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Claims 12-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 01/05/2026.
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 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tran et al. (US 2015/0273207) (hereinafter Tran).
Regarding claim 1, Tran discloses a biostimulator transport system (Figs. 2A-3C, tool 300), comprising: a handle (handle 310); a docking cap having a docking cavity to receive an attachment feature of a biostimulator (Fig. 2B, distal member 352 of core/tube 350 receives attachment structure 222 of biostimulator 200; see also Fig. 3B); a torque shaft coupled to the docking cap (outer tube 330); a tether support extending through the torque shaft to a distal support end, wherein the tether support has one or more support lumens (Fig. 3C, tube 350C which includes lumens 301, 302; para. 23: “According to the illustrated embodiment, tube 350C is a multi-lumen tube, which has a first lumen 301, through which at least first and second lengths 41C, 42C may freely pass, and a second lumen 302, in which a constricted portion forms channel 357”); and a tether extending through the one or more support lumens to a tether bight distal to the distal support end (tethers 41C, 42C).
Regarding claim 2, Tran discloses the one or more support lumens include a first support lumen separated from a second support lumen by a support septum (Fig. 3C, support lumens 301, 302 which are separated by material which is considered a support septum), and wherein the tether includes a first tether leg extending proximally from the tether bight through the first support lumen and a second tether leg extending proximally from the tether bight through the second support lumen (tethers 41C, 42C).
Regarding claim 3, Tran discloses the tether includes a polymeric filament (para. 22).
Regarding claim 4, Tran discloses the polymeric filament includes a polyester thread (para. 22).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tran in view of Eby et al. (US 2021/0138252) (hereinafter Eby).
Regarding claim 5, Tran does not disclose the tether includes a metallic filament.
Eby, however, teaches a biostimulator transport system (Abstract) wherein the tethers can be formed from wire or mechanical linkages created by processes such as machining, molding (metallic or polymer materials), or other fabrication processes (para. 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of this invention to modify Tran such that the tether includes a metallic filament. Making this modification would be useful for using wire created by molding processes, as taught by Eby.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-11 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: In the closest prior art, Tran does not disclose the handle includes a housing and a knob releasably coupled to the housing, wherein the tether includes a first tether leg extending proximally from the tether bight and coupled to the knob, and wherein the tether includes a second tether leg extending proximally from the tether bight and coupled to the housing, in combination with other limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Soltis et al. (US 2018/0178006) discloses delivery devices for leadless cardiac devices (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anant A Gupta whose telephone number is (571)272-8088. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9 am - 5 pm ET.
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, Niketa Patel can be reached at (571) 272-4156. 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.
/A.A.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/NIKETA PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792