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 .
The current application has the effective filing date of 04/18/2024 according to the priority chain on the record.
Claim Status
Claims 16-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 03/25/2026.
Elected Invention I: claims 1-15 are examined below.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitations are:
“anchor insertion assembly” in claims 1, 4-5 and 16
“anchor portion” in claims 1, 5 and 16
“anchor assembly” in claim 16
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Such claim limitation is:
“finger-mountable work channel defining assembly” in claims 1 and 16.
Because this claim limitation is not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it is not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harari WO 2018/109755 A1 (hereinafter “Harari”, provided by the Applicant) in view of Kim et al. US 2022/0175417 A1 (hereinafter “Kim”).
PNG
media_image1.png
410
491
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Harari discloses an anchoring device (Abstract, exemplary as shown in Figs. 1A, 18A-18J) comprising:
a finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (Fig. 1A: 100; see pg. 9, ll.9-14) defining two side walls (142) joined at an end wall (144), said finger-mountable work channel (100) defining assembly defining a finger mounting axis (Fig. 1D: 140; see pg. 9, ll.28-31), said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) defining a work channel axis (154) along one of said side walls (142), said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) defining an aperture (148) lying generally in an aperture plane (149; see pg. 9, ll.15-31) angled with respect to said finger mounting axis (140) and with respect to said work channel axis (154),
an anchor insertion assembly (300) arranged for axial displacement (see pg. 3, ll.25-27 “an anchor insertion assembly arranged for axial displacement along the work channel axis with respect to the aperture”) along said work channel axis (154) with respect to said aperture (148) so as to intersect said aperture plane (149); and
an anchor assembly (800) including at least an anchoring portion (830) and a flexible elongate portion (820) attached thereto, said anchoring portion having a pre-anchoring operative orientation and an anchoring operative orientation (pg. 13, ll.27-pg.14, ll.3 “anchor assembly 800 … has two operative orientations, a non-compressed state, defining a pre-anchoring operative orientation, and a compressed state, defining an anchoring operative orientation.”).
Harari does not disclose said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) defining at least one protrusion adjacent to said aperture. Kim, a prior art reference in the field of trocar instrument devices, discloses the device comprising a body 210 (Fig. 3A) that is held by a user’s hands or fingers, the body comprising an anti-slip portion 211 (Fig. 3B), that can include an anti-slip pad, a plurality of protrusions, etc. so as to prevent a user’s finger from sliding on the body 210 ([0056]). In view of this, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to modify Harari’s finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (148) to include a protrusion adjacent the aperture, in view of Kim; the motivation for doing so is to include an anti-slip feature when the user’s finger is inserted in the finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100 as shown in Fig.1E).
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Harari in view of Kim discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1 comprising a protrusion for preventing a finger from sliding relative to the aperture 16, but does not disclose wherein said at least one protrusion is a tooth having a generally tapered shape, and wherein said at least one protrusion extends in an axial direction with respect to said aperture. However, modifying the particular shape and the positioning of the protrusion would have been an obvious design to a person of ordinary skill in the art because Kim explicitly states that “the anti-slip portion 211 is not limited to the proposed embodiment, but may be changed to various configurations such as an anti-slip pad, a plurality of protrusions, uneven portions and the like as long as they can prevent a finger from sliding on the body 210.” As such, modifying the protrusion to a tooth having a generally tapered shape and placing the protrusion to extend in an axial direction with respect to finger aperture 16 would have been within the teachings of Kim [0056].
Regarding claim 4, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said anchor insertion assembly (300) is arranged for limited axial displacement along said work channel axis (154) with respect to said aperture (148) so as to intersect said aperture plane (149). (see Figs. 4A-4B and pg. 12, ll.9-15 “As seen in Figs. 4A and 4B, both first and second housing portions 310 and 320 include multiple structural internal ribs 400, which define, inter alia, respective sockets 402 and 404 for together accommodating button 332 and permitting limited axial translation thereof along an axis 410.”)
Regarding claim 5, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said anchoring portion (830) is displaceable along said work channel axis (154) across said aperture plane (149) by said anchor insertion assembly while in said pre-anchoring operative orientation. (see Claim 3 “said anchoring portion being displaceable along said work channel axis across said aperture plane by said anchor insertion assembly while in said pre-anchoring operative orientation.”)
Regarding claim 6, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said finger mounting axis (140) lies in a finger mounting axis plane (153), said work channel axis (154) lies in a work channel axis plane (155), which is parallel to said finger mounting axis plane (153) and said aperture plane (149) is orthogonal to said mutually parallel finger mounting axis plane and to said work channel axis plane (see Fig. 1D and pg. 9, ll.28-col.10, ll.3 “which is parallel to the finger mounting axis plane 153 and the aperture plane 149 is orthogonal to the mutually parallel finger mounting axis plane 153 and to the work channel axis plane 155.”).
Regarding claim 7, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said work channel axis (154) is angled with respect to said finger mounting axis (140). (As shown in Fig. 1E, and pg. 9, ll. 25-27 “axis 154 is preferably angled with respect to the finger axis 140 by 7 degrees and to aperture plane 149 by 40 degrees.”)
Regarding claim 8, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) defines a finger anchoring location engagement portion (150, 152) lying generally in an orientation angled with respect to said work channel axis (154).
Regarding claim 9, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) is configured to be either right or left hand specific. (pg. 4, ll.11 left or right hand specific; Figs. 1A-1B is right hand specific, and Figs. 2A-2B is left hand specific)
Regarding claim 10, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) comprises a finger mount element (110), an elongate work channel defining element (120) and an insertion and stop defining element (130), which is fixedly mounted onto said elongate work channel defining element (see pg. 9, ll.9-14, and Fig. 1A-1B).
Regarding claim 11, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 10, wherein said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) is formed as a single piece of a partially flexible plastic material (pg. 9, ll.15-18) and is configured to enable an underside of an operator’s finger to engage an anchoring site (as shown in Fig.18A; also see pg. 4, ll.15-18 “the finger mountable work channel defining assembly is formed as a single piece of a partially flexible plastic material and defines two side walls joined at an end wall and underside wall and is configured to enable an underside of the operator's finger to engage an anchoring site.”).
Regarding claim 12, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 10, wherein said finger-mountable work channel defining assembly (100) defines forward and rearward throughgoing fixed mounting channels (150, 152) for fixedly mounting said elongate work channel defining element (120). (pg. 4, ll.18-21 “the work channel defining assembly defines forward and rearward throughgoing fixed mounting channels for fixedly mounting of the elongate work channel defining element”; also see pg. 9, ll.15-22)
Regarding claim 13, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 10, wherein said insertion and stop defining element (130) is a hollow element, which includes a generally cylindrical hollow portion (162) which communicates with a hollow funnel-shaped portion (166) defining an edge (168), which serves as a precise stop limiting the axial element of displacement of said anchor insertion assembly therethrough. (see pg. 10, ll.8-14)
Regarding claim 14, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 1, wherein said anchor insertion assembly (300) comprises first and second housing portions (310, 320) onto which are mounted an inner tube and button assembly (330) including a button (332) and an elongate tube (334) fixedly mounted thereto at an end (336) of said elongate tube (334). (Figs. 3A-3D and see pg. 11, ll.30- pg. 12, ll.2)
Regarding claim 15, Harari further discloses an anchoring device according to claim 14, further comprising a button guard element (360) pivotably mounted onto said first and second housing portions (310, 320) for selectable protective engagement with said button (332). (see pg. 12, ll.6-8)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHIRLEY X JIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7374. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00-4:00.
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, Benjamin Klein can be reached at 571-270-5213. 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.
/SHIRLEY X JIAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3792
April 23, 2026
Prosecution Insights