DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group 1, claims 1-11 in the reply filed on 12/01/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 12-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/01/2025.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 8-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Whitfield et al U.S 2011/0208211 in view of Bhatnagar et al U.S 2018/0008276.
Claim 1: Whitfield et al disclose a surgical clip applier 100, as best seen in figures 9, 16, comprising: an elongate shaft 300 extending from a drive housing 324; an end effector 320 arranged at a distal end of the elongate shaft and including first and second jaw members 326; and an articulation joint 310 interposing the end effector and the elongate shaft as best seen in fig. 9, the articulation joint including: a flexible shaft length (multiple shaft length 314, fig. 9) having opposing first and second ends and defining a lumen that extends between the first and second ends; a clip track (it is noted that a clip carrier 334 is equivalent with a clip tract that is configured to slidably to retain the stack of surgical clips “c”, see paragraphs 105,106) provided within the lumen and extending at least partially between the first and second ends to guide surgical clips through the articulation joint to be received by the first and second jaw members 326 for crimping; but is silent regarding opposing side rails defined on angularly opposite sides of the lumen, wherein a portion of each surgical clip is receivable within and supported by the opposing side rails. Bhatnagar et al, in the same field of endeavor, namely, a clip cartridge assembly 300 of a surgical clip applier with jaws 214 for endoscopic assembly 200 that comprises a multiple clips C1 or stack of clips “C”. It is noted that with opposing side rails (at 302b, fig. 16) defined on angularly opposite sides of the lumen, wherein a portion of each surgical clip is receivable within and supported by the opposing side rails. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Whitfield et al with opposing side rails defined on angularly opposite sides of the lumen, wherein a portion of each surgical clip is receivable within and supported by the opposing side rails as taught by Bhatnagar et al in order to allow a portion of the clip that is received within and support by the opposing side slots and further to engage distal most clip C1 of stack of clips into the jaw 214 of the endoscopic assembly (see paragraphs 96,97).
Claims 2-4: Whitfield et al disclose wherein the flexible shaft length 314 comprises a plurality of articulation links interconnected in series and extending between the first and second ends, and wherein the plurality of articulation links cooperatively define the lumen (see fig. 9, paragraph 99); wherein the flexible shaft length 314 is articulable in a plane of motion and the clip track (the clip carrier 334) extends perpendicular to the plane of motion., further comprising one or more articulation cables 252/254, fig. 11 extending along the flexible shaft length and actuatable to move the articulation joint in the plane of motion (see paragraph 95).
Claim 5: Bhatnagar et al teach wherein the portion of each surgical clip slidably engages the opposing side rails as each surgical clip advances distally within the clip track (it is noted that that with opposing side rails (at 302b, fig. 16, see paragraphs 96,97) defined on angularly opposite sides of the lumen, wherein a portion of each surgical clip is receivable within and supported by the opposing side rails.
Claims 8-9: Whitfield et al disclose further comprising a feed-bar (a drive sled 344, fig. 16) movable within the lumen to advance the surgical clips distally through the clip track (see paragraph 117); further comprising biasing device 228 arrangeable within the lumen to advance the surgical clips distally through the clip track 334.
Claims 10-11: Whitfield et al disclose wherein the articulation joint 310 further comprises a retention member 316, fig. 11 arranged at or near the distal end of the
flexible shaft length to index the surgical clips., wherein the flexible shaft
length is articulable between an unarticulated state and an articulated state, and
wherein the surgical clips traverse the articulation joint when the flexible shaft is in the unarticulated and articulated states (it is noted that pusher bar 330 is advanced distally, distal slot 330d thereof is advanced distally relative to tab 332b of advancer plate 332. When tab 332b of advancer plate 332 has traversed a length of distal slot 330d, a proximal end of slot 330d abuts against tab 332b and begins to urge advancer plate 332 distally.
Concomitantly with the advancement of pusher bar 330, drive channel 334c of drive sled 344 is distally advanced and translated relative to stem 342b of slider joint 342. Drive channel 344c of drive sled 344 is advanced distally until a shoulder 344e thereof engages a shoulder 340b of drive bar 340. Drive sled 344 is configured and dimensioned such that drive sled 344 does not engage drive bar 340 until after pusher bar 330 has advanced distal-most clip "C1" into jaws 326. When shoulder 344e of drive sled 344 engages shoulder 340b of drive bar 340, drive sled 344 advances drive bar 340 in a distal direction (see paragraphs 119,120).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 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.
Claim 6: The prior arts fail to disclose the opposing side rails that provide a helical path such that the surgical clips enter the clip track in a first angular orientation and exit the clip track in a second angular orientation angularly offset from the first angular orientation. Claim 7 is also allowed by virtue of its dependency from claim 6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VI X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4699. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (6:30-4:30).
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 571-272-4695. 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.
/VI X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771