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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/15/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/15/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Notice of Allowance on 3/17/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. The information provided in the IDS has raised new issues. Accordingly, a new rejection is made in view of Tschida (EP 3 944 827 A1) as discussed below.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 16/992,804 and provisional Application Nos. 62/981,813, 62/916,571, and 62/886,374 fail to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. For example, the above applications fail to provide adequate support for the selective mechanism as claimed. Accordingly, the present application has been given an effective filing date of 2/09/2022.
EXAMINER’S AMENDMENT
An examiner’s amendment to the record appears below. Should the changes and/or additions be unacceptable to applicant, an amendment may be filed as provided by 37 CFR 1.312. To ensure consideration of such an amendment, it MUST be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee.
Authorization for this examiner’s amendment was given in an interview with Michael E. Coyne (Reg. No. 58,443) on 2/19/2026.
The application has been amended as follows:
Claim 1, line 11: “wherein lever” has been amended to read --wherein the lever--.
Claim 4, line 2: “when the lever in” has been amended to read --when the lever is in--.
Claim 5, line 2: “when the lever in” has been amended to read --when the lever is in--.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tschida (EP 3 944 827 A1). It is noted that references to the specification are made with respect to the attached English Translation.
Regarding claim 1, Tschida discloses a minimally invasive surgical device (surgical instrument 1; Fig. 1), comprising: a housing (actuating unit 6); a lever (at least counter handle 10, 11 of two handles 10) pivotably coupled to a first portion (at proximal end of 7) of the housing (as the two handles 10 are formed at one end in the manner of leaf springs and are fixed to the base holder 7 of the operating unit 6; page 5, paragraph 6), the lever (10) being pivotable relative to the housing (6) between a first lever position (when handles 10 are not actuated i.e., unlocked; Fig. 1; page 6, paragraph 5), a second lever position (when handles 10 are locked via catch 14 and hook 16; page 7, paragraph 4), and a third lever position (when the handles are further squeezed to allow the catch 14 to pass the hook 16 i.e., released; page 7, paragraph 4); a shaft (hollow shaft 2) extending along a longitudinal axis from a proximal end to a distal end (Fig. 1), wherein a first portion (proximal end of 2) of the shaft is coupled to a second portion of the housing (at pipe 26); a distal tip assembly (forceps 3) disposed at the distal end of the shaft (Fig. 1), the distal tip assembly (3) coupled to the lever (10) such that when the lever is in the first lever position (Fig. 1), the distal tip assembly is disposed in a first configuration (in the unlocked position; jaws 4 of the forceps 3 are open), and when the lever (10) is in the second lever position (locked), the distal tip assembly is disposed in a second configuration (in the locked position, the jaws 4 of the forceps 3 are pressed together; page 7, paragraph 4), wherein the lever (10) is configured to pivot from the first lever position into the second lever position by a first force applied by a user (page 7, paragraph 4); and a selective locking mechanism (push-push locking mechanism 15) comprising: a lever protrusion (catch 14) extending along a protrusion axis (axis through center of 14 when viewing Fig. 4) from a first end (toward lever 18) to a second end (free end of 14), wherein the first end extends from a portion of the lever (10, 11; Figs. 1, 3); and a locking arm (locking piece 13) comprising: a support arm (13) extending from a first end (proximal end of 13) to a second end (distal end of 13) along an arm axis (Fig. 3), wherein the first end of the support arm is rigidly fixed to a third portion (near 8; Fig. 3) of the housing (at fastening hole 22; page 7, paragraph 1), and the second end of the support arm is a free end (at hook 16) that may be displaced relative to the first end of the support arm (as the piece 13 may be pivotable rather than or in addition to catch 14; page 6, paragraph 6); and a locking element (hook 16) disposed at the second end of the support arm (Fig. 3), the locking element (16) having two or more surfaces that cooperate to define a locking notch (V-shaped surfaces of 16; Fig. 4), wherein when the lever (10) is displaced from the first lever position (unactuated, unlocked position) into the second lever position (locked position) by the first force applied by the user (by squeezing handles 10; page 6, paragraph 4), the selective locking mechanism (15) is moved into a lock position such that a portion of the lever protrusion (14) is releasably disposed in a portion of the locking notch (V-shaped surfaces of 16) to maintain the lever (10) in the second lever position (locked position) without the first force applied to the lever by the user (page 7, paragraph 6), and wherein when the lever (10) is displaced from the second lever position (locked position) to the third lever position (released position) by a second force applied by the user, the selective locking mechanism (15) is moved out of the lock position such that the portion of the lever protrusion (14) is not disposed in the portion of the locking notch (V-shaped surfaces of 16; page 7, paragraph 6), and to displace the lever (10) from the second lever position (locked position) to the third lever position (released position), the second force applied by the user must be greater that a biasing force (of leaf springs of 10) acting on the lever (10) that biases the lever towards the first lever position (once 16 is released from 14, the handles 10 are released and spring apart to the unactuated, unlocked position because of their design as leaf springs; page 7, paragraph 6).
Regarding claim 2, Tschida discloses wherein the lever (10) is biased toward the first lever position (unactuated, unlocked position) by a spring (leaf spring) coupled to a fourth portion (at 7) of the housing (Fig. 1; page 7, paragraph 6).
Regarding claim 3, Tschida discloses the distal tip assembly (3) further comprising a first blunt dissector and a second blunt dissector (as jaws 4 of forceps, jaws, pliers 3 are blunt as opposed to scissors; Fig. 1; page 5, paragraph 1), the first blunt dissector configured to displace relative to the distal end of the shaft from a first position (open) when the distal tip assembly is disposed in the first configuration (open; Fig. 1) to a second position (closed) when the distal tip assembly (3) is disposed in the second configuration (closed; page 7, paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 4, Tschida discloses wherein when the lever (10) is in the third lever position (released position), the distal tip assembly (3) is disposed in the second configuration (as the jaws 4 remain closed as the handles 10 are further squeezed to unlatch 14 and 16; page 7, paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 5, Tschida discloses wherein when the lever (10) is in the third lever position (released position) and the user no longer applies the second force to the lever (10), the lever (10) is displaced from the third lever position (released position) to the first lever position (unactuated, unlocked position) by the biasing force (once 16 is released from 14, the handles 10 are released and spring apart to the unactuated, unlocked position because of their design as leaf springs; page 7, paragraph 6).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH A LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3865. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
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, Elizabeth Houston can be reached at (571)272-7134. 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.
/SARAH A LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights