DETAILED ACTION
The following is a First Action, Non-Final Office Action on the merits.
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 .
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.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 16/730128 provides adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: amend Par. [0001] with updated patent information.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “proximal the” to -proximal to the- in ll. 6. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body” to -transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal configured to ablate tissue in the body via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode- in ll. 8-9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “transfer electrical current via the first and second conductors through the electrode configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode” to -transfer electrical current configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode via the first and second conductors through the electrode - in ll. 1-3. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “applied by the electrode” to -transferred to the electrode- in ll. 3. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “Printed Circuit Board” to -printed circuit board- in ll. 2. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “ablate tissue” to -ablate the tissue- in ll. 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “ablate tissue” to -ablate the tissue- in ll. 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “ablate tissue” to -ablate the tissue- in ll. 9. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “proximal the electrode” to -proximal to the electrode- in ll. 3. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities: amend “ablate tissue” to -ablate the tissue- in ll. 3. Appropriate correction is required.
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, 3-5 & 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karmarkar et al. (2018/0214204) in view of Bar-Tal et al. (2017/0354364).
Concerning claims 1 & 4, as illustrated in at least Figs. 2-3 & 6-7, Karmarkar et al. disclose a medical system (system; [0128], comprising:
a probe configured for insertion into an organ of a body of a patient, the probe comprising a distal tip (steerable catheter 70; [0120]);
an electrode disposed on the distal tip, the electrode connected to a conductor (electrode 10 comprising spiral electrode 40 on distal tip of steerable catheter 70 connected to conductors of coaxial cable 50, where the ablation electrode can be an RF electrode in monopolar configuration with a dispersive grounding pad on the patient's skin to complete the electrical circuit; [0119-0120], [0125]); and
an interface circuit configured to: transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body (ablation electrode 10 can be a monopolar configuration with ablation energy being transferred to ablation electrode 10; [0125]).
Karmarkar et al. fail to disclose specific configuration of the monopolar embodiment, and specifically the electrode connected to a first conductor and a second conductor, the first conductor and the second conductor both being connected to a single conductor proximal the electrode and the interface circuit configured to: transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body; and output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body. However, Bar-Tal et al. disclose a medical system (Fig. 1) comprising a probe (22) an electrode (24) on the distal end of the probe (22), the electrode connected to first and second conductors (50a,b), the first and second conductors (50a,b) connected to a single conductor (conductor line between circuitry block 68 and source 60) and an interface unit (48) configured to: transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body (passing ablating signals into tissue); and output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the electrode, the electrode being a spiral electrode configured as a single axis coil position sensor, in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body (magnetic field induces voltage differences across conducting element 24 that are received by the console, and, based on the induced voltage, processor 32 ascertains the position of each of the conducting element 24). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. such that the electrode is connected to a first conductor and a second conductor, the first conductor and the second conductor both being connected to a single conductor proximal the electrode and the interface circuit configured to: transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body; and output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body in order to provide the benefit of a conducting element that functions in multiple capacities as taught by Bar-Tal et al. ([0035], [0038], [0041-0043], [0049], [0061]; Fig. 1-3).
Concerning claim 3, Karmarkar et al. disclose the electrode (10) comprising a spiral electrode (40) ([0119]; Fig. 1).
Concerning claim 5, Karmarkar et al. disclose the distal tip comprising a dome-shaped distal tip, wherein the electrode (10) is conformed over the dome-shaped distal tip (Fig. 23).
Concerning claim 8, Karmarkar et al. disclose a surface electrode (dispersive grounding pad) configured to be disposed on a surface of the body of the patient and configured to close an electrical circuit for the RF ablation signal applied by the electrode (10) ([0125]).
Claim(s) 2 & 10-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karmarkar et al. (2018/0214204) in view of Bar-Tal et al. (2017/0354364), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Salahieh et al. (2017/0042614).
Concerning claim 2 & 10-12, while Karmarkar et al. disclose a processor temperature feedback system to monitor temperature of non-target tissue to reduce or avoid iatrogenic injury ([0125]) and Bar-Tal et al. disclose the interface circuit (48) configured to transfer electrical current via the first and second conductors (50a,b) through the electrode (24) to measure a resistivity that is indicative of strain and disclose the interface circuit (48) configured to measure a temperature via a thermocouple junction and communicate the information to a processor (32) ([0028-0029], [0049], [0068-0069]; Fig. 1-2), Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. fail to specifically disclose the interface circuit further configured to transfer electrical current via the first and second conductors through the electrode configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode, the processor configured to determine whether the tissue temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature and the processor further configured to, in response to determining that the tissue temperature is less than the predetermined temperature, cause the electrode to transfer the RF ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode to ablate tissue in the body. However, Salahieh et al. disclose an electrode and an interface circuit configured to transfer electrical current via first and second conductors through the electrode and configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode and determining whether the tissue temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature (control temperature maximum) and limiting delivery of energy after the temperature is attained ([0140-0141]). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. such that the interface circuit is further configured to transfer electrical current via the first and second conductors through the electrode configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode and the processor configured to determine whether the tissue temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature and the processor further configured to, in response to determining that the tissue temperature is less than the predetermined temperature, cause the electrode to transfer the RF ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode to ablate tissue in the body in order to provide the benefit of dual usage and reducing the overall profile of the electrode assembly with fewer connections that result in less material and less bulk of the device and to limit delivery of energy after a temperature has been attained as taught by Salahieh et al. ([0136-0137], [0139-0141]) to reduce or avoid injury to tissue as taught by Karmarkar ([0125]).
Concerning claim 13, as illustrated in at least Figs. 2-3 & 6-7, Karmarkar et al. disclose a method (method; [0002]) comprising:
inserting a medical probe into a body of a patient, the medical probe comprising an electrode disposed at a distal tip (ablation electrode 10 on tip of steerable catheter 70 is placed in contact with cardiac tissue to be ablated; [0118]);
navigating the medical probe to an organ of the patient (electrical properties are used to confirm electrode-tissue contact and energy is delivered to ablate cardiac tissue; [0118]); and
in response to determining that the distal tip is positioned at tissue in the organ, transferring the radio frequency (RF) ablation signal to the electrode (the ablation electrode can be an RF electrode in monopolar configuration with a dispersive grounding pad on the patient's skin to complete the electrical circuit; [0119-0120], [0125]);
measuring a temperature being indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode (temperature sensor may be used to monitor the temperature of the target tissue to confirm therapeutic delivery of RF and to monitor temperature of non-target tissue to reduce or avoid iatrogenic injury; [0123]).
Karmarker et al. fail to disclose navigating the medical probe using a voltage that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body. However, Bar-Tal et al. disclose a method comprising inserting a medical probe (22) into tissue and navigating the medical probe (22) to an organ of the patient using a voltage that develops across an electrode (24) in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body. At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. to further comprise navigating the medical probe using a voltage that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body in order to provide the benefit of a conducting element that functions in multiple capacities as taught by Bar-Tal et al. ([0035], [0038], [0041-0043], [0049], [0061]; Fig. 1-3).
While Karmarker et al. disclose a temperature feedback system ([0123]), Karmarker et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. fail to disclose measuring a resistivity of the electrode, the resistivity being indicative of the tissue temperature in the vicinity of the electrode. However, Salahieh et al. disclose an electrode configured to transfer electrical current via first and second conductors through the electrode and configured to measure a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode ([0140-0141]). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. to further comprise measuring a resistivity of the electrode, the resistivity being indicative of the tissue temperature in the vicinity of the electrode in the body in order to provide the benefit of dual usage and reducing the overall profile of the electrode assembly with fewer connections that result in less material and less bulk of the device and to limit delivery of energy after a temperature has been attained as taught by Salahieh et al. ([0136-0137], [0139-0141])
Claim 14 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 1.
Claim 15 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 1.
Claim 16 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 1.
Claim 17 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 2.
Claim 18 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 10.
Claim 19 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 11.
Claim 20 is rejected upon the same rationale as applied to claim 12.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karmarkar et al. (2018/0214204) in view of Bar-Tal et al. (2017/0354364), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Carr (2013/0281851).
Concerning claim 6, Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. fail to disclose the interface circuit comprising high-pass filters in electrical communication with the first and second conductors between the single conductor and the electrode. However, Carr discloses an electrical apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising a conductor (18) disposed on a distal end of a probe (10) and an interface circuit (14) configured to both transfer a signal for ablating tissue and transfer electrical current for measuring a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature, where the interface circuit (14) comprises a high-pass filter (64) on the conductor between a source of the RF ablation signal (14) and the conductor (14). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. such that the interface circuit comprises high-pass filters on conductors between a source of the RF ablation signal and the electrode in order to provide the benefit of filtering the respective ablative and temperature sensing signals as taught by Carr. ([0021], [0035-0037], [0050], [0052]; Fig. 1-2).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karmarkar et al. (2018/0214204) in view of Bar-Tal et al. (2017/0354364), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Ensslin (4,938,761).
Concerning claim 7, Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. fail to disclose the interface circuit comprising isolation capacitors on the first and second conductors between the electrode and the single conductor. However, Ensslin discloses an electrical apparatus (Fig. 1) comprising a conductor (28/29) disposed on a distal end of a probe (12) and an interface circuit (10) configured to both transfer a signal for treating tissue and transfer electrical current for measuring a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature, where the interface circuit (10) comprises isolation capacitors (60) on electrical conductors (23, 25) between the electrode (28/29) and a source of the RF treatment signal (14). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. such that the interface circuit comprises isolation capacitors on electrical conductors between the spiral electrode and a source of the RF ablation signal in order to provide the benefit of isolating the ablation frequency from the temperature sensing frequency as taught by Ensslin (Col. 3, II. 48- 64, Col. 4, II. 33-54; Fig. 1).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karmarkar et al. (2018/0214204) in view of Bar-Tal et al. (2017/0354364), as applied to claim 1, in further view of Govari (2018/0180684).
Concerning claim 9, Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. fail to disclose the electrode is disposed on a first facet of a Printed Circuit Board (PCB), wherein a first end of the electrode is disposed on the first facet and a second end of the electrode is connected to a second facet of the PCB through a via hole. However, Govari et al. disclose an electrical apparatus (12) comprising a spiral conductor (92A) and an interface unit (46) that is configured to output a voltage that develops across the spiral electrode in response to an external magnetic field (30, 32, 34) for measuring a position of a probe (20), the spiral conductor (92A) disposed on a PCB substrate (80) where a first end (110A) of the spiral electrode (92A) is disposed on the first facet (84) and a second end of the spiral electrode (92A) is connected to a second facet (86) of the PCB (80) through a via hole (130 or 132). At the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of Karmarkar et al. in view of Bar-Tal et al. such that the substrate is a PCB where a first end of the spiral electrode is disposed on the first facet and a second end of the spiral electrode is connected to a second facet of the PCB through a via hole in order to provide the benefit of connecting the coil to the interface unit as taught by Govari. ([0075], [0081-0085], [0088], [0095], [0103]; Fig. 2A & 4A)
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-8 of U.S. Patent No. 11,712,295. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they both recite: A medical system (electrical apparatus), comprising: a probe configured for insertion into an organ of a body of a patient, the probe comprising a distal tip (a probe for insertion into a body of a patient, the probe having a three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip); an electrode disposed on the distal tip, the electrode connected to a first conductor and a second conductor, the first conductor and the second conductor both being connected to a single conductor proximal the electrode (spiral electrode disposed on the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip such that the spiral electrode is conformed over the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip of the probe with a center of the spiral electrode being disposed on the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip, the center of the spiral electrode is connected to a first conductor and a perimeter of the spiral electrode connected to a second conductor, the first conductor and the second conductor both being connected to a single conductor proximal the spiral electrode); and an interface circuit (an interface circuit) configured to: transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the electrode configured to ablate tissue in the body (transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the spiral electrode for ablating tissue in the body); and output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body (output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the spiral electrode in response to an external magnetic field, for measuring a position of a distal end in the body). A method comprising: inserting a medical probe into a body of a patient, the medical probe comprising an electrode disposed at a distal tip (a probe for insertion into a body of a patient, the probe having a three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip; a spiral electrode disposed on the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip such that the spiral electrode is conformed over the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip of the probe with a center of the spiral electrode being disposed on the three-dimensional dome-shaped distal tip, the center of the spiral electrode is connected to a first conductor and a perimeter of the spiral electrode connected to a second conductor, the first conductor and the second conductor both being connected to a single conductor proximal the spiral electrode); navigating the medical probe to an organ of the patient using a voltage that develops across the electrode in response to an external magnetic field configured to measure a position of the distal tip in the body (output a voltage via the first and second conductors that develops across the spiral electrode in response to an external magnetic field, for measuring a position of a distal end in the body); in response to determining that the distal tip is positioned at tissue in the organ, transferring a radio frequency (RF) ablation signal to the electrode, the electrode being configured to ablate tissue in the body (transfer a radiofrequency (RF) ablation signal via the single conductor to the first and second conductors and to the spiral electrode for ablating tissue in the body); and measuring a resistivity of the electrode, the resistivity being indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the electrode (transfer electrical current via the first and second conductors through the spiral electrode for measuring a resistivity that is indicative of tissue temperature in a vicinity of the spiral electrode). The patent fails to specifically disclose a method; however, Bar-Tal et al. disclose a method of treating tissue comprising navigating a probe to a location, determining the location of the distal tip, applying energy, and measuring tissue temperature in the vicinity of the electrode. At the time the patent was effectively filed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the invention of the patent such that the patent comprises a method in order to provide the benefit of treating the tissue as taught by Bar-Tal et al. ([0022-0024], [0035], [0058], [0061]) Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the patent anticipate the claims of the application. Accordingly, the application claims are not patentably distinct from the patent claims. Here, the more specific patent claims encompass the broader application claims. Following the rationale in In re Goodman cited in the preceding paragraph, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific narrow invention, applicant may not obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Harris (4,196,734) teaches a cautery circuit and an electrosurgical circuit separated by an isolation transformer (Fig. 1). Montag et al. (2017/0181706) teaches wire loops that are exposed to magnetic fluxes at respective frequencies for location tracking. Wasson et al. (2012/0029343) disclose a single axis position sensor.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAYMI E DELLA whose telephone number is (571)270-1429. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 6:00 am - 4:45 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, Joanne Rodden can be reached on (303) 297-4276. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JAYMI E DELLA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
JAYMI E. DELLA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3794