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 .
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.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The electrodes of claim 8 are not discussed in the detailed description of the instant specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the electrodes of claim 8 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities: “according to claim 19, the first elongated hole” should be amended to --according to claim 19, wherein the first elongated hole--. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-6, 12 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumada et al. (US 2019/0059894).
Regarding claim 1, Twomey discloses a treatment tool comprising: a first gripper (see first gripper 3, Figs. 1-3); a second gripper configured to pivot relative to the first gripper to grip a living tissue between the second gripper and the first gripper (see second gripper 4 that pivots relative to the other jaw to grip tissue, Figs. 2-3); a support (see proximal portion of gripper 3 that the second gripper is attached to at its proximal end via the pivoting shaft 2 and pin 5c as a support, Fig. 1) provided with a pivoting shaft configured to engage with the second gripper and serve as a pivoting center of the second gripper (see pivoting shaft 2 engaging with the second gripper and serving as the pivoting center of the second gripper, Figs. 2-3, [0034]); and a driver provided with a driving shaft configured to engage with the second gripper (see driving-force transmitting member 5d provided with a driving shaft 5c configured to engage the second gripper; [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1), the driver configured to move forward and backward to pivot the second gripper (see [0034]-[0035]), wherein the second gripper includes: a first elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a first direction, in which the driving shaft is disposed, the first elongated hole engaging with the driving shaft (see elongated hole 5b in which the driving shaft is disposed and engaged with; [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1); and a second elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a second direction, in which the pivoting shaft is disposed, the second elongated hole engaging the pivoting shaft (see elongated hole 6a engaging the pivoting shaft; Fig. 1, [0034]-[0035]), wherein as the driver moves forward and backward, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole (see [0034]-[0035]), and wherein as the driving shaft moves along the first direction in the first elongated hole, the second gripper is configured to move along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole (see [0034]-[0035]).
Regarding claim 2, Kumada further discloses wherein, when the driver moves in a direction to approach the second gripper, the second gripper is configured to pivot in a direction to approach the first gripper (see moving to approach the proximal end of the second gripper to pivot the second gripper towards the first gripper, [0035]).
Regarding claim 3, Kumada further discloses wherein the first gripper includes a first gripping surface (see 3a, Fig. 1), wherein the second gripper includes a second gripping surface configured to grip the living tissue between the second gripping surface and the first gripping surface (see 4a, Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 4, Kumada further discloses wherein when the second gripper pivots in a direction to approach the first gripper from a state where the first gripping surface and the second gripping surface are parallel, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole (see [0038]).
Regarding claim 5, Kumada further discloses wherein the first direction is an inclined direction being a direction to move away from the first gripper toward a distal end of the second gripper in a state where the first gripping surface and the second gripping surface are parallel (see [0034], Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 6, Kumada further discloses the first elongated hole is inclined relative to the second elongated hole (see “substantially” parallel in [0036] which is taken to mean the elongated holes are not exactly parallel with one another, resulting relative inclination).
Regarding claim 12, Kumada further discloses wherein, when the driver moves in a direction to move away from the second gripper, the second gripper is configured to pivot in a direction to approach the first gripper (see [0035]).
Regarding claim 17, Kumada further discloses wherein the first elongated hole and the second elongated hole are provided at an end portion on a proximal end side of the second gripper (as shown in Fig. 1), and wherein as the second gripper pivots in a direction to approach the first gripper from a point of time when the first gripper and the second gripper grip the living tissue, the end portion on the proximal end side of the second gripper is configured to move in a direction to move away from the first gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole (see direction of movement during the transition from Fig. 1 to Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, Kumada further discloses wherein the first elongated hole and the second elongated hole are provided at an end portion on a proximal end side of the second gripper (as shown in Fig. 1), wherein the first gripper includes a first gripping surface, wherein the second gripper includes a second gripping surface configured to grip the living tissue between the second gripping surface and the first gripping surface (see gripping surfaces 3a and 4a, respectively, Fig. 1), and wherein when the second gripper pivots in the direction to approach the first gripper from a state where the first gripping surface and the second gripping surface are parallel, the end portion on the proximal end side of the second gripper is configured to move in the direction to approach the first gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole (see direction of movement when the second gripper is being shifted closer to the first gripper, which is configured to occur from a parallel position; [0038], Fig. 8 vs Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 19, Kumada discloses a treatment tool comprising: a first gripper (see first gripper 3, Figs. 1-3); a second gripper including a pivoting shaft (see second gripper 4 including pivoting pin 5c, Figs. 2-3), the second gripper being configured to pivot about the pivoting shaft relative to the first gripper to grip a living tissue between the second gripper and the first gripper (see second gripper 4 that pivots relative to the other jaw to grip tissue, Figs. 2-3); a support configured to engage with the pivoting shaft (see proximal portion of gripper 3 that the second gripper is attached to at its proximal end via the pivoting pin 5c as a support, Fig. 1); and a driver including a driving shaft configured to engage with the second gripper (see driving-force transmitting member 5d provided with a driving shaft 5c configured to engage the second gripper; [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1), the driver configured to move forward and backward to pivot the second gripper (see [0034]-[0035]), wherein the second gripper includes a first elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a first direction (see elongated hole 5b, Fig. 1), in which the driving shaft is disposed, the first elongated hole engaging the driving shaft (see elongated hole 5b in which the pin 5c is disposed and engaged, Fig. 1), wherein the support includes a second elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a second direction, in which the pivoting shaft is disposed, the second elongated hole engaging with the pivoting shaft (see elongated hole 5a in which the pin 5c is disposed and engaged, Fig. 1), wherein as the driver moves forward and backward, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole, and wherein as the driving shaft moves along the first direction in the first elongated hole, the second gripper is configured to move along the second direction while the pivoting shaft is guided to the second elongated hole (see [0033]-[0035], Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 20, Kumada further discloses wherein the first elongated hole is inclined relative to the second elongated hole (as shown in Fig. 1).
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.
Claims 1-9 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnson et al. (US 2017/0164972) in view of Kumada.
Regarding claim 1, Johnson discloses a treatment tool comprising: a first gripper (see blade 240, Figs. 1-3B); a second gripper configured to pivot relative to the first gripper to grip a living tissue between the second gripper and the first gripper (see clamp arm 210 that pivots relative to the other jaw to grip tissue, Figs. 3A-3B); a support (see outer tube 202, Figs. 2A-3B) provided with a pivoting shaft configured to engage with the second gripper and serve as a pivoting center of the second gripper (see tube 202 as a shaft and configured to engage with the clamp arm at a pivot point to serve as a main pivoting center for the clamp arm, [0123]); and a driver provided with a driving shaft configured to engage with the second gripper (see inner tube 204 provided with a shaft portion configured to engage the clamp arm; [0123], Figs. 2A-3B), the driver configured to move forward and backward to pivot the second gripper (see [0123]). However, Johnson fails to disclose wherein the second gripper includes: a first elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a first direction, in which the driving shaft is disposed, the first elongated hole engaging with the driving shaft; and a second elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a second direction, in which the pivoting shaft is disposed, the second elongated hole engaging the pivoting shaft, wherein as the driver moves forward and backward, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole, and wherein as the driving shaft moves along the first direction in the first elongated hole, the second gripper is configured to move along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole.
Kumada teaches wherein the second gripper includes: a first elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a first direction, in which the driving shaft is disposed, the first elongated hole engaging with the driving shaft (see elongated hole 5b in which the driving shaft is disposed and engaged with; [0034]-[0035], Fig. 1); and a second elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a second direction, in which the pivoting shaft is disposed, the second elongated hole engaging the pivoting shaft (see elongated hole 6a engaging the pivoting shaft; Fig. 1, [0034]-[0035]), wherein as the driver moves forward and backward, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole (see [0034]-[0035]), and wherein as the driving shaft moves along the first direction in the first elongated hole, the second gripper is configured to move along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole (see [0034]-[0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the jaw actuation mechanism as disclosed by Johnson to instead include wherein the second gripper includes: a first elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a first direction, in which the driving shaft is disposed, the first elongated hole engaging with the driving shaft; and a second elongated hole being an elongated hole extending along a second direction, in which the pivoting shaft is disposed, the second elongated hole engaging the pivoting shaft, wherein as the driver moves forward and backward, the driving shaft is configured to move along the first direction in the first elongated hole while being guided to the first elongated hole, and wherein as the driving shaft moves along the first direction in the first elongated hole, the second gripper is configured to move along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft while being guided to the second elongated hole in light of Kumada, the motivation being to provide the additional advantage of additional functionality of being able to both pivot the second gripping member towards first gripping member, and also shifting the distance between the gripping surfaces (see Kumada [0035]-[0038]).
Regarding claims 2-6, Johnson in view of Kumada further teaches the additional limitations of these claims in further light of Kumada under the same rationale as that applied in the rejections of claims 2-6 above.
Regarding claim 7, Johnson further discloses wherein the first gripper is a vibration transmitter configured to transmit ultrasound vibration (see ultrasonic blade, [0123]).
Regarding claim 8, Johnson further discloses wherein the first gripper and the second gripper are electrodes configured to cause a high frequency current to flow to the living tissue (see electrode 212 and ultrasonic blade 240 cooperating for bipolar RF energy application, [0126]).
Regarding claim 9, Johnson further discloses wherein the support has a tubular shape, and wherein the driver is inserted into the support (see outer tube 202 having a tubular shape in which inner tube 204 is inserted, [0123], Figs. 2A-3B).
Regarding claim 12, Johnson in view of Kumada further teaches the additional limitations of claim 12 in further light of Kumada under the same rationale as that applied in the rejection of claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 13, Johnson further discloses wherein the support has a tubular shape (see outer tube 202 with a tubular shape, Fig. 2A), and wherein the first gripper is inserted into the support and disposed protruding from a distal end of the support (see ultrasonic blade 240 inserted into the outer tube 202 and protruding from a distal end of tube 202 as shown in Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 14, Johnson further discloses wherein the driver is inserted into the support and has a tubular shape (see inner tube 204 inserted into the outer tube 202 and having a tubular shape, Fig. 2A), and wherein the first gripper is inserted into the driver (see ultrasonic blade 240 inserted into the inner tube 204, Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 15, Johnson in view of Kumada further teaches wherein the second gripper includes: a gripper main body provided with the first elongated hole and the second elongated hole (see proximal body portion of the clamp arm 210 of Johnson with the first and second elongated holes in light of the modification above); and a pad provided to the gripper main body (see clamp arm pad 220, Fig 2A), the pad configured to be in contact with the first gripper when the second gripper pivots in a direction to approach the first gripper (see Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 16, Johnson further discloses a fixed handle gripped by a user (see pistol grip 124, Fig. 1); and an operation handle movable relative to the fixed handle, and the operation handle accepts an operation of the user (see trigger 128; [0115], Fig. 1), wherein the driver configured to move forward and backward in response to an operation of the operation handle by the user (see [0123]).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Johnson in view of Kumada further teaches the additional limitations of these claims in further light of Kumada under the same rationale as that applied in the rejections of claims 17 and 18 above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10 and 11 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: The closest prior art of record, Kumada et al. (US 2019/0059894), and Kerr et al. (US 2011/0301592), fails to reasonably teach wherein an outer surface of the pivoting shaft and an inner surface of the second elongated hole are provided with an engagement structure configured to forbid movement of the second gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft in a first operation state and permit movement of the second gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft in a second operation state; or wherein an inside of the second elongated hole is provided with an elastic material configured to forbid movement of the second gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft in a first operation state and permit movement of the second gripper along the second direction relative to the pivoting shaft in a second operation state when considered in combination with the additional requirements of the claims, respectively. The closest prior art provides for first and second elongated holes in addition to features for resisting movement of the second gripper, however the closest prior art is silent with regard to the outer surface of the pivoting shaft and inner surface of the second elongated hole having an engagement structure as claimed, or the inside of the second elongated hole having the elastic material as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN W COLLINS whose telephone number is (408)918-7607. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM-5:00 PM ET.
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.
/SEAN W COLLINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794