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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 June 13, 2026 has been entered.
Previously Set Forth Rejections
The status of the rejections set forth in the previous Office action (mailed March 13, 2026) is as follows:
The 35 USC 112(b) rejection of claims 13 and 14 has been overcome by amendments to claim 13.
The 35 USC 103 rejection of claims 1-23 as being obvious over Townley et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0104870) in view of Sverdlik et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0095372) is hereby withdrawn.
The following new grounds of rejection are set forth:
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-11, 13, 15-18 and 20-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In independent claims 1, 13, 15 and 18, the phrase “specific result” is vague and indefinite. As claims 2-11, 16, 17 and 20-23 depend from claims 1, 13, 15 and 18, they are likewise rejected.
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)(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) 13, 18, 21 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nishikawa et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0419486).
In regard to claims 13, 18, 21 and 23, Nishikawa et al. teach a system 10 comprised of a controller 100, an endoscope system 200, a generator 300 and an energy device 310 (see Fig. 1). The endoscope system 200 includes an endoscope 210, a main body device 220 and a display 230 and the main body device 220 includes a processing device that controls the endoscope, performs image processing of endoscope images and displays the endoscope images, and a light source device that generates and controls illumination light (see para. 0038). The processing device includes a processor (CPU) and performs image processing of the image signals transmitted from the endoscope 210 to generate endoscope images and then outputs the endoscope images to a display 230 and the controller 100 (see para. 0038). The energy device 310 is a device that outputs energy in the form of high-frequency power, ultrasonic waves or the like from its distal end section to perform treatments including coagulation, sealing, hemostasis, incision, division, resection, dissection or the like with respect to tissues in contact with its distal end section (see para. 0040). The generator 300 supplies energy to the energy device 310, controls the energy supply and acquires electrical information from the energy device 310 (see para. 0041). The controller 100 recognizes a biological tissue and the energy device 310 from the endoscope image through an image recognition process using machine learning or other methods and outputs an energy output adjustment instruction to the generator 300 based on the recognized information (see para. 0044). The recognizes information items relate to matters that affect heat diffusion by the energy device 310 (see para. 0044). The controller 100 includes a control section 110, a storage section 120, an I/O device 180 and an I/O device 190 and the controller 100 is an information processing device, such as a PC (see para. 0048). The I/O device 180 receives image data of the endoscope image from the main body device 220 of the endoscope system 200 and the control section 110 estimates the specific tissue and the heat diffusion region from the endoscope image through an image recognition process using a trained model 121 and outputs the energy output adjustment instruction base on a result of the estimation (see para. 0050). The control section 110 includes one or a plurality of processors (see para. 0050). The control section 110 also includes a heat diffusion detection section 111, an important tissue detection section 112, a risk for heat damage determination section 114 and an output setting section 113 (see para. 0054). In operation, in step S1, the control section 110 acquires an endoscope image from the main body device 220 of the endoscope system 200 via the I/O device 180 (see para. 0056 and Fig. 3). Subsequently, the control section 110 executes steps S2A and S2B where in step S2A, the important tissue detection section 112 performs an image recognition process on the endoscope image using the first trained model 122 to estimate an important tissue from the image and thereby detects the tissue (see para. 0056 and Fig. 3). In step S2B, the heat diffusion detection section 111 performs an image recognition process on the endoscope image using the second trained model 123 to estimate a heat diffusion region (thermal invasion range) around jaw of the energy device 310 and thereby detects the heat diffusion region (see para. 0056 and Fig. 3). Subsequently, in step S3, the risk for heat damage determination section 114 determines a risk that heat diffuses into the important tissue and heat damage is caused based on a result of the estimation in steps S2A and S2B and transmits a signal to the output setting section 113 (see para. 0056 and Fig. 3). In step S4, the output setting section 112 adjusts the energy output from the energy device 310 based on the signal (see para. 0056 and Fig. 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 and 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-11, 16, 17, 20 and 22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-11, 13, 15-18 and 20-23 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BEVERLY MEINDL FLANAGAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4766. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30AM to 5:00PM.
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 at (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 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.
/BEVERLY M FLANAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights