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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 6/11/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made to the amendment received 6/11/2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/11/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding claim 1, applicant argues that Remiszewski does disclose the amended claim language because actuation of bowing/cutting wheel 240 causes the device to bow, while actuation of multi-directional control 237 moves the tip of the end effector to the right and left. Applicant argues that the amended claim language requires the same actuation portion to actuate the device axially and radially and Remiszewski requires two actuating portions to perform those functions. However, the phrase “actuating portion” is inclusive of the top portion of control handle 232 as disclosed by Remiszewski. The claim language requires that the actuating portion is connected to the wire filament and steering wires and is a second portion of the handle. The word portion means “a part of something”. Thus, the entire top portion of control handle 232, including multi-directional control 236, bowing/cutting control 240, and braking control device 248, does disclose the claim language “actuating portion” because it is connected to the wire filament and steering wires and is a portion of control handle 232. Thus, multi-directional control 236 and bowing/cutting control 240 are both considered the “actuating portion” and Remiszewski discloses the amended claim language.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 7-8, 10-11, 13-19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Remiszewski et al., US 20070282358, herein referred to as “Remiszewski”
Regarding claim 1, Remiszewski discloses a medical device (Figures 3A-B) comprising: an elongate tube (Figures 3A-B: shaft 140) having a proximal end (Figure 3A: end near control handle 144) and a distal end (Figures 3A-B: end effector 100) configured to be directed toward an opening of a body lumen ([0011]); a wire filament extending along the elongate tube (Figure 3B: cutting wire 109), a distal end of the wire filament connected to the distal end of the elongate tube ([0085]: “at which point the bowing wire 109 enters another sidewall port (as illustrated in FIG. 4B) and is anchored inside the end effector 100.”), a proximal portion of the wire filament extending at least partially along the elongate tube ([0085]: “the cutting wire 109 extends from the user handle 144 distally through the shaft 140 to a point near or within the end effector 100”), and a distal portion of the wire filament extending external to the elongate tube ([0085]: “ at which point the cutting wire exits the inside of the shaft 140 through a sidewall port and runs distally along the outside of end effector to a point proximal to the tip 108 of the end effector 100”); a steerable distal tip extending distal of the distal end of the wire filament (Figure 3B: end effector 100); and a handle (Figure 3A: handle 144 and Figure 8B) in mechanical communication with the steerable distal tip ([0118]: “The stiffening wires aid the shaft 140 in transmitting motion from the control handle of the device to the tip 108 of the end effector 100 and can allow the user to maintain precise control.”); and one or more steering wires extending from the handle to the steerable distal tip (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193); wherein the handle is configured to be adjusted to control a position of the steerable distal tip in at least three directions ([0085]); wherein adjustment of the handle causes tension on one or more of the one or more steering wires to adjust the position of the steerable distal tip ([0085]: “In other embodiments, the instrument may have a left steering control wire and a right steering control wire in addition to the main bowing or cutting wire. Tension applied to the left steering control wire causes the distal end 108 of the end effector to bend left. Tension applied to the right steering control wire causes the distal end 108 of the end effector 100 to bend right. ”); and wherein the handle includes a first portion (Figure 8B: finger ring 8B) and a second portion (Figure 8B: top portion of control handle 232 including multi-directional control 236, bowing/cutting control 240, and braking control device 248), the second portion being an actuating portion connected to the wire filament and the one or more steering wires ([0122]), wherein actuation of the actuating portion in an axial direction relative to the first portion causes the distal end of the elongate tube to flex ([0122]: “Rotating the bowing/cutting wheel 240 in the proximal direction tensions the bowing/cutting wire 109 and causes the device to bow in the cutting plane.”); and wherein actuation of the actuating portion in a radial direction relative to the first portion adjusts a radial position of the steerable distal tip ([0122]: “Rotating the multi-directional control 236 to the operator's right moves the tip 108 of the end effector 100 of the device to the right. Rotating the multi-directional control 236 to the operator's left moves the tip 108 of the end effector 100 to the left.”).
Regarding claim 7, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, wherein: the one or more of the steering wires extend through at least a portion of the elongate tube (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193); and the elongate tube includes a first lumen for receiving the wire filament (Figure 7: cutting wire or third steering control wire lumen 196) and one or more lumens each configured to receive one of the one or more steering wires (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193).
Regarding claim 8, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, wherein the one or more steering wires include at least three steering wires (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193 and stiffening wire lumens 200).
Regarding claim 10, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, wherein the actuation of the actuating portion in the axial direction relative to the first portion causes the distal end of the elongate tube to flex and expose a cutting portion of the wire filament ([0122]: “Rotating the bowing/cutting wheel 240 in the proximal direction tensions the bowing/cutting wire 109 and causes the device to bow in the cutting plane.”).
Regarding claim 11, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, and Remiszewski discloses a system (Figures 3A-B), comprising: an endoscope (Figure 2A: endoscope 112) having a proximal end with an axial opening ([0067]: “ the instrument is a sphincterome with a cutting wire 109 in the bowed position, emerging from the distal end of an endoscope 112”), a distal end with a radial opening (Figures 1 and 2A) and a working channel extending therebetween ([0067]: “ the instrument is a sphincterome with a cutting wire 109 in the bowed position, emerging from the distal end of an endoscope 112”); a guidewire (Figure 7: guide wire lumen 185); and the medical device of claim 1 (Figures 3A-B) extendable through the working channel (Figure 1) and configured to be directed toward the opening of the body lumen ([0011]), wherein the distal end of the elongate tube (Figures 3A-B: end effector 100) is configured to extend through the radial opening (Figure 3B); and wherein the steerable distal tip is configured to extend through the radial opening (Figures 3A-B: end effector 100).
Regarding claim 13, Remiszewski discloses the system of claim 11, wherein the actuation of the actuating portion in the axial direction causes the distal end of the elongate tube to flex (Figure 8C: bowing/cutting control drive 240 moves in an axial direction along the longitudinal axis and [0122]: “Rotating the bowing/cutting wheel 240 in the proximal direction tensions the bowing/cutting wire 109 and causes the device to bow in the cutting plane. ”) and expose a cutting portion of the wire filament ([0122]: “Rotating the bowing/cutting wheel 240 in the proximal direction tensions the bowing/cutting wire 109 and causes the device to bow in the cutting plane.”)
Regarding claim 14, Remiszewski discloses the system of claim 11, wherein one or more of the steering wires extend through at least a portion of the elongate tube (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193); and wherein the elongate tube includes a first lumen for receiving the wire filament (Figure 7: cutting wire or third steering control wire lumen 196) and one or more lumens each configured to receive one of the one or more steering wires (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193).
Regarding claim 15, Remiszewski discloses system of claim 11, wherein the one or more steering wires include at least three steering wires (Figure 7: first and second steering wire lumens 192 and 193 and stiffening wire lumens 200).
Regarding claim 16, Remiszewski discloses the system of claim 11, and Remiszewski discloses a method ([0012]) of accessing a body lumen of a subject with the system of claim 11 ([0011]), the method comprising: extending the endoscope (Figure 2A: endoscope 112) into the body lumen of the subject ([0012]: “comprising the steps of providing a flexible endoscope having an instrument channel and an exit port; providing a steerable medical instrument sized to fit through the Papilla of Vater; navigating the endoscope through the patient's body”); extending the elongate tube (Figures 3A-B: shaft 140 and [0012]: “ introducing the steerable medical instrument through the instrument channel of the endoscope and advancing the instrument until the distal end of the instrument protrudes from the exit port; ”) through the working channel (Figure 7); directing the distal end of the elongate tube through an opening of the body lumen ([0012]: “advancing the instrument until the distal end of the instrument protrudes from the exit port;”); and steering the steerable distal tip toward a duct located distal of the opening of the body lumen ([0012]: “further advancing and steering the instrument to enter and cannulate the Papilla, wherein the steering is achieved by tensioning at least one steering control wire.” And [0004]).
Regarding claim 17, Remiszewski discloses the method of claim 16, and Remiszewski further discloses a method wherein steering the steerable distal tip comprises actuating the actuating portion in the radial direction relative to the first portion (Figure 8B) to steer the steerable distal tip toward the duct ([0122]).
Regarding claim 18, Remiszewski discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the actuating portion includes a manipulating element coupled to the one or more steering wires (Figure 8B: multi-directional control 236 and [0112]) and configured to radially adjust about a rotational joint (Figure 8B: multi-directional control 236 and [0112]) and wherein steering the steerable distal tip comprises radially adjusting the manipulating element (Figure 8B: multi-directional control 236) about the rotational joint to steer the steerable distal tip toward the duct ([0122]).
Regarding claim 19, Remiszewski discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising: extending the guidewire through the steerable distal tip and into the duct (Figure 7: guidewire lumen 185).
Regarding claim 21, Remiszewski discloses the method of claim 16, wherein the steerable distal tip is steered through the radial opening ([0071]: “FIG. 2A demonstrates the end effector 100 emerging from the distal end of an endoscope 112 navigating through a patient's anatomy 122. ”).
Regarding claim 26, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, wherein the actuating portion includes a manipulating element coupled to the one or more steering wires and configured to radially adjust about a rotational joint (Figure 8B: multi-directional control 236 and [0112]).
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 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.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remiszewski in view of Wilder et al., US 20200214764, herein referred to as “Wilder”.
Regarding claim 20, Remiszewski discloses the method of claim 19, but does not explicitly disclose a method further comprising: removing the elongate tube from the body lumen and the working channel of the endoscope while maintaining the guidewire in the duct; and inserting another elongate tube over the guidewire and into the duct.
However, Wilder teaches a method comprising: removing the elongate tube from the body lumen and the working channel of the endoscope while maintaining the guidewire in the duct; and inserting another elongate tube over the guidewire and into the duct ([0043]: “ A guidewire may be extended through the elongate tube into the body lumen. The elongate tube may be removed from about the guidewire and the working channel such that the guidewire may be left within the working channel and the body lumen. Another instrument may be inserted within the working channel over the guidewire and into the body lumen.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the method disclosed by Remiszewski so that it includes removing the elongate tube from the body lumen and the working channel of the endoscope while maintaining the guidewire in the duct; and inserting another elongate tube over the guidewire and into the duct as taught by Wilder to limit the time taken if a procedure required multiple instruments, which reduces post-procedure complications (Wilder [0024]).
Claims 22-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remiszewski in view of Aznoian et al., US 20030208219, herein referred to as “Aznoian”.
Regarding claim 22, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose a medical device wherein the second portion is configured to receive a thumb of a user.
However, Aznoian teaches a medical device wherein the second portion is configured to receive a thumb of a user (Figure 2: thumb slide 218).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the medical device disclosed by Remiszewski so that the second portion is configured to receive a thumb of a user as taught by Aznoian since applicant has not disclosed that configuring the second portion to receive a thumb solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with a multidirectional tool, as a thumb hole and a multidirectional tool are equivalent in the art for controlling a device as taught by Aznoian.
Regarding claim 23, Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 1, but does not explicitly disclose a medical device wherein the second portion has a thumb hole configured to receive the thumb of the user.
However, Aznoian teaches a medical device wherein the second portion has a thumb hole configured to receive the thumb of the user (Figure 2: thumb slide 218).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the medical device disclosed by Remiszewski so that the second portion has a thumb hole configured to receive the thumb of the user as taught by Aznoian since applicant has not disclosed that configuring the second portion to receive a thumb solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform equally as well with a multidirectional tool, as a thumb hole and a multidirectional tool are equivalent in the art for controlling a device as taught by Aznoian.
Regarding claim 24, Remiszewski in view of Aznoian discloses the medical device of claim 22, and Remiszewski further discloses a medical device wherein the first portion is configured to receive fingers of a user (Figure 8B: finger ring 244).
Regarding claim 25, Remiszewski in view of Aznoian discloses the medical device of claim 23, and Aznoian further discloses a medical device wherein the first portion has two finger holes configured to receive two fingers from the user (Figure 2: handle 216).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical device of Remiszewski so that is has two finger holes instead of one , since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Remiszewski in view of Wu et al., US 20110264011, herein referred to as “Wu”.
Regarding claim 27, C Remiszewski discloses the medical device of claim 26, but does not explicitly disclose a medical device wherein the rotational joint is a ball- socket joint.
Wu teaches a medical device wherein the rotational joint is a rotational ball-socket joint ([0281]: “ the actuator 260 of handle assembly 200 comprises a ball-and socket joint for controlled multi-directional deflection of the second flexure zone 34 via controlled pulling on one or more control wires 40 that proximally terminate at the actuator and distally terminate in the second flexure zone.”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the medical device disclosed by Remiszewski so that the rotational joint is a rotational ball-socket joint as taught by Wu for controller multi-directional deflection of the device (Wu [0281]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nora W Rhodes whose telephone number is (571)272-8126. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am-6pm 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, Joanne Rodden can be reached on 3032974276. 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.
/SEAN W COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/N.W.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights