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 Group 1 smoke evacuation module in the reply filed on 5/29/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is not a serious search burden. This is not found persuasive because Groups 1-3 are directed to different topics requiring different search terms and strategies. Group 1 focuses on the structure of a smoke evacuation module and how various components are engaged with each other in a physical system. Group 2 focuses on specific calibration procedures with minimal overlap with Group 1. Group 3 is a much more generalized supply column that incorporates new components like power lines and an exhaust system.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 15-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected method and apparatus, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Silver et al. (US 20210268211 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Silver discloses a smoke evacuation module (fig. 1) configured for plug-and-play engagement with a supply column (12); the smoke evacuation module comprising:
a pump system (24) connected to an inlet interface (48 on surface 34, fig. 3) at one end and to an outlet interface (60 on surface 36, fig. 8) at the other end, the pump system comprising a pump configured to generate a suction flow from the inlet interface to the outlet interface (para. [0059-0061, 0067], figs. 2, 9),
wherein the inlet interface (48) is configured to operatively engage with at least one surgical tool (200, para. [0060]),
wherein the outlet interface (60, fig. 8) is configured to engage with an exhaust (200 via recirculation supply lumen 90, para. [0060, 0061, 0068]); and
a control system (16) configured to be connected to the pump system (24), the control system comprising a controller configured to operate the pump system in at least different two suction modes (para. [0030, 0054]).
Regarding claim 2, Silver discloses the module of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the smoke evacuation module is configured to be installed inside the supply column (12, fig. 1), wherein at least the pump system (24) or the control system (16) is configured to be coupled to the supply column (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 6, Silver discloses the module of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the inlet interface (figs. 3, 7) comprises at least two inlets (48, 46, para. [0072]) each adapted configured to be coupled a dedicated surgical tool (200, 400, para. [0059]).
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(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silver et al. (US 20210268211 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Silver discloses the module of claim 1 and further discloses wherein the pump system (24) is arranged in a first sub-module and the control system (16) is arranged in a separate second sub-module (figs. 1 and 2), wherein the first and second sub- modules are configured to be installed inside the supply column (12).
However, Silver fails to expressly disclose wherein the sub-modules comprise coupling elements configured to engage matching coupling elements in the supply column.
Silver suggests coupling elements because the pump and control system are installed inside of the housing and are fixed in some manner (para. [0056], figs. 1 and 2); and it would have been obvious to fix the submodules to immobilize and secure them within the housing.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Silver et al. (US 20210268211 A1) in view of Creedon (US 20220305217 A1).
Regarding claims 3 and 4, Silver discloses the module according to claim 1, but fails to disclose:
(Claim 3) wherein the pump is at least one vacuum ejector;
(Claim 4) wherein the pump is powered by an external air source configured to supply compressed air to the pump.
Creedon teaches a similar device in the same field of endeavor:
(Claim 3) wherein the pump is at least one vacuum ejector (i.e., the pump produces a vacuum by means of the Venturi principle, para. [0004, 0073]);
(Claim 4) wherein the pump is powered by an external air source (17) configured to supply compressed air to the pump (para. [0073, 0105]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the module of Silver and incorporate the pump of Creedon because substituting a generic circulation pump as shown in Silver for a vacuum ejector pump of Creedon would yield predictable results, namely a source for negative pressure. MPEP 2143.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7-11, 13, and 14 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. Claims 7-11 are objected to based on their dependency on claim 5.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: there is no art alone or in combination that discloses:
(Claim 5) wherein the controller is configured to perform a calibration procedure, wherein the smoke evacuation module is calibrated to function correctly with the at least one surgical tool in either of the at least two different suction modes; nor
(Claim 13) wherein the control system comprises at least one first measuring unit configured to measure a change in a standby parameter of the at least one surgical tool, wherein the change in the standby parameter is caused by an activation of that surgical tool; nor
(Claim 14) wherein the control system or pump system comprises at least one second measuring unit configured to measure at least one pressure of the inlet interface, wherein the smoke evacuation module is configured to calibrate a flow alarm according to the measured pressure.
Silver does not teach these limitations nor does it form a basis that would suggest such a modification. Although the controller of Silver controls different modes of operation, it does not employ a calibration process to check if the surgical tool at the end of the smoke evacuation module is functioning correctly, nor does the controller monitor a change in a standby parameter caused by an activation of the surgical tool. Making such a modification without secondary support to rely would not have been obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIN A KIM whose telephone number is (703)756-4738. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at (571) 270-5879. 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.
/ERIN A KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/SUSAN S SU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781 30 July 2026
Prosecution Insights