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 .
Notice of Amendment
The Amendment filed 1/29/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 7-17 and 19 are pending in the application with claims 1, 4, 5 amended, claims 6, 18 cancelled. The previous 35 USC 112 rejection of claims 1-5, 7-17 and 19 are withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7, 14-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kasic (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0105715).
In regard to claim 1, Kasic discloses a controllable endoscope (10, Fig. 2a) comprising a hollow tube (50) having a distal end and a proximal end, the hollow tube comprising a tube wall surrounding a tube lumen having a lumen axis (Figs. 2A); a controllable section (110) of the tube comprising an alternance of long-segments of the tube (112,114,116,118,120) and flexible sections (130a-130d) of the tube wherein (Figs. 2A-2B,5,6):
the long-segments of the tube comprise a distal long-segment (120), a proximal long-segment (112), and n intermediate long-segments (114,116,118), wherein n is an integer at least equal to 1 (there are up to 3 intermediate segments); each long-segment having a first axial length (Figs. 5-6);
in each flexible section, the tube wall comprises a plurality of cuts (131) along a series of planes perpendicular to the lumen axis (Fig. 8a), the cuts being arranged such that at least one uncut portion of the tube wall extends continuously in a direction parallel to the lumen axis between the distal end and the proximal end (Fig. 8a illustrates a continuous uncut portion of the tube within each flexible section); wherein the plurality of cuts divide the tube wall in a series of short-segments of the tube (via alternating cuts (131) and short segments (133), Fig. 8a), each short segment of the tube comprising a section of the uncut portion of the tube wall (Fig. 8a);
the uncut portion of the tube wall effectively forming a series of attachment sections between the short segments of the tube (Fig. 8a), the uncut portion of the wall also forming attachment sections between the long segments of the tube and a closest neighboring short segment of the tube (Fig. 8a);
each attachment section having a second axial length and each short-segment of the tube having a third axial length, wherein the first axial length is equal to or greater than three times the third axial length plus two times the second axial length (Fig. 8a);
wherein the n intermediate long-segments and the proximal long-segment comprise each at least one loop structure (146) protruding from the tube wall into the lumen (Fig. 7), each loop structure having a loop opening parallel to the lumen axis, arranged to form at least one series of loop openings aligned in a direction parallel to the lumen axis when the controllable section of the tube is in an unbent state (Fig. 7);
at least one tensioning wire (136) having a distal end and a proximal end, the tensioning wire slidingly passing through the opening of the at least one series of loop structures (Fig. 7), the distal end of the at least one tensioning wire being secured inside the lumen to the distal long-segment of the tube (Fig. 7), such that controllably pulling the proximal end of the tensioning wire results in controllably bending the controllable section of the tube by flexing said attachment sections (Figs. 7, 8a).
In regard to claim 3, Kasic teaches wherein said cuts follow parallel planes, whereby each short segment has a constant axial length (Fig. 8a).
In regard to claim 4, Kasic teaches wherein the cuts separating the segments have each an axial length such that, by bending the attachment sections separating two consecutive segments, long or short, radial planes perpendicular to the axis of the lumen of each segment, respectively, can be rotated by up to three degrees with respect to each other (Par. 66).
In regard to claim 5, Kasic teaches wherein the plurality of cuts are arranged such that the at least one uncut portion that extends continuously in a direction parallel to the lumen axis between the distal end and the proximal end comprises two diametrically opposed uncut portions of the tube wall that extend continuously between the distal end and the proximal end (the flexible sections have two uncut portions on that are arranged on both sides of the slits, Fig. 8a); wherein each attachment section of the tube that attaches each long or short segment to the next and previous long or short segments comprises a pair of radial portions of the wall diametrically opposed with respect to the lumen axis (Fig. 8a).
In regard to claim 7, Kasic teaches wherein said at least one series of loop openings aligned in a direction parallel to the lumen axis comprise a pair of diametrically opposed series of loop openings aligned in directions parallel to the lumen axis (Fig. 7 illustrates diametrically opposed loop openings (146)); wherein the at least one tensioning wire comprises a pair of tensioning wires (136,138) having each a distal end and a proximal end, each tensioning wire respectively passing in the openings of one of said diametrically opposed series of loop openings (Fig. 7), the distal end of each tensioning wire being secured inside the lumen to the distal long-segment of the tube such that controllably pulling respectively the proximal end of a first one and a second one of the pair of tensioning wires results in controllably bending the controllable section of the tube in first and second diametrically opposed directions (Fig. 7).
In regard to claim 14, Kasic teaches wherein the loop openings and the attachment sections have different radial positions (Fig. 7), such that pulling the proximal end of the tensioning wire results in bringing closer portions of the segments of the tube, separated by the cuts when the tube is in an unbent state and that have a same axial position as the loop openings, by flexing the attachment sections between the segments of the tube (Fig. 8a, via pulling tension wire (136)).
In regard to claim 15, Kasic teaches wherein the controllable section of the tube is arranged to achieve a maximally bent state when the attachment sections between the segments of the tube are flexed sufficiently to let portions of segments of the tube that have a same axial position as the loop openings, touch each other instead of being separated by the cuts (Fig. 8a, Par. 66).
In regard to claim 16, Kasic teaches wherein a distance between successive loop openings, or between the secured distal end of the at least one tensioning wire and a closest loop opening, when the controllable section of the tube is in an unbent state, is chosen so that the tensioning wire remains on a same side of a sheet of points, which includes the attachment sections that flex when bending the controllable section of the tube from an unbent state to the maximally bent state (Fig. 7).
In regard to claim 19, Kasic teaches wherein axial lengths of the short and long segments, along with axial length of the radial cuts, are chosen such that the pull wires always remain on a same side of a sheet of points which includes the attachment sections of the tube that flex when the pull wires are pulled to bend the controllable endoscope (Fig. 7).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasic (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0105715)) in view of Salahieh et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0277730, hereinafter Salahieh).
In regard to claim 2, Kasic teaches wherein said cuts are wedge-shaped, whereby an axial length of each short segment of the tube varies radially.
Salahieh teaches an analogous tubular member having a steerable portion (500) comprising a plurality of interrupted slots (510) forming therein connected to spines (506,508). The uninterrupted slots having a wedge-shape as shown in Figs. 1, 2c and an axial length of each short segment varying radially as shown in Figs. 1, 2c.
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the cuts of Kasic with the uninterrupted slot configuration of Salahieh as a matter of design choice thereby allowing reliable bending of the steerable portion and varying the bendability of the steerable portion along the longitudinal axis. There being no unexpected results in modifying the slots of Kasic with the slot configuration of Salahieh.
Claims 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasic (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0105715)) in view of Do et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0237189, hereinafter Do).
In regard to claim 8, Kasic teaches wherein the hollow tube comprises a proximal section (70) between the proximal long-segment and the proximal end (Fig. 2a).
Kasic does not expressly teach wherein said tensioning wire passes through a compression coil arranged in the lumen between the loop opening of the at least one loop structure of the proximal long-segment and the proximal end of the tube.
Do teaches an analogous endoscope (1) comprising an insertion section (2) having a flexible section (20) and a bending portion (A). The flexible section (20) comprises a plurality of coil pipes (8) in which bending wires extend therethrough to the bending portion (A). The coil pipes (8) guide motion of the bending wires through the flexible section. The flexible section (20) comprises three zones (B, C, D) with each zone varying in flexibility by providing a plurality of cuts (S) within each zone.
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the proximal section of Kasic with coil pipes of Do providing structural support to the flexible tube portion as well as guiding motion of the bending wires extending through the flexible tube portion.
In regard to claim 9, Kasic teaches comprising means (34) for controllably pulling the proximal end of the tensioning wire with respect to a proximal end of said compression coil (Fig. 2a).
In regard to claim 10, Do teaches wherein said proximal section (20) of the tube is flexible (Figs. 1-3, Par. 74).
In regard to claim 11, Do teaches therein said proximal section of the tube comprises a series of cuts (S) having each a radial length smaller than a perimeter of the tube (Fig. 3).
In regard to claim 13, Do teaches wherein said compression coil extends proximally beyond the proximal end of the tube, and comprises a curved section between the proximal end of the tube and the proximal end of the compression coil; said curved section having a curvature arranged to freely change if the compression coil gets compressed when pulling the proximal end of the tensioning wire (Figs. 4-5).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kasic (US Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0105715)) in view of Do et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0237189, hereinafter Do), as applied to claim 8, and further in view of Rutgers (US Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0366445).
In regard to claim 12, Kasic and Do do not expressly teach wherein said means for controllably pulling the proximal end of the tensioning wire comprise a lever having a pivotal axis and a radius, an actuating end with a groove perpendicular to said radius, and a hole with an axis perpendicular to said radius, arranged such that the tensioning wire passes in the groove of the actuating end and is bent 180 degree such that the proximal end of the tensioning wire passes through said hole; a peg being secured in the hole to maintain the tensioning wire in position, wherein when the lever pivots around said axis in a first direction the lever pulls the tensioning wire and when the lever pivots around said axis in a second direction the tensioning wire slacks; said groove having a depth provided to prevent the slacking wire from exiting the groove.
Rutgers teaches an analogous endoscope having a steering control mechanism (14, Figs. 10,14) comprising a control mounting disc (42) connected to control cables (44). The control mounting disc (42) is housed within an outer casing (12) and pivotably mounted to a center tube (48). A control case (38) surrounds the control mounting disc (42) and receives a compression screw (62) detachably locks the control cables (44) to the control mounting disc.
It would’ve been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention to modify the means of Kasic with the steering control mechanism (14) of Rutgers as a matter of design choice for controlling bending of a distal tip of the endoscope. The steering control mechanism allows a physician to adjustably lock the control wires to the control mounting disc. There being no unexpected results in providing the endoscope of Kasic with the steering control mechanism of Rutgers.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-5, 7, 14-16 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 RYAN N HENDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1430. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 6am-5pm (PST).
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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.
/RYAN N HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795 March 20, 2026