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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 August 25th, 2026, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The claims filed on August 25th, 2026, have been entered. Claims 2-22 remain pending in the Application.
Response to Arguments
The rejection of claims 2-22 under 103 over Fitzgerald et al. (Pub. No. 2008/0183202) in view of Harari et al. (Pub. No. 2021/0059695) has been withdrawn in light of Applicant’s amendment made August 25th, 2026; specifically, neither reference discloses the spiral coil is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 2-7, 9-10, 12-15, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Broome et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,094,249).
Regarding claim 2, Broome et al. discloses a clot retrieval device (150; FIGs. 13-16; C7:L49-67) comprising:
a device body (154) comprising a plurality of struts (172) and having a medial section (170) and tapered proximal and distal ends (172 and 152, respectively), the device body adopting an elongated configuration when in a delivery catheter (FIG. 13) and a radially expanded configuration when outside of the delivery catheter (FIG. 14), wherein the plurality of struts are composed of shape memory materials (C8:L11-13: 172 is preferably made of nitinol, which is a shape memory material); and
a coil (176) positioned within the device body (FIG. 13: 176 is within 154), wherein the coil is adjustable between a collapsed configuration (FIG. 13) and an expanded configuration (FIG. 14), wherein the coil is configured to apply a force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21: 176 is biased to compress in the direction of arrows 178 in FIG. 13, which helps 172 open to the position of FIG. 14; the claim language does not require direct contact between the coil and the struts), wherein the coil is a spiral coil (FIG. 13: 176 is a spiral) within the device body that is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration (C8:L14-21: 176 is a compression spring, and stores energy by being biased to open 154) and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21 and FIGs. 13-14: when 176 is released, 176 directs the potential energy to expand 154 through moving 172), and the spiral coil within the device body is configured to radially expand and linearly compress in the expanded configuration (FIG. 13: 176 is trying to shorten length-wise and expand radially) and to radially compress and linearly expand in the collapsed configuration (FIG. 14: 176 is capable of acting against being overly compressed, such as if 172 has a shape memory shape which would compress 176 enough for 176 to attempt to linearly expand and thereby radially shrink).
Regarding claim 3, Broome et al. further discloses the plurality of struts define a plurality of open cells (FIG. 14: the spaces between each 172 and 170 create open cells).
Regarding claim 4, Broome et al. further discloses the coil is connected to a distal region of the device body by an elongated end element (FIG. 14: 176 is connected to the distal region of 150 by guidewire 32; C7:L60-67).
Regarding claim 5, Broome et al. further discloses the coil is connected to a proximal region of the device body by an elongated end element (FIG. 14: 176 is connected the proximal region of 150 by tubular member 164; C7:L60-67).
Regarding claim 6, Broome et al. further discloses the coil is connected to a distal region and a proximal region of the device body by a pair of elongated end elements (FIG. 14: 176 is connected to the distal region of 150 by 32 and to the proximal region of 150 by 165; C7:L60-67).
Regarding claim 7, Broome et al. further discloses the pair of elongated end elements are each comprised of a wire or a tube (FIG. 14: 32 is a guidewire while 165 is a tubular member; C7:L60-67).
Regarding claim 9, Broome et al. further discloses the coil is comprised of a wire (FIG. 14: 176 is made of a compression spring wire).
Regarding claim 10, Broome et al. further discloses the medial section of the device body is not tapered (FIG. 14: 170 is not tapered).
Regarding claim 12, Broome et al. further discloses the coil has the collapsed configuration when the device body is in the elongated configuration (FIG. 13).
Regarding claim 13, Broome et al. further discloses the coil has the expanded configuration when the device body is in the radially expanded configuration (FIG. 14).
Regarding claim 14, Broome et al. further discloses the tapered proximal and distal ends form closed ends (FIG. 14: both 172 and 152 are closed ends).
Regarding claim 15, Broome et al. discloses a clot retrieval device (150; FIGs. 13-16; C7:L49-67) comprising:
a device body (154) comprising a plurality of struts (172) and having a medial section (170) and tapered proximal and distal ends (172 and 152, respectively), the device body adopting an elongated configuration when in a delivery catheter (FIG. 13) and a radially expanded configuration when outside of the delivery catheter (FIG. 14), wherein the plurality of struts are composed of shape memory materials (C8:L11-13: 172 is preferably made of nitinol, which is a shape memory material); and
a spring (176) positioned within the device body (FIG. 13: 176 is within 154), wherein the spring is adjustable between a collapsed configuration (FIG. 13) and an expanded configuration (FIG. 14), wherein the spring is configured to apply a force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21: 176 is biased to compress in the direction of arrows 178 in FIG. 13, which helps 172 open to the position of FIG. 14; the claim language does not require direct contact between the coil and the struts), wherein the spring is a spiral coil (FIG. 13: 176 is a spiral) within the device body that is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration (C8:L14-21: 176 is a compression spring, and stores energy by being biased to open 154) and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21 and FIGs. 13-14: when 176 is released, 176 directs the potential energy to expand 154 through moving 172), and the spiral coil within the device body is configured to radially expand and linearly compress in the expanded configuration (FIG. 13: 176 is trying to shorten length-wise and expand radially) and to radially compress and linearly expand in the collapsed configuration (FIG. 14: 176 is capable of acting against being overly compressed, such as if 172 has a shape memory shape which would compress 176 enough for 176 to attempt to linearly expand and thereby radially shrink).
Regarding claim 20, Broome et al. discloses a clot retrieval device (150; FIGs. 13-16; C7:L49-67) comprising:
a device body (154) comprising a plurality of struts (172) and having a medial section (170) and tapered proximal and distal ends (172 and 152, respectively), the device body adopting an elongated configuration when in a delivery catheter (FIG. 13) and a radially expanded configuration when outside of the delivery catheter (FIG. 14), wherein the plurality of struts are composed of shape memory materials (C8:L11-13: 172 is preferably made of nitinol, which is a shape memory material); and
an expansion means for propping open the device body (176) positioned within the device body (FIG. 13: 176 is within 154), wherein the expansion means is adjustable between a collapsed configuration (FIG. 13) and an expanded configuration (FIG. 14), wherein the expansion means is configured to apply a force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21: 176 is biased to compress in the direction of arrows 178 in FIG. 13, which helps 172 open to the position of FIG. 14; the claim language does not require direct contact between the coil and the struts), wherein the expansion means is a spiral coil (FIG. 13: 176 is a spiral) within the device body that is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration (C8:L14-21: 176 is a compression spring, and stores energy by being biased to open 154) and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body (C8:L14-21 and FIGs. 13-14: when 176 is released, 176 directs the potential energy to expand 154 through moving 172), and the spiral coil within the device body is configured to radially expand and linearly compress in the expanded configuration (FIG. 13: 176 is trying to shorten length-wise and expand radially) and to radially compress and linearly expand in the collapsed configuration (FIG. 14: 176 is capable of acting against being overly compressed, such as if 172 has a shape memory shape which would compress 176 enough for 176 to attempt to linearly expand and thereby radially shrink).
Regarding claim 21, Broome et al. further discloses the expansion means is comprised of a coil or spring (C8:L14-21: 176 is a compression spring, forming a coil shown in FIGs. 13-14).
Regarding claim 22, Broome et al. further discloses the spiral coil is entirely internal within the device body (FIGs. 13-16: 176 is entirely within 154).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 8 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Broome et al. in view of Fitzgerald et al. (Pub. No. 2008/0183203).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Broome et al. discloses the invention as claimed in claims 2 and 15, respectively. Broome et al. is silent regarding the coil/spring is radiopaque.
Fitzgerald et al. discloses a device (20; [0026]; FIGs. 4-5) comprising a device body (32) and a coil/spring (31), where the coil/spring is radiopaque ([0027] components of 20 are made of radio-opaque materials, which can include 26) for the purpose of visualization of the coil/spring while the coil/spring is in the body ([0027]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Broome et al. to have the coil/spring be radiopaque, as taught by Fitzgerald et al., for the purpose of visualization of the coil/spring while the coil/spring is in the body.
Regarding claim 18, Broome et al. discloses the invention as claimed in claim 15, as discussed above. Broom et al. is silent regarding the spring is comprised of drawn-filled tubing. However, the present Specification discloses in [0078] that a drawn-filled tubing is merely a combination of radiopaque material and nitinol. As discussed above, the spring of Broome et al. is made of nitinol (C8:L11-13: 172 is preferably made of nitinol), and Broome et al. can be modified by Fitzgerald et al. to have the spring also be radiopaque (claims 8 and 17). Therefore, Broome et al. in view of Fitzgerald et al. discloses the spring is comprised of drawn-filled tubing.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Broome et al. in view of Bowman (Pub. No. 2016/0058459).
Regarding claim 16, Broome et al. as modified by Harai et al. discloses the invention as claimed in claim 15, as discussed above. Broome et al. does not disclose the clot retrieval device comprises a plurality of connected device bodies.
Bowman teaches in the same field of endeavor of clot retrieval devices (Abstract), and discloses a clot retrieval device (200; FIG. 3) with a plurality of connected device bodies (203) for the purpose of creating space between device bodies to have less material physically contacting the device than a single longer device body, which limits endothelial denudation during clot removal ([0047]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Broome et al. to have a plurality of connected device bodies, as taught by Bowman, for the purpose of creating space between device bodies to have less material physically contacting the device than a single longer device body, thereby limiting endothelial denudation during clot removal.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11 and 19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 11 and 19, the prior art does not disclose, in combination with the remaining claim limitations, that the spiral coil is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body, and that the coil/spring is positioned only within the medial section of the device body and does not extend into the tapered proximal and distal ends of the device body when the device body is in the radially expanded configuration.
The closest prior art reference, Broome et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,094,249) does not disclose, alone or in combination, the coil/spring is positioned only within the medial section of the device body and does not extend into the tapered proximal and distal ends of the device body when the device body is in the radially expanded configuration. Instead, as shown in FIGs. 13-14, the coil/spring 176 extends into the tapered sections 152 and 172, and modifying 176 to only be within the medial section 170 would make 176 so small that 176 would be unable to compress or expand in any direction.
Another close prior art reference, Fitzgerald et al. (Pub. No. 2008/0183203), does not disclose, alone or in combination, the spiral coil is configured to store potential energy in the collapsed configuration and to release the stored potential energy through expansion of the spiral coil within the device body that applies said force against the plurality of struts to prop open the device body. Instead, the collapsible ring structures 30 provide support to the membrane 32 in combination with wires 26, which means the force is not being made against the plurality of struts 26 ([0023]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jordan (Pub. No. 2014/0277561) shows a similar coil in FIG. 2; and Choe et al. (Pub. No. 2020/0297364) shows a similar coil in FIG. 27.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES RYAN MCGINNITY whose telephone number is (571)272-0573. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 8 am-5:30 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Elizabeth Houston can be reached at 571-272-7134. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/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.
/JAMES R MCGINNITY/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights