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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/19/2026 has been entered.
Status of the Claims
The amendment filed 05/19/2026 has been entered. At entry, Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 11-22 are pending and under consideration.
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 1-4, 6-8 and 11-22 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 lines 13 recites “wherein, for each of the plurality of sequential cavities, the sequential cavity”. There is antecedent basis for “the sequential cavity” in the claim. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “wherein, for each sequential cavity of the plurality of sequential cavities”
Claim 1 line 15 recites “that sequential cavity” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what structure or component is being referenced by the term “that”. In an effort to compact prosecution, it is interpreted as “the sequential cavity”
Claim 1 line 15 recites “it” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what structure or component is being referenced. In an effort to compact prosecution, it is interpreted as “the sequential cavity”
Claim 1 line 17 recites “wherein at least a plurality of first cavities are each configured to” renders the claim indefinite at it is not clear if the first cavities refers the progressive cavity pump further comprises first cavities in addition to sequential cavities or same element. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “wherein the plurality of sequential cavities”
Claim 1 line 18 recites “a distal end” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “the distal end”
Claim 1 lines 18 and 21 recites “the respective first cavity” There are antecedent basis for the first cavity”, in an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is interpreted as “the respective sequential cavity”
Claim 1 line 21 recites “it” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what structure or component is being referenced. In an effort to compact prosecution, it is interpreted as “the sequential cavity”
Claim 20 line 17 recites “for each of the plurality of sequential cavities, the sequential cavity”, There is antecedent basis for “the sequential cavity” in the claim. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “wherein, for each sequential cavity of the plurality of sequential cavities”
Claim 20 line 19 recites “that sequential cavity” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what structure or component is being referenced by the term “that”. In an effort to compact prosecution, it is interpreted as “the sequential cavity”
Claim 20 lines 20 recites “it” renders the claim indefinite as it is not clear what structure or component is being referenced by the term “it”. In an effort to compact prosecution, it is interpreted as “the sequential cavity”
Claim 20 line 21 recites “wherein at least a plurality of first cavities are each configured to” renders the claim indefinite at it is not clear if the first cavities refers the progressive cavity pump further comprises first cavities in addition to sequential cavities or same element. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “wherein the plurality of sequential cavities”
Claims 20 lines 22-24 recites “the respective first cavity” There are antecedent basis for the first cavity”, in an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is interpreted as “the respective sequential cavity”
Claim 20 line 22 recites “a distal end” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation is being interpreted as “the distal end”
Claim 21 line 4 recites “first cavities” which should read “sequential cavities”
Dependent claims are rejected for at least being dependent of claims 1 or 19.
Examiner’s note: The above noted informalities should not be taken as an exhaustive list of all such instances. Therefore, it is requested that Applicant review the claims in their entirety for compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-4, 6-8, 11-22 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art, alone or in combination, could be found to teach a method of removing an occlusive material within a blood lumen of a patient, said method comprising:
a catheter comprising a catheter lumen and a progressive cavity pump located at a distal portion of said catheter, said progressive cavity pump in fluid communication with said catheter lumen and said blood lumen, wherein said progressive cavity pump comprises a stator and a rotor; and
actuating said progressive cavity pump to ingest at least a portion of said occlusive material from said blood lumen into said catheter lumen,
wherein said actuating the progressive cavity pump comprises forming at least one cavity a plurality of sequential cavities between the stator and the rotor,
wherein, for each of the plurality of sequential cavities, the sequential cavity is initially open at a distal end of the progressive cavity pump and, as the progressive cavity pump is further actuated, that sequential cavity becomes fluidically sealed when closed as it proximally translates along the progressive cavity pump,
wherein at least a plurality of first cavities are each configured to,
when the respective first cavity is open at a distal end of the progressive cavity pump, separate and capture at least a portion of a plurality of portions of the occlusive material, and
when the respective first cavity becomes fluidically sealed as it proximally translates along the progressive cavity pump, proximally translate the separated and captured portion of the plurality of portions of the occlusive material for transfer into the catheter lumen.
The closest prior art Summers (US 4850957 A) teaches the device as claimed (figure 1 and col 2 lines 30-45, col 3 lines 27-55, positive displacement motor at distal end of the catheter 10 comprising a rotor 24 and stator 22, and the stator 22 is resilient thereby forming sealed sequential cavities between the point of contacts of the rotor 24 and stator 22);
except for wherein at least a plurality of first cavities are each configured to,
when the respective first cavity is open at a distal end of the progressive cavity pump, separate and capture at least a portion of a plurality of portions of the occlusive material, and
when the respective first cavity becomes fluidically sealed as it proximally translates along the progressive cavity pump, proximally translate the separated and captured portion of the plurality of portions of the occlusive material for transfer into the catheter lumen.
Specifically, Summers teaches the positive displacement motor is configured for driving cutting element (figure 1, 30), wherein pressurized fluid is directed through the sequential cavities of the positive displacement motor in a distal direction, i.e., fluid flow out of catheter, relative to the catheter. As such, the cavities of Summers function as part of a drive motor transmitting hydraulic energy to the cutting element and they are not capable of separating and capturing the occlusive material, and proximally translating the separated and captured portion into the catheter lumen.
While, Honeycutt (US 20010004700 A1) cures the deficiency of Summers, and teaches the progressive cavity pump comprising a rotor and stator (figure 2, cutter 22 and cutter housing 21) configured to separate and captures the occlusive material, and proximally translates the separated and captured portion into the catheter lumen (figure 2 and [0047]), Honeycutt is silent as to the progressive cavity pump is further actuated, the sequential cavity comes fluidically sealed.
Modifying Summers in view of Honeycutt would change the principle operation of Summers by causing the cavities to transport occlusive material rather than transmit hydraulic energy to drive the cutting element.
Similarly, Claim 20 recites when the respective first cavity is open at a distal end of the progressive cavity pump, separate and capture at least a portion of a plurality of portions of the occlusive material, and when the respective first cavity becomes fluidically sealed as it proximally translates along the progressive cavity pump, proximally translate the separated and captured portion of the plurality of portions of the occlusive material for transfer into the catheter lumen.
Accordingly, Claim 20 is allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH HAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2545. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0900-1700.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/SETH HAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights