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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 12/09/2022fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because a legible and translated version of the internation search report has not been provided. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1 and 11 recite “as same as” but should recite “the same as”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
Basic part in claims 1, 8, and 9
Rotary part in claims 1- 2, 4- 8, and 11
Manipulation portion in claim 2
Winding portion in claims 2-3
Wire securing member in claims 4-5
Self-locking portion in claims 6-7
Locking member in claims 6-7
Fixation member in claims 7
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
Basic part is described as a base body connected with the catheter fixture in a matched manner.
Rotary part is described as a manipulation portion and a winding portion that are sequentially connected along an axial direction.
Manipulation portion is described as is a toothed wheel with multiple grooves.
Winding portion is described as at least two axial shaft sections with different outer diameters.
Wire securing member is described as a wire anchor having a first external thread, a securing hook, a securing ring or the like.
Self-locking portion is described as a plurality of grooves arranged circumferentially about the rotational axis of the rotary part.
Locking member is described as a spring plunger comprising a fixation member, an elastic element and a stop ball.
Fixation member is described as a cylindrical sleeve.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 7 and 19, the claims recite “the corresponding groove” without antecedent proper basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Dixon teaches a control handle for an implant delivery device (for example fig 60a), wherein the control handle comprises a rotary part (see annotated figure 60a), and a rotational axis of the rotary part is not coplanar with an axis of the catheter (see annotated figure, axis is vertical ), and wherein the rotary part is fixedly coupled to a proximal end of a control wire (see pull wires 135 and 136 in n fig 60a/b) and is configured to rotate to cause the control wire to be wound thereon ([0233], [0224]).
Dixon does not exactly disclose a basic part configuration. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) with a basic part (base 1308) and a rotary part (the rotational elements in fig 17-22), wherein the basic part (base 1308 ) is configured to connect a flexible catheter (catheter 1000) in a catheter assembly([0091]) , the basic part having an axial direction that is as same as an axial direction of the flexible catheter (see fig 21), wherein the rotary part is rotatably coupled to the basic part ([0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
PNG
media_image1.png
307
1013
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated figure 60a
Regarding claim 2, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a manipulation portion and a winding portion that are sequentially connected along an axial direction of the rotary part (see annotated figure 60a), wherein the manipulation portion (5901/5905, fig 60a) has a radial outer size greater than a radial outer size of the winding portion (5903/5904, fig 60a), and wherein the winding portion is configured for winding of the control wire thereon (see fig 61, [0224]).
Regarding claim 3, Dixon further teaches wherein the winding portion comprises at least two axial shaft sections with different outer diameters (see fig 60a/b, 5903 and 5904).
Regarding claim 4, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a wire securing member (see part of shaft where wire wraps, fig 60a/b), to the proximal end of the control wire through the wire securing member (see part of shaft where wire wraps, fig 60a/b).
Claim(s) 5 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and in further view of Cheng (CN 211985521 U).
Regarding claim 5, Dixon does not exactly disclose the details of a wire securing member. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) wherein the wire securing member comprises ([0091], the features involved in securing the wire) a wire anchor (disk 1314) having a wherein the rotary part comprises an axial blind bore ([0091], entrance to wire aperture where wire passes into) and a radial wire aperture ([0091], wire aperture), wherein the blind bore is in communication with the wire aperture (inherent), wherein the blind bore is configured for an insertion of the proximal end of the control wire therein through the wire aperture ([0091]) and secures the control wire ([0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the wire securing apparatus, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, wire securing elements, according to known methods, to yield predictable results of securing a wire through an aperture (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding an anchor screwed into a blind bore by external/internal threads. Cheng teaches a catheter handle (abstract) that utilizes threading to screw together catheter parts (see entire document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu, by applying the teaching of a threaded catheter part fixation method, as taught by Cheng, because it would be obvious to try using a finite number of simple fixation methods known in the art, to achieve a reasonable expectation of success of securing catheter handle parts (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 8, Dixon does not exactly disclose the details of a basic part. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) wherein a rotation of the rotary part with respect to the basic part is converted into an axial translation of the rotary part with respect to the basic part (see fig 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a rotary part screwed into a basic part by threads. Cheng teaches a catheter handle (abstract) wherein the rotary part comprises a threaded portion having a second external thread (threaded knob, pg. 2 paragraph 11), wherein the basic part has a second internal thread engageable with the second external thread (screw thread part passes through the handle, pg. 2 paragraph 11), wherein the rotary part is threadedly connected to the basic part by the threaded portion (pg. 2 paragraph 11), translation occurs through the second external thread and the second internal thread (structure is capable of this).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu, by applying the teaching of a threaded connection configuration, as taught by Cheng, because it would be obvious to try using a finite number of simple fixation methods known in the art, to achieve a reasonable expectation of success of securing catheter handle parts (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and in further view of Jiang (CN 212016414 U).
Regarding claim 6, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a self-locking portion ([0224], inherent to structure, note wheel is turned in other direction to release tension, so tension is locked until manually released).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a locking portion. Jiang teaches an adjustable catheter (See entire document) wherein the control handle further comprises a locking member (pg. 7, paragraph 2) configured to apply a resistive torque to the self-locking portion to limit a rotation of the rotary part when a rotating torque is smaller than the resistive torque (pg. 7, paragraph 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the locking portion configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a locking portion, according to known methods, known method of spring plunger locking, to yield predictable results of precisely locking components of a catheter as desired (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 7, Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a locking portion. Jiang teaches an adjustable catheter (See entire document) wherein the self-locking portion comprises a plurality of grooves arranged circumferentially about the rotational axis of the rotary part (see grooves in element 553 in fig 6), wherein the locking member (pg. 7, components in paragraph 1-3) comprises a spring plunger (pg. 7, paragraph 2, spring ball plunger) comprising a fixation member (pg. 7, paragraph 2,driving member), an elastic element (pg. 6, paragraph 8, elastic piece/member) and a stop ball (pg. 7, paragraph 2, ball), wherein the stop ball is coupled to the fixation member by the elastic element (pg. 7, paragraph 2, elastically propped), wherein the fixation member is fixedly coupled to the basic part (pg. 7, paragraph 2, handle shell), wherein the stop ball is brought into abutment against the corresponding groove by an elastic force provided by the elastic element ([0091],see grooves in element 553 in fig 6), thereby applying the resistive torque to the self-locking portion (pg. 7, paragraph 2, elastically propped).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the locking portion configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a locking portion, according to known methods, known method of spring plunger locking, to yield predictable results of precisely locking components of a catheter as desired (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and in further view of Castoldi (US 20090182200 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Dixon further teaches wherein the catheter fixture is configured for an insertion of a proximal end of the flexible catheter therein (see catheter 1114, fig 60a/b).
Dixon does not exactly disclose a basic part configuration. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) with a basic part (base 1308) wherein the basic part (base 1308) comprises a hollow catheter fixture oriented in the axial direction of the basic part ([0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose details of a radial slot. Castoldi teaches a delivery device (See entire document) wherein the catheter fixture comprises a radial wire slot configured for a passage of the control wire therethrough (See entire document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the wire slot, as taught by Castoldi, in order to combine prior art elements, a wire slot, according to known methods, to yield predictable results of allowing a guide wire to exit a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and in further view of Castoldi (US 20090182200 A1) and Cheng (CN 211985521 U).
Regarding claim 10, Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details of a radial slot. Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose details of a radial slot. Castoldi teaches a delivery device (See entire document) further comprising a limiting shell (see figure 5, outer shell piece comprises slot), wherein the wire slot extends in an axial direction of the catheter fixture to a distal end of the catheter fixture (See entire document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the wire slot, as taught by Castoldi, in order to combine prior art elements, a wire slot, according to known methods, to yield predictable results of allowing a guide wire to exit a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu and Castoldi does not exactly disclose the details regarding a limiting shell screwed into a catheter fixture by threads. Cheng teaches a catheter handle (abstract) wherein the catheter fixture is provided at the distal end thereof with a third external thread, and the limiting shell has a third internal thread engageable with the third external thread, and wherein the limiting shell is threadedly connected to the catheter fixture (pg. 10, paragraph 4, catheter and shell can be threadably connected).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu and Castoldi, by applying the teaching of a threaded connection configuration, as taught by Cheng, because it would be obvious to try using a finite number of simple fixation methods known in the art, to achieve a reasonable expectation of success of securing catheter handle parts (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 11-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and Cornish (US 20130253374 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Dixon teaches a control handle for an implant delivery device (for example fig 60a), wherein the control handle comprises a rotary part (see annotated figure 60a), and a rotational axis of the rotary part is not coplanar with an axis of the catheter (see annotated figure, axis is vertical ), and wherein the rotary part is fixedly coupled to a proximal end of a control wire (see pull wires 135 and 136 in n fig 60a/b) and is configured to rotate to cause the control wire to be wound thereon ([0233], [0224]) and wherein the control wire comprises a first traction wire segment (proximal end of wire) and a second traction wire segment (distal end of wire/ 135a/136a), wherein the first traction wire segment is fixedly coupled at a proximal end thereof to the rotary part (proximal end of wire), wherein the first traction wire segment is configured to be wound on the rotary part ([0233], [0224]).
Dixon does not exactly disclose a basic part configuration. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) with a basic part (base 1308) and a rotary part (the rotational elements in fig 17-22), wherein the basic part (base 1308 ) is configured to connect a flexible catheter (catheter 1000) in a catheter assembly([0091]) , the basic part having an axial direction that is as same as an axial direction of the flexible catheter (see fig 21), wherein the rotary part is rotatably coupled to the basic part ([0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose details of the wire materials. Cornish teaches a guidewire (abstract) wherein the first traction wire segment is fixedly coupled at a distal end thereof to a proximal end of the second traction wire segment (distal end of wire is connected to proximal end of wire), wherein the first traction wire segment is more flexible than the second traction wire segment ([0004-0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the guidewire configuration, as taught by Cornish, in order to have a guide wire with sufficient column strength and desired flexibility ([0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 12, Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose details of the wire materials. Cornish teaches a guidewire (abstract) wherein the first traction wire segment is implemented as a polymeric wire segment and the second traction wire segment is implemented as a metallic wire segment ([0004-0006]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the guidewire configuration, as taught by Cornish, in order to have a guide wire with sufficient column strength and desired flexibility ([0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 13, Dixon teaches a control handle for an implant delivery device (for example fig 60a), wherein the control handle comprises a rotary part (see annotated figure 60a), and a rotational axis of the rotary part is not coplanar with an axis of the catheter (see annotated figure, axis is vertical ), and wherein the rotary part is fixedly coupled to a proximal end of a control wire (see pull wires 135 and 136 in n fig 60a/b) and is configured to rotate to cause the control wire to be wound thereon ([0233], [0224]) and wherein the control wire comprises a first traction wire segment (proximal end of wire) and a second traction wire segment (distal end of wire/ 135a/136a), wherein the first traction wire segment is fixedly coupled at a proximal end thereof to the rotary part (proximal end of wire), wherein the first traction wire segment is configured to be wound on the rotary part ([0233], [0224]).
Dixon does not exactly disclose a basic part configuration. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) with a basic part (base 1308) and a rotary part (the rotational elements in fig 17-22), wherein the basic part (base 1308 ) is configured to connect a flexible catheter (catheter 1000) in a catheter assembly([0091]) , the basic part having an axial direction that is as same as an axial direction of the flexible catheter (see fig 21), wherein the rotary part is rotatably coupled to the basic part ([0081]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose details of the wire materials. Cornish teaches a guidewire (abstract) wherein the first traction wire segment is fixedly coupled at a distal end thereof to a proximal end of the second traction wire segment (distal end of wire is connected to proximal end of wire), wherein the first traction wire segment is more flexible than the second traction wire segment ([0004-0006]) and wherein a distal end of the second traction wire segment is inserted within the flexible catheter and is fixedly coupled to a distal end of the flexible catheter (inherent to combination).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the guidewire configuration, as taught by Cornish, in order to have a guide wire with sufficient column strength and desired flexibility ([0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 14, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a manipulation portion and a winding portion that are sequentially connected along an axial direction of the rotary part (see annotated figure 60a), wherein the manipulation portion (5901/5905, fig 60a) has a radial outer size greater than a radial outer size of the winding portion (5903/5904, fig 60a), and wherein the winding portion is configured for winding of the control wire thereon (see fig 61, [0224]).
Regarding claim 15, Dixon further teaches wherein the winding portion comprises at least two axial shaft sections with different outer diameters (see fig 60a/b, 5903 and 5904).
Regarding claim 16, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a wire securing member (see part of shaft where wire wraps, fig 60a/b), to the proximal end of the control wire through the wire securing member (see part of shaft where wire wraps, fig 60a/b).
Claim(s) 17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and Cornish (US 20130253374 A1) and in further view of Cheng (CN 211985521 U).
Regarding claim 17, Dixon does not exactly disclose the details of a wire securing member. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) wherein the wire securing member comprises ([0091], the features involved in securing the wire) a wire anchor (disk 1314) having a wherein the rotary part comprises an axial blind bore ([0091], entrance to wire aperture where wire passes into) and a radial wire aperture ([0091], wire aperture), wherein the blind bore is in communication with the wire aperture (inherent), wherein the blind bore is configured for an insertion of the proximal end of the control wire therein through the wire aperture ([0091]) and secures the control wire ([0091]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the wire securing apparatus, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, wire securing elements, according to known methods, to yield predictable results of securing a wire through an aperture (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding an anchor screwed into a blind bore by external/internal threads. Cheng teaches a catheter handle (abstract) that utilizes threading to screw together catheter parts (see entire document).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu, by applying the teaching of a threaded catheter part fixation method, as taught by Cheng, because it would be obvious to try using a finite number of simple fixation methods known in the art, to achieve a reasonable expectation of success of securing catheter handle parts (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 20, Dixon does not exactly disclose the details of a basic part. Prabhu teaches a controllable delivery system (see entire document) wherein a rotation of the rotary part with respect to the basic part is converted into an axial translation of the rotary part with respect to the basic part (see fig 21).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon by including the basic part configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a basic part, according to known methods, known method of combining basic part and rotary part, to yield predictable results of base capable of holding a catheter (MPEP 2143).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a rotary part screwed into a basic part by threads. Cheng teaches a catheter handle (abstract) wherein the rotary part comprises a threaded portion having a second external thread (threaded knob, pg. 2 paragraph 11), wherein the basic part has a second internal thread engageable with the second external thread (screw thread part passes through the handle, pg. 2 paragraph 11), wherein the rotary part is threadedly connected to the basic part by the threaded portion (pg. 2 paragraph 11), translation occurs through the second external thread and the second internal thread (structure is capable of this).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu, by applying the teaching of a threaded connection configuration, as taught by Cheng, because it would be obvious to try using a finite number of simple fixation methods known in the art, to achieve a reasonable expectation of success of securing catheter handle parts (MPEP 2143).
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dixon (EP 3927284 B1) in view of Prabhu (US 20180133007 A1) and Cornish (US 20130253374 A1) and in further view of Jiang (CN 212016414 U).
Regarding claim 18, Dixon further teaches wherein the rotary part comprises a self-locking portion ([0224], inherent to structure, note wheel is turned in other direction to release tension, so tension is locked until manually released).
Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a locking portion. Jiang teaches an adjustable catheter (See entire document) wherein the control handle further comprises a locking member (pg. 7, paragraph 2) configured to apply a resistive torque to the self-locking portion to limit a rotation of the rotary part when a rotating torque is smaller than the resistive torque (pg. 7, paragraph 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the locking portion configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a locking portion, according to known methods, known method of spring plunger locking, to yield predictable results of precisely locking components of a catheter as desired (MPEP 2143).
Regarding claim 19, Dixon in view of Prabhu does not exactly disclose the details regarding a locking portion. Jiang teaches an adjustable catheter (See entire document) wherein the self-locking portion comprises a plurality of grooves arranged circumferentially about the rotational axis of the rotary part (see grooves in element 553 in fig 6), wherein the locking member (pg. 7, components in paragraph 1-3) comprises a spring plunger (pg. 7, paragraph 2, spring ball plunger) comprising a fixation member (pg. 7, paragraph 2,driving member), an elastic element (pg. 6, paragraph 8, elastic piece/member) and a stop ball (pg. 7, paragraph 2, ball), wherein the stop ball is coupled to the fixation member by the elastic element (pg. 7, paragraph 2, elastically propped), wherein the fixation member is fixedly coupled to the basic part (pg. 7, paragraph 2, handle shell), wherein the stop ball is brought into abutment against the corresponding groove by an elastic force provided by the elastic element ([0091],see grooves in element 553 in fig 6), thereby applying the resistive torque to the self-locking portion (pg. 7, paragraph 2, elastically propped).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device taught by Dixon in view of Prabhu by including the locking portion configuration, as taught by Prabhu, in order to combine prior art elements, a locking portion, according to known methods, known method of spring plunger locking, to yield predictable results of precisely locking components of a catheter as desired (MPEP 2143).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HANNA LOUISE PASQUALINI whose telephone number is (703)756-1984. The examiner can normally be reached Telework 7:30PM-5:00PM EST M-F (occasionally off Fridays).
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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached at (408) 918-7557. 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.
/H.L.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3774
/JERRAH EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774