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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 11/25/2025. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-4, 7-10, 12, 15, 17, 18, 20, 24 and 26 have been amended, claims 14, 16 and 23 have been cancelled and no new claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-13, 15, 17-22 and 24-26 are presently pending in this application, and currently examined in the Office Action.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the stent antenna comprising a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, wherein the main branch comprises a single wavy conductive element and each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element, and further including a branched branch stent not electrically connected to the wavy conductive element (claim 24), and the stent antenna including an antenna configured to receive a power signal transmitted in a wireless manner and transmit and receive data to and from an external device, wherein the stent antenna is any one of a first stent antenna comprising a main branch having a mesh shape; a plurality of branched branches which are branched off from the main branch and each have a mesh shape; and a feed line connected to the main branch to supply power to the first stent antenna, wherein the feed line extends a current path such that a current flows in a length direction of the first stent antenna, or a second stent antenna comprising a graft; a wavy conductive element formed in the same shape as an outer circumference of the graft; and a feed line connected to a first point and a second point of the stent antenna to supply power to the stent antenna, wherein the second stent antenna comprises a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, the main branch comprises a single wavy conductive element, and each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element (claim 26) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 24 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 24, which depends from claim 15, which sets forth the stent antenna comprises a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, the main branch comprising a single wavy conductive element and each of the plurality of branched branches comprising the single wavy conductive element, and claim 24 further sets forth that the stent antenna “further includes a branched branch stent” and that “the branched branch stent is not electrically connected to the wavy conductive element”; however this parameter was never mentioned or suggested in the originally filed disclosure. Specifically, the originally filed disclosure never mentions or illustrates a stent antenna comprising a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, wherein the main branch and each of the branched branches comprise a single wavy conductive element; and further also comprises an additional branched branch stent which is not electrically connected to the wavy conductive element. There is no mention or suggestion of the stent antenna comprising more than two branched branches, as would be the case based on the parameter set forth in claim 24, nor is there any mention of a branched branch stent not electrically connected to the wavy conductive element of the main, and plurality of branched, branches.
Regarding claim 26, which sets forth the parameter of “a stent antenna including an antenna configured to receive a power signal transmitted in a wireless manner…wherein the stent antenna is any one of a first stent antenna and a second stent antenna, the first stent antenna comprising a main branch having a mesh shape; a plurality of branched branches which are branched off from the main branch and each have a mesh shape; and a feed line connected to the main branch to supply power to the first stent antenna, wherein the feed line extends a current path such that a current flows in a length direction of the first stent antenna, and the second stent antenna comprising a graft; a wavy conductive element formed in the same shape as an outer circumference of the graft; and a feed line connected to a first point and a second point of the stent antenna to supply power to the stent antenna, wherein the second stent antenna comprises a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, the main branch comprises a single wavy conductive element, and each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element”; however, this parameter was never mentioned or suggested in the originally filed disclosure. Specifically, the originally filed disclosure never mentions or illustrates a stent antenna “including an antenna”, wherein the stent antenna is/comprises all the above mentioned limitations of either the first or second stent antenna. Instead, it seems the structures as set forth above for the first and second stent antennas are actually what is/act as an antennas, and do not include a separate/additional antenna, as set forth in claim 26.
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 15, 17-22 and 24-25 are 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.
Regarding claim 15, which sets forth that the stent antenna comprises a wavy conductive element formed in the same shape as an outer circumference of the graft, a feed line connected to first and second points of the wavy conductive element, where “the stent antenna comprises a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, the main branch comprises a single wavy conductive element, and each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element”; however this parameter is found to be confusing for multiple reasons. Firstly, it is unclear if the “wavy conductive element” and the “single wavy conductive element” are the same structure or two separate, and distinct, structures. Second, it is unclear if the stent antenna comprises a graft and wavy conductive element and additionally also has a main branch and a plurality of branched branches. Third, it is unclear if the “single wavy conductive element” is in reference to a specific structure or if it is in reference to a material/type of material. Fourth, it is unclear if the “single wavy conductive element” is one continuous element spanning the main branch and the plurality of branched branches, or if there are separate, different, and distinct wavy conductive elements for each of the main and branched branches. Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art would not reasonable be apprised of the scope of the invention, thereby rendering the claim indefinite.
Regarding claim 24, which depends from claim 15, which sets forth the stent antenna comprises a main branch and a plurality of branched branches, the main branch comprising a single wavy conductive element and each of the plurality of branched branches comprising the single wavy conductive element, and claim 24 further sets forth that the stent antenna “further includes a branched branch stent” and that “the branched branch stent is not electrically connected to the wavy conductive element”; however this parameter is found to be confusing since it is not clear how many total branches the stent antenna actually has, and what the structure of each of the branches actually is. Specifically, it is not clear, structurally how exactly the stent antenna comprises a main branch, a plurality of branched branches, and also an additional branched branch stent, and how exactly the branched branch stent is part of/related to the final structure of the stent antenna. Does the branched branch associated with the graft or is there no graft on/in relation to the branched branch stent; also, is the branched branch stent no electrically connected to the wavy conductive element of the main branch, one of the branched branches, both of the branched branches, all of the main and branched branches, some but not all of the main and/or branched branches. Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art would not reasonable be apprised of the scope of the invention, thereby rendering the claim indefinite.
Examiner’s Notes
It is to be noted that in device/apparatus claims only the claimed structure of the final device bears patentable weight, and intended use/functional language is considered to the extent that it further defines the claimed structure of the final device (see MPEP 2114).
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant(s). Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant(s) fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 6, 8, 12, 13, 15, 17, 21, 22, 25 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hunter (US PG Pub. 2015/0335290), as previously disclosed.
Regarding claims 1, 2 and 12, Hunter discloses a stent antenna (14), configured to be inserted into a body and used, illustrated in Figures 1 and 4, comprising a main branch (12) having a mesh shape; a plurality of branched branches (BS) which are branched off from the main branch and each have a mesh shape, wherein the main branch and the plurality of branched branches are each made of a plurality of metal wires; and a feed line/electrical wire connected to one end/sensors and the other end/generation unit of the main branch to supply power to the stent antenna, illustrated in Figures 1, 4 and modified figures 1 and 4, below ([0003], Lines 1-2; [0022]; [0025]; [0076], Lines 1-3; [0077]; [0087] & [0088]).
PNG
media_image1.png
634
660
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 2, wherein the mesh shape includes a right-handed helical wire element formed by causing the metal wire to have right turns in a length direction of the metal wire; and a left-handed helical wire element formed by causing the metal wire to have left turns in the length direction of the metal wire, illustrated in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 6, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 3, wherein mesh rings formed by the right- handed helical wire element and the left-handed helical wire element are uniformly distributed in the stent antenna, illustrated in Figure 1.
Regarding claim 8, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 1, wherein a diameter of the main branch (12) is greater than a diameter of a branched branch (BS), illustrated in Figures 1, 4 and modified figures 1 and 4, above.
Regarding claim 13, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 1, wherein the stent antenna operates at frequencies in at least two different bands within an industry-science-medical (ISM) band ([0090], Lines 15-18).
Regarding claims 15 and 17, Hunter discloses a stent antenna (14), configured to be inserted into a body and used, illustrated in Figures 1 and 4, comprising a graft; a wavy conductive element/stent frame (12), including a single metal wire, formed in the same shape as an outer circumference of the graft ([0033] & [0087], Lines 1-2); and a feed line/electrical wire connected to first and second points of the wavy conductive element/stent frame to supply power to the stent antenna, wherein the stent antenna (14) comprises a main branch (12) and a plurality of branched branches (BS), the main branch comprises a single wavy conductive element, i.e. wire, and each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element, i.e. wire, illustrated in Figures 1, 4 and modified figures 1 and 4, above ([0003], Lines 1-2; [0022]; [0025]; [0033], Lines 1-7; [0076], Lines 1-3; [0077]; [0087] & [0088]).
Regarding claims 21 and 22, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 15, wherein the stent antenna operates at frequencies in at least two different bands within an industry-science-medical (ISM) band, wherein one of the at least two different bands is a band for wireless data communication, and the other is a band for wireless power transmission ([0090], Lines 15-18).
Regarding claim 25, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 21, wherein the stent antenna (14) includes a rectifier configured to receive and rectify a wireless power signal at a frequency in any one band of the at least two different bands and provide the rectified wireless power signal; and a sensor (22) driven by power provided by the rectifier and configured to collect biological information, wherein the stent antenna transmits the biological information collected by the sensor through any one band (30) of the at least two different bands, illustrated in Figures 1 and 3 3 ([0087] – [0090]).
Regarding claim 26, Hunter discloses a biological information communication apparatus, illustrated in Figures 1 and 4, comprising a stent antenna (14) including an antenna configured to receive a power signal transmitted in a wireless manner and transmit and receive data to and from an external device (24); a rectifier configured to rectify the power signal received by the stent antenna; and a sensor (22) configured to operate using the power provided by the rectifier and is inserted into a body to detect biological information of the body, wherein the stent antenna, the rectifier, and the sensor are inserted into the body and operate, wherein the stent antenna (14) comprises a main branch (12) having a mesh shape; a plurality of branched branches (BS) which are branched off from the main branch and each have a mesh shape; and a feed line/electrical wire connected to the main branch (12) to supply power to the stent antenna, wherein the feed line/electrical wire extends a current path such that a current flows in a length direction of the stent antenna, illustrated in Figures 1, 3, 4 and modified figures 1 and 4, above ([0003], Lines 1-2; [0022]; [0025]; [0076], Lines 1-3; [0077]; [0087] – [0089]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter as applied to claim 3 above, and in view of Vong et al. (US Patent No. 9,439,791), as previously disclosed, hereinafter Vong.
Regarding claim 4, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 3, but does not specifically disclose a pitch of each of the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements included in the main branch is greater than a pitch of each of the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements included in the branched branch.
However, Vong teaches that it is known, in the art of a stent in the same field of endeavor, that a greater/higher pitch allows for a faster and further elongation than a lower pitch (Column 18, Lines 58-59).
In view of the teaching of Vong, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the pitch, of each of the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements of the main branch of the stent antenna of Hunter, to be greater/higher than the pitch of each of the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements of the branched branch, in order to allow the main branch to elongate faster and further than the branched branch, as taught by Vong.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter as applied to claim 3 above, and in view of Wallsten (US Patent No. 4,655,771), as previously disclosed.
Regarding claim 5, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 3, wherein the right-handed helical wire element is formed by right turns of metal wire in the length direction, and the left-handed helical wire element is formed by left turns of metal wire in the length direction, illustrated in Figure 1 ([0003], Lines 1-2); but does not specifically disclose the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements are formed by coupling two or more wires, respectively.
However, Wallsten teaches a stent, in the same field of endeavor, wherein right-handed helical wire elements are formed by coupling two wires (2&3) having right turns in the length direction, and the left-handed helical wire are formed by coupling two wires (2a&3a) having left turns in the length direction, illustrated in Figure 1a (Column 4, Line 63 – Column 5, Line 6).
In view of the teachings of Wallsten, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the right-handed and left-handed helical wire elements, of the stent antenna of Hunter, to be formed by coupling two wires, respectively, along the length direction, since this is a well-known way in the art to from a stent, as taught by Wallsten.
Claims 7, 9, 10, 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter as applied to claims 1, 2 and 15 above, and in view of Dolan (US Patent No. 7,377,937), as previously disclosed.
Regarding claim 7, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 2, but does not specifically disclose the plurality of metal wires include a stainless steel wire; however, it is stated that a stent-graft can be as represented by Dolan, US Patent No. 7,377,937 ([0003]).
Wherein Dolan teaches a stent graft comprising a stent framework (110) comprising stainless steel wire, illustrated in Figure 1 (Column 3, Lines 22-29).
In view of the teachings of Dolan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for plurality of metal wires, of the stent antenna/stent-graft of Hunter, to include a stainless steel wire, since this is a known material used in the art of stent-grafts, as taught by Dolan.
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 1, wherein the stent antenna further includes a graft ([0003], Lines 1-2 & [0033], Lines 1-7), but does not specifically disclose that the stent antenna is placed inside the graft such that the main branch and the plurality of branched branches are not in contact with the body when implanted; however, it is stated that a stent-graft can be as represented by Dolan, US Patent No. 7,377,937 ([0003]).
Wherein Dolan teaches a stent graft comprising a stent framework (110) and a graft (120) surrounding the entire outer surface of the framework, illustrated in Figure 1 (Column 3, Lines 22-25 & 58-61).
In view of the teachings of Dolan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the main branch and the plurality of branched branches, of the stent antenna/stent-graft of Hunter, to placed inside the graft such that when implanted the main branch and the branched branches are not in contact with the body, since this is a known structure and/or material for a stent-graft in the art, as taught by Dolan.
Regarding claims 18 and 19, Hunter discloses the stent antenna of claim 15, but does not specifically disclose the metal wire is placed inside the graft and the graft is formed of any one material of polylactic acid (PLA) and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE); however, it is stated that a stent-graft can be as represented by Dolan, US Patent No. 7,377,937 ([0003]).
Wherein Dolan teaches a stent graft comprising a metal wire stent framework (110) placed inside a graft (120), which comprising PTFE, thereby surrounding the entire outer surface of the framework, illustrated in Figure 1 (Column 3, Lines 22-25, 35-40 & 58-61).
In view of the teachings of Dolan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the metal wire, of the wavy conductive element of the stent antenna/stent-graft of Hunter, to be placed inside the graft, which comprises PTFE, thereby surround the entire outer surface of the wavy conductive element, such that the stent antenna is not in direct contact with the body, since this is a known structure for, and material use in, a stent-graft, as taught by Dolan.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunter in view of Dolan as applied to claim 9 above, and further in view of MacTaggart et al. (US PG Pub. 2021/0236260), as previously disclosed, hereinafter MacTaggart.
Regarding claim 11, Hunter in view of Dolan disclose the stent antenna of claim 9, but do not specifically teach the graft is formed of polylactic acid (PLA).
However, MacTaggart teaches a stent-graft, in the same field of endeavor, wherein the graft is formed of polylactic acid (PLA) – ([0017]).
In view of the teachings of MacTaggart, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention for the graft, of the stent antenna of Hunter in view of Dolan, to be formed of polylactic acid (PLA), since this is a known material used for grafts of stent-grafts, as taught by MacTaggart; and it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use (see MPEP 2144.07).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues the rejection of independent claim 1 as being unpatentable over the prior art of Hunter stating that the newly added parameter of “the feed line extends a current path such that a current flows in a length direction of the stent antenna” is not taught by Hunter. Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion. Hunter states that electricity generated by one or more generators can be transmitted, via electric wires/feed lines, to sensors which are physically coupled to the stent ([0077]); thus, the feed line/electric wires extend the electricity/current path such that the current flows in a length direction of the stent antenna since the sensor are placed all along the stent antenna as illustrated in Figure 4. Thus, the rejection of claim 1 is deemed to be proper since Hunter teaches all the structural limitations set forth in the claim; hence, the rejection stands.
Applicant further goes on to argue the rejection of independent claim 15 as being unpatentable over the prior art of Hunter, stating that “Hunter fails to disclose that each of the plurality of branched branches comprises the single wavy conductive element” since the stent is mesh shaped. Again, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s assertion. Firstly, as detailed above in the 112 section, the parameter(s) of claim 15 are found to be unclear, specifically regarding what exactly, structurally, is meant by “a single wavy conductive element”. Secondly, as set forth in the rejection section, the limitation of a single wavy conductive element is interpreted as a single wire, and as illustrated in Figure 1 of Hunter, each of the main branch and plurality of branched branches are formed by wrapping/weaving/braiding a single wire/single wavy conductive element. Furthermore, looking at the stents illustrated in Figure 4 of Hunter, one could also interpret each stent ring as a single wavy conductive element, and each of the main branch and plurality of branched branches has said single wavy conductive element/stent ring, as illustrated in Figure 4 and modified figure 4, above. Therefore, the rejection of claim 15 is deemed to be proper since Hunter teaches all the structural limitations set forth in the claim; thus, the rejection stands.
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 DINAH BARIA whose telephone number is (571)270-1973. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10am - 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, Jerrah Edwards can be reached at 408-918-7557. 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.
/DINAH BARIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774 02/12/2026