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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of species 1a, 2a, and 3a in the reply filed on 07/06/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the species do not constitute patentably distinct inventions. This is not found persuasive because several embodiments of a species of a spacer are disclosed which include mutually exclusive characteristics of a flange, embodiments of the spacer without a movement regulation part and embodiments with mutually exclusive characteristics of the movement regulation part, and embodiments of the spacer with mutually exclusive characteristics of the traction operation body arrangement parts. Similarly, several species of a moveable elongated structure are disclosed requiring different configurations of distal end side tubes, intermediate tube, base end side tubes, and traction portions. Upon allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
In the reply filed on 07/06/2026, Applicant contends that claims 1-4, 6, 8-10, 12, 48, 49, 66, 65 and 80 read on the elected species. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Claims 48 and 49 each depend from independent claim 33, which is directed to an unelected species. Accordingly, claims 48-49 are withdrawn from consideration. The Examiner adds claims 5 and 14 to be examined, as they read on the elected species. Claims 1-77 and 79-80 are presently pending in the applications, with claims 7, 11-13, 15-64, 67-77 and 79 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-6, 8, 10-14, 65-66 and 80 are examined below.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the wiring aid provided with” should be changed to -- wherein the wiring aid is provided with --. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 3-4, 6 and 65 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 3 recites the limitation "both end portions" in third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the traction operation body arrangement part has a flange projecting radially outward from both end parts of the wiring aid, and has a notch part receiving and engaging the traction operation body on the flange”. The specification, as originally filed, discloses the traction operation body arrangement part (44) has “a cutout shape” (see par. [0118] of the published application) and that the traction operation body arrangement parts correspond to the placement recesses (44; see par. [0591] of the published application) where the traction operation body is placed (see, for example, par. [0119]). As is clear, the traction operation body arrangement part is a recess and holds the traction operation body. The specification, as originally filed, discloses the recess (44) and flange (43) as two separate components. Thus, it is not clear how the recess has a flange projecting radially outward from the wiring aid. Regarding the traction operation body arrangement part having a notch receiving part, the specification discloses the operation body arrangement part (44) being a notch portion (see par. [0127] and [0160] of the published application). Further, claim 3, from which claim 4 depends, recites “the wiring aid provided with a traction operation arrangement part receiving the traction operation body”. The difference between the traction operation body arrangement part (44) and the notch part receiving and engaging the traction operation body is unclear, as they are both disclosed as being a portion of the wiring aid that holds the traction operation body. Accordingly, the claim is rendered indefinite. Appropriate correction is required. For purposes of examination, the claim is interpreted as “wherein the wiring aid has a flange projecting radially outward from both end parts of the wiring aid, and the traction operation body arrangement part receiving and engaging the traction operation body adjacent the flange” (emphasis added).
Claim 4 recites the limitation "both end parts of the wiring aid" in third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the pair of base end side through holes" in third line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 65 recites the limitation "drive mechanism" in the fifth line of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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, 14, 65 and 80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hinman (US 2011/0022078 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hinman discloses a movable elongated structure comprising at least a distal end side tubular body (582; Figs. 14-15; par. [0052] and [0056]), a base end side tubular body (560; Figs. 15-16; par. [0052] and [0056]), and a traction operation body (522; Fig. 15), further comprising a wiring part (556; Figs. 7A-7B, 9, and 10A-10B) configured to arrange , wherein the distal end side tubular body (582) and the traction operation body (522) are flexible (Fig. 2 – for articulation), and wherein each of an inside tube wall of the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side body (560) is provided with a longitudinal through hole (570; par. [0049]; Figs. 13-14) to be inserted by the traction operation body (522).
Regarding claim 2, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 80, wherein the wiring aid (556) is removably held (capable of being uncoupled) by the traction operation body (522) between the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side tubular body (560).
Regarding claim 3, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 80, wherein the wiring aid (556) provided
Regarding claim 4, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure of claim 3, wherein the traction operation body arrangement part (interpreted as wiring aid 556) has a flange (518; Figs. 7A-7B and 9) projecting radially outward from both end parts of the wiring aid (Figs. 7A-7B and 9), and has a notch part (interpreted as traction operation body arrangement part 516) receiving and engaging the traction operation body (522) on (adjacent to) the flange (518).
Regarding claim 5, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 80, wherein the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side tubular body (560) are formed in a flexible (Fig. 2) and elongated shape (Figs. 7A-7B and 14A-14C), wherein the traction operation body (522) is a pair of flexible traction operation bodies that are inserted through a pair of longitudinal through holes (570) provided inside tube walls of the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side tubular body (560), and wherein the through hole (570) provided in the base end side tubular body (560) is referred to as a base end side through hole (570), and the through hole provided in the distal end side tubular body (582) is referred to as a distal end side through hole (570).
Regarding claim 14, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 5, wherein the traction operation body (522) is a flexible wire, wherein the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side tubular body (560) are composed of flexible tubes (Figs. 2, 7A-7B and 14A-14C) having a main lumen (554/506), and wherein the through hole (570) is a wire lumen formed inside the tube wall of the tube and through which the wire (522) is available to be inserted.
Regarding claim 65, Hinman discloses a movable long treatment tool, wherein a distal end side of the distal end side tubular body (582) in the movable elongated structure according to claim 80 is provided with a treatment tool such as a retractor, a gripper (580/584; Fig. 15; par. [0051]-[0052]), forceps, forceps, or scissors, and wherein drive mechanism (par. [0027] and [0031] – linearly moveable rod) for the treatment tool is arranged in an internal space of the movable elongated structure.
Regarding claim 80, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 1, wherein the wiring part is a wiring aid (556; Fig. 16) arranging the traction operation body (522) between the distal end side tubular body (582) and the base end side tubular body (560).
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) 66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hinman, as applied to the claims above, in view of Yamamoto et al. (US 2007/0135813 A1).
Regarding claim 66, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 80, wherein the distal end side tubular body (582) includes elastic retractors, grippers (580/584), forceps, needles, probes, or scissors having [[am]] an internal space, which are opened and closed with wires. However, the grippers of Hinman are not disclosed as being elastic. Yamamoto teaches an analogous end effector wherein the gripper is elastic (7; par. [0044]; Figs. 1-3B). The elastic gripper is disposed within a sheath (2) until it is deployed for use (par. [0044]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to use elastic grippers that are stowed until use, as taught by Yamamoto, thereby preventing damage to any internal tissue during navigation to the surgical site.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6, and claims 8-10 and 12 depending therefrom, 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. Regarding claim 6, Hinman discloses the movable elongated structure according to claim 5, wherein a traction operation body arrangement part (516) provided at the base end side and the distal end side have a base end side flange (518) and a distal end side flange (518), respectively, protruding radially outward (Figs. 7A-7B and 9). However, Hinman does not specifically disclose wherein an interval between the pair of base end side through holes in a circumferential direction in a cross-sectional plane of the base end side tubular body is set wider than an interval between the pair of distal end side through holes in a circumferential direction in a cross-sectional plane of the distal end side tubular body, and wherein the traction operation body led out from the base end side through hole and introduced into the distal end side through hole is disposed in the traction operation body arrangement part, in combination with the other elements of the claim. Analogous prior art reference Jogasaki (US 11,130,244 B2) teaches an analogous movable elongated structure wherein analogous traction operation bodies (6; Fig. 2) cross as they are led through through-holes of analogous tubular bodies (5; Fig. 2), however, like Hinman, Jogasaki does not disclose the interval between the pair of base end side through holes in a circumferential direction in a cross-sectional plane of the base end side tubular body is set wider than an interval between the pair of distal end side through holes in a circumferential direction in a cross-sectional plane of the distal end side tubular body.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYNAE E BOLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00.
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.
/RYNAE E BOLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANHTUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
09/20/26
Prosecution Insights