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 .
Election/Restrictions
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claim 1-7, 15, drawn to a system, classified in A61B 1/267.
II. Claim 8-14, drawn to a product, classified in A61B 1/07.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because the invention II provides aspects to the unibody plug which are more specific than that of the unibody plug provided in invention I. The subcombination has separate utility such as having a frame formed of solid transparent material.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: as the groups of inventions are independent or distinct a search and/or examination burden is present, requiring different fields of search and likely different non-prior art issues.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
This application contains claims directed to the following patentably distinct species:
Species A: First embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 2
Species B: Second embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6A
Species C: Third embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6B
Species D: Fourth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6C
Species E: Fifth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6D
Species F: Sixth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6E
Species G: Seventh embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6F
Species H: Eighth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 6G
Species I: Ninth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 7A
Species J: Tenth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 7B
Species K: Eleventh embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 7C
Species L: Twelfth embodiment of a light guide disclosed in FIG. 7D
The species are independent or distinct because they are substantially dissimilar and structurally divergent surgical device structures. In addition, these species are not obvious variants of each other based on the current record.
Applicant is required under 35 U.S.C. 121 to elect a single disclosed species, or a single grouping of patentably indistinct species, for prosecution on the merits to which the claims shall be restricted if no generic claim is finally held to be allowable. Currently, No claim is generic.
There is a serious search and/or examination burden for the patentably distinct species as set forth above because at least the following reason(s) apply: as the groups of inventions are independent or distinct a search and/or examination burden is present, requiring different field of search and likely different non-prior art issues.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of a species to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species, including any claims subsequently added. An argument that a claim is allowable or that all claims are generic is considered nonresponsive unless accompanied by an election.
The election may be made with or without traverse. To preserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the election of species requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable on the elected species or grouping of patentably indistinct species.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the species, or groupings of patentably indistinct species from which election is required, are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing them to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the species unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other species.
Upon the allowance of a generic claim, applicant will be entitled to consideration of claims to additional species which depend from or otherwise require all the limitations of an allowable generic claim as provided by 37 CFR 1.141.
During a telephone conversation with Michael Wagner on 12/18/22 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of Restriction Group 1 and Species A, claims 1-7, 15. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 8-14 withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Glukhovsky (US 20070002135 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Glukhovsky discloses
A video laryngoscope (imaging device 40, FIG. 1; par. 46 discloses device may be an endoscope device of some kind, i.e. video laryngoscope) comprising:
a display (image monitor 18, FIG. 1; par. 48 discloses connection between monitor and imaging device);
a handle (endoscope 400, FIG. 5; par. 66 discloses overall device may have a structure an endoscope, i.e. any proximal portion can be considered handle and handle is inherent);
an arm (main body 62, FIG. 1) extending distally from the handle (par. 44 discloses main body may be tube of an endoscope which extends distally);
a camera (imager 46) positioned at a distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1);
a light source (illumination sources 42) positioned at the distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1); and
a unibody plug (optical system 10) positioned at the distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1), the unibody plug comprising:
a light guide (optical window 54, FIG. 1) formed of a solid transparent material (par. 42 discloses window is transparent, par. 37 discloses window made of plastic) having an entry surface (inner surface 54', FIG. 2) at a proximal end of the light guide and an exit surface (external surface 54'', FIG. 2) at a distal end of the light guide (depicted in FIG. 2),
wherein the entry surface is adjacent the light source (depicted in FIG. 2); and
a frame (optical dome 54/ 55, FIG. 2) that defines an air gap (space 52, FIG. 1) around at least 70% of a length of the light guide (depicted in FIG. 1).
Regarding Claim 2, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein the frame further defines a cavity (FIG. 1 depicts interior space of the optical window defined by inner surface 54’) for receiving the camera (par. 37-38 disclose imager is received in open air space and images via the optical window, par. 39 discloses imaging portions of the imager may be recessed from optical window, i.e. something is set back or built into the surface of the dome, par. 50 discloses imager is disposed and recessed in relation to optical window, i.e. recessed within a cavity).
Regarding Claim 3, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein the frame and the light guide are formed from the same transparent material (par. 63 discloses dome may be substantially transparent, par. 37 discloses window made of plastic, par. 42 discloses dome made of plastic).
Regarding Claim 4, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein a surface area of the entry surface is less than a surface area of the exit surface (FIG. 2 depicts external surface being more outer than the inner surface, i.e. having a larger surface area).
Regarding Claim 5, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein a center of the exit surface is positioned anteriorly from a center of the entry surface (FIG. 2 depicts external surface center in front of the inner surface center).
Regarding Claim 6, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein at least one of the entry surface or the exit surface is textured to cause diffusion of light from the light source (FIG. 2, par. 50-51 disclose surfaces of optical window are configured to have a shape that allows for the reflection, i.e. diffusion, of a certain percentage of light, as depicted in FIG. 2; par. 61 discloses shape of window surface may be deformed and/ or flattened, i.e. textured).
Regarding Claim 7, Glukhovsky discloses
The video laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein at least one of the entry surface or the exit surface is formed as a concave or convex lens (FIG. 1, par. 41 disclose window has ellipsoid shape which is convex, moreover, it is inherent that a transparent piece of glass that disperses light rays, i.e. the optical window and its surfaces, is a lens).
Regarding Claim 15, Glukhovsky discloses
A video laryngoscope (imaging device 40, FIG. 1; par. 46 discloses device may be an endoscope device of some kind, i.e. video laryngoscope) comprising:
a display (image monitor 18, FIG. 1; par. 48 discloses connection between monitor and imaging device);
a handle (endoscope 400, FIG. 5; par. 66 discloses overall device may have a structure an endoscope, i.e. any proximal portion can be considered handle and handle is inherent);
an arm (main body 62, FIG. 1) extending distally from the handle (par. 44 discloses main body may be tube of an endoscope which extends distally);
a camera (imager 46) positioned at a distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1);
a light source (illumination sources 42) positioned at the distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1); and
a unibody plug (optical system 10) positioned at the distal end of the arm (depicted in FIG. 1), the unibody plug comprising:
a light guide (optical window 54, FIG. 1) formed of a solid transparent material (par. 42 discloses window is transparent),
the light guide comprising:
an entry surface (inner surface 54') at a proximal end of the light guide (depicted in FIG. 2),
the entry surface having a first center and a first surface area (FIG. 2 depicts inner surface center and surface area);
an exit surface (external surface 54'') at the distal end of the light guide (depicted in FIG. 2),
the exit surface having: a second center positioned anteriorly from the first center of the entry surface (FIG. 2 depicts external surface center in front of the inner surface center); and
a second surface area that is substantially the same as the first surface area of the entry surface (depicted in FIG. 2); and
a frame (optical dome 54/55, FIG. 2) formed of the solid transparent material (par. 63 discloses dome may be substantially transparent), the frame defining:
an air gap (space 52, FIG. 1) around at least 90% of a length of the light guide (depicted in FIG. 1); and
a cavity (FIG. 1 depicts interior space of the optical window defined by inner surface 54’) that receives the camera (par. 37-38 disclose imager is received in open air space and images via the optical window, par. 39 discloses imaging portions of the imager may be recessed from optical window, i.e. something is set back or built into the surface of the dome, par. 50 discloses imager is disposed and recessed in relation to optical window, i.e. recessed within a cavity).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL HADI ABBASI whose telephone number is (571)272-4076. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 am - 5:00 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 at (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.
/ABDUL HADI ABBASI/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/RYAN N HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights