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
Amendments to claims 1, 12 of 11/7/2025 acknowledged and entered.
New claims 13, 14 of 11/7/2025 acknowledged and entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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
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 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, 12, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakade (WO 2011086735 A1) .
Regarding claim 1, Nakade teaches An endoscope, comprising:
an endoscope insertion portion (fig. 1, element 2, p. 2, para. 7, insertion portion 2) provided with a bending portion;
an operation portion (fig. 1, element 3, p. 2, para. 7, operation portion 3) connected with the endoscope insertion portion;
an operation member (fig. 1, element 16a/b, p. 3, para. 4, operation knob 16a/b) provided in the operation portion, the operation member having a surface, which when moved, is configured to perform a bending operation on the bending portion;
a pulley (fig. 5a/b, element 22a, p. 3, para. 5, first pulley 22a) provided in the operation portion, the pulley being separated from a proximal end of the endoscope insertion section in a longitudinal direction, the pulley having an outer diameter larger than an inner diameter of the endoscope insertion portion (fig. 2 illustrates operation wires 27 converging and narrowing to fit into the insertion portion), and the pulley configured to wind a wire (fig. 5a, element 27, p. 4, para. 5, operation wires 27), the wire being disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the pulley (fig. 5a) connected to the bending portion; and
a wire guard (fig. 5a, element 28, p. 4, para. 2, cylindrical guide portion 28) having a guide wall (fig. 4, element 28, inner surface of guide portion 28) arranged to cover a predetermined range of the outer circumferential surface of the pulley, the predetermined range including:
a first outer circumferential surface portion of the pulley where the wire separates from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley; and
a second outer circumferential surface portion of the pulley where the wire is separated from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley and intersects with the guide wall;
wherein, when the pulley rotates, a length in the longitudinal direction between where the wire separates from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley and where the wire is separated from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley and intersects with the guide wall is smaller than a radius of the pulley (fig. 5a, element 27a, the distance between the section of the pulley where the wire 27a leaves the pulley 22a and contacts the guide 28 is less than the radius of the pulley in the drawing); and
the pulley moves relative to the wire guard (p. 4, para. 2, wire guide portion is fixed to the substrate by screws and does not rotate with the pulley).
Regarding claim 12, Nakade teaches An endoscope, comprising:
an endoscope insertion portion ((fig. 1, element 2, p. 2, para. 7, insertion portion 2) provided with a bending portion;
an operation portion (fig. 1, element 3, p. 2, para. 7, operation portion 3) connected with the endoscope insertion portion;
an operation member (fig. 1, element 16a/b, p. 3, para. 4, operation knob 16a/b) provided in the operation portion, the operation member having a surface, which when moved, is configured to perform a bending operation on the bending portion;
a pulley (fig. 5a/b, element 22a, p. 3, para. 5, first pulley 22a) provided in the operation portion, the pulley having an outer diameter larger than an inner diameter of the endoscope insertion portion (fig. 2 illustrates operation wires 27 converging and narrowing to fit into the insertion portion), and the pulley configured to wind a wire (fig. 5a, element 27, p. 4, para. 5, operation wires 27)connected to the bending portion, the wire being disposed on an outer circumferential surface of the pulley; and
a wire guard (fig. 5a, element 28, p. 4, para. 2, cylindrical guide portion 28) having a guide wall (fig. 4, element 28, inner surface of guide portion 28) arranged to cover a predetermined range of the outer circumferential surface of the pulley, the predetermined range including:
a first outer circumferential surface portion of the pulley where the wire separates from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley; and
a second outer circumferential surface portion of the pulley where the wire is separated from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley and intersects with the guide wall (fig. 5a, element 27a, the distance between the section of the pulley where the wire 27a leaves the pulley 22a and contacts the guide 28 is less than the radius of the pulley in the drawing) ; and
the pulley moves relative to the wire guard (p. 4, para. 2, wire guide portion is fixed to the substrate by screws and does not rotate with the pulley).
Regarding claim 13, Nakade teaches The endoscope according to claim 1,
wherein the wire guard is radially outside all portions of the pulley (fig. 5a, element 28, the guide is separated and outside the pulley).
Regarding claim 14, Nakade teaches The endoscope according to claim 1,
wherein the wire guard is radially outside all portions of the pulley (fig. 5a, element 28, the guide is separated and outside the pulley).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-6, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nakade in view of Hijihara (US 20170238787 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Nakade teaches The endoscope according to claim 1,
Nakade does not explicitly teach the device wherein the endoscope insertion portion is closer to an extended end of the guide wall than a contact point position where the wire separates from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley.
However, Hijihara teaches the device wherein the endoscope insertion portion is closer to an extended end of the guide wall than a contact point position where the wire separates from the outer circumferential surface of the pulley (Fig. 2, element 12, support plate 12 upon which the wire guide is disposed has an end proximate to the insertion portion).
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 have modified the guide of Nakade to be disposed closer to the insertion portion in order to better arrange the operation wires (Nakade [0043]).
Regarding claim 3, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 2,
Further, Hijihara teaches the device wherein the endoscope insertion portion is closer to the guide wall than a rotation center of the pulley (Fig. 2, element 12, support plate 12 upon which the wire guide is disposed has an end proximate to the insertion portion).
Regarding claim 4, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 2,
Further, Nakade teaches the device wherein the guide wall is disposed in parallel to a longitudinal axis of the wire (fig. 5a, guide 28 is a concentric circle to the pulley 22a upon which the guide wire wraps).
Regarding claim 5, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 2,
Further, Hijihara teaches the device wherein the wire guard is disposed such that a gap is defined between an inner surface of the wire guard and the outer circumferential surface of the pulley, the gap being equal to or smaller than an outer diameter of the wire (fig. 4c, element 40, [0056] wires contain screwing members whose radii are greater than or equal to the distance between pulley and guard, securing the wire).
Regarding claim 6, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 10,
Further, Hijihara teaches the device wherein the endoscope insertion portion is closer to a coupling section of the coupling parts than the pulley (Fig. 2, element 12, support plate 12 upon which the wire guide is disposed has an end proximate to the insertion portion).
Regarding claim 8, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 2,
Nakade does not explicitly teach a device further comprising: a pulley cover overlapping the pulley, wherein the pulley cover includes a locking member configured to engage with a locking claw protruding from one surface of the pulley, and is attached and fixed to the pulley.
However, Hijihara teaches a device further comprising: a pulley cover (fig. 9a, element 65, [0113], step portion 65) overlapping the pulley, wherein the pulley cover includes a locking member (fig. 9a, element 66, stop claw 66) configured to engage with a locking claw (fig. 9a, element 72g, [0113-114], tooth portions 72g of the ratchet gear, which engages and restricts rotation) protruding from one surface of the pulley, and is attached and fixed to the pulley.
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 have modified the pulley of Appling to include a toothed locking member as taught in Hijihara in order to mechanically restrict rotation of the pulley (Hijihara [0113-114]).
Regarding claim 9, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 1,
Further, Hijihara teaches the device wherein the wire guard is disposed such that a gap between an inner surface of the wire guard and the outer circumferential surface of the pulley, the gap being equal to or smaller than an outer diameter of the wire (fig. 4c, element 40, [0056] wires contain screwing members whose radii are greater than or equal to the distance between pulley and guard, securing the wire).
Regarding claim 10, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 1,
Further, Nakade teaches the device wherein the wire guard includes, two members (fig. 4, element 28, p. 4, para. 4, the guard can be subdivided into two surfaces that interface with the separate grooves 31a/b) each formed in a substantially semicircular plate shape, and coupling parts (fig. 3, element 29, p. 4, para. 2, cylinder part 20 formed integrally with guide part 28) formed in arc shapes extending from an end portion of each of the two members, the coupling parts configured to couple the two members and form a circular shape to cover the predetermined range of the outer circumferential surface of the pulley.
Regarding claim 11, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 10,
Further, Nakade teaches the device wherein the coupling parts are formed in arc shapes extending from the end portion of each of the two members (fig. 3, element 29, p. 4, para. 2, cylinder part 20 formed integrally with guide part 28).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakade in view of Hijihara as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Appling (US 20210212553 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Nakade in view of Hijihara teaches The endoscope according to claim 2,
Nakade teaches a device further comprising: a substrate (fig. 3, element 21, p. 4, para. 2, substrate 21) disposed in the operation portion
Nakade does not explicitly teach a substrate disposed in the operation portion and on which an electronic component is mounted; and
a plate is provided between the wire and the substrate.
However, Appling teaches a device further comprising: a substrate (fig. 2, element 19, [0046], data card 19) disposed in the operation portion and on which an electronic component is mounted; and
a plate is provided between the wire and the substrate (fig. 2, element 36, [0046], compartment 36 is separated from the main body by 2 plate protrusions. Compartment 36 falls between the cams 68/70 where the wires 38/40 are located and the distal base of the handle where the cord is located, see fig. 1, element 18 which connects to the data card 19).
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 have modified the substrate of Nakade to include electronic devices as taught in Appling in order to interface with data received at the distal tip (Appling [0046]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY TUAN LUU whose telephone number is (703)756-4592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-Friday.
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, Michael Carey can be reached on 5712707235. 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.
/TIMOTHY TUAN LUU/ Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795