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 .
Acknowledgments
In the reply, filed on March 10, 2026, Applicant amended claims 1-7, 10-11, and 14-16.
Applicant cancelled claim 13.
Applicant added new claims 19-20.
In the non-final rejection of December 18, 2025, Examiner objected to the Drawings under 37 CFR 1.83(a). Applicant amended claim 5. Objection is withdrawn.
Examiner objected to the Abstract. Applicant amended the Abstract. Objection is withdrawn.
Examiner objected to claims 1-7, 10, and 13-16. Applicant amended claims 1-7, 10, and 13-16, and cancelled claim 13; however, Applicant did not address all of the objections. Objection is maintained.
Examiner rejected claims 1-16 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Applicant amended claims 1-3, 5-7, 10-11, and cancelled claim 13; however, Applicant did not address all of the rejections. Rejection is maintained.
Currently, claims 1-12, 14-16, and 19-20 are under examination.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, 10-11, 14, and 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 1, lines 2-3, “a housing (21” should be changed to “a housing (21)”.
In regards to claim 1, lines 11-12, “the proximal opening of the first through lumen (26) and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (23)” should be changed to “the proximal opening (26) of the first through lumen (22) and the proximal opening (23) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 1, lines 12-14, “the distal opening of the first through lumen (27) and the distal opening of the second through lumen (24)” should be changed to “the distal opening (27) of the first through lumen (22) and the distal opening (24) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 1, line 14, “distal part” should be changed to “the distal part”.
In regards to claim 2, line 2, “distal opening of the first through lumen (27)” should be changed to “the distal opening (27) of the first through lumen (22)”.
In regards to claim 2, lines 3-4, “the distal opening of the second through lumen (24)” should be changed to “the distal opening (24) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 4, lines 1-3, “the proximal opening of the first through lumen (26) and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (23)” should be changed to “the proximal opening (26) of the first through lumen (22) and the proximal opening (23) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 5, lines 1-3, “the proximal opening of the first through lumen (26) and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (23)” should be changed to “the proximal opening (26) of the first through lumen (22) and the proximal opening (23) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 7, line 2, “the connector (21)” should be changed to “the connector (20)”.
In regards to claim 10, lines 2-3, “the connector (21)” should be changed to “the connector (60)”.
In regards to claim 11, lines 2-3, “the connector (21)” should be changed to “the connector (60)”.
In regards to claim 14, lines 1-2, “the distal end of the air tube and the distal end of the water tube” should be changed to “a distal end of the air tube and a distal end of the water tube”.
In regards to claim 19, line 2, “a connector” should be changed to “the connector”.
In regards to claim 20, lines 1-2, “an air tube and (34)” should be changed to “an air tube (34) and”.
In regards to claim 20, lines 10-11, “the proximal opening of the first through lumen (26) and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (23)” should be changed to “the proximal opening (26) of the first through lumen (22) and the proximal opening (23) of the second through lumen (25)”.
In regards to claim 20, lines 11-13, “the distal opening of the first through lumen (27) and the distal opening of the second through lumen (24)” should be changed to “the distal opening (27) of the first through lumen (22) and the distal opening (24) of the second through lumen (25)”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2, 7, and 20 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.
In regards to claim 2, lines 1-2 recite “the medical device”. First, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Second, claim 2 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 1 recites “a medical instrument”. It is unclear whether the two recitations are the same or different.
In regards to claim 2, line 3 recites “the air port (3) of the scoping device”. Claim 2 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 6 recites “an air port (3) of the medical instrument”. Thus, the air port is a component of the medical instrument, and not of the scoping device. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the air port” being “of the scoping device” in claim 2.
In regards to claim 2, line 5 recites “the water port (2) of the scoping device”. Claim 2 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, line 9 recites “a water port (2) of the medical instrument”. Thus, the water port is a component of the medical instrument, and not of the scoping device. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the water port” being “of the scoping device” in claim 2.
In regards to claim 7, lines 4-5 recite “the distal part and the proximal part of the housing”. Claim 7 depends upon claim 1. Claim 1, lines 10-12 recite “a two-part connector comprising a proximal part… and a distal part”. Thus, the distal part and the proximal part are components of the two-part connector, and not of the housing. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the distal part” and “the proximal part” being “of the housing” in claim 7.
In regards to claim 20, line 15 recites “the distal part of the housing”. Claim 20, lines 9-11 previously recite “a two-part connector comprising… a distal part”. Thus, the distal part is a component of the two-part connector, and not of the housing. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the distal part” being “of the housing” in claim 20, line 15.
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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kazuyoshi et al (JP 2014140459).
In regards to claim 20, Kazuyoshi et al teaches a connector (54)(Figures 3-11) to fluidically connect a medical instrument with an air tube and a water tube (Figure 3), the connector comprising a housing (54) having:
a first through lumen (labeled in Figure 5 below) with a proximal opening (labeled in Figure 5 below) configured to couple with the air tube (Figure 5) and a distal opening (labeled in Figure 5 below) configured to couple with an air port of the medical instrument (Figure 6)
a second through lumen (labeled in Figure 5 below) with a proximal opening (labeled in Figure 5 below) configured to couple with the water tube (Figure 5) and a distal opening (labeled in Figure 5 below) configured to couple with a water port of the medical instrument (Figure 6)
wherein the connector is a two-part connector comprising a proximal part (62b/56/57) comprising the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen and a distal part (61) comprising the distal opening of the first through lumen and the distal opening of the second through lumen, wherein the proximal part and the distal part are configured for detachable engagement (Figures 4-5), and wherein the second through lumen comprises a non-return valve (59) disposed in the distal part of the housing, wherein the distal part of the connector is disposable (61 is structurally capable of being disposed of) and the proximal part of the connector is re-usable (62b/56/57 is structurally capable of being re-used)
PNG
media_image1.png
755
782
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, 8, 12, 14-15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazuyoshi et al, and further in view of Savitt et al (US 5,297,537).
In regards to claim 1, Kazuyoshi et al teaches a connector (54)(Figures 3-11) to fluidically connect a medical instrument with an air tube and a water tube (Figure 3), the connector comprising a housing (54) having:
a first through lumen (labeled in Figure 5 above) with a proximal opening (labeled in Figure 5 above) configured to couple with the air tube (Figure 5) and a distal opening (labeled in Figure 5 above) configured to couple with an air port of the medical instrument (Figure 6)
a second through lumen (labeled in Figure 5 above) with a proximal opening (labeled in Figure 5 above) configured to couple with the water tube (Figure 5) and a distal opening (labeled in Figure 5 above) configured to couple with a water port of the medical instrument (Figure 6)
wherein the connector is a two-part connector comprising a proximal part (62b/56/57) comprising the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen and a distal part (61) comprising the distal opening of the first through lumen and the distal opening of the second through lumen, wherein the proximal part and distal part are configured for detachable engagement (Figures 4-5), and wherein the second through lumen comprises a non-return valve (59) disposed in the distal part of the connector configured to prevent water passing from the medical instrument to the water tube (Figure 5)
However, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach wherein the second through lumen comprises the non-return valve disposed in the distal part of the connector configured to prevent water passing from the medical instrument to the water tube “when the connector is fluidly coupled to the medical instrument and the air tube and the water tube”. Savitt et al teaches a connector (Figure 17) wherein a second through lumen comprises a non-return valve (ONE WAY VALUE) disposed in a distal part of the connector configured to prevent water passing from a medical instrument to a water tube when the connector is fluidly coupled to the medical instrument and an air tube and the water tube (Figure 17). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-return valve disposed in the distal part of the connector, of the connector of Kazuyoshi et al, to be configured to prevent water passing from the medical instrument to the water tube when the connector is fluidly coupled to the medical instrument and the air tube and the water tube, as taught by Savitt et al, as such will prevent fluid from running back into the water bottle after the end of a medical procedure (column 7, lines 25-32).
In regards to claim 2, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the medical device is a scoping device (Figure 3), and distal opening of the first through lumen is configured to fluidly connect with the air port of the scoping device and the distal opening of the second through lumen is configured to fluidically connect with the water port of the scoping device (Figure 6).
In regards to claim 3, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the medical instrument is an endoscope (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 6, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the proximal part and the distal part are detachably engageable by means of a detachable friction-fit engagement (Figures 4-5).
In regards to claim 8, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the proximal part comprises a housing section (62b) dimensioned to receive the distal part (Figure 5).
In regards to claim 12, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the distal opening of the second through lumen is recessed proximally relative to the distal opening of the first through lumen (Figure 5).
In regards to claim 14, in the modified assembly of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the distal end of the air tube and the distal end of the water tube are non-detachably attached to the connector (Figure 5).
In regards to claim 15, in the modified assembly of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al teaches including a bottle (51) and a bottle cap (52) non-detachably connected to a proximal part of the water tube and the air tube to fluidically connect the bottle with the air tube and the water tube when the cap is attached to the bottle (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 19, Kazuyoshi et al teaches an air and water tube assembly (Figures 3-11) comprising:
the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al according to claim 1
a water tube (liquid supply tube)(water)(53b)
an air tube (air supply tube)(53a)
Claims 4-5, 7, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, as applied to claims 1 and 19 above, and further in view of Briggs (US 2019/0117046).
In regards to claim 4, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach in which each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, as Kazuyoshi et al instead teaches in which an end of the air tube and the water tube (53) comprises a recessed socket (53a/53b) dimensioned to receive each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (Figure 5). Briggs teaches a connector (40)(Figures 1a-3c) in which each of a proximal opening of a first through lumen and a proximal opening of a second through lumen comprises a recessed socket (labeled in Figure 3b below) dimensioned to receive an end of an air tube and a water tube (2). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen, of the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, to comprise a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, as taught by Briggs, as an obvious matter of design choice, as either an end of the air tube and the water tube comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen, as taught by Kazuyoshi et al, or each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, as taught by Briggs, will allow for the same end result of connection of the connector to the air tube and the water tube such that air and water can travel between the air tube and the water tube and the medical instrument.
PNG
media_image2.png
692
353
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 5, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach in which each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, in which the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the second through lumen has a diameter greater than the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the first through lumen, as Kazuyoshi et al instead teaches in which an end of the air tube and the water tube (53) comprises a recessed socket (53a/53b) dimensioned to receive each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen (Figure 5). Briggs teaches a connector (40)(Figures 1a-3c) in which each of a proximal opening of a first through lumen and a proximal opening of a second through lumen comprises a recessed socket (labeled in Figure 3b above) dimensioned to receive an end of an air tube and a water tube (2), in which the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the second through lumen has a diameter greater than the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the first through lumen (Figure 3b). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen, of the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, to comprise a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, in which the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the second through lumen has a diameter greater than the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the first through lumen, as taught by Briggs, as an obvious matter of design choice, as either an end of the air tube and the water tube comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen, as taught by Kazuyoshi et al, or each of the proximal opening of the first through lumen and the proximal opening of the second through lumen comprises a recessed socket dimensioned to receive an end of the air tube and the water tube, in which the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the second through lumen has a diameter greater than the recessed socket of the proximal opening of the first through lumen, as taught by Briggs, will allow for the same end result of connection of the connector to the air tube and the water tube such that air and water can travel between the air tube and the water tube and the medical instrument.
In regards to claim 7, in the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach in which a proximal end of the distal part of the connector comprises projecting ports, and a distal end of the proximal part of the connector comprises recessed ports configured to receive the projecting ports to fluidically couple the distal part and the proximal part of the housing, as Kazuyoshi et al instead teaches in which a proximal end of the distal part of the connector comprises recessed ports (70/67), and a distal end of the proximal part of the connector comprises projecting ports (56/57) configured to be received by the recessed ports to fluidically couple the distal part and the proximal part of the housing (Figure 5). Briggs teaches a connector (40)(Figures 1a-3c) in which a proximal end of a distal part of a connector (40) comprises projecting ports (labeled in Figure 3b below), and a distal end of a proximal part of the connector comprises recessed ports (labeled in Figure 3b below) configured to receive the projecting ports to fluidically couple the distal part and the proximal part of the housing (Figure 3b). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify a proximal end of the distal part of the connector and a distal end of the proximal part of the connector, of the modified connector of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, to comprise projecting ports and recessed ports, respectively, configured to receive the projecting ports to fluidically couple the distal part and the proximal part of the housing, as taught by Briggs, as an obvious matter of design choice, as either a proximal end of the distal part of the connector comprises recessed ports and a distal end of the proximal part of the connector comprises projecting ports, as taught by Kazuyoshi et al, or a proximal end of the distal part of the connector comprises projecting ports and a distal end of the proximal part of the connector comprises recessed ports, as taught by Briggs, will allow for the same end result of fluid coupling of the distal part and the proximal part of the housing such that air or water can travel between the air tube or the water tube and the medical instrument.
PNG
media_image3.png
808
389
media_image3.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 16, in the modified assembly of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach in which the water tube has a bore that is smaller than a bore of the air tube, as Kazuyoshi et al instead teaches in which the water tube has a bore that is the same size as a bore of the air tube (Figure 5). Briggs teaches an air and water tube assembly (Figures 1a-3c) in which a water tube (2b) has a bore that is smaller than a bore of an air tube (2a) (Figure 3b). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the water tube, of the modified assembly of Kazuyoshi et al and Savitt et al, to have a bore that is smaller than a bore of the air tube, as taught by Briggs, as an obvious matter of design choice, as either the water tube has a bore that is the same size as a bore of the air tube, as taught by Kazuyoshi et al, or the water tube has a bore that is smaller than a bore of the air tube, as taught by Briggs, will allow for the same end result of the passage of air and water between the bottle and the medical instrument.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-12, 14-16, and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed March 10, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
In regards to claim 20, Applicant argued: In contrast, the distal part and proximal part of the connector of Kazuyoshi are not configured for detachable engagement. Figure 4 of Kazuyoshi is an "exploded view perspective view of the connector showing the structure of the liquid feed connector." See, e.g., page 9 of Kazuyoshi. A fair reading of Kazuyoshi would not lead the skilled person to understand that the distal part and proximal part of the connector are configured for detachable engagement. In any event, Figure 4 of Kazuyoshi does not show, or indicate, that the distal part 61 can be detached from proximal part 62b. As the distal and proximal parts are not configured for detachable engagement, it follows that the distal part cannot be disposable and the proximal part reusable (Remarks, pages 10-11). Examiner disagrees. First, Kazuyoshi et al teaches wherein the proximal part (62b/56/57) and the distal part (61) are configured for detachable engagement (Figures 4-5). Figure 4 shows the proximal part (62b/56/57) and the distal part (61) detached, and Figure 5 shows the proximal part and the distal part engaged; thus, the proximal part and the distal part are configured for detachable engagement. Second, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. In Kazuyoshi et al, the distal part (61) of the connector (54) is structurally capable of being disposed of, thus being disposable, and the proximal part (62b/56/57) of the connector is structurally capable of being re-used, thus being re-usable.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 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.
In regards to dependent claim 9, the prior art of record does not disclose or render obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention the combination of a connector to fluidically connect a medical instrument with an air tube and a water tube, as claimed, specifically including in which the housing section comprises a lid section hingedly mounted to the base section and adjustable from an open configuration to allow insertion of the distal part into the housing section and a closed configuration in which the distal part is enclosed within the housing section.
Kazuyoshi et al teaches in which the proximal part (62b/56/57) comprises a housing section (62b) dimensioned to receive the distal part (61) (Figure 5), in which the housing section comprises a base section (62b).
However, Kazuyoshi et al does not teach in which the housing section comprises a lid section hingedly mounted to the base section and adjustable from an open configuration to allow insertion of the distal part into the housing section and a closed configuration in which the distal part is enclosed within the housing section.
Thus, dependent claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim 1, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim 1. Dependent claims 10-11 are objected to by virtue of being dependent upon claim 9.
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 SHEFALI D PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm 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, Kevin C Sirmons can be reached at (571) 272-4965. 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.
/SHEFALI D PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights