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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed July 23rd, 2026 has been entered. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed February 11th, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-9, filed July 23rd, 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 16 under 35 U.S.C. 102 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 newly found prior art that teaches the newly disclosed limitations.
The following new grounds of rejection are set forth:
Claim Objections
Claim 20 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20, line 1: “ablative energy” should read --the ablative energy--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 16-20 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.
Regarding claim 16, the claim recites “ablative energy” in line 19 and it is unclear if this is the same ablative energy or is a different ablative energy from that recited in line 5. For examination purposes, these are the same ablative energies and the limitation will be interpreted as “the ablative energy”.
Claims 17-20 are also rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 16.
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.
Claims 1-4, 13 & 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20250107835, earliest effective filing date & previously cited), herein referred to as “Buck” in view of Wright et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20170065334), herein referred to as “Wright”.
Regarding claim 1, Buck discloses a medical probe (Abstract: A catheter for ablation of tissue through irreversible electroporation is disclosed) comprising:
an inner catheter shaft (central post 258) extending along a longitudinal axis (see Fig. 2A);
an ablation electrode (ablation electrode 262) disposed at a distal end of the inner catheter shaft ([0074]: an ablation electrode 262 disposed on the central post 258), the ablation electrode configured to deliver ablative energy to tissue ([0065]: ablation electrode 260 is configured to receive pulsed electrical signals/waveforms from the electroporation console 130 (FIG. 1), thereby creating pulsed electric fields sufficient for ablating target tissue via irreversible electroporation; [0074]: ablation electrode assembly 260 includes a central post 258 extending from the outer shaft 202 and an ablation electrode 262);
an outer sleeve (outer shaft 202) disposed at least partially around the inner catheter shaft and extending along the longitudinal axis ([0074]: an ablation electrode assembly 260 extending distally from the distal end 209 of the outer shaft 202; see Fig. 2A); and
a plurality of spines (splines 216A-F; see also [0030] & [0039] where the splines are described as comprising a movable spine of the plurality of splines) coupled to a distal end of the outer sleeve by a spine hub ([0067]: each respective spline 216A-216F has a distal end portion 217A-217F, a proximal end portion 218A-218F, and an intermediate portion 219A-219F extending between the distal end portion 217A-217F and the proximal end portion 218A-218F. As shown, each of the proximal end portions 218A-218F is attached to and constrained by the distal end 209 of the outer shaft 202; see Fig. 2A, wherein the distal end of the outer shaft is seen as the spine hub), each spine of the plurality of spines comprising a mapping electrode configured to detect electrophysiological signals ([0071]: the splines 216A-216F include a plurality of spline-disposed mapping electrodes, or sensing electrodes 250), the outer sleeve configured to move axially along the inner catheter shaft to move the plurality of spines axially with respect to the ablation electrode ([0074]: axial length of the ablation electrode assembly 260 can be varied, e.g., such as to extend into the proximal section of the inner space 212 or the distal section of the inner space 212, or variable by a user, such as retractable or extendable to various axial location, for instance, in the inner space 212; wherein this paragraph describes the motion of the ablation electrode relative to the outer shaft, the reciprocal motion of the outer shaft relative to the ablation electrode is possible, depending on which feature is held stationary).
But Buck fails to disclose the spine hub comprising a connector configured to distribute the ablative energy from the ablation electrode to the mapping electrode of at least one spine of the plurality of spines when the ablation electrode is in electrical communication with the connector.
However, Wright discloses the spine hub comprising a connector (tube 207) configured to distribute the ablative energy from the ablation electrode (tip 201/301) to the mapping electrode of at least one spine of the plurality of spines (filaments 206a, 206b) when the ablation electrode is in electrical communication with the connector ([0122]: the tube 207 comprise a conductive material, such as stainless steel (e.g., 300 Series Stainless Steel), such that when the RF probe 401 is inserted in the tube 207, the RF energy emitted by the RF probe 401 may be conducted through the tube 207 and into and through the tip 201, 211, the filament 206a, and/or the filament 206b; [0127]: In this regard, together, the RF probe 401 inserted into the lumen 222, the tip 201, 211, 311, 321, and the filaments 206a, 206b, 319a, 319b, may form a monopolar electrode for application of RF energy to the target volume). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spine hub of Buck to include a connector, as taught by Wright, for the purpose of the filaments allowing the RF energy from the RF probe to be dispersed over a larger volume than would be possible with the tip alone (Wright: [0127]).
Regarding claim 2, Buck discloses the outer sleeve configured to move the plurality of spines beyond a distal end of the ablation electrode ([0074]: axial length of the ablation electrode assembly 260 can be varied, e.g., such as to extend into the proximal section of the inner space 212 or the distal section of the inner space 212, or variable by a user, such as retractable or extendable to various axial location, for instance, in the inner space 212; wherein this paragraph describes the motion of the ablation electrode relative to the outer shaft, the reciprocal motion of the outer shaft relative to the ablation electrode is possible, depending on which feature is held stationary, see also Fig. 2A where the splines are beyond a distal end of the ablation electrode).
Regarding claim 3, Buck discloses the plurality of spines configured to extend radially outward from the longitudinal axis ([0067]: the mapping electrode assembly 210 is configured to self-expand from a collapsed configuration when constrained within a delivery sheath to the pre-defined expanded configuration defining the inner space 212; see Fig. 2A where the splines extend radially outward from the longitudinal axis).
Regarding claim 4, Buck discloses the plurality of spines configured to be positioned radially around the ablation electrode ([0066]: the ablation electrode assembly is configured to be fully disposed within an undeformed, expanded mapping electrode assembly 210; see Fig. 2A).
Regarding claim 13, Buck discloses an electromagnetic sensor disposed near the distal end of the inner catheter shaft, the electromagnetic sensor configured to generate a current when subjected to an electromagnetic field ([0065]: the mapping electrode assembly 210 further includes a plurality of mapping and sensing electrodes 250 configured for sensing cardiac electrical signals, localization of the electrode assembly 210 within the patient anatomy (e.g., via the EAM system 70 of FIG. 1), and determining proximity to target tissue within the anatomy; [0058] The EAM system 70 generates a localization field, via the field generator 80, to define a localization volume about the heart 30, and one or more location sensors or sensing elements on the tracked device(s), e.g., the electroporation catheter 100 … the device tracking is accomplished using magnetic tracking techniques, whereby the field generator 80 is a magnetic field generator that generates a magnetic field defining the localization volume, and the location sensors on the tracked devices are magnetic field sensors; [0074]: a magnetic navigation sensor (not shown) may be partially or wholly disposed within the central post 258).
Regarding claim 15, Buck discloses wherein the plurality of spines comprises at least five spines (splines 216A-F; wherein this describes 6 splines), each spine of the at least five spines comprising a plurality of the mapping electrodes ([0071]: the splines 216A-216F include a plurality of spline-disposed mapping electrodes, or sensing electrodes 250; see Fig. 2A where each spline 216 has at least one mapping electrode 250).
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Werneth et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 10004459, previously cited), herein referred to as “Werneth” in view of Wright.
Regarding claim 16, Werneth discloses a method (Abstract: The present invention includes systems, devices and methods for treating and/or diagnosing a heart arrhythmia, such as atrial fibrillation) comprising:
inserting a medical probe (catheter 100, 200) into a lumen of a body (Col. 24, lines 30-33: STEP 902, a diagnostic catheter is inserted into a heart chamber, for example the left atrium, the right atrium, the left ventricle, or the right ventricle; lines 39-42: A treatment device such as ablation catheter 200 can also be inserted into a heart chamber, either simultaneously with the diagnostic catheter (e.g. when the ablation catheter shaft resides within a lumen of the diagnostic catheter)), the medical probe comprising:
an inner catheter shaft (ablation catheter 200) extending along a longitudinal axis (see Fig. 1A);
an ablation electrode (ablation element 261) disposed at a distal end of the inner catheter shaft (Col. 18, lines 32-34: ablation element 261 positioned on shaft 220, for example on a distal portion or the distal tip of shaft 220), the ablation electrode configured to deliver ablative energy to tissue (Col. 18, lines 42-45: In the case where ablation element 261 includes one or more electrodes, the electrodes can include electrodes constructed and arranged to deliver radiofrequency (RF) energy);
an outer sleeve (elongate shaft 120) disposed at least partially around the inner catheter shaft and extending along the longitudinal axis (Col. 19, lines 8-12: an elongate shaft 120 which includes lumen 126 exiting its distal end. Ablation catheter 200, which has been removed for clarity, is configured to be slidingly received by lumen 126); and
a plurality of spines (array of splines 130), coupled to a distal end of the outer sleeve by a spine hub (connection points 127; Col. 19, lines 36-41: Proximal segment 132 of each spline 131 connects to shaft 120 via connection points 127. A mechanical attachment can be made between any spline 131 and shaft 120 at connection points 127, such as an attachment comprising a compression fitting or adhesive), each spine of the plurality of spines comprising a mapping electrode (electrode 141) configured to detect electrophysiological signals (Col. 17, lines 33-36: Electrodes 141 can be configured to record electric signals such as voltage and/or current signals. System 10 can utilize the recorded signals to produce electrogram information; dipole mapping information);
sliding the outer sleeve along the inner catheter shaft to cause the plurality of spines to extend beyond a distal end of the ablation electrode (Col. 23, lines 54-57: Retraction of diagnostic catheter 100 and/or ablation catheter 200 can be performed by an operator grasping the relevant proximal portion (e.g. a handle) and moving the device proximally relative to sheath 50; Col. 18, lines 65-67 & Col. 19, lines 1-3: Ablation catheter 200 can be steered and advanced by an operator such as a clinician, so as to exit at any opening of the expandable assembly 130, including the space between two splines 131 or through opening 135, such as to be further advanced to contact and ablate cardiac tissue; wherein in the steering of ablation catheter through opening 135 and to between two splines 131, the steering includes sliding the diagnostic catheter along the inner shaft so that the ablation catheter can retract proximally from opening 135); and
receiving one or more electrophysiological signals from at least one mapping electrode disposed on the plurality of spines (Col. 24, lines 61-66: electrical information can also be collected via one or more electrodes positioned on a device, such as electrodes 141 described herein, or one or more electrodes positioned on one or more devices such as devices 100, 200, 500, 600 and/or 700 described herein; see also methods in Figs. 4 & 5).
But Buck fails to disclose the spine hub comprising a connector configured to distribute the ablative energy from the ablation electrode to the mapping electrode of at least one spine of the plurality of spines when the ablation electrode is in electrical communication with the connector;
contacting the connector of the spine hub to the ablation electrode; and delivering ablative energy to the tissue via the mapping electrode of the at least one spine.
However, Wright discloses the spine hub comprising a connector (tube 207) configured to distribute the ablative energy from the ablation electrode (tip 201/301) to the mapping electrode of at least one spine of the plurality of spines (filaments 206a, 206b) when the ablation electrode is in electrical communication with the connector ([0122]: the tube 207 comprise a conductive material, such as stainless steel (e.g., 300 Series Stainless Steel), such that when the RF probe 401 is inserted in the tube 207, the RF energy emitted by the RF probe 401 may be conducted through the tube 207 and into and through the tip 201, 211, the filament 206a, and/or the filament 206b; [0127]: In this regard, together, the RF probe 401 inserted into the lumen 222, the tip 201, 211, 311, 321, and the filaments 206a, 206b, 319a, 319b, may form a monopolar electrode for application of RF energy to the target volume);
contacting the connector of the spine hub to the ablation electrode ([0122]: when the RF probe 401 is inserted in the tube 207, the RF energy emitted by the RF probe 401 may be conducted through the tube 207 and into and through the tip 201, 211, the filament 206a, and/or the filament 206b); and
delivering ablative energy to the tissue via the mapping electrode of the at least one spine ([0127]: In this regard, together, the RF probe 401 inserted into the lumen 222, the tip 201, 211, 311, 321, and the filaments 206a, 206b, 319a, 319b, may form a monopolar electrode for application of RF energy to the target volume; [0024]: applying RF energy to the tip and plurality of filaments).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spine hub and method of Werneth to include a connector, as taught by Wright, for the purpose of the filaments allowing the RF energy from the RF probe to be dispersed over a larger volume than would be possible with the tip alone (Wright: [0127]).
Regarding claim 17, Werneth discloses generating an electrophysiological map based at least in part on the one or more electrophysiological signals (Col. 25, lines 51-56: STEP 912 where a 3-D map is displayed. The surface data collected from the ultrasound transducers or other transducers can be used to create an anatomical map of the heart chamber, and the surface data collected from the electrodes or other sensors can be used to create an electrical map of the heart chamber).
Regarding claim 18, Werneth discloses actuating a pull wire to cause the inner catheter shaft, ablation electrode, outer sleeve, and the plurality of spines to deflect radially outward away from the longitudinal axis (Col. 24, lines 11-25: pull wires and anchors for sheath 50, diagnostic catheter 100 and ablation catheter 200, each set configured to steer their respective device. Sheath 50 includes pull wire 52 and anchor 53 which can be connected to a lever, a cam, or other wire control mechanism which is operably connected to a knob or slide positioned on a handle, all not shown but located at a proximal end of sheath 50. Similarly, diagnostic catheter 100 includes pull wire 122 and anchor 123, and ablation catheter 200 includes pull wire 222 and anchor 223, each pull wire 122 and 222 typically controlled as described above by a control on a handle. Each device can be independently controlled via its respective steering pull wire and anchor, however if desired two or more devices can be controlled in concert, such as via a single control).
Regarding claim 19, Werneth discloses retracting the outer sleeve along the inner catheter shaft to cause the ablation electrode to extend beyond a distal end of the plurality of spines (Col. 32, lines 52-54: Once advanced distal to opening 135, ablation element 261 can positioned to contact and/or deliver energy to tissue such as heart wall tissue; wherein the motion of the ablation catheter extending beyond opening 135 includes the motion of the diagnostic catheter moving proximally/retracting relative to the ablation catheter).
Regarding claim 20, Werneth discloses delivering ablative energy to tissue via the ablation electrode (Col. 26, line 49: STEP 930, the target tissue is ablated).
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.
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck in view of Wright as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Solis et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20170071494, cited in IDS), herein referred to as “Solis”.
Regarding claim 5, Buck describes that the axial length of the ablation electrode assembly may be varied in [0074] but fails to explicitly disclose a first handle disposed at a proximal end of the inner catheter shaft and a second handle disposed at a proximal end of the outer sleeve.
However, Solis discloses a first handle (control handle 12) disposed at a proximal end of the inner catheter shaft (inner tubular member 26; [0028]: Control handle 12 may be secured to inner tubular member 26) and a second handle (actuator 28) disposed at a proximal end of the outer sleeve (outer tubular member 24; [0028]: an actuator 28 may be secured to the proximal end of outer tubular member 24). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical probe of Buck in view of Wright to include first and second handles, as taught by Solis, so that by manipulating control handle and actuator to slide longitudinally relative to each other, an electrophysiologist may control the distance between proximal multiray array and distal multiray array at the distal end of catheter (Solis: [0028]).
Regarding claim 6, Buck in view of Wright and Solis discloses wherein the second handle configured to be moved axially along the longitudinal axis with respect to the first handle, thereby causing the outer sleeve to move axially along the inner catheter shaft (Solis: [0028]: by manipulating control handle 12 and actuator 28 to slide longitudinally relative to each other, an electrophysiologist may control the distance between proximal multiray array 20 and distal multiray array 22 at the distal end of catheter 10; [0037]: outer tubular member 24 may be withdrawn proximally, such as by manipulation of actuator 28).
Regarding claim 7, Buck in view of Wright fails to disclose a pull wire configured to cause the inner catheter shaft to deflect radially outward from the longitudinal axis.
However, Solis discloses a pull wire (puller wire 34) configured to cause the inner catheter shaft to deflect radially outward from the longitudinal axis ([0039]: Rotating deflection arm 36 places puller wire 34 under tension, producing a deflection of inner tubular member 26). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical probe of Buck in view of Wright to include a pull wire, as taught by Solis, for the purpose of deflecting the distal end to impart further control over which areas of tissue are contacted (Solis: [0039]).
Regarding claim 8, Buck in view of Wright and Solis discloses the first handle (Solis: control handle 12) comprising an actuator (rotating deflection arm 36) configured to pull the pull wire to cause the inner catheter shaft to deflect radially outward from the longitudinal axis ([0039]: Rotating deflection arm 36 places puller wire 34 under tension, producing a deflection of inner tubular member 26).
Regarding claim 9, Buck in view of Wright and Solis discloses the outer sleeve configured to deflect radially outward when the inner catheter shaft is caused to deflect radially outward from the longitudinal axis (Solis: [0039]: Rotating deflection arm 36 places puller wire 34 under tension, producing a deflection of inner tubular member 26 … Alternatively or in addition, outer tubular member 24 may also be deflectable as desired using similar techniques).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck in view of Wright and Solis as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Harlev et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 20230172661, previously cited), herein referred to as “Harlev”.
Regarding claim 10, Buck discloses irrigation port 161 but Buck in view of Wright and Solis the first handle comprising an irrigation coupler configured to receive irrigation fluid from an irrigation supply and the ablation electrode comprising a plurality of apertures each configured to permit the irrigation fluid to pass therethrough.
However, Harlev discloses the first handle (handle 120) comprising an irrigation coupler (fluid line connector 148) configured to receive irrigation fluid from an irrigation supply ([0178]: The fluid line 115 can be connectable to the fluid line connector 148 and, in use, irrigation fluid (e.g., saline) can be delivered from the irrigation pump 114 to the catheter 104) and the ablation electrode comprising a plurality of apertures each configured to permit the irrigation fluid to pass therethrough ([0338]: an irrigation element (such as the irrigation element 228 in FIG. 21) itself can be used as a center electrode; [0316]: The irrigation element 228 can include a nozzle portion 229 disposed along an end of a substantially cylindrical body 230. The plurality of irrigation holes 234 can be defined along one or both of the nozzle portion 229 and the substantially cylindrical body 230). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical probe of Buck in view of Wright and Solis to comprise an irrigation coupler and for the ablation electrode to comprise a plurality of apertures, as taught by Harlev, for the purpose of directing irrigation fluid toward the deformable portion of the ablation electrode/distal assembly and entraining blood and increasing the volume velocity of fluid over the ablation electrode and tissue (Harlev: [0316]).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck in view of Wright and Solis as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of Olson (U.S. Pub. No. 20210244360, cited in IDS), herein referred to as “Olson”.
Regarding claim 11, Buck in view of Wright and Solis fails to disclose the second handle comprising an irrigation coupler configured to receive irrigation fluid from an irrigation supply, the outer sleeve configured to deliver the irrigation fluid to the plurality of spines.
However, Olson discloses the second handle (handle 24) comprising an irrigation coupler (cable connector or interface 26) configured to receive irrigation fluid from an irrigation supply ([0024]: The connector 26 provides mechanical, fluid, and electrical connections for conduits or cables extending from the pump 20), the outer sleeve configured to deliver the irrigation fluid to the plurality of spines ([0039]: Some or all of the catheterlets 66 can include an irrigation port (not shown) at various locations such as at the electrode, proximate the electrode, through the electrode, and/or proximate the point of furcation of each of the plurality of catheterlets 66. A fluid can be circulated through an irrigant lumen and out through the irrigation ports; see Figs. 2A-3B where the sheath 62 delivers irrigation fluid via catheterlets 66A). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical probe of Buck in view of Wright and Solis to comprise an irrigation coupler and fluid delivery to the plurality of spines, as taught by Olson, for the purpose of enabling a fluid to be circulated and out of through the irrigation ports (Olson: [0039]).
Regarding claim 12, Buck in view of Wright, Solis and Olson disclose each spine of the plurality of spines comprising an aperture configured to permit the irrigation fluid to pass therethrough (Olson: [0039]: Some or all of the catheterlets 66 can include an irrigation port (not shown) at various locations such as at the electrode, proximate the electrode, through the electrode, and/or proximate the point of furcation of each of the plurality of catheterlets 66. A fluid can be circulated through an irrigant lumen and out through the irrigation ports).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buck in view of Wright as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Govari et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 8357152, cited in IDS), herein referred to as “Govari”.
Regarding claim 14, Buck in view of Wright fails to disclose a force sensor disposed proximal to the ablation electrode, the force sensor configured to detect a force applied to the ablation electrode.
However, Govari discloses a force sensor (resilient member 58 & sensor 62) disposed proximal to the ablation electrode (electrode 50), the force sensor configured to detect a force applied to the ablation electrode (Col. 6, lines 61-67 & Col. 7, lines 1-4: The relative movement of the distal tip relative to the distal end of the insertion tube gives a measure of the deformation of resilient member 58. Generally speaking, this deformation is proportional to the force that is exerted on the resilient member, which is roughly equal to the force that is exerted on the distal tip by the heart tissue with which the distal tip is in contact. Thus, the combination of field generator 64 with sensor 62 serves as a pressure sensing system, for determining the approximate pressure exerted by the endocardial tissue on the distal tip of the catheter (or equivalently, the pressure exerted by electrode 50 against the endocardial tissue)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the medical probe of Buck in view of Wright to include a force sensor, as taught by Govari, for the purpose of determining the approximate pressure exerted by the endocardial tissue on the distal tip of the catheter (or equivalently, the pressure exerted by electrode against the endocardial tissue) (Govari: Col. 7, lines 1-4).
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 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 Abigail M Ziegler whose telephone number is (571)272-1991. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 a.m. - 5 p.m. 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, 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.
/ABIGAIL M ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/BEVERLY M FLANAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights