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 I the first structural schematic view of an endoscopic system as illustrated in Figs. 3a-12 and citing claims 1-13, 16-18 and 19-25 apply to Species I, in the reply filed on 09/23/2025 is acknowledged. The requirement was deemed proper and therefore made final in the office action dated 10/29/2025. However, Applicant’s response dated 12/18/2025 stated original claim 14 was inadvertently omitted from the claims selected for Species I in Applicant’s response dated 09/23/2025. Applicant cites support for original claim 14 to be a part of Species I in paragraph 171 and Fig. 5. Therefore, Applicant has amended the pending independent claim 1 to include the subject matter of original dependent claim 14 and canceling original claim 14. Examiner agrees with Applicant’s explanation within Remarks dated 12/18/2025. Therefore, claims 1-13, 16-18 and 19-25 are examined below. Claims 15 and 26-35 are withdrawn as being drawn to directed to non-elected species.
Status of Claims
In the present application, claims 1-13 and 16-25 are currently pending within the application because they read on the elected species, Species I, which is the first structural schematic view of an endoscopic system as illustrated in Figs. 3a-12. Claims 15 and 26-35 are withdrawn because they read on a non-elected species.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 12/18/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-13 and 15-35 are currently pending. Claims 1-13, 16-18, and 19-25 are examined below. Claims 15 and 26-35 are currently withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the independent claim has been amended with new limitations, which states, “wherein an open surgical space is enclosed between the forward edge, and the surgical space is configured to accommodate a knife extending from a distal end of the insertion tube to the distal portion, and wherein the endoscopic attachment further comprises one or more drain holes configured as an outlet for trapped water or air.”
Such newly added limitation changes the scope of the claims, renders the previous rejection moot, and requires a new ground of rejection. As such the previous grounds of rejection identified in the non-final office action dated, 10/29/2025, have been withdrawn and a new grounds of rejections are presented below.
Please see section 35 U.S.C. §103 below for further explanation.
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 1-13, 16-18, and 19-25 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “wherein an open surgical space is enclosed between the forward edge” in line 13. The limitation is unclear an indefinite because the limitation uses the term “between” to describe the boundaries of the open surgical space. The term “between” grammatically eludes to more than one boundary but the limitation only mentions one boundary. Therefore, it is unclear whether Applicant’s intention is to claim how the forward edge surrounds the open surgical space or whether Applicant intended to include a second boundary, for example, stating language similar to but not limited to, “wherein an open surgical space is enclosed between the forward edge and the proximal portion.” Appropriate correction is required. All claims depending from claim 1 are also rejected because of their direct or indirect dependence on the rejected base claim, claim 1.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the surgical space" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the open surgical space.” Appropriate correction is required. All claims depending from claim 1 are also rejected because of their direct or indirect dependence on the rejected base claim, claim 1.
Claim 25 recites the limitation “a distal end of the insertion tube” in lines 2-3. However claim 25 indirectly depends from claim 1. Claim previously introduces the limitation “a distal end of the insertion tube” in line 14. Therefore it is unclear whether Applicant is claiming the same distal end as introduced in claim 1 or introducing a separate portion of the insertion tube the is difference from the limitation of claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-13 and 18-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross et al. (2017/0119435) hereinafter Gross in view of Wales et al. (US2018/0000321) hereinafter Wales.
Regarding Claim 1, Gross discloses an endoscopic attachment (abstract, Figs. 15A-D, distal end 160) , comprising:
a proximal portion (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) configured to be coupled to an insertion tube (Figs. 15A-D longitudinal member 220) of the endoscope (Figs. 15A-D apparatus 120); and
a distal portion (Figs. 15A-D area near distal portion 660) coupled to the proximal portion (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) and extending forwardly (Fig. 15a near reference numeral 160) from the proximal portion (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) to a forward edge (Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665);
wherein the distal portion (Figs. 15A-D area near distal portion 660) comprises:
a first axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) that extends from the proximal portion (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) configured axially to the forward (Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) by a first axial length (see annotated Figs. 15A-D), and defines a passage (Figs. 15A-D passage within lumen 180),
wherein the first axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) extends circumferentially entirely around an axis (Fig. 15b axis A5) of the passage (Figs. 15A-D passage within lumen 180); and
a second axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) that extends a second axial length (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) from the first axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) to the forward edge (Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665), and over at least part of the second axial length (see annotated Figs. 15A-D length of annotated second axial segment along port 660), the second axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) extends circumferentially around the axis (Fig. 15b axis A5) of the proximal portion less than 360 degrees (see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
wherein an open surgical space (Fig. 15B near suction chamber 824) is enclosed between the forward edge (Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665), and the surgical space (Fig. 15B near suction chamber 824) is configured to accommodate a knife extending from a distal end of the insertion tube (see annotated Figs. 15a-d) to the distal portion (Figs. 15A-D area near distal portion 660, [0147] “In applications in which a working space is created, a surgical tool may then be passed over the guidewire and into the working space, in order to perform a surgical procedure on the heart. … Examples of surgical tools that may be used include a forceps, a needle, an electrosurgery tool, a cutting tool, a suction device, and a balloon.”)
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Although Gross discloses distal end 160 is coupled to the insertion tube, longitudinal member 220, Gross is silent whether the distal end 160 is attachable to the insertion tube. Gross is also silent at whether the endoscope attachment further comprises one or more drain holes configured as an outlet for trapped water or air.
However Wales, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an endoscope attachment (Wales – Figs. 1-5B cap assembly 20) attachable to (Wales – [0030] “Distal end 14 of shaft 12 may be coupled to a cap assembly 20 to facilitate various medical procedures, e.g., endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). … That is, the bore of sleeve 22 may grip, secure to, hold, or otherwise couple to each of shaft 12 and cap 24. For example, at least a portion of sleeve 22 may comprise an elastomeric material that tightly, closely, or snuggly, receives shaft 12 and cap 24 therein. That is, due to the elastomeric material of sleeve 22, a portion of sleeve 22 may be stretched about an exterior surface of shaft 12, while another portion of sleeve 22 may be stretched about an exterior surface of cap 24, so as to securely couple sleeve 22 to shaft 12 and cap 24.”), the insertion section (Wales – Figs. 1-5b shaft 12) and wherein the endoscope attachment (Wales – Figs. 1-5B cap assembly 20) further comprises one or more drain holes configured as an outlet for trapped water or air (Wales – [0030-0034] “Cap assembly 20 may be, for example, a two-piece structure. That is, cap assembly 20 may include a sleeve 22 and a cap 24. … As shown, cap 24 may have a drain hole 40 extending therethrough. That is, drain hole 40 may extend through the thickness of a side wall of cap 24 to enable a medical professional to evacuate, clear, or otherwise remove blood or other such visual obstructions from central lumen 25 through drain hole 40. That is, a medical professional may deliver an appropriate irrigation fluid (not shown) through endoscope 10, into cap assembly 20, and out through drain hole 40 without being required to invert or otherwise reposition endoscope 10 to allow removal of obstructions via gravity.”).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Gross with the teachings of Wales to have the endoscope attachment be attachable to an insertion section for the benefit of securing a cap to the distal end of the insertion section in order for the cap to be capable of “…facilitate[ing] various medical procedures.”
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Gross with the teachings of Wales to include wherein the endoscope attachment further comprises one or more drain holes configured as an outlet for trapped water or air for the benefit of “…a medical profession [able ] to evacuate, clear, or otherwise remove blood or other such visual obstructions from the central lumen…through [a] drain hole…with out being required to invert or otherwise reposition the endoscope…to allow removal of obstructions via gravity.”
Regarding Claim 2, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscope attachment according to claim 1, wherein the second axial segment extends circumferentially about the axis less than or equal to 180 degrees.
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment according to claim 1, wherein a lateral notch (Gross - see annotated Figs. 15A-D near label of first axial segment) which transverses to said axis (Gross - Fig. 15b axis A5) and extends through the passage (Gross - Figs. 15A-D passage within lumen 180) is formed over the forward edge (Gross - Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment according to claim 3, wherein a tip of the knife is axially flush with or protruding from the lateral notch. (Gross -[0147] “In applications in which a working space is created, a surgical tool may then be passed over the guidewire and into the working space, in order to perform a surgical procedure on the heart. … Examples of surgical tools that may be used include a forceps, a needle, an electrosurgery tool, a cutting tool, a suction device, and a balloon.”)
Regarding Claim 5, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 3, wherein the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) is axially recessed to form the lateral notch (Gross - see annotated Figs. 15A-D near label of first axial segment) with respect to a plane extending laterally across the passage (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15a-d) and intersecting both a short side of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) and the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D), respectively, the short side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D), being a portion of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) at the first axial length in the first axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 5, wherein the plane intersects the long side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D), of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) , the long side being a portion of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) at the second axial length in the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) extends the first axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) over a first circumferential span of 0 to 180 degrees about the axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b near axis A5).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 8, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 7, wherein the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) extends the first axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) over a first circumferential span of 30 to 150 degrees about the axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b near axis A5).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) extends the second axial length over a second circumferential span of 0 degrees to 180 degrees about the axis(Gross -[Fig. 15b near axis A5).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10 Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein the first axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D length of annotated second axial segment along port 660) is 2 to 15 mm (Gross -[0177] “For some applications, a length between two lying along a perimeter of side-facing suction port 660 is at least 3 mm and/or less than 20 mm, e.g., less than 15 mm.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11 Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein the second axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D length of annotated second axial segment along port 660) is 2 to 15 mm (Gross -[0177] “For some applications, a length between two lying along a perimeter of side-facing suction port 660 is at least 3 mm and/or less than 20 mm, e.g., less than 15 mm.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 12, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 11, wherein the second axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D length of annotated second axial segment along port 660) is 2 to 5 mm (Gross -[ [0177] “For some applications, a length between two lying along a perimeter of side-facing suction port 660 is at least 3 mm and/or less than 20 mm, e.g., less than 15 mm.”).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) transitions moving axially from the circular cross-section shape of the first axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) at a proximal side to having a flattened side on a distal side.
PNG
media_image3.png
777
1756
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 18, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein a circumferential sidewall (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) of the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) extends in a direction coincident with the axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b axis A5), such that the distal portion extends axially forward from the proximal portion (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) to the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 19, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 18, wherein the lateral notch (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) over the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) is provided between a short side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) and the axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b axis A5); the short side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) is a portion of the forward edge at the first axial length in the first axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 20, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1, wherein at least a portion (Gross -[Fig. 15B near reference numeral 665) of said second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) is inclined toward (Gross -[see Fig. 15D) said axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b axis A5) in a direction away (Gross -[see Fig. 15D) from said first axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D), and an end (Gross -[Fig. 15b near reference numeral 660) of the at least portion of the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) is located at the second axial length of the second axial segment (see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 20,wherein the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) is inclined from said first axial segment(Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) towards said axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b axis A5) through the second axial length (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) .
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 22, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 20, wherein the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) and the short side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) are located on two different sides of a first section plane (Gross -[Fig. 15C near dotted arrow), respectively; wherein the first section plane (Gross -[Fig. 15C near dotted arrow) is a longitudinal section passing through the axis (Gross -[Fig. 15b axis A5), and the short side (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) is the portion of the forward edge (Gross -[Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) at the first axial length in the first axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 23, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 22, wherein circumferentially opposite side edges of the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) are located on the first section plane (Gross -[Fig. 15C near dotted arrow).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 24, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 22, wherein the lowest portion of the lateral notch (see annotated Figs. 15A-D) over the forward edge (Figs. 15B-C near protrusion 665) is flush with or below the first section plane (Fig. 15C near dotted arrow).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
23
3
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 25, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 20, wherein a projection of a circumferential sidewall (side walls of annotated second axial segment in annotated Figs. 15a-d) of the second axial segment (Gross -[see annotated Figs. 15A-D) on a distal end of the insertion tube is arranged in a staggered manner (Gross – [0180] “…the edges of suction port 660 are generally blunt and not sharp, e.g., rounded. In other words, a plurality, e.g., some or all, of tissue-contact sites along the perimeter of suction port 660, are dull in order to facilitate safe advancement of apparatus 120 toward the heart and reduce the risk of damaging and slicing into tissue during advancement of apparatus 120. For some applications, each one of the tissue-contact sites of port 660, or alternatively, only the distally-facing tissue-contact sites, have a smallest radius of curvature R5 (with or without liner 667) that is greater than 0.1 mm, e.g., greater than 0.2 mm, or between 0.1 mm and 0.2 mm. Typically, smallest radius of curvature R5 is less than 60 mm. This radius of curvature contributes to the bluntness of the perimeter of suction port 660, such that tissue-contact sites of port 660 do not damage tissue during advancement of apparatus 120. For some applications, longitudinal guide member 220 is shaped to define a tube wall 223 having a thickness Ti along at least part of the perimeter that is 40-60 microns, e.g., 50 microns. Typically, a distance D6 between two edges of perimeter of suction port 660 is between 1 and 6 mm, e.g., 4-5 mm.”) with respect to an optical system (Gross- Figs. 15a-d imaging device 240) at the distal end of the insertion tube (Figs. 15A-D longitudinal member 220).
PNG
media_image1.png
726
1756
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gross et al. (2017/0119435) hereinafter Gross in view of Wales et al. (US2018/0000321) hereinafter Wales in view of Mitelberg et al. (US2018/0042603) hereinafter Mitelberg.
Regarding Claim 16, Gross in view of Wales teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 1. Wales teaches wherein the endoscope attachment (Wales – Figs. 1-5B cap assembly 20) attachable to (Wales – [0030] “Distal end 14 of shaft 12 may be coupled to a cap assembly 20 to facilitate various medical procedures, e.g., endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). … That is, the bore of sleeve 22 may grip, secure to, hold, or otherwise couple to each of shaft 12 and cap 24. For example, at least a portion of sleeve 22 may comprise an elastomeric material that tightly, closely, or snuggly, receives shaft 12 and cap 24 therein. That is, due to the elastomeric material of sleeve 22, a portion of sleeve 22 may be stretched about an exterior surface of shaft 12, while another portion of sleeve 22 may be stretched about an exterior surface of cap 24, so as to securely couple sleeve 22 to shaft 12 and cap 24.”), the insertion section (Wales – Figs. 1-5b shaft 12). But Gross in view of Wales are silent at further teachings wherein an adhesive tape with a non-adhesive removable coating is secured to a rearward edge, wherein the adhesive tape is configured to be folded backward over the rearward edge onto the insertion tube, wherein the rearward edge is an edge of an end of the proximal portion away from the distal portion.
However Mitelberg, in the same field of endeavor teaches wherein an adhesive tape (Mitelberg - Fig. 7 cohesive banding 98) with a non-adhesive removable coating is secured to a rearward edge (Mitelberg - edge of mount 52), wherein the adhesive tape is configured to be folded backward over the rearward edge (Mitelberg - [0057] “A tape or cohesive banding 98 may be used over the clip 90 and distal end 44 of the endoscope to additionally secure the cap assembly relative to the endoscope during use. By way of example, a surgical-grade tape or silicone cohesive banding may be used.”) onto the insertion tube (Mitelberg - Fig. 7 distal end 44) wherein the rearward edge (Mitelberg - edge of mount 52)is an edge of an end of the proximal portion (Mitelberg - see annotated Fig. 8 and near mount 52) away from the distal portion (Mitelberg - Fig. 4 tissue guard 87).
PNG
media_image4.png
449
456
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Gross in view of Wales with the teachings of Mitelberg to have an adhesive tape with a non-adhesive removable coating is secured to a rearward edge, wherein the adhesive tape is configured to be folded backward over the rearward edge onto the insertion tube, wherein the rearward edge is an edge of an end of the proximal portion away from the distal portion for the benefit of “secur[ing] the cap assembly relative to the endoscope during use” (Mitelberg –[0057]).
Regarding Claim 17, Gross in view of Wales in view of Mitelberg teach the endoscopic attachment of claim 16, wherein the adhesive tape is secured to a surface of the insertion tube by peeling off the non-adhesive coating (Mitelberg –[ [0057] “A tape or cohesive banding 98 may be used over the clip 90 and distal end 44 of the endoscope to additionally secure the cap assembly relative to the endoscope during use. By way of example, a surgical-grade tape or silicone cohesive banding may be used.”).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant disclosure:
Malchey et al. (2017/0311789);
Kresch et al. (US5456689);
Bhatt et al. (US2015/0133926);
Tyler McLawhorn (US2014/0100570);
Jagelski et al. (US2017/0112523); and
Takayasu Mikkaichi (US2007/0203395).
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 MEGAN E MONAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7330. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am - 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, Michael 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.
/MEGAN ELIZABETH MONAHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights