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 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.
Claims 1-5, 10, 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Palese et al. (US 20120130164 A1) in view of Shelton IV (US 20190000471 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Palese discloses a medical grasping device 100 for use in an interventional procedure in a body lumen of a patient (paras. [0046]), the medical grasping device comprising: an actuator (Fig. 3) comprising: a housing 150; a button 190 coupled to the housing (Fig. 4); a locking member (i.e., as disclosed in para. [0067]) coupled to the button (para. [0067]) and releasably lockingly engageable to the housing (para. [0067]); and a slide carriage 192 coupled to the slide button (Fig. 3) and the locking member and slidingly disposed within the housing (Figs. 13-14); a catheter 120 coupled to the locking member (i.e., as disclosed in para. [0067]) and distally extendible relative to the housing (Figs. 13-14); an elongate member 177 concentrically disposed within the catheter (Fig. 3), wherein the catheter is slidable over the elongate member (para. [0065]); and a grasping member 183 having an open state (Fig. 6) and a closed state (Fig. 5), wherein the catheter is disposed over the grasping member when the grasping member is in the closed state (Fig. 5).
Palese doesn’t directly disclose: wherein the locking member comprises a first set of locking teeth and the housing comprises a second set of locking teeth, wherein the first set of locking teeth and the second set of locking teeth are configured to engage in a plurality of detent positions. However, Palese does disclose including a locking mechanism for locking the slider in one of the positions (para. [0067]).
In the same field of endeavor, namely surgical instrument comprising firing member supports, Shelton discloses wherein the locking member 11400 comprises a first set of locking teeth 11406 and the housing comprises a second set of locking teeth 11316, wherein the first set of locking teeth and the second set of locking teeth are configured to engage in a plurality of detent positions (i.e., para. [0461]-[0463]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Palese to have the locking mechanism include locking teeth for the purpose of maintaining the device in a specific orientation (para. [0461]-[0463]).
Regarding claim 2, Palese and Shelton disclose the medical grasping device of claim 1. Palese also discloses further comprising an anchor coupled to the elongate member and the housing (i.e., see Fig. 3 where 177 meets 159).
Regarding claim 3, Palese and Shelton disclose the medical grasping device of claim 1. Palese doesn’t disclose a resilient member coupled to the slide button and the locking member, wherein the resilient member forces the locking member into locking engagement with the housing.
Shelton discloses a resilient member 11403 coupled to the slide button and the locking member, wherein the resilient member forces the locking member into locking engagement with the housing (para. [0462]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Palese and Shelton to have a resilient member for purposes of return or easy engagement into a use position (para. [0462]).
Regarding claim 4, Palese and Shelton disclose the medical grasping device of claim 1. Palese also discloses further comprising a filler tube 172 concentrically disposed within the catheter and over the elongate member (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, Palese and Shelton disclose the medical grasping device of claim 1. Palese discloses wherein the grasping member comprises: a stem (i.e., coupled to 172 as shown in Fig. 14) couplable with the elongate member (Fig. 14); a first resilient prong (i.e., Fig. 14) extending from the stem; a second resilient prong (Fig. 14) extending from the stem; a first grasping feature coupled to the first resilient arm (i.e., inner face as shown in Fig. 14); and a second grasping feature coupled to the second resilient arm (i.e., inner face as shown in Fig. 14).
Regarding claim 10, Palese and Shelton discloses the grasping device of claim 1. Shelton also disclose wherein the catheter comprises a bend ranging from 20 degrees to 60 degrees relative to a longitudinal axis of the catheter (para. [0437]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Palese to have a bend as disclosed by Shelton for the purposes of being able to articulate into desired positions (paras. [0437]).
Regarding claim 15, Palese and Shelton disclose a method of retrieving a foreign object from a body lumen, comprising: disposing the grasping device of claim 1 to a position within a body lumen adjacent a target foreign object; actuating the slide actuator such that the first and second grasping features overlap with each other to secure the engaged target foreign object; and longitudinally proximally displacing the grasping device to dislodge the secured target foreign object from a position within the body lumen (at least as disclosed by Palese in para. [0104]; Shelton para. [0487]).
Regarding claim 16, Palese and Shelton disclose the method of claim 15. Palese also discloses wherein actuating the slide actuator comprises: depressing the slide button (i.e., at least by pressure from the thumb during sliding); displacing the slide button distally (para. [0065]); and disposing the catheter over the grasping device (para. [0065]).
Regarding claim 17, Palese and Shelton disclose the method of claim 15. Palese also discloses further comprising transitioning the grasping member from the open state to the closed state (Figs. 13-14).
Regarding claim 18, Palese and Shelton disclose the method of claim 15. Palese also discloses further comprising locking the grasping device in a distally displaced position such that the grasping member is in the closed state (para. [0067]).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Palese et al. in view of Shelton IV in further view of Russo et al. (US 2021/0186545 A1)
Regarding claim 6, Palese and Shelton disclose the medical grasping device of claim 5. Palese and Shelton don’t directly disclose wherein the first grasping feature is oriented radially inward and angled proximally, wherein the second grasping feature is oriented radially inward and angled proximally, and wherein the first grasping feature and the second grasping feature are configured to overlap when the grasping member is in the closed state.
In the same field of endeavor, namely microforceps, Russo discloses a similar device including a slide actuator (Fig. 2) including a slider 24 and a housing 22, a grasping member (Fig. 3) including two prongs 140, 142, and further including grasping features on each prong (i.e., teeth) each that are oriented radially inward and angled proximally (Fig. 3). Russo also discloses that the grasping features are configured to overlap when the grasping member is in the closed state (para. [0096]).
Regarding claim 7, Palese, Shelton, and Russo disclose the medical grasping device of claim 6. Russo also discloses wherein the first grasping feature is angled proximally by negative 5 degrees to 20 degrees, and wherein the second grasping feature is angled proximally by negative 5 degrees to 20 degrees (i.e., see Fig. 3 and paras. [0085], [0097]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the grasping member to have teeth overlapping and angled backwards as disclosed by Russo for purposes of improving a grasping and handling feature of the grasping feature (Abstract).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Palese et al. in view of Shelton IV in further view of Layman et al. (US 2021/0282759 A1)
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Palese and Shelton disclose the grasping device of claim 1. Palese and Shelton don’t disclose: wherein the catheter comprises: a tube comprising a reinforcement braid; and a closing member disposed at a distal end of the tube, wherein the reinforcement braid is coupled to the clos+ing member and wherein the grasping member is disposable within the closing member when in the closed state.
In the same field of endeavor, namely medical devices with deflective distal ends, Layman discloses a similar device including a catheter 110. Layman also discloses coupling a reinforcement braid to the catheter such that the braid extends over the catheter and is thereby coupled to the closing member (para. [0004]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Juan and Yoshi to have a reinforcement braid coupled to the closing member for purposes of providing sufficient flexibility, kink resistance, pushability, and torqueability to allow navigation through vasculature (para. [0004]).
Claims 11-14are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Russo et al. (US 2021/0186545 A1) in view of Palese.
Regarding claim 11, Russo discloses a medical retrieval system 10 for use in an interventional procedure in a body lumen of a patient, the medical retrieval system comprising: a medical retrieval device comprising: a slide actuator 24; a catheter 14 distally extendible relative to the slide actuator (Figs. 1A-2); a filler tube 12 concentrically disposed within the catheter (Fig. 1A), wherein the catheter is slidable over the filler tube (i.e., at least during delivery of 12), the filler tube filling at least a portion of the lumen of the catheter to prevent kinging of the catheter (Fig. 1A-1B); an elongate member concentrically disposed within the catheter (i.e., drive wire as disclosed in paras. [0050]-[0052]), wherein the catheter is slidable over the elongate member (para. [0050]); and a retrieval member 100 having an open state (Fig. 1B) and a closed state (Fig. 1A), wherein the retrieval member is at least partially disposed within the catheter when in the closed state (i.e., at least by removing 100 such that 100 has to fit through 12).
Russo doesn’t also disclose an introducer sheath configured for passage of the catheter.
Palese discloses an introducer sheath 101.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Russo to have an introducer sheath as taught by Palese for purposes of providing access to the inside of a patient (para. [0046]).
Regarding claim 12, Russo and Palese disclose the medical retrieval system of claim 11. Russo discloses wherein the retrieval member comprises: a stem couplable 110 with the elongate member (Figs. 1A-1B); a first resilient arm 140 extending from the stem (Fig. 4); a second resilient arm 142 extending from the stem (Fig. 4); a first retrieval feature coupled to the first resilient arm (i.e., teeth as shown in Fig. 4); and a second retrieval feature coupled to the second resilient arm (i.e., teeth as shown in Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 13, Russo and Palese disclose the medical retrieval system of claim 12. Russo discloses the first retrieval feature is oriented radially inward and angled proximally (Fig. 3), wherein the second retrieval feature is oriented radially inward and angled proximally (Fig. 3), and wherein the first grasping feature and the second grasping feature are configured to overlap when the grasping member is in the closed state (Fig. 1A).
Regarding claim 14, Russo and Palese disclose the medical retrieval system of claim 13. Russo discloses wherein the first retrieval feature is angled proximally by negative 5 degrees to 20 degrees, and wherein the second retrieval feature is angled proximally by negative 5 degrees to 20 degrees (i.e., see Fig. 3 and paras. [0085], [0097]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 RACHAEL LYNN GEIGER whose telephone number is (571)272-6196. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00am-5:00pm 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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 5712724695. 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.
/RACHAEL L GEIGER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/BROOKE LABRANCHE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights