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 .
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 .
Claims 1-19 are examined in this office action.
Claims 1 and 13 are currently amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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(s) 1, 4, 6-8, 13, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruise et al. (WO 2020/159881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0254488 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Cruise in view of Kim discloses a medical device configured to be inserted into a lumen of a living body, the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0004]) comprising:
a base layer (Cruise, "… a top coat …" - Para [0006]) that possesses a surface (the surface of the top coat); and
a surface lubricating layer (Cruise, "… a base coat …" - Para [0006]) formed on at least a part of the surface of the base layer (Cruise, "The top coat is designed to adhere to the base coat …" - Para [0006]), wherein the surface lubricating layer includes a polymer (Cruise, "… a base coat including a … hydrophilic polymer …" - Para [0008]) and a polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010]), the polymer including a carboxy group (Cruise, "… the base coat includes a polymer … such as … carboxylic acid groups." - Para [0012]), a salt of the carboxy group, or an ester of the carboxy group.
Cruise does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of 700% or more and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more.
Kim teaches that the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of 700% or more ("… elongation percentage ranging between 65% and 700%." - Para [0026]) and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the medical device of Cruise to include that the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of 700% or more and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Examiner interprets the top coat to have its own surface which is part of the catheter medical device.
Regarding claim 4, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein the polymer is at least one type selected from a group consisting of:
hyaluronic acid (Cruise, "Polymer used for the top coat can include … hyaluronic acid …" - Para [0042]), or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of hyaluronic acid;
polyacrylic acid, or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of polyacrylic acid;
and a polymer having a structural unit represented by the following formula (1);
PNG
media_image1.png
144
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein
X
1
and
X
2
each independently represent a hydrogen atom, an alkali metal, a Group 2 metal, or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 24 carbon atoms.
Regarding claim 6, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
the medical device is a catheter (Cruise, "Described herein are coatings for medical devices. These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) or guide wire.
Regarding claim 7, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
Cruise does not expressly disclose that the elongation percentage is 3000% or less.
Kim teaches that the elongation percentage is 3000% or less ("… elongation percentage ranging between 65% and 700%." - Para [0026]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the medical device of Cruise to include that the elongation percentage is 3000% or less as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Regarding claim 8, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
Cruise does not expressly disclose that the Young's modulus is 800 N/mm2 or less.
Kim teaches that the Young's modulus is 800 N/mm2 or less ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the medical device of Cruise to include that the Young's modulus is 800 N/mm2 or less as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Regarding claim 13, Cruise discloses a method for producing a medical device configured to be inserted into a lumen of a living body (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]), the method comprising;
preparing or selecting a polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010])
preparing a coating liquid containing the polyurethane and a polymer (Cruise, "… a base coat including a … hydrophilic polymer …" - Para [0008]) having a carboxy group ("… the base coat includes a polymer … such as … carboxylic acid groups." - Para [0012]), a salt of the carboxy group, or an ester of the carboxy group; and
coating at least part of a surface a base layer of the medical device (Cruise, "… a top coat …" - Para [0006]) with the coating liquid to form a surface lubricating layer on the at least the part of the surface of base layer (Cruise, "The methods can include: applying a base coat … and applying a top coat to the base coat …" - Para [0008]).
Cruise does not expressly disclose a polyurethane having an elongation percentage of 700% or more and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more.
Kim teaches a polyurethane having an elongation percentage of 700% or more ("… elongation percentage ranging between 65% and 700%." - Para [0026]) and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise to include a polyurethane having an elongation percentage of 700% or more and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm2 or more as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Examiner interprets the top coat to have its own surface which is part of the catheter medical device.
Regarding claim 16, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, further comprising: wherein the polymer is selected form one or more groups consisting of;
hyaluronic acid (Cruise, "Polymer used for the top coat can include … hyaluronic acid …" - Para [0042]), or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of hyaluronic acid;
polyacrylic acid, or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of polyacrylic acid;
and a polymer having a structural unit represented by the following formula (1);
PNG
media_image1.png
144
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein
X
1
and
X
2
each independently represent a hydrogen atom, an alkali metal, a Group 2 metal, or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 24 carbon atoms.
Regarding claim 18, Cruise in view of Kim discloses the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, wherein
the medical device is a catheter (Cruise, "Described herein are coatings for medical devices. These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) or guide wire.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruise et al. (WO 2020/159881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0254488 A1) in further of Kurosaki et al. (US Pub No. 20200188643 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Cruise in view of Kim and Kurosaki discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010] is contained in the surface lubricating layer (Cruise "… a base coat …" - Para [0006])
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer.
Kurosaki teaches that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer. ("An amount of the water-soluble low molecular weight compound is … preferably 50 to 3000 parts by mass … with respect to 100 parts by mass of the water -insoluble drug." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer as taught by Kurosaki in order to form a coating layer (Kurosaki, Para [0010]).
Regarding claim 3, Cruise in view of Kim and Kurosaki discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010]) is contained in the surface lubricating layer (Cruise, "… a base coat …" - Para [0006])
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer.
Kurosaki teaches that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer ("An amount of the water-soluble low molecular weight compound is preferably … 100 to 1000 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the water-insoluble drug." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer as taught by Kurosaki in order to form a coating layer (Kurosaki, Para [0010]).
Regarding claim 14, Cruise in view of Kim and Kurosaki discloses the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, further comprising:
wherein the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010] is contained in the surface lubricating layer (Cruise "… a base coat …" - Para [0006])
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer.
Kurosaki teaches that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer. ("An amount of the water-soluble low molecular weight compound is … preferably 50 to 3000 parts by mass … with respect to 100 parts by mass of the water -insoluble drug." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer as taught by Kurosaki in order to form a coating layer (Kurosaki, Para [0010]).
Regarding claim 15, Cruise in view of Kim and Kurosaki discloses the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, further comprising:
wherein the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010]) is contained in the surface lubricating layer (Cruise, "… a base coat …" - Para [0006])
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer.
Kurosaki teaches that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer ("An amount of the water-soluble low molecular weight compound is preferably … 100 to 1000 parts by mass with respect to 100 parts by mass of the water-insoluble drug." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 100 parts by mass to 1000 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer as taught by Kurosaki in order to form a coating layer (Kurosaki, Para [0010]).
Claim(s) 5, 10, 12, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruise et al. (WO 2020/159881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0254488 A1) in further view of Creasy et al. (US Patent No. 4642267).
Regarding claim 5, Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate.
Creasy teaches that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate ("… such polyurethanes are prepared by the reaction of … polyisocyanates …" - Para [14]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate as taught by Creasy in order to be used in low-friction coatings (Creasy, Abstract).
Regarding claim 10, Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy discloses a lubricating layer (“… a base coat …” – Para [0006]) configured to be applied to a surface of a medical device to improve sliding durability of the medical device in a lumen of a living body ("The top coat is designed to adhere to the base coat and provide lubricity to reduce the frictional forces when the catheter is moved in the vasculature " - Para [0015]), the lubricating layer comprising:
a hydrophilic polymer ("… a base coat including a … hydrophilic polymer …" - Para [0008]) having a carboxy group, a salt of the carboxy group, or an ester of the carboxy group ("… the base coat includes a polymer … such as … carboxylic acid groups." - Para [0012]);
a polyurethane ("The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010]);
Cruise does not expressly disclose a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate; and wherein the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of at least 700% or more and a Young's modulus of at least 5.0 N/mm2.
Kim teaches that the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of at least 700% or more ("… elongation percentage ranging between 65% and 700%." - Para [0026]) and a Young's modulus of at least 5.0 N/mm2 ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the lubricating layer of Cruise to include that the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of at least 700% or more and a Young's modulus of at least 5.0 N/mm2 as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate.
Creasy teaches a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate ("… such polyurethanes are prepared by the reaction of … polyisocyanates …" - Para [14]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the lubricating layer of Cruise in view of Kim to include a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate as taught by Creasy in order to be used in low-friction coatings (Creasy, Abstract).
Regarding claim 12, Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy disclose the lubricating layer (Cruise, “… a base coat …” – Para [0006]) as recited above, wherein
the polymer is selected form one or more groups consisting of hyaluronic acid (Cruise, "Polymer used for the top coat can include … hyaluronic acid …" - Para [0042]), or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of hyaluronic acid, polyacrylic acid, or an alkali metal salt or a Group 2 metal salt of polyacrylic acid, and a polymer having a structural unit represented by the following formula (1);
PNG
media_image1.png
144
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
wherein
X
1
and
X
2
each independently represent a hydrogen atom, an alkali metal, a Group 2 metal, or a linear or branched alkyl group having 1 to 24 carbon atoms.
Regarding claim 17, Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy disclose the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, wherein
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate.
Creasy teaches that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate. ("… such polyurethanes are prepared by the reaction of … polyisocyanates …" - Para [14]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the surface lubricating layer further contains a polyisocyanate or a crosslinked product of polyisocyanate as taught by Creasy in order to be used in low-friction coatings (Creasy, Abstract).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruise et al. (WO 2020/159881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0254488 A1) in further view of Creasy et al. (US Patent No. 4642267) and Kurosaki et al. (US Pub No. 20200188643 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Cruise in view of Kim, Creasy, and Kurosaki disclose the lubricating layer (Cruise, “… a base coat …” – Para [0006]) as recited above, wherein
the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010]) is contained in the surface lubricating layer (Cruise, "… a base coat …" - Para [0006])
Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer.
Kurosaki teaches that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer ("An amount of the water-soluble low molecular weight compound is … preferably 50 to 3000 parts by mass … with respect to 100 parts by mass of the water -insoluble drug." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the lubricating layer of Cruise in view of Kim and Creasy to include that the polyurethane is contained in the surface lubricating layer in a proportion of 50 parts by mass to 1200 parts by mass based on 100 parts by mass of the polymer as taught by Kurosaki in order to form a coating layer (Kurosaki, Para [0010]).
Claim(s) 9 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cruise et al. (WO 2020/159881 A1) in view of Kim et al. (US Pub No. 2020/0254488 A1) and in further view of Ogata et al. (US Pub No. 20170320345 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Cruise in view of Kim and Ogata discloses the medical device (Cruise, "These medical devices can include catheters …" - Para [0014]) as recited above, wherein
Cruise does not expressly disclose that the elongation percentage is 1100% or greater and the Young's modulus is 5.4 N/mm2 or greater.
Kim teaches that the Young's modulus is 5.4 N/mm2 or greater ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the medical device of Cruise to include that the Young's modulus is 5.4 N/mm2 or greater as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the elongation percentage is 1100% or greater.
Ogata teaches that the elongation percentage is 1100% or greater ("… elongation percentage at least 250%." - Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the medical device of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the elongation percentage is 1100% or greater as taught by Ogata for flexibility and durability (Ogata, Para [0001]).
Regarding claim 19, Cruise in view of Kim and Ogata disclose the method (Cruise, "… methods of applying those coatings." - Para [0002]) as recited above, wherein
the polyurethane (Cruise, "The thermoplastic polymers can include … poly(urethanes) …" - Para [0010])
Cruise does not expressly disclose that the polyurethane has the elongation percentage of at least 1100% and the Young's modulus of at least 5.4 N/mm2.
Kim teaches that the Young's modulus is 5.4 N/mm2 or greater ("… Young's modulus ranging between .5 gigapascals (GPa) and 6.1 GPa." - Para [0073]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise to include that the Young's modulus is 5.4 N/mm2 or greater as taught by Kim in order to be flexible (Kim, Abstract).
Cruise in view of Kim does not expressly disclose that the elongation percentage is of at least 1100% or greater.
Ogata teaches that the elongation percentage of at least is 1100% or greater ("… elongation percentage at least 250%." - Abstract).
Therefore, it would have been obvious, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method of Cruise in view of Kim to include that the elongation percentage is 1100% or greater as taught by Ogata for flexibility and durability (Ogata, Para [0001]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-7, filed 7/02/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-19 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Cruise in view of Kim.
Applicant argues that here, Kim is not from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention. As set forth above, the claimed invention pertains to medical device that is configured to be inserted into a lumen of a living body and having the above configuration can exhibit an excellent lubricating property and an excellent lubrication retaining property (sliding durability) even under severe situations. Meanwhile, Kim relates to a flexible tactile actuator that is attachable to an inside and an outside of an information technology (IT) device. Meanwhile, the problem that is addressed by Kim is quite different. In Kim there was a desire for research on a tactile sense transmitting structure that is thin, flexible, operable at a low voltage, and applicable to various types of devices such that more emotional and complex information is effectively transmitted in addition to a simple vibration. An individual interested in addressing the problem addressed by the inventors here would not look to the flexible tactile actuator art because similar problems simply do not exist in the flexible tactile actuator art. A careful reading of Kim reveals absolutely no mention or concern about a medical device that can maintain a high lubricating property even when sliding on the surface of the medical device is repeated and that has excellent sliding durability inside a lumen of a living body. Additionally, rather than a surface lubricating layer as recited in claims 1 and 13, in Kim, the matrix layer 111 is "formed of a rubber, plastic, or polymer material such as elastic silicone, polyurethane, nitrile, polyethylene, polypropylene, polyvinyl alcohol, and the like to enable the tactile transmitter 11 to be bent." (See para. [0061] of Kim). Thus, in Kim, "[t]he matrix layer may have a tensile strength ranging between 0.02 newtons per square millimeter (N/mm2) and 8.85 N/mm2, and the matrix layer may have an elongation percentage ranging between 65% and 700%." However, based on the analysis above, the secondary reference (i.e. Kim) relied upon by the Examiner is not reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventors here and thus does not qualify as analogous prior art.
Examiner interprets Cruise in view of Kim to teach the claimed limitations as recited in the rejection above. Kim is relied upon to teach the following claimed limitations "the polyurethane has an elongation percentage of 700% or more and a Young's modulus of 5.0 N/mm^2 or more." It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the elongation percentage and Young's modulus of Cruise et al. from 700% or more and 5.0 N/mm^2 or more since it has been held that "[i]n the case where the claimed ranges 'overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art' a prima facie case of obviousness exists." In re Wertheim 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ 2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990). Further, applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed range (see pp. [0012]) indicating the angle "may" be within the claimed range).
With respect to the applicant's argument the rejection above teaches the claimed limitations. The rejection above is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ESHA P KASHYAP whose telephone number is (571)272-9890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/ESHA PRAKASH KASHYAP/Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /CHELSEA E STINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights