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 without traverse of Group 1 in the reply filed on May 20th 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 9-17, 21 and 22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 23 and 25 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 23 recites the limitation "the blades" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 25 is rejected due to its dependency from claim 23
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4-6 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron (US 2017/0281413) in view of Nordt (US 2006/0149267).
Regarding claim 1, Baron discloses a device comprising: an elongated head (100) and a handle (200).
Baron fails to disclose that the handle is flexible and that the handle comprises at least one component configured to bend the flexible handle upon application of external pressure and return the flexible handle to original position upon releasing of the external pressure. Baron discloses that the head may couple to the handle using any type of coupling including and joint and that the head may be rotatable about the handle (¶[0091]).
Nordt also discloses a device for removing a tissue layer (21; Figures 4 and 5) and further discloses that the handle may have a pivoting hinge in order to better allow the head to conform to a tissue surface (¶[0038], [0039]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and in view of Nordt to have used a hinge to connect the head of Baron to the handle as a suitable prior art means for allowing rotation between components of a tissue removal device. With the above hinge joint, the flexible handle could be returned to original position upon releasing of the external pressure (the claim does not require the handle to be biased to the original position if that was the intended function).
Regarding claim 2, the hinge provided in view of Nordt is a joint.
Regarding claim 4, the handle comprises a connector (202) for detachably connecting the flexible handle to the elongated head (¶[0090] of Baron).
Regarding claim 5, the head is disposed with one or more recesses (114 of Baron) that are configured to engage with the flexible handle, and wherein the recesses are disposed at a proximal end of the head and engaging with the flexible handle comprises having no contact with the distal edges of blades included in the elongated head (¶[0090]; Figures 1A and 1C).
Regarding claim 6, the elongated head comprises one or more blades (102, 104 of Baron) positioned substantially in parallel with at least one guiding gagger (“strip” - ¶[0074] of Baron; alternatively the structure pointed to by the rightmost “102” in Figure 1A - noting that it appears to be pointing to the identical structure referred to by Applicant as the guiding gagger) and wherein the elongated head has a length ranging between 1-100 millimeters (¶[0076] of Baron), and having a distal end having a length ranging from 1-50 millimeters formed by an elongated edge of the one or more blades (¶[0068], [0076], the blades form the top of the trapezoid (¶[0068]).
Regarding claim 8, the device comprises another guiding gagger (e.g. the ridge pointed to by “106” in Figure 1A), wherein the blade is a double-sided blade (it has lateral sides as evident from Figure 1A), and wherein the guiding gaggers are disposed on either side of the one or more blades (evident from Figure 1A).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baron (US 2017/0281413) in view of Nordt (US 2006/0149267), as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Rosemberg et al. (US 2015/0047202).
Regarding claim 7, Baron in view of Nordt fail to disclose that the elongated edge of at least one blade is covered with a functional coating, selected from: a lubrication material, a medication, nutritive material, moisturizing material, and an antiseptic material. Baron discloses that the blades may be coated with a hydrophilic material to retain liquid (¶[0084], [0115]).
Rosemberg et al. (bladed devices for scraping skin being reasonably pertinent to a bladed device for cutting a thin layer from a tissue surface) teach a moisturizing hydrophilic coating for a blade for retaining liquid (¶[0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the hydrophilic coating of Rosemberg et al. on the blade(s) of Baron in order to help the blade retain liquid.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Thomas McEvoy whose telephone number is (571) 270-5034 and direct fax number is (571) 270-6034. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9:00 am – 6:00 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, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Elizabeth Houston at (571) 272-7134. 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/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.
/THOMAS MCEVOY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights