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
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 10, 12, and 14, the amendment to the Specifications, and the cancellation of claims 13 and 16-17 in the response filed August 20, 2025, are acknowledged by the Examiner.
Claims 1-12, 14, and 18-20 are under consideration.
Claim 15 is withdrawn as it is drawn to an unelected embodiment.
Response to Arguments
In response to “35 USC 112”
Applicant’s amendments to claim 1 has overcome the current 112b rejection, the rejection is withdrawn.
The rejections of claims 4 and 10-11 were in light of the claim 1 language, and therefore are overcome. The rejections are withdrawn.
In response to “35 USC 103”
With respect to claim 1, Applicant argues that Navis/Renehan/Babcock does not meet each limitation of the amended claim. As necessitated by the amendments, new grounds of rejection have been made.
Navis remains the primary reference in the current action as it continues to share structural and functional characteristics with the instant application.
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.
Claims 1-12, 14, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,676,159 (“Navis”) in view of US 3,099,015 (“Renehan”) in view of US 4,152,033 (“Ohlmeyer et al”).
With respect to claim 1, Navis discloses A medical drape comprising: a first section of drape material (Fig 1, first section 20); a second section of drape material (Fig 1, second section 22); and a connector system (Fig 2, connector 28, col 3 ll 35-40).
Navis is silent on the connector system comprising a receiving body defining a groove, the groove comprising a first sidewall, a second sidewall, a bottom wall connecting the first sidewall and the second sidewall, and an opening comprising an opening width extending between a first edge and a second edge, wherein the opening width is narrower than a maximum width between the first sidewall and the second sidewall; and a locking body press fit into and retained by the groove, the locking body comprising a locking body width that is greater than the groove opening width; wherein a portion of the first section of drape material is positioned overlaying the groove, a portion of the second section of drape material is positioned overlaying the groove, and the locking body is inserted into the groove thereby locking the portion of the first section of drape material and the portion of the second section of drape material in the groove; wherein the receiving body is comparatively rigid and the locking body is comparatively deformable.
Renehan teaches an analogous connector system for protective covers having comprising a receiving body defining a groove (Fig 1, receiving body 8, groove 9), the groove comprising a first sidewall, a second sidewall, a bottom wall connecting the first sidewall and the second sidewall (Annotated Fig 1, first sidewall, second sidewall, bottom wall), and an opening comprising an opening width extending between a first edge and a second edge (Annotated Fig 1, opening between a fist edge and second edge), wherein the opening width is narrower than a maximum width between the first sidewall and the second sidewall; and a locking body press fit into and retained by the groove, the locking body comprising a locking body width that is greater than the groove opening width; wherein a portion of the first section of drape material is positioned overlaying the groove, a portion of the second section of drape material is positioned overlaying the groove, and the locking body is inserted into the groove thereby locking the portion of the first section of drape material and the portion of the second section of drape material in the groove (Fig 1, first and second surgical covers 1 and 2 overlay and the locking body 10 is inserted into the groove 9 to lock the system); wherein the receiving body is comparatively rigid and the locking body is comparatively deformable (col 2 ll 35-40, col 2 ll 50-60, receiving body is aluminum and locking body is elastic so the receiving body is comparatively rigid and the locking body is comparatively deformable).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
Navis/Renehan is silent on wherein the opening width is narrower than a maximum width between the first sidewall and the second sidewall; and a locking body press fit into and retained by the groove, the locking body comprising a locking body width that is greater than the groove opening width.
Ohlmeyer et al teaches an analogous inserted and sealing locking system wherein the opening width is narrower than a maximum width between the first sidewall and the second sidewall (col 2 ll 20-25, opening less than the wall width); and a locking body press fit into and retained by the groove, the locking body comprising a locking body width that is greater than the groove opening width (col 2 ll 20-25, col 2 ll 35-40, press fit, locking body with is greater than opening).
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 shape of the receiving body, groove, and locking body of Navis/Renehan to be the shape as taught by Ohlmeyer et al in order to ensure a seal but to allow for easier removal (Ohlmeyer et al col 3 ll 20-35).
PNG
media_image1.png
260
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 2, Renehan
With respect to claim 2, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the first section of drape material has a different chemical composition than the second section of drape material (Navis col 2 ll 50-55, closed portion 20 is polyurethane; col 3 ll 20-25, open drape 22 is polyethylene).
With respect to claim 3, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the first section of drape material exhibits a higher tear resistance than the second section of drape material according to ASTM D 1004-21 (Navis col 2 ll 50-55, closed portion 20 is polyurethane; col 3 ll 20-25, open drape 22 is polyethylene; polyurethane with the same or similar thickness to polyethylene would have a higher tear resistance as it is a more flexible material and known to have a high tear resistance).
With respect to claim 4, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the first section of drape material and the second section of drape material each comprise a tunnel (Navis col 2 ll 60-65, col 3 ll 20-25, both portions are tubular and thus create a tunnel), the receiving body defines a frame extending about a perimeter of the tunnel with the frame providing an open lumen, and the locking body extends about an exterior perimeter of the tunnel (Renehan Fig 1, col 2 ll 35-40, receiving body is a ring so it defines a perimeter).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 5, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 4, wherein the tunnel is circular, the receiving body defines an annulus, and the locking member comprises a circular locking member (Renehan Fig 1, col 2 ll 35-40, receiving body is a ring so it defines a circular perimeter and a circular tunnel between members).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 6, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 4, wherein the frame defines an outer face facing an external environment (Renehan Annotated Fig 1, outer face with groove 9), an inner face facing the open lumen (Renehan Annotated Fig 1, opposing inner face relative to the groove 9), a first sidewall joining the outer face to the inner face on one side of the frame, and a second sidewall joining the outer face to the inner face on another side of the fame (Renehan Annotated Fig 1, sidewalls between inner and outer faces).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 7, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 6, wherein the groove is formed in the outer face (Renehan Annotated Fig 1, groove 9 on outer surface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 8, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 6, wherein the groove is formed in the first sidewall (Renehan Annotated Fig 1, groove 9 on outer surface formed in and by the sidewalls).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 9, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the first section of drape material defines a bag configured to be positioned over an end of a robotic arm of a surgical robotic system (Navis col 2 ll 10-15, capable of use with a probe so capable of use with a robot).
With respect to claim 10, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein: the portion of the first section of drape material is positioned overlaying an entirety of the groove between the first edge and the second edge; and the portion of the second section of drape material is positioned overlaying the entirety of the groove between the first edge and the second edge (Renehan Fig 1, first and second drape overlay the groove between the edges).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 11, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein: the portion of the first section of drape material overlaying the groove contacts an inner surface of the groove (Renehan Fig 1, section 6 of first drape 2 contacts the groove); the portion of the second section of drape material overlaying the groove contacts the portion of the first section of drape material contacting the inner surface of the groove (Renehan Fig 1, section 7 of second drape 1 overlays the first section); and the locking body inserted into the groove contacts the portion of the second section of drape material overlaying the groove (Renehan Fig 1, locking body 10 overlays the second section 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 12, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein: the first section of drape material defines a first terminal edge (Renehan Fig 1, drapes 1, 2 with edges); the second section of drape material defines a second terminal edge (Renehan Fig 1, drapes 1, 2 with edges); the first terminal edge is positioned extending past the second edge of the opening (Renehan Fig 1, drapes 1, 2 overlap over opening of groove 9, drape 1 edge extends past both groove edges); and the second terminal edge is positioned extending past the first edge of the opening (Renehan Fig 1, drapes 1, 2 overlap over opening of groove 9, drape 2 edge extends past both groove edges).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
With respect to claim 14, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the groove is defined by a radius of curvature (Ohlmeyer et al Fig 2a, col 2 ll 15-25, omega shaped groove has a radius of curvature).
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 shape of the receiving body, groove, and locking body of Navis/Renehan to be the shape as taught by Ohlmeyer et al in order to ensure a seal but to allow for easier removal (Ohlmeyer et al col 3 ll 20-35).
With respect to claim 18, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein locking body has a complementary shape to a shape of the groove (Ohlmeyer col 2 ll 20-40, complementary ring shape).
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 shape of the receiving body, groove, and locking body of Navis/Renehan to be the shape as taught by Ohlmeyer et al in order to ensure a seal but to allow for easier removal (Ohlmeyer et al col 3 ll 20-35).
With respect to claim 19, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1, wherein the receiving body is attached to one of the first section of drape material and the second section of drape material, and the locking body is attached to an other of the first section of drape material and the second section of drape material (Renehan col 2 ll 35-45, in use the receiving body and locking body compress and attach to the first and second drape portions to retain the system in place).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the connection system of Navis with the connection system of Renehan in order to improve the seal between the covers (Renehan col 2 ll 45-50).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ortmaier et al, US 2010/0292707.
With respect to claim 20, Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al discloses The drape of claim 1.
Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al is silent on wherein the first section of drape material, the second section of drape material, and the connector system are all sterilized.
Ortmaier et al teaches an analogous drape connection system having the first section of drape material, the second section of drape material, and the connector system are all sterilized ([0009], [0013], [0020]).
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 elements of Navis/Renehan/Ohlmeyer et al to be sterilized as taught by Ortmaier et al in order to allow for use of the system in medical settings (Ortmaier et al [0003]).
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 ADAM D BAKER whose telephone number is (571)270-3333. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30-5:30.
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, Rachael E Bredefeld can be reached on (571)270-5237. 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.
/ADAM BAKER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3786