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. Claim Objections Claim(s) 14 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 14, line 1, “a plurality of LCP fibers” should be amended as “a plurality of liquid crystal polymer (LCP) fibers”. 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 appl icant regards as his invention. Claim(s) 15 , 16 is/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 15 recites the limitation "the plurality of LCP fibers" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner suggests Applicant to amend the dependency of claim 15 since claim 14 initially recites “a plurality of LCP fibers” limitation. Claim 16 recites the limitation "the shape memory deformer" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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. (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. Claim(s) 1-2, 5-13, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Vale et al. (US 2019/0328411). Regarding claim 1 , Vale discloses An aspiration catheter (500, fig. 60 and pars. 0150-0154) configured for removal of a blood clot from a vessel of a patient (see pars. 0150-0154) , the aspiration catheter (500) comprising: an elongated body (elongated body/shaft of 500) formed of a flexible material (material of elongated body/shaft of 500 that is flexible to allow 500 to be compatible with the curvature of the blood vessel) and including an inner lumen (lumen of 500 to retrieve a blood clot) extending between a proximal body end ( 501 , away from the insertion site) and a distal body end ( 502 including distal clot reception tip 503 – towards the insertion site) , the inner lumen (lumen of 500) defined by an inner wall (inner wall of 500) and forming a distal opening at the distal body end ( distal opening at 503, see fig. 60) ; a reinforcement element (507, fig. 60 and par. 0150) extending along a first length of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 below ) between a proximal reinforcement end (proximal end of 507) and a distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507, see fig. 60) , the distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507) positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 below) ; and a deformer (503) extending along the second length of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 below) , the deformer (503) coupled to the second length such that the distal opening includes a first opening diameter when the deformer forms a first configuration (first opening diameter of distal opening of 500 is when 503 is in a collapsed configuration , see fig. 61a ) and includes a second opening diameter when the deformer forms a second configuration (second opening diameter of distal opening of 500 is when 503 is in an expanded configuration , see fig. 61b ) , the second opening diameter being larger than the first opening diameter (see figs. 61a-61b) . Regarding claim 2 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 1, wherein the deformer includes an inflatable balloon (see par. 0066 for the expansion of the distal end of the clot receptor/deformer being actuatable by inflation of a balloon cuff ) . Regarding claim 5 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 2, wherein the distal opening (distal opening at 503 ) forms a first suction area (area of 503 in collapsed configuration , see fig. 61a ) when the inflatable balloon is in the first configuration (when the balloon is deflated, see par. 0 066 for the disclosure of the balloon) and forms a second suction area ( area of 503 in expanded configuration, see fig. 61b ) when the inflatable balloon is in the second configuration (when the balloon is inflated, see par. 0 066 for the disclosure of the balloon) , the second suction area being larger than the first suction area (see figs. 61a-61b and par. 0066 for the disclosure of the balloon ) . Regarding claim 6 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 5, wherein the first suction area and the second suction area are each defined by one or more of a diameter and a cross-sectional area of the distal opening (see fig. 61a for the diameter and cross-sectional area of 503 in its collapsed configuration, and see fig. 61b for the diameter and cross-sectional area of 503 in its expanded configuration ) . Regarding claim 7 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 5, wherein the inflatable balloon is deflated when in the first configuration (see fig. 61a and par. 0 066 ) and inflated when in the second configuration (see fig. 61b and par. 0 066 ) . Regarding claim 8 , Vale discloses T he aspiration catheter of claim 1, wherein the deformer includes a shape memory material ( Examiner notes: see par. 0150 for 503 being a distal clot reception tip and 503 comprising any of the designs shown elsewhere in this document. S ee par. 0068 and fig. 3 for the distal end of the clot receptor/deformer including Nitinol material) . Regarding claim 9 , Vale discloses T he aspiration catheter of claim 8 , wherein the shape memory material includes a nitinol material (see par. 0068 ) that transitions between the first configuration and the second configuration ( collapsed and expanded configurations ) based on a temperature of the shape memory material (Examiner notes: since the material is nitinol, it is capable of changing the configurations based on temperature of nitinol) . Regarding claim 10 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 8, wherein the shape memory material includes at least one nitinol wire (see par. 0068) that extends longitudinally along the second length (s ee fig. 3 for the length of the clot receptor/deformer ) . Regarding claim 11 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 8, wherein the shape memory material includes a stent retriever (see fig. 3 and par. 0068 for 2/4 comprising Nitinol material and having a stent-like self-expanding shape to retrieve a blood clot ) . Regarding claim 12 , Vale discloses T he aspiration catheter of claim 1 , wherein the elongated body is more flexible along the second length than along the first length (see figs. 61a-61b for 503 being more flexible such that 503 is expanded during the retrieval of a blood clot) . Regarding claim 13 , Vale discloses The aspiration catheter of claim 1, wherein the reinforcement element ( 507 ) includes one or more of a Teflon liner and a metal wire ( see par. 0152 for the material of 507 ) . Regarding claim 22 , Vale discloses An aspiration catheter (500, fig. 60 and pars. 0150-0154) configured for removal of a blood clot from a vessel of a patient (see pars. 0150-0154) , the aspiration catheter (500) comprising: an elongated body (elongated body/shaft of 500) formed of a flexible material (material of elongated body/shaft of 500 that is flexible to allow 500 to be compatible with the curvature of the blood vessel) and including an inner lumen (lumen of 500 to retrieve a blood clot) extending between a proximal body end (501, away from the insertion site) and a distal body end (502 including distal clot reception tip 503 – towards the insertion site) , the inner lumen (lumen of 500) defined by an inner wall (inner wall of 500) and forming a distal opening at the distal body end (distal opening at 503, see fig. 60), the distal opening (distal opening at 503) having a shaped distal end (see fig. 60 for the shape of 503) including a perimeter extending along more than one plane (see fig. 60 for the perimeter of 503) , the perimeter including a shape extending longitudinally relative to a longitudinal axis of the inner lumen (see fig. 60 for the perimeter of 503 with some cuts along the longitudinal axis) ; and a reinforcement element (507, par. 0150) extending along a length of the elongated body (see fig. 60) . 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. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action. Claim (s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vale et al. (US 2019/0328411) in view of Murata (US 2009/0240235). Regarding claim 1 4 , Vale discloses t he aspiration catheter of claim 1 , as set forth above, except for further comprising a plurality of LCP fibers extending along the second length of the elongated body. However, Murata teaches an elongated body with a plurality of LCP fibers extending along a length of the elongated body (see par. 0027 for the wire being liquid crystal polymer wire, see fig. 6 for the layer of the catheter/elongated body with wires 51 and 52). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Vale’s elongated body to comprise a plurality of LCP fibers, as taught by Murata, for the purpose of providing the elongated body with kink resistance, pressure resistance, torque-transmitting efficiency, insertion efficiency (par. 0108 of Murata) and making the elongated body more compatible with the curvature in complicated blood vessel (par. 0110 of Murata). Regarding claim 15 , Vale discloses t he aspiration catheter of claim 10 , as set forth above, except for wherein a first LCP fiber of the plurality of LCP fibers is oriented longitudinally along the elongated body and a second LCP fiber of the plurality of LCP fibers is oriented circumferentially along the elongated body. However, Murata teaches an elongated body with a plurality of LCP fibers (see par. 0027 for the wire being liquid crystal polymer wire, see fig. 6 for the layer of the catheter/elongated body with wires 51 and 52) wherein a first LCP fiber (52) of the plurality of LCP fibers is oriented longitudinally along the elongated body (see fig. 6) and a second LCP fiber (51) of the plurality of LCP fibers is oriented circumferentially along the elongated body (see fig. 6). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Vale’s elongated body to comprise a plurality of LCP fibers, as taught by Murata, for the purpose of providing the elongated body with kink resistance, pressure resistance, torque-transmitting efficiency, insertion efficiency (par. 0108 of Murata) and making the elongated body more compatible with the curvature in complicated blood vessel (par. 0110 of Murata). Claim (s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vale et al. (US 2019/0328411) . Regarding claim 16 , Vale discloses An aspiration catheter ( system shown in figs. 11a-11d and pars. 0075-0087) configured for removal of a blood clot from a vessel of a patient (see figs. 11a-11d) , the aspiration catheter (101) comprising: an elongated body (body of 108) formed of a flexible material (material of elongated body of 108 that is flexible to allow 108 to be compatible with the curvature of the blood vessel) and including an inner lumen (lumen of 108 for 101 to be positioned within) extending between a proximal body end (proximal end of 108 – away from the insertion site) and a distal body end (distal end of 108 – towards the insertion site) , the inner lumen (lumen of 108) defined by an inner wall (inner wall of 108) and forming a distal opening at the distal body end (distal opening of 108) ; a movable deformer (112) slidably positioned along the inner lumen of the tubular elongated body (see figs. 11a-11d) , the movable deformer (112) being slidable along the first length of the elongate body (see figs. 11a-11d) , the movable deformer (112) forming a collapsed configuration along the first length thereby allowing the distal opening to form a first opening diameter (when 112 is positioned within 108 and in its collapsed configuration, before being advanced out of the distal end of 108 towards the target blood clot, the distal opening of 113 as shown in fig. 11a) , the shape memory deformer (112) being movable to the second length ( see fig. 11d ) for forming an expanded configuration (see fig. 11d) thereby allowing the distal opening (distal opening of 108) to form a second opening diameter (see fig. 11d for 113 being expanded to accommodate clot 110) , the second opening diameter being larger than the first opening diameter (see figs. 11a and 11d) . Vale’s embodiment in figs. 11a-11d is silent about a reinforcement element extending along a first length of the elongated body between a proximal reinforcement end and a distal reinforcement end, the distal reinforcement end positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body . However, Vale’s embodiment in fig. 60 teaches a reinforcement element (507, fig. 60 and par. 0150) extending along a first length of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above) between a proximal reinforcement end (proximal end of 507) and a distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507, see fig. 60) , the distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507) positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Vale’s elongated body in figs. 11a-11d by adding a reinforcement element, as taught by Vale’s embodiment in fig. 60, for the purpose of providing the elongated body with kink resistance, pressure resistance, torque-transmitting efficiency, insertion efficiency. Claim (s) 28, 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sepetka et al. (US 2004/0073243) in view of Vale et al. (US 2019/0328411). Regarding claim 2 8 , Sepetka discloses An aspiration catheter (2, figs. 1-4 and pars. 0128-0136) configured for removal of a blood clot from a vessel of a patient (see figs. 1-4) , the aspiration catheter (2) comprising: an elongated body (10) formed of a flexible material (material of 10 that is flexible to allow 10 to be compatible with the curvature of the blood vessel) and including an inner lumen (lumen of 10 for 8 to be positioned within, see fig. 2) extending between a proximal body end (proximal end of 10, see fig. 1) and a distal body end (distal end of 10, see fig. 2) , the inner lumen (lumen of 10) defined by an inner wall (inner wall of 10, see fig. 2) and forming a distal opening at the distal body end (opening of 10 to allow 8 to protrude out of 10, see fig. 2) ; an occlusion grasper (8) extending along the inner wall of the second length of the elongated body (see fig. 2) , the occlusion grasper (8) including an exposed coil (16, fig. 2) configured to grasp the blood clot for securing the blood clot at least partially within the inner lumen ( Examiner notes: the limitation “configured to grasp the blood clot for securing the blood clot at least partially within the inner lumen” is interpreted as functional limitation. See figs. 2-4 for 16 to grasp the blood clot and secure the blood clot , so it is capable of grasping the blood clot for securing the blood clot at least partially within the inner lumen ) . Sepetka is silent about a reinforcement element extending along a first length of the elongated body between a proximal reinforcement end and a distal reinforcement end, the distal reinforcement end positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body . However, Vale teaches a reinforcement element (507, fig. 60 and par. 0150) extending along a first length of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above) between a proximal reinforcement end (proximal end of 507) and a distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507, see fig. 60) , the distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507) positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Sepetka’s elongated body by adding a reinforcement element, as taught by Vale, for the purpose of providing the elongated body with kink resistance, pressure resistance, torque-transmitting efficiency, insertion efficiency. Regarding claim 32 , Sepetka discloses A method (figs. 10-14 and pars. 0148- 0158) for removing a blood clot from a vessel of a patient (see figs. 10-14) , the method comprising: inserting a distal portion of an aspiration catheter (distal portion of 4) into a vessel (see fig. 10) , the aspiration catheter comprising: an elongated body (107) formed of a flexible material (material of 107 that is flexible to allow 107 to be compatible with the curvature of the blood vessel, see fig. 10) and including an inner lumen (inner lumen of 107, see fig. 11) extending between a proximal body end (proximal end of 107, see fig. 10) and a distal body end (distal end of 107 comprising elements 122, see fig. 11) , the inner lumen (inner lumen of 107) defined by an inner wall (inner wall of 107, see fig. 11) and forming a distal opening at the distal body end (distal opening at 122 to allow 106 to protrude out and grasp the target blood clot, see fig. 11) ; a deformer (122) extending along the second length of the elongated body (distal end portion of 107) , the deformer (122) coupled to the second length such that the distal opening (distal opening at 122) includes a first opening diameter (fig. 10) when the deformer forms a first configuration (fig. 10 when 122 is in a collapsed configuration) and includes a second opening diameter (fig. 12) when the deformer forms a second configuration (fig. 12 when 122 is in a expanded configuration) , the second opening diameter being larger than the first opening diameter (see figs. 10 and 12, see also par. 0152 for 122 forming a cone 124 when expanded) ; causing the deformer (122) to transition between the first configuration (fig. 10) and the second configuration (fig. 12) ; and applying a vacuum (135, fig. 10 and par. 0158) to the elongated body (107) for suctioning at least a part of the blood clot into the distal opening having the second opening diameter (see par. 0158) . Sepetka is silent about a reinforcement element extending along a first length of the elongated body between a proximal reinforcement end and a distal reinforcement end, the distal reinforcement end positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body . However, Vale teaches a reinforcement element (507, fig. 60 and par. 0150) extending along a first length of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above) between a proximal reinforcement end (proximal end of 507) and a distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507, see fig. 60) , the distal reinforcement end (distal end of 507) positioned a second length from the distal body end of the elongated body (see annotated fig. 60 above). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to modify Sepetka’s elongated body by adding a reinforcement element, as taught by Vale, for the purpose of providing the elongated body with kink resistance, pressure resistance, torque-transmitting efficiency, insertion efficiency Allowable Subject Matter Claim(s) 3-4 is/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. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO 892 form . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DUNG T ULSH whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-9894 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Friday 9am-6pm . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Bhisma Mehta can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-3383 . 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. /DUNG T ULSH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783