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 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.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgement is made to the amendment received 06/15/2026.
Acknowledgement is made to the amendment of claims 1, 6-7, 9-11, 14-16, 19, 21, 29, 31, and 34-36.
Acknowledgement is made to the cancellation of claim 5.
Acknowledgement is made to the withdrawal of claims 3-4, 8, 12-13, 23-28 and 32-33.
Any claims listed above as cancelled have sufficiently overcome any rejections set forth in any of the prior office actions.
Any claims listed above as withdrawn have been withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, as these claims are drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 9-11, 14-22, 29-31 and 34-36 are pending as rejected below. A complete action on the merits appears below.
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 29-36 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.
Claim 29 recites the limitation “the coupling member” in lines 18 and 20. It is unclear if the applicant is referring to the cap of line 12 or a distinct element of “a coupling member”. For examination purposes, the coupling member of lines 18 and 20 will be read as the same element of the cap of line 12.
Claims 30-36 inherit the issue of indefiniteness from claim 29 by the nature of dependency.
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.
The claim limitation “means for coupling” in claim 19 has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C 112(f) or pre-AIA U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses “means” coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, means is not proceeded by a structural modifier.
Since the claim limitation invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, claim 19 has been interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification that achieves the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
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.
Claims 1-2, 6-7, 10-11, 14-22, 29-31 and 34-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGrath (US 20100280311 A1) in view of Wahr (US 20190142511 A1).
Regarding claim 1, McGrath teaches a delivery sheath to catheter coupler (Fig. 4; adaptor 10), the coupler comprising:
(a) a cylindrical shaft (Fig. 4; second portion of adaptor 24) extending along an axis, the cylindrical shaft being configured for longitudinal alignment with an insertion port of a catheter delivery sheath ([0037]), the cylindrical shaft including:
(i) a proximal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing opening 44),
(ii) a distal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing threads 68),
(iii) a lumen (Fig. 4; lumen 49) extending from the proximal end to the distal end along the axis, the lumen being sized to receive an end effector of a catheter ([0035], [0037]),
(iv) a feature (Fig. 4; seal 60) at the distal end of the cylindrical shaft, and
(v) an outer surface (Fig. 4; outer surface portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10); and
(b) a coupling member (Fig. 4; the distal outer portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 containing threads 68) with a center axis and disposed on the outer surface of the cylindrical shaft, the cylindrical shaft aligned with the center axis of the coupling member ([0035]), with the proximal end of the cylindrical shaft being proximal of the coupling member ([0037]) and the distal end with the outwardly flared feature being distal of the coupling member ([0037]), the coupling member being configured for selective securement to the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]), the coupling member being configured to align the axis of the lumen with a longitudinal axis of the insertion port ([0037]) and generally surround the feature of the distal end of the cylindrical shaft when the coupling member is selectively secured to the catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as surrounding seal 60).
However, McGrath fails to teach the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft as being outwardly flared.
McGrath instead teaches the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft, which is the element for connecting the adaptor for connecting to a connector for insertion of a medical instrument into an endoscope as being tubular (Fig. 4; seal 60 is provided so that the lumen 49 of the adaptor 10 may be operably connected to the accessory channel 30 of the endoscope 20 by the connector 28).
Wahr teaches a catheter and handle system for insertion of a catheter into an endoscope ([0043]). This system is taught as having an insertion tube for connecting to an insertion port of an endoscope so as to insert the catheter assembly into the endoscope ([0050]- [0052]).
Wahr further teaches the insertion tube which aligns with the insertion port as having an outwardly flared end, so as to create a friction fit with the insertion port, this flared end prevents the insertion tube from extending beyond the port such that the insertion tube does not extend within the working channel for any appreciable length ([0052], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the element for inserting the medical device into the connecter of an endoscope as being tubular, as is taught by McGrath with the insertion tube as having a shape with an outwardly flared end, as is taught by Wahr, to produce the predictable result preventing the insertion tube from extending beyond the port while creating a friction with said port, as is taught by Wahr, as it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 2, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 1, the coupling member being fixedly attached to the cylindrical shaft (Fig. 4; the distal portion the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as being fixedly attached to the proximal portion the second portion 24 of adaptor 10).
Regarding claim 6, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 1, the feature defining a surface leading into the lumen ([0037]).
In accordance with the above rejection of claim 1, Wahr teaches the feature as being the outwardly flared feature and the surface as being an angled surface ([0052], [0058]).
Regarding claim 7, in accordance with the above rejection of claim 1, Wahr further teaches the coupler of claim 6, the outwardly flared feature being configured to prevent insertion of the cylindrical shaft into the insertion port of the catheter delivery sheath ([0052], [0058]).
Regarding claim 10, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 1, the coupling member including a cap (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as having a proximal end wall of the threads 68 and extends from the proximal portion radially and distally).
Regarding claim 11, McGrath further teaches the coupler of claim 1, the coupling member being configured to engage the catheter delivery sheath in a threadable manner ([0035], [0037]).
Regarding claim 14, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 1, further comprising a catheter disposed in the lumen, the catheter being configured to fit within an anatomical structure (Fig. 5; medical device 50; [0039]).
Regarding claim 15, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 1, further comprising a catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 1; accessory channel 30) having an insertion port (Fig. 1; connector 28) configured for longitudinal alignment with the cylindrical shaft, the insertion port defining a longitudinal axis, the coupling member being configured to align the axis of the lumen with the longitudinal axis of the insertion port when the coupling member is selectively secured to the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]).
Regarding claim 16, McGrath teaches a kit (Abstract), comprising:
(a) a catheter instrument (Fig. 5; medical device 50) including:
(i) a catheter having a distal end ([0039]), and
(ii) an end effector at the distal end of the catheter, the catheter and the end effector being sized to fit in an anatomical structure ([0004]- [0006]), the end effector including at least one electrode ([0004]- [0006]); and
(b) a coupler (Fig. 4; adaptor 10) including:
(i) a cylindrical shaft (Fig. 4; the second portion 24 of adaptor 10) including:
(A) a proximal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing opening 44),
(B) a distal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing threads 68),
(C) a lumen (Fig. 4; lumen 49) extending from the proximal end to the distal end along an axis, the lumen being sized to receive the end effector and the catheter ([0035], [0037]),
(D) a feature (Fig. 4; seal 60) at the distal end of the cylindrical shaft, and
(E) an outer surface (Fig. 4; outer surface portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10); and
(ii) a coupling member (Fig. 4; the distal outer portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 containing threads 68) with a center axis and disposed on the outer surface of the cylindrical shaft, the cylindrical shaft in alignment with the center axis of the coupling member ([0035]), with the proximal end of the cylindrical shaft being proximal of the coupling member and the distal end with the feature of the cylindrical shaft being distal of the coupling member ([0037]), the coupling member configured to generally surround the feature of the distal end of the cylindrical shaft when the coupling member is secured to the catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as surrounding seal 60).
However, McGrath fails to teach the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft as being outwardly flared.
McGrath instead teaches the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft, which is the element for connecting the adaptor for connecting to a connector for insertion of a medical instrument into an endoscope as being tubular (Fig. 4; seal 60 is provided so that the lumen 49 of the adaptor 10 may be operably connected to the accessory channel 30 of the endoscope 20 by the connector 28).
Wahr teaches a catheter and handle system for insertion of a catheter into an endoscope ([0043]). This system is taught as having an insertion tube for connecting to an insertion port of an endoscope so as to insert the catheter assembly into the endoscope ([0050]- [0052]).
Wahr further teaches the insertion tube which aligns with the insertion port as having an outwardly flared end, so as to create a friction fit with the insertion port, this flared end prevents the insertion tube from extending beyond the port such that the insertion tube does not extend within the working channel for any appreciable length ([0052], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the element for inserting the medical device into the connecter of an endoscope as being tubular, as is taught by McGrath with the insertion tube as having a shape with an outwardly flared end, as is taught by Wahr, to produce the predictable result preventing the insertion tube from extending beyond the port while creating a friction with said port, as is taught by Wahr, as it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 17, McGrath teaches the kit of claim 16, further comprising a catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 1; accessory channel 30), the catheter delivery sheath including an insertion port (Fig. 1; connector 28) defining a longitudinal axis, the coupling member being configured for selective securement to the catheter delivery sheath, the coupling member being configured to align the axis of the lumen with the longitudinal axis of the insertion port when the coupling member is selectively secured to the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]).
Regarding claim 18, McGrath teaches the kit of claim 17, the coupling member being configured to engage the catheter delivery sheath in at least one of a threadable manner, a snap-fit manner, or a bayonet- style manner ([0035], [0037]).
Regarding claim 19, McGrath teaches a kit (Abstract), comprising:
(a) a catheter instrument (Fig. 5; medical device 50) including:
(i) a catheter having a distal end ([0039]), and
(ii) an end effector at the distal end of the catheter, the catheter and the end effector being sized to fit in an anatomical structure ([0004]- [0006]), the end effector including at least one electrode ([0004]- [0006]); and
(b) a coupler (Fig. 4; adaptor 10) including:
(i) a cylindrical shaft (Fig. 4; the second portion 24 of adaptor 10) including:
(A) a proximal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing opening 44),
(B) a distal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing threads 68),
(C) a lumen (Fig. 4; lumen 49) extending from the proximal end to the distal end along an axis, the lumen being sized to receive the end effector and the catheter ([0035], [0037]),
(D) a feature (Fig. 4; seal 60) at the distal end of the cylindrical shaft, and
(E) an outer surface (Fig. 4; outer surface portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10); and
(ii) a means for coupling (Fig. 4; the distal outer portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 containing threads 68) with a center axis and disposed on the outer surface of the cylindrical shaft, the cylindrical shaft in alignment with the center axis, with the proximal end of the cylindrical shaft being proximal of the means for coupling ([00135]) and the distal end with the feature of the cylindrical shaft being distal of the means for coupling ([0037]), the means for coupling configured to generally surround the outwardly flared feature of the distal end of the cylindrical shaft when the means for coupling is secured to the catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as surrounding seal 60).
However, McGrath fails to teach the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft as being outwardly flared.
McGrath instead teaches the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft, which is the element for connecting the adaptor for connecting to a connector for insertion of a medical instrument into an endoscope as being tubular (Fig. 4; seal 60 is provided so that the lumen 49 of the adaptor 10 may be operably connected to the accessory channel 30 of the endoscope 20 by the connector 28).
Wahr teaches a catheter and handle system for insertion of a catheter into an endoscope ([0043]). This system is taught as having an insertion tube for connecting to an insertion port of an endoscope so as to insert the catheter assembly into the endoscope ([0050]- [0052]).
Wahr further teaches the insertion tube which aligns with the insertion port as having an outwardly flared end, so as to create a friction fit with the insertion port, this flared end prevents the insertion tube from extending beyond the port such that the insertion tube does not extend within the working channel for any appreciable length ([0052], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the element for inserting the medical device into the connecter of an endoscope as being tubular, as is taught by McGrath with the insertion tube as having a shape with an outwardly flared end, as is taught by Wahr, to produce the predictable result preventing the insertion tube from extending beyond the port while creating a friction with said port, as is taught by Wahr, as it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 20, McGrath teaches the kit of claim 19, the means for coupling including threading, a snap fit feature, a bayonet fit feature, or functional equivalents of threading, a snap fit feature, or a bayonet fit feature ([0035], [0037]).
Regarding claim 29, McGrath teaches a delivery sheath to catheter coupler (Fig. 4; adaptor 10), the coupler comprising:
(a) a cylindrical shaft (Fig. 4; the second portion 24 of adaptor 10) extending along an axis, the cylindrical shaft being configured for longitudinal alignment with an insertion port of a catheter delivery sheath ([0035], [0037]), the cylindrical shaft including:
(i) a proximal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing opening 44),
(ii) a distal end (Fig. 4; the portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 which is closer to the end containing threads 68), and
(iii) a lumen (Fig. 4; lumen 49) extending from the proximal end to the distal end along the axis, the lumen being sized to receive an end effector of a catheter, the lumen including a frustoconical proximal portion (Fig. 4; lumen 49 contains the shape described as broadly as is currently claimed)
(iv) a feature (Fig. 4; seal 60) at the distal end of the cylindrical shaft, and
(v) an outer surface (Fig. 4; outer surface portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10); and
(b) a cap (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as having a proximal end wall of the threads 68 and extends from the proximal portion radially and distally) with a center axis and disposed on the outer surface of the cylindrical shaft, the distal end of the cylindrical shaft being aligned with the center axis of the cap ([0035]), with the proximal end of the cylindrical shaft being proximal of the cap and the distal end with the feature being distal of the cap ([0037]), the cap being configured for selective alignment with the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]), the cap being configured to align the axis of the lumen with a longitudinal axis of the insertion port when the coupling member is selectively aligned with the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]), the cap configured to generally surround the feature of the distal end of the cylindrical shaft when the coupling member is secured to the catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 4; the distal portion of the second portion 24 of adaptor 10 is shown as surrounding seal 60).
However, McGrath fails to teach the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft as being outwardly flared.
McGrath instead teaches the feature at the distal end of the cylindrical end of the cylindrical shaft, which is the element for connecting the adaptor for connecting to a connector for insertion of a medical instrument into an endoscope as being tubular (Fig. 4; seal 60 is provided so that the lumen 49 of the adaptor 10 may be operably connected to the accessory channel 30 of the endoscope 20 by the connector 28).
Wahr teaches a catheter and handle system for insertion of a catheter into an endoscope ([0043]). This system is taught as having an insertion tube for connecting to an insertion port of an endoscope so as to insert the catheter assembly into the endoscope ([0050]- [0052]).
Wahr further teaches the insertion tube which aligns with the insertion port as having an outwardly flared end, so as to create a friction fit with the insertion port, this flared end prevents the insertion tube from extending beyond the port such that the insertion tube does not extend within the working channel for any appreciable length ([0052], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have substituted the element for inserting the medical device into the connecter of an endoscope as being tubular, as is taught by McGrath with the insertion tube as having a shape with an outwardly flared end, as is taught by Wahr, to produce the predictable result preventing the insertion tube from extending beyond the port while creating a friction with said port, as is taught by Wahr, as it has been held that the substitution of one known element for another according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 30, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 29, the cap being configured for selective securement to the catheter delivery sheath ([0035]).
Regarding claim 31, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 29, the cap being fixedly attached to the distal end of the cylindrical shaft ([0035], [0037]).
Regarding claim 34, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 30, the cap being configured to engage the catheter delivery sheath in at least one of a threadable manner, a snap-fit manner, an interference-fit manner, or a bayonet-style manner ([0035], [0037]).
Regarding claim 35, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 29, further comprising a catheter disposed in the lumen, the catheter being configured to fit within an anatomical structure (Fig. 5; medical device 50; [0039]).
Regarding claim 36, McGrath teaches the coupler of claim 29, further comprising a catheter delivery sheath (Fig. 1; accessory channel 30) having an insertion port (Fig. 1; connector 28) configured for longitudinal alignment with the cylindrical shaft, the insertion port defining a longitudinal axis, the coupling member being configured to align the axis of the lumen with the longitudinal axis of the insertion port when the coupling member is aligned with the catheter delivery sheath ([0037]).
Regarding claims 21-22, the method is considered inherent in the ordinary use of the device as taught by McGrath as currently modified in claims 1-2, 6-7, 10-11, 14-20, 29-31, and 34-36.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McGrath (US 20100280311 A1) in view of Wahr (US 20190142511 A1) further view of Hirsch (US 20120101336 A1).
Regarding claim 9, McGrath as modified teaches the coupler of claim 1.
However, McGrath as modified fails to teach the coupling member including a vent opening for venting fluid from a space between the coupling member and the catheter delivery sheath when the coupling member is selectively secured to the catheter delivery sheath.
Hirsch teaches an endoscopic system having an endoscope, a controller and a branch connector ([0023], [0042]).
Hirsch further teaches the known use of a vent tube for venting air or other fluid from a surgical site so as to allow ambient or pressurized air to enter the system and flow to irrigation and also to expel or purge debris ([0043]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the vent, as is taught by Hirsch, into the endoscope as is taught by McGrath as modified, to produce the predictable result of venting air or other fluids from a surgical site, as is taught by Hirsch, as it has been held that the incorporation and/or combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims have been considered but are moot because the amendments have necessitated new grounds of rejection.
Specifically, applicant’s arguments of the limitations that art not taught by the McGrath reference are moot in view of the new rejections under the newly provided rejection of McGrath and Wahr.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSAY REGAN LANCASTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7259. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8-4 EST.
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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached on (571) 272-1213. 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.
/L.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights