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 addition of claims 21-22, cancellation of claims 2 and 10, and the amendments to claims 1, 2, and 19 in the response filed on 02/12/2026 are acknowledged.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-22 remain pending in the application
Claims 2 and 10 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 3-9, and 11-12, 15-17 and 19-22 are examined.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection necessitated by the applicant’s amendments to the claims. The applicant has modified claim 1 to require wherein the illumination lens includes an illumination window, wherein the illumination window is spaced apart from the distal end of the optical fiber to form a space between the illumination window and the distal end of the optical fiber, and wherein the illumination chamber is configured to store a liquid in the space, and applicant has modified claim 19 to require space between the illumination window and the distal end of the optical fiber, limitations heretofore not presented for examination in this application. As such, the scope of the claims was substantially changed and new grounds for rejection are presented.
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(s) 1, 4, 7, 8, 9, 12, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2016/0030707 to Dillon in view of EP 3714759 A1 to Schöler et al. (hereinafter “Schöler”).
Regarding claim 1, Dillon discloses an insertion apparatus, comprising: an insertion portion (102, Fig. 1, [0018]) including: a first conduit (112, Fig. 1, [0018]) having a first opening (118, Fig. 1, [0018]), wherein the first conduit is in fluid communication (134, Fig. 1, [0030]) with an outside of the insertion portion via the first opening (Fig. 1), an illumination chamber (110, Fig. 1, [0018], [0025], [0029], [0044]), having a second opening (114, Fig. 1, [0018]), wherein the illumination chamber is configured to fluidly communicate with a peripheral part of the first conduit via the second opening ([0018]), an optical fiber (124, Fig. 1, [0029]) configured to guide and radiate an illumination light ([0023], [0025], [0029]) wherein a distal end of the optical fiber is located inside of the illumination chamber (124, Fig. 1, [0029]), and an illumination lens provided distally relative to the distal end of the optical fiber (120, Fig. 1, [0023]), wherein the illumination lens is configured to radiate the illumination light to the outside of the insertion portion (120, Fig. 1, [0023]).
Dillon fails to expressly teach wherein the illumination lens includes an illumination window, wherein the illumination window is spaced apart from the distal end of the optical fiber to form a space between the illumination window and the distal end of the optical fiber, and wherein the illumination chamber is configured to store a liquid in the space.
However, Schöler teaches of an insertion apparatus (Schöler: 2, Fig. 1, page 1) includes an illumination window (Schöler: 20, Fig. 3a1 page 5), wherein the illumination window is spaced apart from the distal end of the optical fiber (Schöler: 30, Fig. 1, page 5) to form a space between the illumination window and the distal end of the optical fiber (Schöler: Fig. 3a), wherein the illumination chamber is configured to store a liquid in the space (Schöler: Fig. 3b, page 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, to utilize the space in the manner taught by Schöler. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of soldering the components together (Schöler: page 6).
Regarding claim 4, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the first conduit is configured to suction a fluid through the first opening and toward a proximal end of the first conduit (Dillon: [0032]).
Regarding claim 7, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 5, and Dillon further discloses wherein the first conduit is configured for insertion of a treatment instrument (Dillon: [0032]-[0033]).
Regarding claim 8, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the first conduit includes a guide part configured to guide a liquid from the first conduit toward the illumination chamber (Dillon: 142, Fig. 1, [0030]).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler.
Regarding claim 9, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 8, and Dillon further discloses wherein the guide part has an inclined surface provided around at least a portion of a periphery of the second opening (Dillon: [0030]).
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach an inclined surface.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the shape of the guide part of the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, to be configured to be inclined, since Dillion already teaches various configurations of the guide part ([0030] of Dillon). Additionally, it is noted that a change in shape of a component or device is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art MPEP2144.04(IV)(B).
Regarding claim 12, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the illumination chamber includes an inner surface (Dillon: 110, Fig. 1, [0018], [0025], [0029], [0044]), wherein the optical fiber includes an outer surface (Dillon: 124, Fig. 1, [0029]), and wherein a maximum distance between the outer surface of the optical fiber and the inner surface of the illumination chamber is 0.1 mm (Dillon: 124, Fig. 1, [0029]).
Regarding claim 15, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the insertion apparatus is an endoscope or a single-use endoscope (Dillon: [0017]).
Regarding claim 16, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches a method of illuminating with the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses the method comprising: flowing a liquid (Dillon: 134, Fig. 1, [0030]) through the first conduit (Dillon: 112, Fig. 1, [0018]) and through the second opening (Dillon: 114, Fig. 1, [0018]) into the illumination chamber (Dillon: 110, Fig. 1, [0018], [0025], [0029], [0044]); filling the illumination chamber to a level with the liquid (Dillon: Fig. 1); and radiating the illumination light to the outside of the insertion portion (Dillon: [0023], [0025], [0029]).
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein the level is sufficient to optically couple the distal end of the optical fiber to an illumination window of the illumination lens.
However, Schöler further teaches teach wherein the level is sufficient to optically couple the distal end of the optical fiber to an illumination window of the illumination lens (Schöler: Fig. 3b, page 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, to utilize the space in the manner taught by Schöler. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of soldering the components together (Schöler: page 6).
Regarding claim 17, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the method according to claim 16, and Dillon further discloses wherein radiating the illumination light to the outside of the insertion portion illuminates an inside of a subject (Dillon: [0023]).
Regarding claim 19, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches a medical kit, comprising: an insertion apparatus including an insertion portion configured for insertion into a subject (Dillon: 102, Fig. 1, [0018]), wherein the insertion portion includes: an illumination chamber (Dillon: 110, Fig. 1, [0018], [0025], [0029], [0044]), an optical fiber configured to guide and radiate an illumination light (Dillon: 124, Fig. 1, [0029]), wherein a distal end of the optical fiber is located inside of the illumination chamber (Dillon: 124, Fig. 1, [0029]), and an illumination window configured to radiate the illumination light to an outside of the insertion portion fiber (Dillon: 120, Fig. 1, [0023]), and wherein the illumination window is spaced apart from the distal end of the optical fiber to form a space (Dillon: 346, Fig. 3, [0035])).
Regarding claim 20, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the medical kit according to claim 19.
Dillon, in view of Schöler fails to expressly teach further comprising a liquid, wherein the liquid is located in the space.
However, Schöler further teaches further comprising a liquid, wherein the liquid is located in the space (Fig. 3b, page 6).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, to utilize the space in the manner taught by Schöler. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of soldering the components together (Schöler: page 6).
Regarding claim 22, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 4, and Dillon further discloses wherein the peripheral part of the first conduit is configured to allow a portion of a fluid drawn by suction via the first opening to flow toward the illumination chamber via the second opening (Dillon: [0032]).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler, and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2022/0107492 to Baumann et al. (hereinafter “Baumann”).
Regarding claim 3, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the illumination lens includes an illumination window extending from a distal end surface of the insertion portion to a distal end surface of the illumination chamber (Dillon: 120, Fig. 1, [0023]).
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein the liquid has a refractive index of 1.33 and wherein the illumination window has a refractive index of 1.63.
However, Schöler further teaches of an insertion apparatus (Schöler: Fig. 1A), wherein the liquid has a refractive index of 1.33 (Schöler: [0237]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, so that the liquid has a refractive index of 1.33, as taught by Schöler. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing refraction ([0237] of Schöler).
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein the illumination window has a refractive index of 1.63.
However, Baumann teaches of an insertion apparatus (Baumann: Fig. 1) wherein the illumination window has a refractive index of 1.63 (Baumann: [0026])
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, so that the illumination window has a refractive index of 1.63, as taught by Baumann. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing better brightness and depth of field ([0026] of Baumann).
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler, and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2009/0054728 to Trusty.
Regarding claim 5, Dillion discloses the insertion apparatus according to claim 4.
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein the insertion portion further includes: a discharge conduit having a discharge opening, wherein the discharge conduit is in fluid communication with the outside of the insertion portion via the discharge opening, and wherein the first conduit has a first inner diameter, the discharge conduit has a second inner diameter, and the second inner diameter is smaller than the first inner diameter.
However, Trusty teaches of an insertion apparatus (Trusty: Fig. 1) wherein the insertion portion further includes: a discharge conduit having a discharge opening (Trusty: [0034]), wherein the discharge conduit is in fluid communication with the outside of the insertion portion via the discharge opening (Trusty: [0034]), and wherein the first conduit has a first inner diameter, the discharge conduit has a second inner diameter, and the second inner diameter is smaller than the first inner diameter (Trusty: [0034]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, to utilize a discharge conduit in the manner taught by Trusty. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing suction to an area within the body ([0034] of Trusty).
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler, and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2006/0293564 to Nishiee et al. (hereinafter “Nishiie”).
Regarding claim 6, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 4.
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein a filter is located in the second opening.
However, Nishiie teaches of an insertion apparatus (Nishiie: Fig. 1) wherein a filter is located in the second opening (Nishiie: 48, Fig. 2, [0053]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, to utilize a filter in the manner taught by Nishiie. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of preventing at least one of intrusion of dust into the interior of the endoscope ([0012] of Nishiie).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2007/0092188 to Hoefig.
Regarding claim 11, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1, and Dillon further discloses wherein the illumination chamber is connected to an optical fiber conduit (Dillon: 124, Fig. 1, [0029]).
Dillion fails to expressly teach wherein portions of the optical fiber are located in the optical fiber conduit, and wherein a gap between an inner surface of the optical fiber conduit and the optical fiber is sealed to form a watertight structure.
However, Hoefig teaches of an insertion apparatus (Hoefig: Fig. 1) wherein portions of the optical fiber are located in the optical fiber conduit (Hoefig: [0064]), and wherein a gap between an inner surface of the optical fiber conduit and the optical fiber is sealed to form a watertight structure (Hoefig: [0064]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, to utilize a seal in the manner as taught by Hoefig. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing a tight and lasting seal ([0064] of Hoefig).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillon in view of Schöler and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2019/0059701 to Igarashi.
Regarding claim 21, Dillon, in view of Schöler, teaches the insertion apparatus according to claim 1.
Dillon, in view of Schöler, fails to expressly teach wherein the illumination window is concave and has a curved surface recessed toward the space.
However, Igarashi teaches of an insertion apparatus (Igarashi: 10, Fig. 1A [0066]) wherein the illumination window is concave and has a curved surface recessed toward the space (Igarashi: 7, Fig. 1A, [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Dillon, in view of Schöler, so that the illumination window is concave and has a curved surface recessed toward the space, as taught by Igarashi. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of ensuring that the light distribution characteristics are optimized ([0070] of Igarshi).
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 CHRISTEN A. SHARPLESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 6:00 AM - 2:00 PM, and Friday 6:00 AM - 10:00 AM.
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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/C.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795