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
The amendment filed 16 September 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 3, 6, and 10-17 are currently amended. Claims 18-20 are canceled, and claims 21-23 are new. Claims 1-17 and 21-23 are pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 16 June 2025.
Claim Objections
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: “3) clear an entirety” should read --3) to clear an entirety--. Appropriate correction is required.
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 10, 12-14, and 21 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the desired electric field threshold” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as independent claim 1 recites only “a target electric field threshold.”
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the target electric field threshold” in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as independent claim 11 recites only “a desired electric field threshold.” Dependent claims 13-14 and 21 are necessarily rejected as depending upon a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-17 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sahay et al. (US PGPub No. 2017/0209218), hereinafter Sahay, in view of Borsic (WO 2021/216750).
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 15, Sahay teaches a system for planning or preparing an ablation procedure (par. 0030: “cryosurgical system 10 includes a computer device 38 that is programmed with software configured to run an ablation planning, guidance and treatment system”), the system comprising:
a generator configured to generate electrical energy for delivery to a target tissue (par. 0033: “an ablation energy device, such as, for example, a cryoengine 16, in order to deliver energy/cryogen to the treatment region. Additional ablation energy devices include, and are not limited to, radio frequency generators, laser energy generators, microwave generators and high-intensity focused ultrasound generators”);
a plurality of probes operably connected to the generator, the plurality of probes configured to deliver the electrical energy to the target tissue (Fig. 5: two cryoprobes 122, 124; note that the disclosure teaches an embodiment using cryoprobes, but the teachings are interchangeable with other ablation devices such as radio frequency probes, as described in par. 0033 quoted above);
a display device (Fig. 1: display 40);
a processor operably connected to the display device and one or more input devices (par. 0030: “the computer device 38 also includes at least one user interface 39, a display 40 and a processor”);
and a non-transitory, computer-readable medium storing instructions (par. 0030: “a computer device 38 that is programmed with software”) that, when executed, cause the processor to:
receive an image of a patient comprising a target tissue (Fig. 3 and par. 0034: “the clinician begins by uploading patient image data of the treatment region”);
obtain an ablation plan comprising a planned probe arrangement including a planned position for each of a plurality of probes (Fig. 5 and par. 0040: “As can be seen in FIG. 5, based on all of the anatomy identified on the CT scan, including the treatment region, all of the information entered into the system by the clinician including the identification of surrounding anatomy and tissue type, and any thermal modeling performed by the system based on the information in the tissue property database, the planning system has developed a treatment plan that includes two cryoprobes 122, 124 with the specific locations and orientations (insertion angles) in the treatment region”),
receive, by one or more input devices, target feedback related to the identification of a target zone (Fig. 3 and par. 0036: “With the CT scan or image data set uploaded to the planning system and displayed in the three-view format 100, the clinician can now identify the treatment region with a target 114. The target 114 is identified and delineated by the clinician using any of a number of fast/intuitive methods, one of which is to use predefined target shapes and locate the target shape centrally in the target region and then adjust using ‘intuitive handles’”),
identify a planned probe arrangement, including a planned position for a first probe of a plurality of probes relative to the target zone (Fig. 5: probe 122 relative to target zone 114; par. 0040: “based on all of the anatomy identified on the CT scan, including the treatment region, all of the information entered into the system by the clinician including the identification of surrounding anatomy and tissue type, and any thermal modeling performed by the system based on the information in the tissue property database, the planning system has developed a treatment plan that includes two cryoprobes 122, 124 with the specific locations and orientations (insertion angles) in the treatment region”),
receive, based on one or more signals from a sensor, a real-time position of the first probe; and display, on the display device, the planned position and the real-time position for the first probe superimposed over the image of the target tissue and the target zone (Fig. 9 and par. 0048: “the clinician partially inserts the actual cryoprobe 138 and then obtains additional CT-fluoro image data (3 or more CT-slices) using the imaging device 36. After the additional CT-fluoro image data is received by the guidance system, the system performs the CT fusion process discussed above by registering the newly-received CT-fluoro image data with/to the baseline CT image data. At this juncture of the process, if needed, the system may also use cryoprobe positioning from the CT-fluoro image data as part of its fusion process. This newly registered CT-fluoro image data is now displayed as the three-view image depicted in FIG. 9, which shows that the actual cryoprobe 138 was not placed according to the calculated cryoprobe placement 122 of the treatment plan;” examiner interprets the CT-fluoro system in this instance as comprising at least one sensor).
Sahay teaches manual determination of the real-time position and a placed position of the first probe based on the real-time position (par. 0049: “the clinician can see that the actual cryoprobe 138 placement is not in accordance with the planned cryoprobe 122 placement”) and does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured to perform these steps. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the processor to determine the real-time position and placed position of the first probe, since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192.
Sahay is silent with respect to the details of the electrical delivery in the non-cryogenic embodiments of the disclosed ablation system and does not explicitly teach wherein the generator is configured to generate at least one electrical pulse, and the plurality of probes are configured to deliver the at least one electrical pulse to the target tissue, or wherein the planned probe arrangement is configured to satisfy a target electric field threshold of the target tissue. However, in an analogous art, Borsic teaches a multi-probe ablation system with a generator configured to generate at least one electrical pulse to be delivered by a plurality of probes for irreversible electroporation (par. 0112: “In IRE, tissue damage is not cause by thermal effects as in RFA, MWA, and CRA, but instead stems from bursting of cell membranes caused by high intensity, short duration, electric pulses. The probes inserted in the tissues apply voltage pulses that diffuse in the tissues”), which Borsic teaches as an explicit alternative to cryogenic, radiofrequency, and microwave ablation (par. 0044: “Ablation systems deliver energy and obtain the necrotization of tissues by heating (radiofrequency, microwave ablation), by freezing (cryoablation), and by causing irreversible cell damage (electroporation ablation) through one or more probes which necrotize a certain volume of targeted tissue”). Borsic further teaches wherein the planned probe arrangement is configured to satisfy a target electric field threshold of the target tissue in order to improve treatment time and effectiveness (par. 0014: “treatment time and effectiveness can be improved by simulating ablation volume in real-time based on known probe positioning, by displaying the simulated ablation volume, and by continuing to update in real-time the simulated ablation volume to reflect any adjustments in the probe positioning. This allows a clinician to interactively adjust the probe positioning to ensure that a predicted and displayed treatment volume matches with the identified target volume” and par. 0114: “Equation (0.11) allows computing the electric potential in the tissues u and from the electric field E = ∇u. The intensity of the electric field determines whether a tissue would be subject to irreversible electroporation, the volume of the ablation can be therefore determined by the iso-surface |E|= k where k is the threshold above which electroporation occurs in the specific tissue”).
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 system of Sahay by substituting the cryogenic, radiofrequency, or microwave ablation generator probes for the irreversible electroporation generator and probes taught by Borsic, since Borsic teaches that these forms of ablation are obvious alternatives of one another, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have performed the substitution by known means and the results would have been predictable, i.e., a system for non-thermal ablation. It would further have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Sahay such that the planned probe arrangement is configured to satisfy a target electric field threshold of the target tissue, as taught by Borsic, in order to improve treatment time and effectiveness, as taught by Borsic.
Sahay teaches using the imaging device for indicating and determining positions of the probes and does not explicitly teach one or more sensors configured to indicate a position of each probe of the plurality of probes, separate from the imaging device itself, or wherein the one or more sensors include a respective sensor operatively coupled to each probe of the plurality of probes. However, Borsic further teaches that electromagnetic location tracking is known in the art as an obvious alternative to using an imaging device for determining positions of probes (par. 0056: “the positioning of the probes in the tissue and their orientation relative to each other are determined using known techniques. For example, the position of the probes can be identified with an optical or electromagnetic surgical tool tracking system. Alternatively, the probe positioning can be identified by acquiring an image of the tissue comprising the probes, and retrieving and processing the image with a computing device. For example, in accordance with known techniques, probes can be placed in a patient, and the positions of the probes can be verified using a CT scan”), wherein an electromagnetic location tracking system includes a respective sensor operatively coupled to each probe of the plurality of probes (par. 0066: “Electromagnetic tracking is instead based on setting up an array of electromagnetic coils, for example on the surface of the operating table, and in equipping the surgical tools with multiple miniaturized receiving coils. Analysis of the received signals at the coils allows to determine with precision the position/orientation of the surgical tool. In the present system, a surgical tool-tracking system continuously tracks the spatial position of the ablation probes and communicate this position via network to the computing device / guidance software”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the system of Sahay by substituting electromagnetic location tracking taught by Borsic for the CT-based location tracking taught by Sahay, since Borsic teaches that electromagnetic location tracking is a known and obvious alternative to other forms of location tracking, and one of ordinary skill in the art could have performed such a substitution by known means, and the results would have been predictable, i.e., a system that can continuously track the location of each respective probe rather than taking discrete images to track probe location.
Regarding claim 2, the combination teaches the system of claim 1 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein the processor is operably connected to an imaging device (Figs. 1-2: imaging device 36; par. 0045: “current CT-fluoro image data (3 or more CT-slices) is obtained. In some embodiments, the imaging device 36 is connected to the primary ablation computer 38, which is programmed with software configured to run the guidance system, such that the CT-fluoro image data can be directly uploaded into the guidance system”) and wherein the instructions to receive an image of the target tissue comprise instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to receive the image of the target tissue from the imaging device (Fig. 3 and par. 0045: “the imaging device 36 is connected to the primary ablation computer 38, which is programmed with software configured to run the guidance system, such that the CT-fluoro image data can be directly uploaded into the guidance system”).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Sahay teaches the ablation systems of claims 1 and 11 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein a clinician compares the placed position of the first probe to the projected position of the first probe (Fig. 10 and par. 0049: “This newly-registered CT-fluoro image data of the final placement of the first cryoprobe 138 can be seen in FIG. 10, which shows that the actual final position of the cryoprobe 138 is closer to the planned cryoprobe 122 placement position but was still not placed exactly according to the treatment plan”), and modifies an ablation plan based on the comparison (Fig. 11 and par. 0049: “Therefore, at this point, the clinician can again revise the treatment plan by repositioning the planned cryoprobe 122 placement so that it coincides exactly with the actual cryoprobe 138 placement as depicted in FIG. 11”), wherein the modified ablation plan is configured to satisfy a target ablation threshold of the target tissue (par. 0051: “Based on the “revised treatment plan” that resulted from updating the planned cryoprobe 122 placement to correspond with the actual cryoprobe 138 placement, the clinician can again adjust the target 114 size or the planned placement of the other cryoprobe 124 in order to change the size and shape of the composite isotherms 134, 136 and hence, the size and shape of the resulting ice ball, to compensate for the misplacement of the first cryoprobe 138. Additional adjustments that can be made to the treatment plan to compensate for any misplacement of a cryoprobe include, but are not limited to, adjusting the energy power levels and/or cryoprobe freeze times or cycle times for certain cryoprobes or all cryoprobes;” examiner notes that the ablation parameters taught in Sahay correspond to a target electric field threshold in the combined reference).
Sahay teaches these steps as manual activities and does not explicitly teach wherein the processor is configured via the instructions to perform these steps. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the processor to compare the placed position with the projected position of the probe and modify a treatment plan based on the comparison, since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192.
Regarding claims 4-5 and 13-14, the combination teaches the systems of claims 3 and 12 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein the modification of the treatment plan includes updating the planned position for one or more additional probes of the plurality of probes, or one or more treatment parameters of the treatment plan, based on the comparison (par. 0051: “Based on the “revised treatment plan” that resulted from updating the planned cryoprobe 122 placement to correspond with the actual cryoprobe 138 placement, the clinician can again adjust the target 114 size or the planned placement of the other cryoprobe 124 in order to change the size and shape of the composite isotherms 134, 136 and hence, the size and shape of the resulting ice ball, to compensate for the misplacement of the first cryoprobe 138. Additional adjustments that can be made to the treatment plan to compensate for any misplacement of a cryoprobe include, but are not limited to, adjusting the energy power levels and/or cryoprobe freeze times or cycle times for certain cryoprobes or all cryoprobes”).
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the system of claim 1 as described previously. Sahay further teaches further comprising one or more input devices (par. 0049: “a user interface such as, for example, an electronic pen, a mouse or any other user interface known in the art. Other manipulation methods and devices will be readily understood and known by those of skill in the art”),
wherein the instructions to obtain an ablation plan comprise instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to: identify, based on the image, a proposed target zone comprising at least a portion of the target tissue (Fig. 3: proposed target zone 114; par. 0036: “the clinician can now identify the treatment region with a target 114 […] The target 114 can be any size or geometric shape so that it completely covers/identifies the treatment region. Other embodiments of fast/intuitive methods for target definition include atlas shapes from a library of shapes that are automatically morphed using image density information to the shape of the lesion/target region”),
and the processor is configured to display, on the display device, the proposed target zone superimposed over the image (Fig. 3: target region 114 superimposed over image of kidney 115),
receive, by the one or more input devices, target feedback related to the proposed target zone, wherein the target feedback includes one or more of an indication 1) of the proposed target zone to be retained or removed, 2) to accept the proposed target zone, 3) clear an entirety of the proposed target zone, and 4) to select a new zone for the proposed target zone, and modify the proposed target zone based on the target feedback to define a selected target zone (Fig. 3: target 114; par. 0036: “The target 114 is identified and delineated by the clinician using any of a number of fast/intuitive methods;” examiner interprets the delineation of the proposed target zone as an indication of the proposed target zone to be retained or removed),
and generate the ablation plan, wherein the ablation plan comprises the selected target zone (par. 0041: “based on the clinician's identification of the treatment region with a target 114 and the clinician's identification of the target tissue and any surrounding anatomy of interest, the system calculates/generates a treatment plan (number of cryoprobes to use, location of cryoprobe insertion, and orientation of the cryoprobes) based on the treatment parameters recommended by the system”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches the system of claim 6 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: measure one or more distances in the selected target zone based on the image, and define a location of the selected target zone based on the image, wherein the ablation plan is based on the one or more distances and the location of the selected target zone (Fig. 5: selected target zone 114, isotherms 126, 128, cryoprobes 122, 124; par. 0042: “the planning system has identified an individual isotherm 126, 128 for each cryoprobe 122, 124, respectively, as well as calculated the distances of each cryoprobe 122, 124 from its closest boney structure;” par. 0043: “The system also calculates and displays the boundary of the lethal ice zone (−20° C.) 134 and the margin of the lethal ice zone (0° C.) 136”).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches the system of claim 6 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein the instructions to generate the ablation plan comprise instructions that, when executed, further cause the processor to: identify, based on the selected target zone, a proposed probe arrangement comprising a proposed position for each of the plurality of probes (par. 0041: “based on the clinician's identification of the treatment region with a target 114 and the clinician's identification of the target tissue and any surrounding anatomy of interest, the system calculates/generates a treatment plan (number of cryoprobes to use, location of cryoprobe insertion, and orientation of the cryoprobes)”),
display, on the display device, the proposed probe arrangement superimposed over the image (Fig. 5: probes 122 and 124 superimposed over image),
receive, by the one or more input devices, probe feedback related to the proposed probe arrangement, modify the proposed probe arrangement based on the probe feedback to define a selected probe arrangement, and update the ablation plan based on the selected probe arrangement, wherein the planned probe arrangement of the ablation plan comprises the selected probe arrangement (par. 0044: “the clinician can make manual adjustments to the treatment plan based on the clinician's experience or preferences. For example, the clinician can change the location of the cryoprobes 122, 124, the orientation of the cryoprobes 122, 124 […] As a result of any clinician changes, the planning system will reflect these changes”).
Regarding claim 9, the combination teaches the system of claim 8 as described previously. Sahay teaches wherein the probe feedback comprises one or more of: an indication of one or more of the plurality of probes to be removed from the proposed probe arrangement; an indication to add one or more additional probes to the plurality of probes in the proposed probe arrangement; an indication to adjust the proposed position of one or more of the plurality of probes; and an indication of approval of the proposed probe arrangement (par. “0044: the clinician can make manual adjustments to the treatment plan based on the clinician's experience or preferences. For example, the clinician can change the location of the cryoprobes 122, 124, the orientation of the cryoprobes 122, 124”). Examiner notes that as these limitations are stated in the alternative, the claim is considered to be met when any one limitation is found in the prior art.
Regarding claim 10, the combination teaches the system of claim 8 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein updating the ablation plan comprises updating the power settings for the probes (par. 0041: “Any such changes to the treatment parameters results in the system recalculating a new treatment plan that may result in a change in the number of cryoprobes used, a change in the location of cryoprobe insertion, a change in cryoprobe orientation, a change in cryoprobe power settings, etc” and par. 0051: “Additional adjustments that can be made to the treatment plan to compensate for any misplacement of a cryoprobe include, but are not limited to, adjusting the energy power levels and/or cryoprobe freeze times or cycle times for certain cryoprobes or all cryoprobes”), and Borsic teaches providing a series of pulses for ablation (par. 0112: “In IRE, tissue damage […] stems from bursting of cell membranes caused by high intensity, short duration, electric pulses. The probes inserted in the tissues apply voltage pulses that diffuse in the tissues”), but the combination does not explicitly teach wherein the ablation plan further comprises a planned series of pulses to be emitted between the plurality of probes to satisfy the target electric field threshold of the target tissue, or wherein the instructions to update the ablation plan cause the processor to update the planned series of pulses.
However, given that Sahay teaches adjusting ablation power levels to compensate for a change in probe position, and Borsic teaches a providing a series of pulses for ablation, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the processor of the combined reference to update the planned series of pulses based on the selected probe arrangement, in order to compensate for a change in probe position, as taught by Sahay.
Regarding claim 16, the combination teaches the system of claim 15 as described previously. Sahay further teaches a generator (Fig. 1: cryoengine 16; par. 0033: “an ablation energy device, such as, for example, a cryoengine 16, in order to deliver energy/cryogen to the treatment region. Additional ablation energy devices include, and are not limited to, radio frequency generators, laser energy generators, microwave generators and high-intensity focused ultrasound generators”) with the plurality of probes operably connected to the generator (Fig. 2: probes 32 operably connected to generator 16), but does not explicitly teach wherein the generator is configured to generate at least one electrical pulse for delivery to a target tissue, or wherein the plurality of probes are configured to deliver the at least one electrical pulse to the target tissue to irreversibly electroporate substantially all of the target tissue in the target zone. However, these limitations are taught by Borsic for the same reasons set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, the combination teaches the system of claim 15 as described previously. Borsic further teaches wherein the sensor comprises an electromagnetic sensor, and further comprising: an electromagnetic generator operably connected to the processor (par. 0066: “Electromagnetic tracking is instead based on setting up an array of electromagnetic coils, for example on the surface of the operating table, and in equipping the surgical tools with multiple miniaturized receiving coils. Analysis of the received signals at the coils allows to determine with precision the position/orientation of the surgical tool. In the present system, a surgical tool-tracking system continuously tracks the spatial position of the ablation probes and communicate this position via network to the computing device / guidance software”).
Regarding claim 21, the combination teaches the system of claim 13 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein the instructions to modify the ablation plan comprise instructions that, when executed, cause the processor to update one or more treatment parameters of the ablation plan based on the updated planned position for the one or more additional probes of the plurality of probes (par. 0051: “Additional adjustments that can be made to the treatment plan to compensate for any misplacement of a cryoprobe include, but are not limited to, adjusting the energy power levels and/or cryoprobe freeze times or cycle times for certain cryoprobes or all cryoprobes”).
Regarding claim 22, the combination teaches the system of claim 11 as described previously. Borsic further teaches wherein the instructions, when executed, further cause the processor to: determine a placed position of each probe of the plurality of probes; and determine a location and/or distance of each probe relative to other probes of the plurality of probes based on the determined placed positions (par. 0056: “the positioning of the probes in the tissue and their orientation relative to each other are determined using known techniques”), which facilitates simulating ablation volume based on the relative locations of the probes (Abstract: “the relative locations of a plurality of ablation probes capable of providing ablation energy are determined, and the effect of energy provided by the probes based on the determined locations is predicted to identify a simulated ablation volume”). 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 system of the combined reference by determining the relative locations of the plurality of probes, as taught by Borsic, in order to simulate ablation volume based on the relative locations, as taught by Borsic.
Regarding claim 23, the combination teaches the system of claim 11 as described previously. Sahay further teaches wherein a clinician may compare the placed position of the first probe to the projected position of the first probe and determine whether the placed position of the first probe is within a predetermined threshold distance of the projected position of the first probe (Fig. 9 and par. 0049: “the clinician can see that the actual cryoprobe 138 placement is not in accordance with the planned cryoprobe 122 placement”); and wherein, upon a determination that the placed position of the first probe is not within the predetermined threshold distance of the projected position of the first probe, the system provides feedback related to repositioning of the first probe so that the placed position of the first probe is within the predetermined threshold distance of the projected position of the first probe (Figs. 9-10: actual cryoprobe placement 138, planned cryoprobe 122 placement; examiner interprets visual display of misaligned placement as feedback related to repositioning and notes that the threshold distance is determined by the clinician in this case, where the placement in Fig. 9 is outside the threshold, but the placement in Fig. 10 is within the threshold). Sahay teaches these steps as a manual process and does not explicitly teach wherein the instructions cause a processor to perform the steps. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to configure the instructions and processor to compare the placed and projected positions of the first probe and determine whether the placed position is within a threshold distance of the projected position, since it has been held that broadly providing a mechanical or automatic means to replace manual activity which has accomplished the same result involves only routine skill in the art. In re Venner, 120 USPQ 192.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 16 September 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 11, and 15 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, in light of the amendments to the claims, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Borsic. As described previously, Borsic teaches planning a probe arrangement to satisfy a target electric field threshold of the target tissue and wherein a respective sensor is operatively coupled to each probe of the plurality of probes.
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 DAVINA E LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5765. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday between 8:00 AM and 5:30 PM (ET).
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, LINDA C DVORAK can be reached at 571-272-4764. 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.
/LINDA C DVORAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/D.E.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights