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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 9-13, 15-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Potter (US 2009/0163915).
Regarding claim 1, Potter discloses
A catheter comprising:
a control handle (50);
a catheter shaft (20) coupled to (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0021) the control handle (50) and extending from (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0021) the control handle (50), the catheter shaft (20) having a proximal end (proximal end of 20) coupled to (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0021) the control handle (50) and a distal end (distal end of 20) located opposite (Figs. 1-2) the proximal end (proximal end of 20);
a pull wire band (30) coupled to the catheter shaft (Fig. 2, Paragraph 0022), wherein at least a portion (33-36, Fig. 2) of the pull wire band (30) is exposed to (Fig. 2) an environment outside of (Fig. 2) the catheter shaft (20); and
a pull wire (26) extending from (Fig.2, Paragraph 0022) the control handle (50) and through the catheter shaft (20) to the pull wire band (30).
Regarding claim 4, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the portion (34) of the pull wire band (30) that is exposed (Fig. 2) to the environment outside (Fig. 2) of the catheter shaft (20) is recessed (Fig. 2) relative to an outer surface (outer surface of 20) of the catheter shaft (20). Examiner notes the portion 34 is exposed to the environment via the orifices 36 spaced around its periphery.
Regarding claim 5, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the pull wire band (30) includes an additional layer (44) having an outer surface (outer surface of 44) that is substantially flush (Fig. 5, Paragraphs 0029 and 0031) with an outer surface (outer surface of 20) of the catheter shaft (20).
Regarding claim 9, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the pull wire band (30) includes openings (36) spaced circumferentially apart (Fig. 2, Paragraph 0024).
Regarding claim 10, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the pull wire band (30) is coupled to (Fig. 2) the distal end (distal end of 20) of the catheter shaft (20).
Regarding claim 11, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the pull wire band (30) is an electrode (31).
Regarding claim 12, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 11, wherein the pull wire band (30) is part of a steering system (Paragraph 0022) for deflecting and steering (Paragraph 0022) the distal end (distal end of 20) of the catheter (20).
Regarding claim 13, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 12, wherein the steering system (Paragraph 0022) includes the pull wire band (30), the pull wire (26), and an actuating mechanism (triggers of control handle 50, Paragraph 0022) at the control handle (50).
Regarding claim 15, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, further comprising an electrode wire (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0031, Claim 28) coupled to (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0031, Claim 28) the pull wire (26).
Regarding claim 16, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 15, wherein the electrode wire (Fig. 1, Paragraph 0031, Claim 28) is coupled to the pull wire (26) within the control handle (50).
Regarding claim 17, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the pull wire band (30) is formed at least in part from an electrically conductive material (Paragraph 0025).
Regarding claim 18, Potter discloses
The catheter of claim 1, wherein the catheter (20) is a delivery catheter (10). (Paragraph 0022).
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.
Claim(s) 14, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potter (US 2009/0163915) in view of Grunewald et al. (US 2012/0111482).
Regarding claim 14, Potter discloses the catheter of claim 13, as set forth above, except for wherein the actuating mechanism includes a control knob, wherein the control knob is coupled to the pull wire such that when the control knob is rotated, the pull wire is tensioned, and the distal end of the catheter flexes.
However, Grunewald teaches the actuating mechanism (figs. 1A-1C and par. 0036) includes a control knob (37), wherein the control knob (37) is coupled to the pull wire (44a/44b) such that when the control knob is rotated, the pull wire is tensioned, and the distal end of the catheter flexes (see figs. 1A-1C and par. 0036).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Potter by adding a control knob, as taught by Grunewald, for the purpose of allowing the operator to deflect the catheter tip as needed (par. 0036).
Regarding claim 20, Potter discloses the catheter of claim 1, as set forth above, except for wherein the catheter shaft is a flexible polymer shaft.
However, Grunewald teaches the catheter shaft made of PEBAX – a flexible polymer shaft (par. 0037).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Potter catheter shaft to be made of PEBAX, as taught by Grunewald, for the purpose of allowing the catheter to be flexible and to be deflected as needed (pars. 0036-0037 of Grunewald).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Potter (US 2009/0163915) in view of Subramaniam et al. (US 2021/0031006).
Regarding claim 19, Potter discloses the catheter of claim 18, as set forth above, except for wherein the delivery catheter includes a stopcock.
However, Subramaniam teaches the delivery catheter includes a stopcock (pars. 0021 and 0026).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Potter by adding a stopcock, as taught by Subramaniam, for the purpose of allowing the operator to open and close the fluid pathway as needed (par. 0026 of Subramaniam).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim(s) 2-3, 6-8 is/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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892 form.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG T ULSH whose telephone number is (571)272-9894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at 571-272-3383. 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.
/DUNG T ULSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783