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 .
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is a response to applicant’s arguments and amendment filed 12/15/2025. Claims 1, 5-10 and 15 are amended. Claims 2-3 and 13 are cancelled. Claims 1, 4-12 and 14-21 are currently pending.
The objection to the drawings has been withdrawn, due to applicant’s submission of new replacement drawings.
The objection of claims 1 and 7 has been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claims 2-8 and 15-19 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn due to applicant’s amendment.
The rejection of claim 20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is maintained; see below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 12/15/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 9-12 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mozdzierz; claims 2-8 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Muthuchidambaram; claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Fujii; claims 15-20 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Fujii and Liu; and claim 21 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Ricci, have been fully considered but are not persuasive, in combination with the amendments to the claims. The rejection has been modified, necessitated by applicant’s amendment to the claims.
Applicant argues Mozdzierz relates to surgical devices which belongs to a different technical field from the present application (Remarks, pg. 10).
In response to applicant’s argument, it is respectfully submitted para. [0001] of the instant spec. describes the technical field of the present application being medical instruments, which is considered to be equivalent to surgical devices.
Applicant further argues Mozdzierz doesn’t disclose a “disassembling/assembling assembly” since the handle assembly 100 is directly connected to the adapter assembly 200 via interface (Remarks, pg. 12).
In response to applicant’s argument, it is respectfully submitted the arguments are narrower than the claim limitations. The claim limitation does not preclude a direct connection between two structures; the claim language provides no further description or definition for disassembling/assembling, such that broadest reasonable interpretation encompasses structures with any type of connection or any capability of disassembly or assembly.
Applicant further argues Mozdzierz doesn’t disclose the newly added limitations (Remarks, pgs. 12-13).
In response to applicant’s argument, it is respectfully submitted Mozdzierz is not relied on to teach the newly added limitations, therefore applicant’s argument is moot.
Applicant further argues Muthuchidambaram does not teach the second deformation structure, because lower housing portions 318 do not deform, and further argues the projections are outside of the second through hole as claimed (Remarks, pg. 14).
In response to applicant’s argument, it is respectfully submitted the rejection has been modified regarding the second deformation structure as discussed below, necessitated by applicant’s amendment to the claims. Further, the arguments are narrower than the claim limitations. The claim language does not require the structure itself to deform. Broadest reasonable interpretation of the term “deformation structure” encompasses a structure that deforms or is capable of deforming, but also encompasses a structure connected to another structure that deforms, or contributes to deformation in some way as discussed below.
Applicant further argues significant structural differences between Mozdzierz and Muthuchidambaram, because the modification would significantly affect the compatibility of various interfaces between the handle assembly and adapter assembly of Mozdzierz (Remarks, pgs. 15-16).
In response to applicant’s argument, it is respectfully submitted attorney arguments cannot take the place of evidence (MPEP 2145(I)). The references do not disclose evidence leading to lack of compatibility between the devices, and further, applicant has not described how it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to make the combination for the benefits provided as discussed below. Accordingly, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 15-20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 10, the phrase “the driving gear” and “the driving motor” should read “the gear” and “the motor”, to properly refer to the motor and the gear previously introduced in claim 9.
In claims 15-20, the dependency on each of the claims appears to be amended without the appropriate markings (see claim set filed 08/07/2025 indicating original dependency), and the claims are not labeled as amended. It is requested that applicant indicate any deleted matter using a strike-through or double brackets in any future amended claims in order to comply with 37 CFR 1.121(c)(2).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “connecting structures” in claim 1; “supporting portion” in claim 5; and “driving mechanism” in claim 9.
Fig. 8 of the instant spec. depicts the connecting structures. “Connecting structures” uses the generic placeholder “structures” coupled with the term “connecting”, which is functional in that the limitation alternatively recites structures for connecting, and the term “structures” is not preceded by a structural modifier since the term “connecting” does not imply any structure.
Fig. 6 of the instant spec. depicts the supporting portion. “Supporting portion” uses the generic placeholder “portion” coupled with the term “supporting”, which is functional in that the limitation alternatively recites a portion for supporting, and the term “portion” is not preceded by a structural modifier since the term “supporting” does not imply any structure.
Para. [0139] of the instant spec. describes the driving mechanism as including a motor and a gear. “Driving mechanism” uses the generic placeholder “mechanism” coupled with the term “driving”, which is functional in that the limitation alternatively recites a mechanism for driving, and the term “mechanism” is not preceded by a structural modifier since the term “driving” does not imply any structure.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 4-8 and 15-20 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.
Regarding claim 4, the preamble of the claim recites “the puncture device according to claim 3”. Claim 3 is a cancelled claim, therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite, because it is unclear what subject matter claim 4 is further limiting. For examination purposes, the claim is interpreted to be dependent on claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, the preamble of the claim recites “the puncture device according to claim 13”. Claim 13 is a cancelled claim, therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite, because it is unclear what subject matter claim 15 is further limiting. For examination purposes, the claim is interpreted to be dependent on claim 14.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “the fixed bracket” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a fixed bracket has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a fixed bracket.
Further, the claim recites “the control circuit board” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a control circuit board has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a control circuit board.
Regarding claim 18, the claim recites “the protective cover plate” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a protective cover plate has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a protective cover plate.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites “the control circuit board” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a control circuit board has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a control circuit board.
Further, the claim recites “the fixed bracket” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a fixed bracket has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a fixed bracket.
Further, the claim recites “the housing” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, since a housing has not been previously introduced. Therefore, the scope of the claim is indefinite. For examination purposes, the phrase is interpreted to refer to a housing of the device.
Claims 5-8, 17 and 19 are indefinite due to their dependency on indefinite base claims 4 and 15.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Regarding claim 4, the preamble of the claim recites “the puncture device according to claim 3”. Claim 3 is a cancelled claim, therefore, claim 4 is in improper dependent form for failing to further limit a previously set forth claim. For examination purposes, the claim is interpreted to be dependent on claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, the preamble of the claim recites “the puncture device according to claim 13”. Claim 13 is a cancelled claim, therefore, claim 15 is in improper dependent form for failing to further limit a previously set forth claim. For examination purposes, the claim is interpreted to be dependent on claim 14, which introduces the display module recited in claim 15.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz (US 2018/0360460 A1) in view of Muthuchidambaram (US 2021/0338272 A1) (all references previously of record).
Regarding claim 1, Mozdzierz discloses (see abstract; paras. [0181]-[0403]; figs. 1-89) a puncture device (fig. 1), comprising: a puncture base (power handle 101, para. [0182]; fig. 3), a protective sleeve (proximal half-section 10b), a disassembling/assembling assembly (distal half-section 10a) and a puncture assembly (adapter assembly 200 and reload 400, para. [0181]), wherein a mounting hole (cavity 10c) is formed in one end of the protective sleeve (fig. 3);
the protective sleeve is sleeved on the puncture base (figs. 5-6);
the disassembling/assembling assembly is connected to the one end of the protective sleeve having the mounting hole (figs. 5-6); and
a tip of the puncture assembly sequentially passes through the disassembling/assembling assembly (placed within recess of 10a, fig. 22) and the mounting hole (considered to electrically pass through cavity 10c via connection to distal half-section 10a) to be in driving connection with the puncture base (para. [0181]).
However, Mozdzierz fails to disclose wherein the disassembling/assembling assembly comprises an elastic buckle connected to the protective sleeve; the elastic buckle is provided with a deformation hole; a tip of the puncture assembly sequentially passes through the deformation hole and the mounting hole, to be in driving connection with the puncture base; when the elastic buckle is in a state of not being subjected to an external force, a projection of the tip on a plane where the deformation hole is located partially overlaps with the deformation hole; when the elastic buckle is in a state of being subjected to the external force, the projection of the tip on the plane where the deformation hole is located falls within the deformation hole; wherein the elastic buckle comprises: a first deformation structure, a second deformation structure, and connecting structures being elongated and connecting an outer wall of the first deformation structure and an inner wall of the second deformation structure; the first deformation structure is provided with a first through hole which forms the deformation hole; the second deformation structure is provided with a second through hole; and a projection of the first deformation structure on a plane where the second deformation structure is located is in the second through hole.
Muthuchidambaram teaches (paras. [0096]-[0104]; figs. 11-13), in the same field of endeavor, a puncture device (abstract, fig. 1) comprising a disassembling/assembling assembly (figs. 11-13) comprising an elastic buckle (310) connected to a protective sleeve (connected to 124, depicted in fig. 6); the elastic buckle is provided with a deformation hole (hole formed within inner walls 340 and 342 of lower housing portion 318, para. [0097]; fig. 13); a tip of a puncture assembly sequentially passes through the deformation hole and a mounting hole (depicted in fig. 6), to be in driving connection with a puncture base (fig. 6); when the elastic buckle is in a state of not being subjected to an external force (fixed configuration, para. [0100]; fig. 12b), a projection of the tip on a plane where the deformation hole is located partially overlaps with the deformation hole (considered to partially overlap when extending through hole); and when the elastic buckle is in a state of being subjected to the external force (movable configuration, para. [0100]; fig. 12a), the projection of the tip on the plane where the deformation hole is located falls within the deformation hole (considered to fall within the hole as hole is being moved along tube), wherein the elastic buckle comprises: a first deformation structure (lower housing portion 318, considered to aid in deforming 354 and 356, therefore functioning as a deformation structure, para. [0097]; figs. 12a-13), a second deformation structure (biasing arms 354 and 356, para. [0098]; fig. 13), and connecting structures (inner walls 340 and 342) being elongated (fig. 13) and connecting an outer wall of the first deformation structure (considered to connect outer portion of hole) and an inner wall of the second deformation structure (depicted in figs. 12a-b); the first deformation structure is provided with a first through hole which forms the deformation hole (fig. 13); the second deformation structure is provided with a second through hole (formed by 354 and 356); and a projection of the first deformation structure on a plane where the second deformation structure is located is in the second through hole (considered to project within hole formed by 354 and 356), for the purpose of reducing over insertion and/or under insertion of the trocar (para. [0084]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mozdzierz to further include the depth collar of Muthuchidambaram, in order to provide adjustment of the depth of the instrument through tissue when desired, based on the suggestions and teachings of Muthuchidambaram (para. [0084]).
Regarding claim 4, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 3. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the connecting structures comprise a first connecting structure (340 of Muthuchidambaram) and a second connecting structure (342 of Muthuchidambaram) opposite to each other (fig. 13 of Muthuchidambaram); and
when the elastic buckle is in the state of not being subjected to the external force, the deformation hole is elliptical (considered to be elliptical as depicted in fig. 12b, because walls of 354 and 356 pinch inward when no force is being exerted on 320 and 322, such that the hole of 318 forms an elliptical shape similar to the shape of walls 354 and 356 depicted in fig. 12b of Muthuchidambaram), projections of the first connecting structure and the second connecting structure on the plane where the deformation hole is located respectively form angles α with a straight line where a short axis of the deformation hole is located, wherein 0 ≤ α < 45° (straight line and angle formed by projections depicted in annotated fig. 12b, depicting at least one angle formed by edge of wall 342 of Muthuchidambaram).
PNG
media_image1.png
410
850
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 12B of Muthuchidambaram
Regarding claim 5, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 4. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the elastic buckle further comprises: a fixed cover (316 of Muthuchidambaram), a first handle (320, para. [0096] of Muthuchidambaram) and a supporting portion (322), wherein the first handle and the supporting portion are disposed opposite to each other (fig. 13);
the first handle and the supporting portion are separately connected to the second deformation structure (fig. 13);
the fixed cover is provided with a third through hole (depicted in fig. 13) corresponding to the deformation hole (fig. 13), and forms an accommodating region with one side of the puncture base close to the elastic buckle (combination considered to further teach accommodating region formed with a side of handle 101 of Mozdzierz), and the elastic buckle is disposed in the accommodating region (depicted in fig. 13);
a first opening is formed in a peripheral of the fixed cover (gaps formed by 326 and 328), the first handle passes through the first opening to extend out of the accommodating region (figs. 12a-b), and one end of the supporting portion is connected to the second deformation structure (figs. 12a-13), and the other end of the supporting portion being away from the second deformation structure is abutted against an inner side wall of the fixed cover (considered to abut portions of upper housing portion when collectively forming cavity 344, see also inner wall 332 of upper housing portion 16, para. [0097]; fig. 11 of Muthuchidambaram).
Regarding claim 6, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 4. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the elastic buckle further comprises a first handle (320, para. [0096] of Muthuchidambaram) and a second handle (322) disposed opposite to each other (fig. 13);
the first handle and the second handle are separately connected to the second deformation structure (fig. 13);
when the elastic buckle is in the state of not being subjected to the external force (fig. 12b), projections of the first handle and the second handle on the plane where the deformation hole is located respectively form angles β with a straight line where a long axis of the deformation hole is located, wherein 0 ≤ β < 45° (see annotated fig. 12b depicting 320 and 322 falling along annotated line and therefore within the claimed range, figs. 12b-13).
Regarding claim 7, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 6. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the disassembling/assembling assembly further comprises a fixed cover (316 of Muthuchidambaram);
the fixed cover forms an accommodating region with a side of the puncture base close to the elastic buckle (combination considered to further teach accommodating region formed with a side of handle 101 of Mozdzierz), and the elastic buckle is disposed in the accommodating region (depicted in fig. 13); and
the fixed cover is provided with a third through hole corresponding to the deformation hole (depicted in fig. 13).
Regarding claim 8, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 5. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the disassembling/assembling assembly further comprises a limiting member (330/332 of Muthuchidambaram) including a first limiting block (330) and a second limiting block (332);
the limiting member is fixedly connected to one side of the fixed cover close to the elastic buckle (fig. 13), the limiting member is disposed in the second through hole (cavity 344 houses biasing feature 314, figs. 11-13), and the first limiting block is used for limiting at least one of the first deformation structure and the second deformation structure (figs. 11-13) and the second limiting block is used for limiting at least one of the first connecting structure and the second connecting structure (considered to limit by housing structures and forming cavity 344, fig. 11), when the elastic buckle is deformed (limits extension, figs. 11-12b).
Regarding claim 9, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 1. Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the puncture base comprises a housing (inner handle housing 110, para. [0201]) and a driving mechanism (power-pack core assembly 106);
the driving mechanism is disposed in the housing (para. [0201]) and comprises a motor (para. [0210]) and a gear (structure driving gear components of adapter assembly 200, para. [0213]); and the tip of the puncture assembly is in driving connection with the driving mechanism (para. [0213]).
Regarding claim 10, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 9. Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the driving gear is fixedly connected to an output end of the driving motor (connected to end of motor shafts, para. [0213]); and
a gear-tooth structure is disposed in a circumferential direction of the tip of the puncture assembly (gears of adapter assembly 200 considered to include a gear-tooth structure); and the driving gear is engaged with the gear-tooth structure (para. [0213]).
Regarding claim 11, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 10. Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the puncture assembly comprises a connecting cover (outer tube 206, para. [0231]; figs. 24-25), a puncture needle (trocar member 274) and a puncture sheath (connector sleeve 290, para. [0302]);
the puncture sheath is sleeved outside the puncture needle (para. [0302]; fig. 24);
a needle head end of the puncture needle extends out of a sheath head end of the puncture sheath (fig. 24), a needle tail end of the puncture needle and the tip are coaxial and fixedly connected to both sides of the connecting cover respectively (figs. 24-25); and
the connecting cover is in driving connection with a sheath tail end of the puncture sheath (figs. 24-25).
Regarding claim 12, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 11. Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the connecting cover comprises a connecting plate (support block 292, para. [0244]; figs. 29-33), an extension sleeve (tubular housing 272, para. [0243]) and a clamping key (lock pins 275c, para. [0243]);
both sides of the connecting plate (considered to be at least two sides of support block 292) are fixedly connected to the needle tail end of the puncture needle and the tip respectively (figs. 24-33);
the extension sleeve and the clamping key are fixedly connected to one side of the connecting plate facing the puncture sheath, separately (considered to at least be connected via spring clip, para. [0244]; figs. 29-33);
the extension sleeve is sleeved outside the sheath tail end of the puncture sheath (distinct from 290 and therefore considered to be sleeved outside of 290, figs. 29-33); and
a clamping groove (openings 272a, para. [0243]) matching with the clamping key (para. [0243]) is formed in one side, facing the connecting plate, of the sheath tail end of the puncture sheath (formed at one side, figs. 29-33).
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Muthuchidambaram as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fujii (US 2019/0350619 A1).
Regarding claim 14, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 1.
Mozdzierz further discloses further comprising a display module (includes display screen 146, para. [0209]); the display module is disposed at one end of the puncture base away from the puncture assembly (figs. 12 and 17).
However, Mozdzierz (as modified) fails to explicitly teach a camera; the camera is disposed at one end in the puncture assembly away from the puncture base; and the camera is in communication connection with the display module.
Fujii teaches (paras. [0090]-[0092]; figs. 1-2), in the same field of endeavor, a puncture device (abstract) comprising a camera (16), the camera in communication with a display module (para. [0092]), for the purpose of providing an image of the tissue to the medical staff (para. [0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Mozdzierz (as modified) to further include a camera connected to the display module, in order to provide an image of the tissue to the medical staff when desired, based on the teachings of Fujii (para. [0092]).
Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches the camera disposed at one end in the puncture assembly away from the puncture base (combination considered to further teach camera disposed on trocar).
Claim(s) 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Muthuchidambaram and Fujii as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Liu (CN 207020906U, translation provided in the IDS filed 10/23/2023).
Regarding claim 15, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 13.
Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the display module comprises a control circuit board (142b, para. [0209]), a display screen (146) and a protective cover plate (110d, para. [0209]; fig. 12); one side of the protective cover plate is connected to an inner side wall of a housing of the puncture base (para. [0209]).
However, Mozdzierz (as modified) fails to teach the display module comprising a fixed bracket; the protective cover plate is connected to the fixed bracket, and limits the display screen to one side of the fixed bracket away from the puncture assembly; one side of the fixed bracket close to the puncture assembly is connected to the control circuit board; and one side of the protective cover plate away from the fixed bracket is connected to an inner side wall of the housing of the puncture base.
Note Mozdzierz does disclose display screen 146 supported on circuit board 142b (para. [0209]), but does not specifically describe the mounting structure of the display screen on the circuit board.
Liu teaches (paras. [0028]-[0042]; figs. 1-5), in the analogous art of the claimed invention, a mounting structure for a display screen comprising a display module (1) comprising a fixed bracket (16, para. [0030]), a protective cover plate (includes face shell 11 and screen cover 12) connected to the fixed bracket (via bolts, para. [0036]), and limits a display screen (13) to one side of the fixed bracket (fig. 3), another side of the fixed bracket is connected to a control circuit board (connected to 17, para. [0036]), for the purpose of providing installation of a display screen that reduces material costs, improves production and assembly efficiency and is easy to repair or replace (paras. [0004], [0020] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the display screen 146 of Mozdzierz (as modified) to be mounted on the fixed bracket of Liu, such that the display screen 146 is mounted between the fixed bracket and the transparent window serving as the cover plate, in order to reduce material costs, improve production and assembly efficiency and provide ease of repairing or replacing any parts, based on the suggestions and teachings of Liu (paras. [0004], [0020] and [0040]).
Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches the display screen limited to one side of the fixed bracket away from the puncture assembly (combination considered to further teach display screen 146 mounted on fixed bracket 16 facing upwards and therefore away from the puncture assembly); one side of the fixed bracket close to the puncture assembly is connected to the control circuit board (combination considered to further teach a second side of fixed bracket 16 connected to board 142b of Mozdzierz); and one side of the protective cover plate away from the fixed bracket is connected to an inner side wall of the housing of the puncture base (combination considered to further teach transparent window 110d as protective cover plate and therefore connected to an inner side wall of the housing of handle 101, fig. 12 of Mozdzierz).
Regarding claim 16, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 14.
Mozdzierz further discloses a control circuit board (142b, para. [0209]).
However, Mozdzierz (as modified) fails to teach wherein the fixed bracket comprises a bracket body and a first clamping key structure; the control circuit board is provided with a first clamping position; and the first clamping key structure has one end connected to the bracket body and one other end in clamping connection with the first clamping position in a mutual matching manner.
Liu teaches (paras. [0028]-[0042]; figs. 1-5), in the analogous art of the claimed invention, a mounting structure for a display screen comprising a fixed bracket (16, para. [0030]) comprising a bracket body (body of 16) and a first clamping key structure (fixing structure for fixing 16 to 17, para. [0039]), a control circuit board (17) provided with a first clamping position (considered to have a first clamping position), and the first clamping key structure has one end connected to the bracket body (para. [0039]) and one other end in clamping connection with the first clamping position in a mutual matching manner (fixing structure, para. [0039]), for the purpose of providing installation of a display screen that reduces material costs, improves production and assembly efficiency and is easy to repair or replace (paras. [0004], [0020] and [0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to clamp the control circuit board on the fixed bracket of Liu, in order to reduce material costs, improve production and assembly efficiency and provide ease of repairing or replacing any parts, based on the suggestions and teachings of Liu (paras. [0004], [0020] and [0040]).
Regarding claim 17, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 15. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the bracket body (body of 16 of Liu) comprises a first baffle plate structure (connection holes of 16, para. [0039] of Liu) and a bottom plate (plate of 16);
the first baffle plate structure is arranged in a circumferential direction of the bottom plate (para. [0039]), and abutted against the protective cover plate (via bolts 18); and
a placing region is formed by the first baffle plate structure and the bottom plate in an enclosing manner (13 placed between 11 and 16, figs. 1-5 of Liu); and the display screen is embedded into the placing region (paras. [0034]-[0036] of Liu).
Regarding claim 18, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 16. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the protective cover plate (110d, para. [0209]; fig. 12 of Mozdzierz) comprises a cover plate body (body of 110d) and a second clamping key structure (combination considered to further teach connecting structure for bolt 18, similar to connection of 11 and 12 in Liu, paras. [0036] and [0039] of Liu); the bracket body is further provided with a second clamping position (additional connecting structures for bolts 18); and
the second clamping key structure has one end connected to the protective cover plate and one other end in clamping connection with the second clamping position in the mutual matching manner (paras. [0036] and [0039] of Liu).
Regarding claim 19, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 17. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the cover plate body comprises a transparent member (combination considered to further teach cover plate body including transparent window 110d of Mozdzierz) and a frame (combination further teaches frame of 11 of Liu); a display window is formed in one side of the housing away from the puncture assembly (para. [0209]); and
the transparent member has a part embedded into the frame and a part protruding from the frame and embedded into the display window (combination considered to further teach transparent member embedded in window 110d and provided in housing, further note fig. 12 of Mozdzierz depicting protruding structures of 146 relative to handle 101).
Regarding claim 20, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 18. Mozdzierz (as modified) further teaches wherein the puncture base further comprises a limiting stopper (clamping connector 1142, para. [0031] of Liu);
the limiting stopper is disposed on one side of the control circuit board away from the fixed bracket (para. [0037]; fig. 5); and
the limiting stopper has one end connected to the housing and one other end connected to the first clamping key structure (connects 11 to embedded box 2, combination considered to further teach connector 1142 having one end connected to a housing and one other end connected to 16, figs. 1-5 of Liu).
Claim(s) 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mozdzierz in view of Muthuchidambaram as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ricci (US 2005/0267591 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Mozdzierz (as modified) teaches the puncture device of claim 1.
Mozdzierz further discloses wherein the puncture assembly comprises a sheath tube comprising a sheath tube body (outer tube 206, para. [0231]; figs. 20-24).
However, Mozdzierz (as modified) fails to teach wherein the puncture assembly comprises a first thread structure and a first horizontal stripe structure, wherein the first thread structure and the first horizontal stripe structure are disposed on an outer wall of the sheath tube body; the first thread structure is disposed at a first end of the sheath tube body; and the first horizontal stripe structure is disposed between the first thread structure and a second end of the sheath tube body in an axial direction of the sheath tube body; and horizontal stripes of the first horizontal stripe structure are patterns perpendicular to the axial direction of the sheath tube body.
Ricci teaches (paras. [0024]-[0027]; figs. 1 and 8a), in the same field of endeavor, a puncture device (abstract; fig. 1) comprising a sheath tube body (fig. 1) comprising a first thread structure (threaded shaft portion 66, fig. 1) and a first horizontal stripe structure (micro-textured external surface 30, depicted as square ridges in fig. 8a, para. [0029]), wherein the first thread structure and the first horizontal stripe structure are disposed on an outer wall of the sheath tube body (fig. 1); the first thread structure is disposed at a first end of the sheath tube body (fig. 1); and the first horizontal stripe structure is disposed between the first thread structure and a second end of the sheath tube body in an axial direction of the sheath tube body (fig. 1); and horizontal stripes of the first horizontal stripe structure are patterns perpendicular to the axial direction of the sheath tube body (depicted in fig. 8a), for the purpose of providing zones of strong integration with different types of tissue, such as bone and soft tissue, which reduces microbial infiltration of the soft tissue site and establishes an interface between the portion and the tissue (para. [0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sheath tube body of Mozdzierz (as modified) to have a first thread structure and a first horizontal stripe structure as claimed, in order to provide zones of strong integration with different types of tissue, such as bone and soft tissue, which reduces microbial infiltration of the soft tissue site and establishes an interface between the portion and the tissue, based on the teachings of Ricci (para. [0047]).
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 BRIGID K BYRD whose telephone number is (571)272-7698. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at (571)-272-4695. 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.
/BRIGID K BYRD/Examiner, Art Unit 3771