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 .
Formal Matters
Applicant’s Response and Amendments filed 13 November 2025 are acknowledged. Claim 8 is cancelled. Claims 1-3, 5-7, 9, 10, 12, 15, and 18 are currently amended. Claims 1-7 and 9-20 are pending and under examination.
Objections/Rejections Withdrawn
The objections to the drawings are withdrawn in light of Applicant’s claim amendments.
The objection to the specification is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s claim amendments.
The rejection of claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Avelar et al., US 20140039527 (6 February 2014), is withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendments. However, a new rejection is set forth below, necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Regarding amended independent claims 1 and 9, Applicant argues that Avelar does not teach the amendments to the claims. Regarding amended independent claim 15, Applicant argues that Avelar in view of Shelton does not teach the amendments as claimed. Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but are not persuasive in light of prior art over the amended claims as set forth below.
New Claim Objections/Rejections – Necessitated by Amendment
Claim Objections
Claims 6, 7, 14, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities: independent claims 1, 9, 15 were amended to narrow the claim limitations such that the word “move” was amended to the word “rotate”. However, the word “move” still remains in dependent claim 6, line 3, dependent claim 7, lines 3 and 5, dependent claim 14, line 4, and dependent claim 19, line 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b) – Necessitated by Amendment
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.
Claim 20 is 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 20 is dependent on claim 15, which has been amended to recite that a cartridge is rotatably supported in the housing and that the cartridge is configured to rotate in response to activation of the motor. Claim 20 is an original claim. The amendment of claim 15 from a cartridge being “movably” supported in the housing to “rotatably supported” creates confusion with the recitation in claim 20 that the cartridge is a rectangular strip that defines a linear array of spaced openings. See also, Specification ¶80 and FIGs 11 and 12. It is unclear and confusing whether the linear array strip of the cartridge is also applicable to a rotatable embodiment.
Applicant is referred to Ex parte Miyazaki, 89 USPQ2d 1207, 1211 (2008). A five member expanded panel of the Board held that "if a claim is amenable to two or more plausible claim constructions, the USPTO is justified in requiring applicant to more precisely define the metes and bounds of the claimed invention by holding the claim unpatentable under 35 USC 112, second paragraph, as indefinite."
Applicant is also referred to Nautilus Inc., v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 572 U.S. 898, 908-909 (2014) in which the Court held that a claim is indefinite if the specification and prosecution history fail to inform, with reasonable certainty, those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention. The Court also held that a patent must be precise enough to afford clear notice of what is claimed thereby "appris[ing] the public of what is still open to them (citing Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc., 517 U.S. 370, 373 (1996)), in a manner that avoids "[a] zone of uncertainty which enterprise and experimentation may enter only at the risk of infringement claims," (citing United Carbon Co., v. Binney & Smith Co., 317 U.S. 228, 236 (1942)) (Nautilus 909).
Claim Rejections Modified – Necessitated by Amendment
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-7 and 9-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shelton et al., US 20190125353 (2 May 2019) (previously cited of record).
Regarding amended independent claim 1, Shelton teaches a surgical robotic system (FIG 27, robotic surgical instrument 20), comprising:
a surgical robotic arm (30; ¶253) having a holder (actuator module 32) configured to movably support a surgical instrument (¶253, “comprising an electric motor configured to supply the rotary motion to the shaft 110 of a clip applier 100, and/or any other surgical instrument”).
In the embodiment of the system of FIG 27, Shelton does not expressly teach an embodiment of robotic surgical instrument 20 comprising: a trocar including: a head configured for attachment to the holder and a cannula extending distally from the head and configured to receive the surgical instrument; and a reloading module configured to couple to the head of the trocar and including: a housing defining a longitudinal channel configured to be coaxial with the cannula of the trocar when the reloading module is coupled to the head of the trocar; and a cartridge rotatably coupled to the housing configured to store a plurality of surgical clips, wherein the cartridge is configured to rotate relative to the housing to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips within the longitudinal channel of the housing, wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally.
However, Shelton does expressly teach that robotic surgical instrument 20 may comprise clip applier 100 and/or any other surgical instrument.
Shelton also teaches a modified clip applier subsystem at FIGs 82, 83 comprising:
a trocar (FIG 82, 72010) including: a head configured for attachment to the holder (FIGs 82, 83) and
a cannula (elongate shaft 72011) extending distally from the head and configured to receive the surgical instrument (FIG 83); and
a reloading module (clip magazine 72050) configured to couple to the head of the trocar (FIGs 82, 83) and including:
a housing (¶334) defining a longitudinal channel (opening 72051) configured to be coaxial with the cannula of the trocar (FIGs 82, 83) when the reloading module (clip magazine 72050) is coupled to the head of the trocar (72010); and
In the embodiment of a modified clip applier subsystem at FIGs 82, 83, Shelton does not expressly teach an embodiment of FIGs 82, 83 comprising: a cartridge rotatably coupled to the housing configured to store a plurality of surgical clips, wherein the cartridge is configured to rotate relative to the housing to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips within the longitudinal channel of the housing, wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally.
Shelton teaches a similar embodiment comprising clip applier system 71500 (FIG 75, ¶320), comprising clip applier 70600 (FIGs 52-60, ¶282).
Shelton teaches a cartridge (rotatable clip cartridge 70650, ¶285; clip magazine 70650, ¶282) rotatably coupled to the housing (FIG 75, clip applier 70600; see also ¶282, FIGs 52-60) configured to store a plurality of surgical clips (clips 70654, ¶320; FIGs 52, 62A, 75), wherein the cartridge (clip magazine 70650) is configured to rotate relative to the housing (¶282) to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips within the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶282), wherein each surgical clip (70654) is stored within the housing (¶282) such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally (FIG 53). Shelton also teaches that clip magazine 70650 can have any suitable diameter including diameters which can permit clip magazine 70650 to be inserted through a trocar (¶283).
Although Shelton discloses the main surgical robotic instrument system comprising a surgical robotic arm having a holder configured to moveably support a surgical instrument, including a clip applier, Shelton does not disclose teach a trocar or cannula or rotatably coupled clip applier cartridge attached to a housing in the primary system. However, Shelton specifically addresses modification of clip applier subsystems comprising trocars, cannulas, and clip appliers, and related clip applier embodiment subsystems comprising clip magazines rotatably coupled to the housing. Because Shelton expressly discloses that the surgical robotic arm (30; ¶253) having a holder (actuator module 32) configured to movably support a surgical instrument “comprising an electric motor configured to supply the rotary motion to the shaft 110 of a clip applier 100, and/or any other surgical instrument” (¶253), a person of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised that other surgical instruments could be used with the robotic arm and holder without modifying the primary robotic system. Additionally, because Shelton’s primary robotic system comprises a clip applier 100, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of other clip appliers that could be used with the primary robotic system of Shelton. These modifications would include the different embodiments of clip applier subsystems taught by Shelton as part of the same reference. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to consider the other clip applier systems taught by Shelton that were compatible with the robotic arm system, given the express disclosures of compatibility. The trocar with the arm-housing attachable head provides a base device for use in surgical robotic systems where the robotic arm is readily coupled with the trocar. Additionally, the other clip applier embodiments have rotatable and slidable clip cartridges that can be selected based on the end-use case as most applicable for the surgery being performed. Shelton’s rotatable clip cartridge solution can be incorporated along-side of Shelton’s trocar solution with the primary robotic arm device using known assembly methods without redesigning any of the core devices or delivery pathways. The rotatable clip cartridge of Shelton would be readily modifiable as a substitution of the other clip appliers taught as being useful, given that Shelton expressly teaches that clip magazine 70650 can be inserted through a trocar (¶282). Because the subsystems of Shelton are taught as being modifiable and compatible and they all address the same engineering problem (utilization of clip appliers with multi-clip cartridges in surgical robotic arm systems) and the proposed modifications are mechanically compatible and implemented by routine engineering practices (using multi-clip cartridges that are rotatable and slidable and sized to be inserted through a trocar), a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining these teachings.
Regarding claim 2, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 1, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) is axially or rotatably supported in the housing (¶282) such that the cartridge slides or rotates relative to the housing from a first position (FIG 53), in which the surgical clip (70654) is positioned outside of the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶284), to a second position (FIG 53), in which the surgical clip (70654) is within the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶284).
Regarding claim 3, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 2, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) is annular (FIG 52, pentagonal, ¶283) and includes a plurality of circumferentially spaced flanges (FIG 52) that detachably support (¶283-285) the respective plurality (FIG 52, ¶283) of surgical clips (70654).
Regarding claim 4, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 3, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) defines at least one slot (opening 70653) configured to be coaxial with the longitudinal channel of the housing when the cartridge is in the first position (FIGs 52, 53; ¶¶284-285).
Regarding claim 5, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 4, as set forth above, wherein the at least one slot is a plurality of slots (70653), each slot of the plurality of slots (70653) being positioned between adjacent flanges of the plurality of flanges (FIG 52, 53) and wherein each slot (70653) retains a respective surgical clip (70654) of the plurality of clips (FIG 52, ¶283).
Regarding claim 6, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 1, as set forth above, wherein the reloading module (clip magazine 70650, ¶282; clip cartridge 70650, ¶285) further includes a motor (¶285) operably coupled to the cartridge (70650) and configured to move the cartridge to change the position of the surgical clip (70654) relative to the longitudinal channel of the housing (¶285).
Regarding claim 7, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 6, as set forth above, wherein the reloading module (clip magazine 70650, ¶282; clip cartridge 70650, ¶285) further includes a sensor (FIG 75, Hall Effect sensor, ¶320; other sensor ¶321) in communication with the motor (¶285) , the motor being configured to move the cartridge (70650) to position the surgical clip (70654) within the longitudinal channel (¶285) when the sensor determines that a distal end portion of the surgical instrument is moved proximally of the cartridge (¶320).
Regarding independent claim 9, Shelton teaches a surgical robotic system (FIG 27, robotic surgical instrument 20; surgical robotic arm (30; ¶253); holder (actuator module 32) configured to movably support a surgical instrument (¶253, “comprising an electric motor configured to supply the rotary motion to the shaft 110 of a clip applier 100, and/or any other surgical instrument”).
In the embodiment of the system of FIG 27, Shelton does not expressly teach an embodiment of robotic surgical instrument 20 comprising: a trocar including: a head configured for attachment to a surgical robotic arm and a cannula extending distally from the head and configured to receive the surgical instrument; and a reloading module configured to couple to the head of the trocar and including: a housing defining a longitudinal channel configured to be coaxial with the cannula of the trocar when the reloading module is coupled to the head of the trocar; and a cartridge rotatably coupled to the housing configured to store a plurality of surgical clips, wherein the cartridge is configured to rotate relative to the housing to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips within the longitudinal channel of the housing, wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally.
However, Shelton does expressly teach that robotic surgical instrument 20 may comprise clip applier 100 and/or any other surgical instrument.
Shelton also teaches a modified clip applier subsystem at FIGs 82, 83 comprising:
a trocar (FIG 82, 72010) including: a head configured for attachment to the holder (FIGs 82, 83) and
a cannula (elongate shaft 72011) extending distally from the head and configured to receive the surgical instrument (FIG 83); and
a reloading module (clip magazine 72050) configured to couple to the head of the trocar (FIGs 82, 83) and including:
a housing (¶334) defining a longitudinal channel (opening 72051) configured to be coaxial with the cannula of the trocar (FIGs 82, 83) when the reloading module (clip magazine 72050) is coupled to the head of the trocar (72010); and
In the embodiment of a modified clip applier subsystem at FIGs 82, 83, Shelton does not expressly teach an embodiment of FIGs 82, 83 comprising: a cartridge rotatably coupled to the housing configured to store a plurality of surgical clips, wherein the cartridge is configured to rotate relative to the housing to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips within the longitudinal channel of the housing, wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally.
Shelton teaches a similar embodiment comprising clip applier system 71500 (FIG 75, ¶320), comprising clip applier 70600 (FIGs 52-60, ¶282).
Shelton teaches a cartridge (rotatable clip cartridge 70650, ¶285; clip magazine 70650, ¶282) rotatably coupled to the housing (FIG 75, clip applier 70600; see also ¶282, FIGs 52-60) configured to store a plurality of surgical clips (clips 70654, ¶320; FIGs 52, 62A, 75), wherein the cartridge (clip magazine 70650) is configured to rotate relative to the housing (¶282) to position a surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips (clips 70654, ¶320; FIGs 52, 62A, 75) within the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶282), wherein each surgical clip (70654) is stored within the housing (¶282) such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally (FIG 53). Shelton also teaches that clip magazine 70650 can have any suitable diameter including diameters which can permit clip magazine 70650 to be inserted through a trocar (¶283).
Although Shelton discloses the main surgical robotic instrument system comprising a surgical robotic arm having a holder configured to moveably support a surgical instrument, including a clip applier, Shelton does not disclose teach a trocar or cannula or rotatably coupled clip applier cartridge attached to a housing in the primary system. However, Shelton specifically addresses modification of clip applier subsystems comprising trocars, cannulas, and clip appliers, and related clip applier embodiment subsystems comprising clip magazines rotatably coupled to the housing. Because Shelton expressly discloses that the surgical robotic arm (30; ¶253) having a holder (actuator module 32) configured to movably support a surgical instrument “comprising an electric motor configured to supply the rotary motion to the shaft 110 of a clip applier 100, and/or any other surgical instrument” (¶253), a person of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised that other surgical instruments could be used with the robotic arm and holder without modifying the primary robotic system. Additionally, because Shelton’s primary robotic system comprises a clip applier 100, a person of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of other clip appliers that could be used with the primary robotic system of Shelton. These modifications would include the different embodiments of clip applier subsystems taught by Shelton as part of the same reference. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to consider the other clip applier systems taught by Shelton that were compatible with the robotic arm system, given the express disclosures of compatibility. The trocar with the arm-housing attachable head provides a base device for use in surgical robotic systems where the robotic arm is readily coupled with the trocar. Additionally, the other clip applier embodiments have rotatable and slidable clip cartridges that can be selected based on the end-use case as most applicable for the surgery being performed. Shelton’s rotatable clip cartridge solution can be incorporated along-side of Shelton’s trocar solution with the primary robotic arm device using known assembly methods without redesigning any of the core devices or delivery pathways. The rotatable clip cartridge of Shelton would be readily modifiable as a substitution of the other clip appliers taught as being useful, given that Shelton expressly teaches that clip magazine 70650 can be inserted through a trocar (¶282). Because the subsystems of Shelton are taught as being modifiable and compatible and they all address the same engineering problem (utilization of clip appliers with multi-clip cartridges in surgical robotic arm systems) and the proposed modifications are mechanically compatible and implemented by routine engineering practices (using multi-clip cartridges that are rotatable and slidable and sized to be inserted through a trocar), a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining these teachings.
Regarding claim 10, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 9, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) is annular (FIG 52, pentagonal, ¶283) and includes a plurality of circumferentially spaced flanges (FIG 52) that detachably support (¶283-285) the respective plurality (FIG 52, ¶283) of surgical clips (70654).
Regarding claim 11, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 10, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) defines at least one slot (opening 70653) configured to be coaxial with the longitudinal channel of the housing when the cartridge is in the first position (FIGs 52, 53; ¶¶284-285).
Regarding claim 12, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 11, as set forth above, wherein the at least one slot is a plurality of slots (70653), each slot of the plurality of slots (70653) being positioned between adjacent flanges of the plurality of flanges (FIG 52, 53), and wherein each slot (70653) retains a respective surgical clip (70654) of the plurality of clips (FIG 52, ¶283).
Regarding claim 13, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 9, as set forth above, wherein the reloading module (clip magazine 70650, ¶282; clip cartridge 70650, ¶285) further includes a motor (¶285) operably coupled to the cartridge (70650) and configured to move the cartridge between the first and second positions (FIG 53).
Regarding claim 14, Shelton teaches the surgical robotic system according to claim 13, as set forth above, wherein the reloading module (clip magazine 70650, ¶282; clip cartridge 70650, ¶285) further includes a sensor (FIG 75, Hall Effect sensor, ¶320; other sensor ¶321) in communication with the motor (¶285), the motor (¶285) being configured to rotate the cartridge (70650) from the first position (FIG 53) to the second position (FIG 53) when the sensor determines that a distal end portion of the surgical instrument is moved proximally of the cartridge (¶320).
Regarding currently amended independent claim 15, Shelton teaches a reloading module for use in a surgical robotic system (FIGs 82, 83; clip magazine 72050; ¶334), the reloading module comprising:
a housing (¶334) having a proximal end portion defining an inlet for receiving a surgical instrument (FIGs 82, 83), and a distal end portion (FIGs 82, 83) configured to couple to a trocar (72010), the housing defining a longitudinal channel therethrough (FIGs 82, 83; ¶334).
In the embodiment of a modified clip applier subsystem comprising a reloading module at FIGs 82, 83, Shelton does not expressly teach an embodiment of FIGs 82, 83 comprising: a motor supported in the housing and a cartridge rotatably supported in the housing at a location between the proximal and distal end portions, the cartridge storing a plurality of surgical clips, wherein the cartridge is configured to rotate, in response to an activation of the motor, relative to the housing between a first position, in which a first surgical clip of the plurality of surgical clips is outside of the longitudinal channel of the housing, and a second position, in which the first surgical clip is within the longitudinal channel of the housing, wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally.
Shelton teaches a similar embodiment comprising clip applier system 71500 (FIG 75, ¶320), comprising clip applier 70600 (FIGs 52-60, ¶282).
Shelton teaches a motor supported in the housing (¶285) and a cartridge (rotatable clip cartridge 70650, ¶285; clip magazine 70650, ¶282) rotatably supported in the housing at a location between the proximal and distal end portions (FIG 75, clip applier 70600; see also ¶282, FIGs 52-60), wherein the cartridge (rotatable clip cartridge 70650, ¶285; clip magazine 70650, ¶282) is configured rotate, in response to an activation of the motor (¶285), relative to the housing between a first position (FIG 53), in which the surgical clip (70654) is positioned outside of the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶284), and a second position (FIG 53), in which the first surgical clip (70654) is within the longitudinal channel of the housing (FIG 53, ¶284), wherein each surgical clip is stored within the housing such that an open end of each surgical clip is oriented distally (FIG 53).
Although Shelton discloses a reloading module for use in a surgical robotic system as part of the subsystem of FIGs 82 and 83, Shelton does not disclose a motor or how the cartridge rotates in response to the motor or how the cartridge is configured to store a plurality of clips in that embodiment. However, these modification are disclosed in a different embodiments of a clip applier subsystem taught by Shelton as part of the same reference. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to consider the other clip applier systems taught by Shelton that were compatible with the robotic arm system, given the express disclosures of compatibility (¶253, “comprising an electric motor configured to supply the rotary motion to the shaft 110 of a clip applier 100, and/or any other surgical instrument”). Shelton teaches several clip applier embodiments comprising reloading modules that have rotatable and slidable clip cartridges that can be selected based on the end-use case as most applicable for the surgery being performed. Shelton’s rotatable clip cartridge solution can be incorporated along-side of Shelton’s trocar solution with the primary robotic arm device using known assembly methods without redesigning any of the core devices or delivery pathways. The rotatable clip cartridge of Shelton would be readily modifiable as a substitution of the other clip appliers taught as being useful, given that Shelton expressly teaches that clip magazine 70650 can be inserted through a trocar (¶282). Because the subsystems of Shelton are taught as being modifiable and compatible and they all address the same engineering problem (utilization of clip appliers with multi-clip cartridges in surgical robotic arm systems) and the proposed modifications are mechanically compatible and implemented by routine engineering practices (using multi-clip cartridges that are rotatable and slidable and sized to be inserted through a trocar), a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have had a reasonable expectation of success in combining these teachings.
Regarding claim 16, Shelton teaches the reloading module according to claim 15, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) is annular (FIG 52, pentagonal, ¶283) and includes a plurality of circumferentially spaced flanges (FIG 52) that detachably support (¶283-285) the respective plurality (FIG 52, ¶283) of surgical clips (70654).
Regarding claim 17, Shelton teaches the reloading module according to claim 16, as set forth above, wherein the cartridge (70650) defines at least one slot (opening 70653) configured to be coaxial with the longitudinal channel of the housing when the cartridge is in the first position (FIGs 52, 53; ¶¶284-285).
Regarding claim 18, Shelton teaches the reloading module according to claim 17, as set forth above, wherein the at least one slot is a plurality of slots (70653), each slot of the plurality of slots (70653) being positioned between adjacent flanges of the plurality of flanges (FIG 52, 53), and wherein each slot (70653) retains a respective surgical clip (70654) of the plurality of clips (FIG 52, ¶283).
Regarding claim 19, Shelton teaches the reloading module according to claim 15, as set forth above, further comprising a sensor (FIG 75, Hall Effect sensor, ¶320; other sensor ¶321) in communication with the motor (¶285), the motor (¶285) being configured to rotate the cartridge (70650) from the first position (FIG 53) to the second position (FIG 53) when the sensor determines that a distal end portion of the surgical instrument is moved proximally of the cartridge (¶320).
Conclusion
No claim is allowed.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Vandenbroek et al., US 20060249410 (9 November 2006) teaches a surgical clip dispenser for use with endoscopic surgical procedures, has a button with teeth that contacts teeth of carousel such that rotational movement of carousel is restricted, when button is not pressed.
Shelton et al., US 20190125352 (2 May 2019) teaches a surgical clip applier comprising an automatic clip feeding system.
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 CHERIE M POLAND whose telephone number is (703)756-1341. The examiner can normally be reached M-W (9am-9pm CST) and R-F (9am-3pm CST).
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at 571-272-4696. 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.
/CHERIE M POLAND/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/SHAUN L DAVID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771