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 .
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 1-30 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 "catheter robot module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "catheter robot module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "catheter robot module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "catheter robot module" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2, 5-6, 11-30 recite the limitation "catheter robot module" in line 1. It is unclear whether this is the same catheter as the independent claim or another. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Double Patenting
Claims 1, 3, 7 and 9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-4, 7-8, 9-10, 12, 14 of U.S. Patent No. 18/259,233. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. See details below. It is noted that claims 1, 3, 7 and 9 recite similar limitations and slightly different wording and are rejected for the same reason.
1. Catheter robot module for translation and rotation of a flexible elongated medical element,comprising: > a casing, > two pairs of movable pads:o said pads of a same pair at least partly facing each other, o each pair of movable pads being adapted to separately or in combination: - perform a translation of said flexible elongated medical element longitudinally with respect to said casing, by a first translation cycle:" clamping said flexible elongated medical element between said pads, " translating forth said pads synchronously longitudinally in the same direction with respect to said casing, with respect to a user set longitudinal translation direction, e unclamping said flexible elongated medical element, " translating back said pads synchronously longitudinally in the same reverse direction with respect to said casing, with respect to said user set longitudinal translation direction, - perform a rotation of said flexible elongated medical element around longitudinal axis with respect to said casing, by a second rotation cycle:" clamping said flexible elongated medical element between said pads, " performing a relative forth translation of said pads transversely in opposite directions with respect to said casing, with respect to a transversal translation direction corresponding to a set rotation direction, e unclamping said flexible elongated medical element, " performing a relative back translation of said pads transversely in opposite reverse directions with respect to said casing, with respect to said transversal translation direction corresponding to said set rotation direction, > a driver of said pairs of movable pads implemented so that:
3. (Currently Amended) Catheter robot module for translation and rotation of a flexible elongated medical element
in at least one mode where, in combination, said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both said pairs working in phase opposition, and said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element is performed by at least one of said pairs of movable pads,-
depending on a set rotation direction, > a driver of said pairs of movable pads implemented so that: o said translation of said flexible elongated medical element is alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads, both said pairs working in phase opposition
conflict of synchronization between said translation and said rotation is managed at least:e by varying travel extension of said forth translation in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, and/or by varying travel extension and/or duration of said forth translation in said second rotation cycle for at least one of said pairs, o so as to always keep at least one pair of movable pads clamped on said flexible elongated medical element, during the whole duration of said translation of said flexible elongated medical element in said first translation cycle as well as during the whole duration of said rotation of said flexible elongated medical element in said second rotation cycle
4. (Currently Amended) The catheter Catheter robot module according to claim 3, wherein:> said driver of said pairs of movable pads is implemented so that: o conflict of synchronization, between said translation alternatively performed by said pairs of movable pads working in phase opposition and said rotation, when in combination, is managed at least: - by varying travel extension and/or duration of said forth translation, in said first translation cycle and/or in said second rotation cycle, for at least one of said pairs,e so as to always keep at least one pair of movable pads clamped on said flexible elongated medical element, during said translation and during said rotation. said phase opposition being controlled at least:e by varying duration of said translating back in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, o so as to control and keep said phase opposition between both said pairs
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The independent claims recite “conflict of synchronization between said translation and said rotation is managed at least: by varying travel extension of said forth translation in said first translation cycle for at least one of said pairs, and/or by varying travel extension and/or duration of said forth translation in said second rotation cycle for at least one of said pairs” which when taken in combination with the remaining limitations are not disclosed, taught or rendered obvious.
The closest prior arts are US 20170151024 A1 to Deboeuf et al., US 20180353250 to Fournier et al. and US 20140277333 to Lewis et al. The mentioned references discloses various claimed limitations including the pair of pads, clamping, capable of performing horizontal and rotational movement but fails to disclose, teach or render obvious means to overcome conflict of synchronization between rotation and translation cycles as claimed.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SANA SAHAND whose telephone number is (571)272-6842. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8:30 am -5:30 pm; F 9 am-3 pm.
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, Jennifer S McDonald can be reached at (571) 270- 3061. 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.
/SANA SAHAND/ Examiner, Art Unit 3796
Prosecution Insights