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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on October 26, 2023; April 24, 2025; and November 11, 2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 3 and 11-12 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 3 depends from claim 1 and recites the limitation “when the first and second shanks move from the open position to the approximated position,” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because claim 1 does not recite an open position or an approximated position of the first and second shanks. Rather, claim 1 only recites open and approximated positions for the pair of jaws. For examination purposes, claim 3 is interpreted as reciting open and approximated positions for the shanks as well.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the electrode actuators” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation because claim 11 only recites the tissue sealing system having “an electrode actuator,” in lines 1-2.
Claim 12 is rejected as being dependent from claim 11 and failing to remedy the indefiniteness issue.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dumbauld et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 20070106297; hereinafter “Dumbauld”).
Regarding claim 1, Dumbauld discloses a surgical device (10; Figs. 1A-2), comprising:
a distal portion (100) having a pair of jaws (110, 120; Fig. 13) configured to move between an open position and an approximated position for manipulating tissue disposed therebetween (Figs. 3A-3D; para. [0093]);
a proximal portion having a housing (20) and a hemostat style gripping mechanism (30; para. [0096]), the hemostat style gripping mechanism including a first finger grip (33a; Fig. 14; para. [0095]) and a second finger grip (33b);
an elongated shaft (12) positioned between the proximal portion and the distal portion, the elongated shaft defining a longitudinal axis (A; Fig. 1A); and
a pull tube (17) at least partially disposed within the elongated shaft (Fig. 13),
wherein the hemostat style gripping mechanism comprises a linkage system configured for effectuating movement of the pair of jaws between the open position and the approximated position, the linkage system comprising a first shank (30a) having distal end rotatably coupled to the housing at a first fixed pivot point (34a) and a proximal end coupled to the first finger grip, a second shank (30b) having a distal end rotatably coupled to the housing at a second fixed pivot point (34b) and a proximal end coupled to the second finger grip, and a slider link (69) operatively coupled to the first shank and the second shank (para. [0099]),
wherein the linkage system is a 7-bar linkage system (Fig. 13) comprising the first shank, second shank, housing, and slider link, the linkage system further comprising a first lever link (35a) rotatably coupled to the first shank at each of a first floating pivot point (36c) and the slider link (at (36a); Fig. 14), a second lever link (35b) rotatably coupled to the second shank at a second floating pivot point (36d) and the slider link (at (36b); Fig. 14), and a slide track link (62) affixed to or defined by the housing and configured to limit the slider link to longitudinal movement relative to the housing, and
wherein the pull tube comprises a proximal end coupled to the slider link and a distal end coupled to the pair of jaws (Fig. 17), the pull tube configured to move between a first position and a second position proximal of the first position in response to manipulation of the first shank and/or the second shank, whereby the pair of jaws are moved between the open position and the approximated position (paras. [0107]-[0108]).
Regarding claim 2, Dumbauld discloses wherein the first and second shanks, the first and second lever links, and the first and second floating links are collectively configured to vary a mechanical advantage between the open position and the approximated position (paras. [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 3, Dumbauld discloses wherein when the first and second shanks move from the open position to the approximated position during a stroke, the pair of jaws travel a greater distance during a first half of the stroke (e.g., prior to contacting tissue) than during a second half of the stroke (e.g., after contacting tissue paras. [0093], [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 4, Dumbauld discloses wherein a compressive force needed to move the first and second finger grips closer together decreases as the pair of jaws approaches the approximated position (paras. [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 5, Dumbauld discloses wherein the first and second floating pivot points are configured move outwardly from the longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft when the pull tube moves distally (paras. [0098]-[0103]).
Regarding claim 6, Dumbauld discloses wherein the first and second floating pivot points are configured move inwardly from the longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft when the pull tube moves proximally (paras. [0098]-[0103]).
Regarding claim 7, Dumbauld discloses wherein the first and second floating pivot points are configured to lock the pair of jaws in the approximated position when the first shank and the first lever link form an angle of approximately 180 degrees therebetween (para. [0103]).
Regarding claim 8, Dumbauld discloses wherein the slider link comprises a spring housing (62) that houses a load-limiting spring (63), and wherein the load-limiting spring is configured to limit a pull force on the pull tube when the pair of jaws are in the approximated position (paras. [0123]-[0124]).
Regarding claim 9, Dumbauld discloses wherein the load-limiting spring is configured to disengage from the pull tube during a transition of the pair of jaws from the approximated position to the open position (paras. [0123]-[01234]).
Regarding claim 10, Dumbauld discloses wherein the linkage system is configured to prevent locking of the pair of jaws in the approximated position (para. [0124]).
Regarding claim 11, Dumbauld discloses the device further comprising a tissue sealing system (Figs. 13-14) having an electrode actuator (150), a first electrode (112) disposed on a first jaw (110) of the pair of jaws, and a second electrode (122) disposed on a second jaw (120) of the pair of jaws, wherein the first and second electrodes are configured to seal the tissue disposed between the pair of jaws in response to a proximal movement of either one of the electrode actuators (para. [0147]), wherein the electrode actuators move in response to a force applied to either one of the electrode actuators in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft (para. [0148]-[0156]).
Regarding claim 12, Dumbauld discloses wherein the electrode actuators are disposed along and laterally offset from the longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft (Figs. 13-14; paras. [0148]-[0156]).
Regarding claim 13, Dumbauld discloses wherein the linkage system is configured to vary a mechanical advantage between the open position and the approximated position (paras. [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 14, Dumbauld discloses wherein when the first and second shanks of the linkage system move from the open position to the approximated position during a stroke, the pair of jaws travel a greater distance during a first half of the stroke (e.g., prior to contacting tissue) than during a second half of the stroke (e.g., after contacting tissue paras. [0093], [0103]-[0105]), and wherein the mechanical advantage decreases throughout the stroke (paras. [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 15, Dumbauld discloses wherein a compressive force needed to move the first and second finger grips decreases as the pair of jaws approaches the approximated position (paras. [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 16, Dumbauld discloses the device further comprising a protrusion (36b’’) coupled to the slider link (Figs. 28-30), wherein at least a portion of the protrusion is slidably disposed within a guide member (36b’), and wherein the protrusion and the guide member are configured to prevent rotation of the slider link (Figs. 13-14, 28-30; paras. [0100]-[0101]).
Regarding claim 17, Dumbauld discloses a surgical device configured to manipulate tissue, the surgical device comprising:
a handle (20) operably coupled to an end effector (100) by a linkage system (30) and an elongated shaft (12), the handle comprising a first shank (30a) and a second shank (30b; Figs. 13-14), the end effector comprising opposing jaws (110, 120) selectively movable between an open position and an approximated position when the handle is actuated Figs. 3A-3D; para. [0093]),
wherein the linkage system is configured so that a stroke of the handle moves the opposing jaws to an approximated position to engage tissue disposed therebetween by moving the first and second shanks closer together (para. [0096]), and wherein a mechanical advantage varies during the stroke whereby the opposing jaws travel a greater distance during a first half of the stroke (e.g., prior to contacting tissue) than during a second half of the stroke (e.g., after contacting tissue paras. [0093], [0103]-[0105]).
Regarding claim 18, Dumbauld discloses wherein the linkage system is configured such that moving the first and second shanks causes the first shank to rotate about a first fixed pivot (34a) of the linkage system and causes the second shank to rotate about a second fixed pivot (34b) the linkage system, and wherein the first and second fixed pivots are laterally offset from a longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft (Figs. 13-14).
Regarding claim 19, Dumbauld discloses the device further comprises one or more electrode actuators (150) each having a contact surface (151) for a user’s finger, wherein at least one of the electrode actuators is disposed along and laterally offset from the longitudinal axis defined by the elongated shaft (Figs. 13-14; para. [0147])).
Regarding claim 20, Dumbauld discloses wherein the contact surface of the at least one of the actuators is radially offset from the longitudinal axis by a first distance, and the fixed pivot points are radially offset from the longitudinal axis by a second distance greater than the first distance (Figs. 5A-5B).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan A Hollm whose telephone number is (703)756-1514. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:30-5:30.
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, Elizabeth Houston can be reached at (571) 272-7134. 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.
/JONATHAN A HOLLM/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights