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
Claims 4 and 8-10 were also withdrawn as set forth in the previous office action, therefore the status identifiers of all amendments henceforth should reflect claims 4 and 8-20 as being withdrawn. It is noted that the response filed 04/15/2026 does not correctly reflect the status of claims 4 and 8-10.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the “continuous single unit” does not appear to be present in the original specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2, “the entire length” should be changed to “an entire length” for further clarification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent No. 6,030,369 to Engelson et al. (“Engelson”).
Regarding claim 1, Engelson teaches a catheter comprising an elongate tubular body (103, Fig. 2) having a proximal end portion (131) and a distal end portion (135) and extending the entire length of the catheter (Fig. 2), the elongate tubular body comprising: an inner liner (114) comprising a first surface (inner surface of 114) and a second surface (outer surface of 114), the first surface defining a lumen of the elongate tubular body (Fig. 2), and one or more outer layers (116) over the second surface of the inner liner, wherein the inner liner comprises a continuous single unit (Fig. 2) constructed from a lubricious material (claim 9, PTFE) and extending the entire length of the catheter, the inner liner comprises a first thickness (thickness of 129) at the proximal end portion of the elongate tubular body and a second thickness (thickness of 136) at the distal end portion of the elongate tubular body, the second thickness being smaller than the first thickness (Fig. 2), but does not show the continuous single unit.
Regarding claim 2, Engelson teaches the catheter of claim 1 as shown above, Engelson further teaching the second surface of the inner liner defines a first outer diameter (diameter at 129) at the proximal end portion (flat proximal portion of 129 before 126) of the elongate tubular body and a second outer diameter (diameter at 136) at the distal end portion (flat distal portion of 136 after 127) of the elongate tubular body, the second outer diameter being smaller than the first outer diameter (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 3, Engelson teaches the catheter of claim 2 as shown above, Engelson further teaching the first outer diameter defined by the second surface of the inner liner at the proximal end portion is substantially constant (the flat portion of 129 as previously defined is substantially constant), the second outer diameter defined by the second surface of the inner liner at the distal end portion is substantially constant (the flat portion of 136 as previously defined is substantially constant), and the second surface of the inner liner further comprises a transition section (126/130/127) having a tapering function from the first outer diameter to the second outer diameter (Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Engelson teaches the catheter of claim 2 as shown above, Engelson further teaching the first surface of the inner liner defines a diameter of the lumen substantially constant between the proximal end portion and the distal end portion of the elongate tubular body (Fig. 2, the diameter of the lumen is substantially constant).
Regarding claim 6, Engelson teaches the catheter of claim 2 as shown above, Engelson further teaching the inner line being constructed from a material comprising polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) (claim 9).
Regarding claim 7, Engelson teaches the catheter of claim 6 as shown above, Engelson further teaching the first outer diameter defined by the second surface of the inner liner at the proximal end portion is substantially constant (the flat portion of 129 as previously defined is substantially constant), the second outer diameter defined by the second surface of the inner liner at the distal end portion is substantially constant (the flat portion of 136 as previously defined is substantially constant), and the second surface of the inner liner further comprises a transition section (126/130/127) having a tapering function from the first outer diameter to the second outer diameter (Fig. 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments and amendments with respect to the art rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Engelson as shown above.
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 BENJAMIN KOO whose telephone number is (703)756-1749. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm EST.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571) 270-5246. 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.
/B.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/MICHAEL J TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights