DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Acknowledgment
A remark filed on 7/7/2026 without any amendment to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 18-22 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Millman et al. (US.20070005002A1) (“Millman”) in view of Rone et al. (US. 20110112364A1) (“Rone”).
Re Claim 18, Millman discloses a system for moving fluids into and out of a surgical field (Fig. 1-2B, ¶0065, Fig.12), the system comprising: a first proximal flexible tubing (106a, Fig. 1, ¶0129) and a second proximal flexible tubing (106b, ¶0129), the first and second proximal tubings connected to a distal tubing (404, Fig. 12) at a Y connector (1206 ¶0198); a first valve constructed and arranged to control flow of irrigant in the first proximal tubing and the distal tubing (1204a, Fig.12); a second valve (1204b, ¶00200) constructed and arranged to control fluid flow between the distal tubing and a vacuum source (1028, Fig. 1); a distal tip (406, Fig. 14), the distal tip having a lumen therethrough (¶0120 lumen with opening 424) and a plurality of suction relief holes in a wall thereof (424); and a remote control for operating the first valve (¶0145, ¶0058, ¶0271).), but it fails to disclose the distal tip is a rigid distal tip attached to a distal end of the distal flexible tubing, the rigid tip being more rigid than the distal flexible tubing, the rigid distal tip constructed and arranged to provide freedom of motion at the probe tip when manipulated by a surgical instrument, and maneuverable to point 180 degrees from an orientation of at least a portion of the distal flexible tubing that is within the surgical field.
However, Rone discloses a system for a procedure in a surgical field (abstract, ¶0014, Figs. 1-3), the system comprising: a flexible tubing (24, ¶0016, ¶0035) and the distal tip (26, 16, ¶0035, ¶0036) is a rigid distal tip (¶0036) attached to the distal end of the distal flexible tubing (32, Fig. 3, ¶0035), the rigid tip being more rigid than the distal flexible tubing (¶0035-¶0036), the rigid distal tip constructed and arranged to provide freedom of motion at the probe tip when manipulated by a surgical instrument (graspers ¶0035), and maneuverable to point 180 degrees from an orientation of at least a portion of the distal flexible tubing that is within the surgical field (¶0035).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modify system of Millman so that the rigid tip being more rigid than the distal flexible tubing, the rigid distal tip constructed and arranged to provide freedom of motion at the probe tip when manipulated by a surgical instrument, and maneuverable to point 180 degrees from an orientation of at least a portion of the distal flexible tubing that is within the surgical field as taught by Rone for the purpose of using a material that support and maintain the desired shape of the tip while manipulating the tip by grasper (Rone ¶0032, ¶035).
Re Claim 19, Millman discloses comprising a second remote control for operating the second valve (¶0058, ¶0145, ¶0200).
Re Claim 20, Millman discloses wherein the remote control is constructed and arranged to operate the first valve and the second valve (¶0058, ¶0145, ¶0200).
Re Claim 21, Millman discloses wherein the first and second valves can be opened independently and concurrently (¶0058, ¶0145, ¶0200).
Re Claim 22, Millman discloses wherein including a fluid bag in fluid communication with the first proximal flexible tubing and an inflatable pressure cuff around the fluid bag (108 bag, and cuff for pressurize the bag ¶0065, ¶0145, ¶0200).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remark, filed 7/7/2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 18 under 103 using Millman and Rone have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, both art are related to the surgical tool using a robot wherein Millman uses a robot for irrigation and Rone is more on suction irrigation catheter/ cannula’s shape for the purpose of using a material that support and maintain the desired shape of the tip while manipulating the tip by grasper (Rone ¶0032, ¶035).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 HAMZA A. DARB whose telephone number is (571)270-1202. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F (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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/HAMZA A DARB/Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /CHELSEA E STINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights