumen (Fig. 2, where 36 is connected with 32).
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 HADEN M RITCHIE whose telephone number is (703)756-1699. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5:30pm.
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, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at 571-272-3383. 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.
/HADEN MATTHEW RITCHIE/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/BHISMA MEHTA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights