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 .
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)(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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Buerk et al (2024/0206886).
Regarding claim 1, Buerk et al disclose an electrosurgical end effector (2) for rotatably coupling to a surgical instrument handpiece (1.2), the handpiece comprising a Hall effect sensor (12 – Figure 5). The end effector comprises a distal end (2.3 – Figure 1b, for example) and a proximal end comprising a ring-shaped magnet (8 – Figure 4) and connection means (2.1 – Figure 1b) for rotatably coupling to the handpiece.
Regarding claims 6 and 7, the ring-shaped magnet (8) is radially polarized to identify a function of the end effector (para. [0010-0011], for example). Regarding claim 9, the end effector is a rotary shaver (para. [0004], for example).
Regarding claim 10, Buerk et al provide an instrument comprising a handpiece (1.2) and the end effector according to claim 1 as addressed above.
Regarding claim 11, the handpiece includes a Hall effect sensor (12 – Figure 5). Regarding claims 12-14, see Figure 5 which shows the Hall effect sensors aligned and offset with respect to the magnet (8). Regarding claim 15, there is a processor (i.e. evaluation unit) configured to determine the function of the end effector (para. [0011-0012], for example).
Regarding claim 16, Buerk et al disclose a method of detecting a coupling of an end effector comprising a ring-shaped magnet (8) comprising detecting the presence of the magnetic field with a Hall effect sensor (12) as discussed above.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, an evaluation unit determines a function and other parameters of the end effector (para. [0044-0045], for example). Regarding claim 20, see paragraph [0016], for example, which discusses identifying end effector by determining a changing magnetic field (i.e. polarization).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buerk et al (‘886) in view of the teaching of Ryan (7,674,263).
Buerk et al disclose various different types of instruments that may be attached to the handpiece, but fail to specifically disclose an end effector having bipolar electrodes.
Ryan discloses a rotating end effector for cutting tissue that is attached to a handpiece (Figure 1), similar to the Buerk et al devices. In particular, Ryan teaches that it is known to provide a rotatable cutting end effector with bipolar RF electrodes for the delivery of RF energy during the procedure. See, Abstract and Figure 3, for example.
To have provided the Buerk et al device with an end effector having bipolar electrodes for the delivery of RF energy during a treatment would have been an obvious modification for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Ryan fairly teaches it is known to provide similar rotatable cutting end effectors with bipolar electrodes to treat tissue with RF energy as tissue is being cut.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5 and 19 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 prior art fails to disclose a ring-shaped, face-to-face polarized magnet on an end effector for attachment to a handpiece comprising a Hall effect sensor. The Buerk et al reference, addressed above, and Harari et al (2023/0277220) reference both disclose ring-shaped magnets used in conjunction with Hall effect sensors, but both fail to specifically disclose a face-to-face polarized magnet for use in a device as claimed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cox et al (12,440,238) disclose a ring-shaped magnet on a probe (i.e. needle) for use with a handpiece having Hall effect sensors, but the needle is not inserted into the handpiece, per se, but is rather used separately from the handpiece. Carroll et al (11,923,084), Harari et al (2023/0277220), Jezierski et al (2021/0353321), Germain et al (2021/0093371) and Cucin (2021/0077176) disclose various other devices that use a magnet in combination with Hall effect sensors to monitor the operation of an end effector.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PEFFLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4770. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am-5 pm.
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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at (571) 272-4764. 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.
/MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/M.F.P/November 14, 2025