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 .
Election
Applicants’ election of claims 1-15, 18-20 is acknowledged. The election is considered as without traverse and made final. See MPEP 818.01 (portions below) -
818.01(a) Reply Must be Complete [R-07.2015]
As indicated in the first sentence of 37 CFR 1.143, the traverse to a requirement for restriction must be complete as required by 37 CFR 1.111(b). Under this rule, the applicant is required to specifically point out the reason(s) on which he or she bases his or her conclusion(s) that a requirement to restrict is in error. A mere broad allegation that the requirement is in error does not comply with the requirement of 37 CFR 1.111. Thus, the required provisional election (see MPEP § 818.01(b)) becomes an election without traverse if accompanied by an incomplete traversal of the requirement for restriction.
Claims 16-17 are withdrawn from further consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/24/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, recites “wherein each link of the plurality of links includes a wall having a radially inner surface and a radially outer surface”. This feature is repeated because claim 2 already recites this feature.
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 2, 3, 5, 9-10, 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 2 recites the limitation "wherein each link of the plurality of links includes a wall having a radially inner surface and a radially outer surface, wherein each stiffening channel is defined by the radially outer surface of a corresponding link and is open to a side of the corresponding link". The phrase/terms “radially inner surface,” “radially outer surface” is unclear.
Claim 9 recites “a particular link” in lines 1-2. The use of the term particular itself does not appear to have any added limitation in the claim which makes the claim unclear.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 3, 5, 10 are rejected for being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 6-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being anticipated by Prindiville (US 20160228202).
Regarding claim 1, Prindiville discloses an articulation joint (FIG. 4) for a medical device, the articulation joint having a proximal end and a distal end and comprising:
a plurality of links (linked link members 302, 304, and 306; FIGS. 2-3; Para [0045]), each link of the plurality of links configured to articulate relative to adjacent links of the plurality of links (FIGS. 6A-6B);
one or more actuating wires (cables 410a and 410b; Para [0063]), each actuating wire extending through an actuation channel (channel are integrated with the links for guiding the cables; Para [0069]) of each link of the plurality of links, fixedly attached proximate the distal end of the articulation joint (Cable are attached to the proximal end of the instrument for providing actuation movement. FIG. 1), and translatable (cable movement 502, 504; Para [0063]) relative to the plurality of links to articulate the articulation joint (FIG. 6A, 6B; para [0070]); and
at least one stiffening element (Flexures 320-326; Flexures 320-326 can provide an inherent spring force to the link members; FIG. 4; Para [0051]) extending through a stiffening channel (Channel/groove/recess 321 where the flexures 320-326 are guided; FIG. 3 annotated) of each link of the plurality of links, having a proximal end fixedly attached to one link of the plurality of links, and having a distal end fixedly attached to another link of the plurality of links (Flexures 324 is connected to the link members 304, 306).
PNG
media_image1.png
492
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Prindiville discloses wherein each link of the plurality of links includes a wall having a radially inner surface and a radially outer surface (FIG. 3, annotated), wherein each stiffening channel is defined by the radially outer surface of a corresponding link (The outer surface defines the stiffening channel. FIG. 3) and is open to a side of the corresponding link (The stiffening channel/recess 321 opens on the side. FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Prindiville discloses wherein the stiffening channel has a rectangular cross-sectional shape (The recess 321 has a rectangular cross-section. FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 8, Prindiville discloses wherein the at least one stiffening element includes a first stiffening element (flexure 324) and a second stiffening element (flexure 320) disposed opposite the first stiffening element (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 9, Prindiville discloses wherein the plurality of links comprises a particular link (flexure 304), a proximal link (flexure 302), and a distal link (flexure 306), and wherein the at least one stiffening element comprises two proximal stiffening elements (flexure 320) that couple the particular link to the proximal link and two distal stiffening elements (flexure 324) that couple the particular link to the distal link (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 10, Prindiville discloses wherein the two proximal stiffening elements are arranged opposite each other (Two stiffening elements, flexures 324 are opposite to each other. FIG. 3) and 90 degrees to each of the two distal stiffening elements (The proximal and distal stiffening elements, flexures 320, 324 are 90 degrees considering their positions in the circumferential surface of the links. FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Prindiville discloses wherein at least one stiffening element is continuous from the proximal end to the distal end (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Prindiville discloses wherein the one or more actuating wires includes two (Cables 410a and 410b; Para [0063]) or four actuating wires.
Regarding claim 13, Prindiville discloses gaps (FIG. 3 annotated) disposed between each link of the plurality of links, wherein the gaps are narrowest at a location of the at least one stiffening element.
Regarding claim 14, Prindiville discloses wherein the articulation joint further comprises a second stiffening element (stiffening element, flexure320).
Regarding claim 15, Prindiville discloses wherein each link of the plurality of links includes a wall having a radially inner surface and a radially outer surface (FIG. 3), wherein each stiffening channel is disposed on the radially outer surface of a corresponding link (FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 18, Prindiville discloses a medical device (FIGS. 1, 4) comprising:
a handle (FIG. 1), an articulation joint (FIG. 4), a flexible shaft (flexible shaft 104) disposed between the handle and the articulation joint, and a tip (end effector 402; FIG. 4) disposed distally of the articulation joint, wherein the articulation joint has a proximal end and a distal end (FIGS. 3-4) and comprises:
a plurality of links (Linked link members 302, 304, and 306; FIGS. 2-3; Para [0045]), each link of the plurality of links configured to articulate relative to adjacent links of the plurality of links (FIGS. 6A-6B);
one or more actuating wires (cables 410a and 410b; Para [0063]), each actuating wire extending through an actuation channel (channel are integrated with the links for guiding the cables; Para [0069]) of each link of the plurality of links, fixedly attached proximate the distal end of the articulation joint (Cable are attached to the proximal end of the instrument for providing actuation movement. FIG. 1), and translatable (cable movement 502, 504; Para [0063]) relative to the plurality of links to articulate the articulation joint (FIG. 6A, 6B; para [0070]); and
at least one stiffening element (Flexures 320-326; Flexures 320-326 can provide an inherent spring force to the link members; FIG. 4; Para [0051]) extending through a stiffening channel (Channel/groove where the Flexures 320-326 are guided; FIG. 3 annotated) of each link of the plurality of links, having a proximal end fixedly attached to one link of the plurality of links, and having a distal end fixedly attached to another link of the plurality of links (Flexures 324 is connected to the link members 304, 306).
Regarding claim 19, Prindiville discloses wherein each link defines four stiffening channels (Stiffening channels are defined - two on the distal side and two on the proximal side; FIG. 3).
Regarding claim 20, Prindiville discloses wherein stiffening element is nonmetallic (Polymers may be used with the mechanism; Para [0043]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prindiville (US 20160228202) in view of Major (US 20230128263).
Regarding claim 3, Prindiville discloses wherein each link of the plurality of links includes a wall having a radially inner surface and a radially outer surface (FIG. 3). Prindiville does not expressly disclose wherein each actuation channel is defined by the radially outer surface of a corresponding link and is open to a side of the corresponding link.
Major is directed to a catheter system (abstract) and teaches wherein each actuation channel is defined by the radially outer surface of a corresponding link and is open (FIG. 2A, annotated below) to a side of the corresponding link.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prindiville to have/include an open channel in accordance with the teaching of Major so that actuating wires could be installed in the device conveniently by way of having an open channel.
PNG
media_image2.png
656
711
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 4, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prindiville (US 20160228202) in view of Julian (US 20200205908).
Regarding claim 4, Prindiville does not expressly disclose wherein the stiffening channel has a concave shape.
Julian is directed to a medical device (abstract) and teaches wherein the stiffening channel (One or more recesses 208 for connecting the links; FIG. 22B; Para [0119]) has a concave shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prindiville to include a concave shape in the stiffening channel in accordance with the teaching of Julian so that additional flexibility could be provided in bending by way of having an oval shaped channel.
Claim(s) 5, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prindiville (US 20160228202) in view of Ikeda (US 20060199999).
Regarding claim 5, Prindiville does not expressly disclose wherein the stiffening channel is enclosed by a wall of the corresponding link.
Ikeda is directed to minimally invasive articulating surgical endoscope (abstract) and teaches wherein the stiffening channel is enclosed by a wall of the corresponding link (holes covering the channel for bending cables 104; FIG. 9; para [0164]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Prindiville to have holes for stiffening channel in the links in accordance with the teaching of Ikeda so that stiffening elements could be protected and guided.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO – 892. For example, see Yoon (US 20150327751) for body/links 111 and coupling slots 113.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHANKAR R GHIMIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-0515. The examiner can normally be reached 8 AM - 5 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached on 571-272-4963. 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.
/SHANKAR RAJ GHIMIRE/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 04/02/26
Prosecution Insights