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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 1-6, 10, 12 and 13 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 "the fitting opening portion” and “the fitting member is mounted on endoscope holding device” There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. As such, they are indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
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.
Claims 1-4, 10, 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2014/0341777 A1 [Deshays] in view of US 3,563,394 [Joyce]
Regarding Claim 1:
Deshays discloses an endoscope sterilization system in which an insertion portion of an endoscope is capably of being irradiated with light for sterilization (para 11, Fig. 3b), the system comprising:
an endoscope sterilization device which is configured to irradiate the insertion portion of the endoscope with the light for sterilization (para 11), the endoscope sterilization device comprising:
an accommodation portion that has a bottomed tubular shape including an opening portion, a peripheral surface portion, and a bottom surface portion and into which at least a portion of the insertion portion is insertable through the opening portion (see annotated Fig. 3b below); and
a sterilization light source that is provided in the accommodation portion and that is configured to irradiate the insertion portion inserted into the accommodation portion with the light for sterilization (Fig. 3b (302));
an endoscope holding device that is provided with a hanger holding an operation portion of the endoscope (para 65 describes suspending the endoscope, i.e., the insertion portion, by the cable, i.e. the operation portion, by coupling or attaching to the cable), the operation portion being consecutively connected to the insertion portion (as described in para 65).
PNG
media_image1.png
734
601
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, However, Deshays fails to teach:
an attachment and detachment mechanism that makes the endoscope sterilization device and the endoscope holding device attachable to each other and detachable from each other and
that comprises a fitting member and a fitting operation portion configured to be fitted to each other,
wherein the fitting opening portion has a rectangular cross section an is cut out from an outer peripheral surface of the peripheral surface portion, and
the fitting member is mounted on endoscope holding device and is formed to have a cross section matching the of the fitting opening portion such that an outer shape thereof is capable of being fitted to the fitting opening portion.
Joyce is directed to an attachable bin (abstract). Joyce is analogous art to the instant invention at least because it addresses the same problem as the invention, i.e., attaching a bin, such as a sterilization device, to another body. Joyce teaches an attachment and detachment mechanism that makes a bin and body attachable to each other and detachable from each other (See Fig. 3) and
that comprises a fitting member and a fitting operation portion configured to be fitted to each other (Fig. 3 (70,72) are the fitting members, the sides of Fig. 3 (50) are the fitting operation portions),
wherein the fitting opening portion has a rectangular cross section an is cut out from an outer peripheral surface of the peripheral surface portion (see square cut out in side of bin in Fig. 3), and
the fitting member is mounted on body and is formed to have a cross section matching the of the fitting opening portion such that an outer shape thereof is capable of being fitted to the fitting opening portion (as shown in Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to use the above noted attachment/detachment mechanisms of Joyce to connect the endoscope sterilization device and the endoscope holding device of Deshays. One would have been motivated to do so since the attachment/detachment mechanisms of Joyce provides the user with the ability to easily replace or add additional bins, i.e., endoscope sterilization devices, to the invention.
Regarding Claim 2:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 1,
wherein the sterilization light source is provided on the bottom surface portion (Fig. 3b (302a), para 60).
Regarding Claim 3:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 1,
wherein the sterilization light source is provided on the peripheral surface portion (as demonstrated Fig. 3b (302), para 60).
Regarding Claim 4:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 1,
wherein a reflective material is provided on at least one of the bottom surface portion or the peripheral surface portion (paras 12, 40, 44 describe reflective material position throughout the interior surfaces, which would include those areas claimed).
Regarding Claim 10:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 1, further comprising:
an insertion portion holding portion that has an opening portion configured to hold a soft portion of the insertion portion that is to be inserted into the accommodation portion (para 65 describes holding a suspended portion with a hook structure).
Regarding Claim 13:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 11,
wherein the opening portion is open in a direction intersecting a hanging direction in which the insertion portion hangs down because of a weight thereof in a case where the operation portion is held by the hanger. Paras 14, 63-65 all explain this relationship at length.
Claims 5- 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deshays in view of Joyce as applied above, and further in view of US 11,090,399 B2 [Starkweather].
Regarding Claim 5:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 1,
but fails to teach that the light with which the sterilization light source performs the irradiation is ultraviolet rays of which a central wavelength is 222 nm.
Starkweather teaches a UV sterilization system using an Ultraviolet source at 222 nm so as to prevent harm to surrounding objects and persons. 21:40-47.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to use the 222 nm excimer lamps of Starkweather in place of the UV sources of Deshays since this change in wavelength and source would prevent harm to surrounding objects and persons.
Regarding Claim 6:
The modified invention of claim 5 teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 5,
wherein the sterilization light source is an excimer lamp or an LED (Starkweather 21:40-47).
Claims 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Deshays in view of Joyce as applied above, and further in view of US 2008/0283769 A1 [Deshays II].
Regarding Claim 12:
Deshays teaches the endoscope sterilization system according to claim 11,
But fails to teach that the endoscope holding device is an endoscope stand or an endoscope cart.
Deshays II teaches holding endoscopes (para 3, Fig. 1 (5)) and providing UV sterilization those endoscopes (Fig. 1 (11)) with a cart (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to use chamber of Deshays in the cart of Deshays II since this would allow a user to conveniently move the device of Deshays.
Response to Arguments
Applicant amendments have sufficiently modified the claims to obviate the 35 USC 112(a) and (b) rejections of the previous office action, and the 35 USC 112(f) interpretations of record.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amendments to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection relies upon the new Joyce reference for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 WYATT A STOFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0700-1600 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, ROBERT KIM can be reached at 571 272 2293. 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.
WYATT STOFFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881