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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/22/2026 has been entered. Claims 21, 23-32, and 34-42 are pending in the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a first protrusion” and “a second protrusion” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the phrase/feature “a first protrusion end adjacent to a first slot of the elongate slot, (ii) a second protrusion end adjacent to a second slot end of the elongate slot” is not found in the specification. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 21, 23-32, and 34-42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention the phrase “each of the elongate protrusions includes: (i) a first protrusion end adjacent to a first slot of the elongate slot, (ii) a second protrusion end adjacent to a second slot end of the elongate slot, and (iii) a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends” is confusing since “a first protrusion” and “a second protrusion” is not found in the specification and is not identified with a reference number. Also, “raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends” is not found either.
The closet support for the protrusion(s) examiner can find in the instant specification [00041] is: “A first side of detent slot (155) includes a first proximal detent protrusion (156), and an opposed second side of detent slot (155) includes a second proximal detent protrusion (159) and a distal detent protrusion (160)” (instant specification [00041]). However, as the slot claimed “an elongate slot disposed in the deck and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough” is presumably the “Arcuate knife slot (218) is configured to slidably receive curved knife (32) distally therethrough” (instant specification [0056]). Is the elongate slot the detent slot or the knife slot?
Also, the specification/drawings have several features that could also be “a first protrusion” and “a second protrusion” – “first circular opening (220) and protrudes away from deck (210)”, raised annular surface (226), “Raised ridge surfaces (230)”, “pair of cleats (240)”, and “gap post (232)” [00059-00060], figs. 6-8. What feature (ridges, cleats, post, detents for the detent slot and etc.) is “a first protrusion” and “a second protrusion”? What is the “raised surface” (raised annular surface or Raised ridge or some other feature). It is not clear what the elongate slot, protrusion(s), and raised surface features are directed to.
As claimed, “a first protrusion”, “a second protrusion”, and “raised surface” are terms/features is broader than what is stated in the specification and/or is a mis-match of the specification, drawings and claims resulting in confusion and lack of support. Presumably the elongate slot is the arcuate knife slot 218. Appropriate correction is required.
Moreover, claims 21 and 39 recites the limitation "a pair of elongate protrusions…each of the elongate protrusions includes: a first protrusion…a second protrusion". How many protrusions are being claimed? Are there two pairs- four in total? Is the recitation “a pair of elongate protrusions…along opposed sides of the elongate slot” two or four in total? As claimed one/first protrusion is on one side and the other/second protrusion is on the other/opposed side but not clear how one protrusion includes a first and second protrusion. The phrase “the elongate protrusions includes: a first protrusion…a second protrusion" is confusing since “the elongate protrusion” should not be two protrusions unless there is two pairs of protrusions on each side of the slot.
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.
Claim 39 is 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.
Claims 39 recites the limitations “the elongate protrusion” and "the raised surfaces". There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. The prior recited phrase “a pair of elongate protrusions” does not match “the elongate protrusion” in singular/plural and likewise the prior recited phrase “a raised surface” does not match “the raised surfaces” in singular/plural. How many protrusions and raised surfaces are being claimed?
Claim Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: In claim 21, the phrase “a first slot of the elongate slot” appears to be a typographical error and should be recited - - a first slot end of the elongate slot - -. Appropriate correction is required. Also, see 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) issues above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
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 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.
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) 21, 34-35, and 39-42 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) in view of Huitema (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0297223).
Regarding claims 21 and 41-42, Williamson discloses (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) a cartridge (11) for use with a surgical instrument (10), the cartridge (11) comprising:(a) a body (as seen in Figure 4 and Figure 5); (b) a deck (13) defined by the body and configured to clamp tissue (16) against an anvil (14; as seen in Figure 6); (c) a plurality of staple openings (12) disposed in the deck (13) and configured to house a plurality of staples (see Column 3, line 22-25); (d) an elongate slot (21) disposed in the deck (13) and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough (see Column 4, line 06-11); and (e) a pair of elongate protrusions (18) arranged on the deck (13) and extending along opposed sides of the elongate slot (21), wherein the elongate protrusions (18) are configured to directly contact and compress tissue (16) clamped between the cartridge and the anvil (see Column 4, line 06-14), wherein each of the elongate protrusions (18) includes: (i) a first protrusion end adjacent to a first slot of the elongate slot, (ii) a second protrusion end adjacent to a second slot end of the elongate slot (see Column 3, line 43-58, Column 4, line 06-14, figs. 1-5), and (iii) a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (distal end of cartridge deck in fig. 1 shows ridge surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends adjacent to the knife slot, fig. 1).
Williamson fails to disclose the raised surfaces are interconnected by an intermediate raised surface and wherein the raised surface of each elongate protrusion extends continuously at a constant height relative to the deck and In the alternative, if it can be argued that Williamson fails to disclose having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot –
Huitema et al. teaches a similar a staple cartridge (342) with deck (390) with an elongate slot (fig. 12) disposed in the deck (390) and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough, the deck (390) having a raised surface (ridge 315) that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (V-shaped portions 314) and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot and teaches ridge 515 which forms a perimeter protrusion, ridge 615 with first and second protrusion ends (614/613), [0299-0305], figs. 12-13 and 16-18) and teaches a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (ridges 2851, ridges 2951, lateral sidewalls 3617/3717) and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot –
ridges 2851, ridges 2951 with “angled portions 2954 which extend inwardly and proximally, straight portions 2955 which extend longitudinally, and angled portions 2956 which extend inwardly and distally” along with teaching the protrusions/ridges having different heights on portions of the ridges or gaps to aid in gripping tissue ([0314-0315] figs. 56-58), lateral sidewalls 3617/3717 with raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends ([0339-0342], fig. 70-74 and 81), projections 3324 ([0368-0370], fig. 67), and also projections 5124 ([0370-0372], figs. 88-89). Huitema et al. also teaches having a raised surface (2014 or ramps 3614’/3614’’) that extends continuously between first and second protrusion ends (2053 [0310, 0342], figs. 55, 70-71, and 81).
Huitema et al. states: “sloped surface 2014 can comprise a radiused surface. In various instances, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise an angled surface. In certain instances, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise a concave surface and/or a convex surface. In at least one instance, as illustrated in FIG. 55, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise a distal concave surface which transitions into a flat, angled surface which transitions into a proximal convex surface, for example [0310] …ridges 2951 extending from the deck 2911 on a first side of the longitudinal slot 2915 can comprise a mirror image of the ridges 2951 extending from the deck on a second side of the longitudinal slot 2915” [0315]… cartridge body 3610 can further include ramps 3614′ and 3614″ [0338]
Given the teachings of Williamson to have protrusions on both sides of a knife slot and a raised surface that extends between the first and second protrusion ends, it 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 to modify the having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot to have better tissue gripping (avoid slipping), ensure tissue gets stapled at the end of the cartridge, and/or for having different gaps/height portions for improved gripping purposes as taught by Huitema et al.
Regarding claim 34, Williamson discloses (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) a surgical instrument (10), comprising:(a) an instrument body (see Column 2, line 28-33); (b) a shaft (17) extending distally from the instrument body; and (c) an end effector (as seen in Figure 1 and Figure 4) operatively coupled with the shaft (17), wherein the end effector includes:(i) a support, and(ii) a cartridge unit (11) removably coupled with the support, wherein the cartridge unit (11) includes:(A) an anvil (14) fixed relative to the support and having a plurality of staple-forming pockets (15), and (B) a cartridge housing (as seen in Figure 5) defined by the cartridge (11) of claim 21, wherein the cartridge housing (as seen in Figure 5) is selectively actuatable relative to the support and the anvil (14) to clamp tissue (16) between the anvil (14) and deck (13).
Regarding claim 35, Williamson discloses wherein the deck (13) is orthogonal to a longitudinal axis of the shaft (as seen in Figure 4 and Figure 5).
Regarding claim 39, Williamson discloses (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) a surgical instrument (10), comprising:(a) an instrument body (see Column 2, line 28-33); (b) a shaft (17) extending distally from the instrument body; and (c) an end effector (as seen in Figure 1 and Figure 4) operatively coupled with the shaft (17), wherein the end effector (as seen in Figure 1 and Figure 4) includes:(i) a support, (ii) an anvil (14) fixed relative to the support and including a plurality of staple-forming pockets (15), and (iii) a cartridge housing (11) selectively actuatable relative to the support and the anvil (14) to clamp tissue (16) against the anvil (14), wherein the cartridge housing (11) includes:(A) a body (see Figure 4), (B) a deck (13) defined by the body (as seen in Figure 4) and configured to clamp tissue (16) against an anvil (14), (C) a plurality of staple openings (12) disposed in the deck (13) and configured to house a plurality of staples (see Column 3, line 22-25), (D) an elongate slot (21) disposed in the deck (13) and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough (see Column 4, line 06-11), and (E) a pair of elongate protrusions (18) arranged on the deck (13) and extending along opposed sides of the elongate slot (21), wherein the elongate protrusions (21) are configured to directly contact and compress tissue (16) clamped between the cartridge (11) and the anvil (14), each of the elongate protrusions (18) includes: (i) a first protrusion end adjacent to a first slot of the elongate slot, (ii) a second protrusion end adjacent to a second slot end of the elongate slot (see Column 3, line 43-58, Column 4, line 06-14, figs. 1-5), and (iii) a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (distal end of cartridge deck in fig. 1 shows ridge surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends adjacent to the knife slot, fig. 1).
In the alternative, if it can be argued that Williamson fails to disclose having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot –
Huitema et al. teaches a similar a staple cartridge (342) with deck (390) with an elongate slot (fig. 12) disposed in the deck (390) and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough, the deck (390) having a raised surface (ridge 315) that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (V-shaped portions 314) and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot and teaches ridge 515 which forms a perimeter protrusion, ridge 615 with first and second protrusion ends (614/613), [0299-0305], figs. 12-13 and 16-18), ridges 2851, ridges 2951 with “angled portions 2954 which extend inwardly and proximally, straight portions 2955 which extend longitudinally, and angled portions 2956 which extend inwardly and distally” along with having different heights on portions of the ridges or gaps to aid in gripping tissue ([0314-0315] figs. 56-58), lateral sidewalls 3617/3717 with raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends ([0339-0342], fig. 70-74 and 81), projections 3324 ([0368-0370], fig. 67), and also projections 5124 ([0370-0372], figs. 88-89). Huitema et al. also teaches having a raised surface (2014 or ramps 3614’/3614’’) that extends continuously between first and second protrusion ends (2053 [0310, 0342], figs. 55, 70-71, and 81).
Given the teachings of Williamson to have protrusions on both sides of a knife slot and a raised surface that extends between the first and second protrusion ends, it 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 to modify the having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot to have better tissue gripping (avoid slipping), ensure tissue gets stapled at the end of the cartridge, and/or for having different gaps/height portions for improved gripping purposes as taught by Huitema et al.
Regarding claim 40, Williamson discloses (see Figure 4 and Figure 5) wherein the deck (13) faces distally such that the elongate slot (21) has a length that extends transversely to a longitudinal axis (20) of the shaft (17).
Claims 23, 27-32, and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) in view of Huitema (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0297223)
Regarding claims 23 and 36, Williamson discloses all of the elements of the current invention as stated above including each of the elongate protrusions (18) includes: (i) a first protrusion end adjacent to a first slot of the elongate slot, (ii) a second protrusion end adjacent to a second slot end of the elongate slot (see Column 3, line 43-58, Column 4, line 06-14, figs. 1-5), and (iii) a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (distal end of cartridge deck in fig. 1 shows ridge surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends adjacent to the knife slot, fig. 1). Williamson discloses all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except for the explicit disclosure of a staple cartridge for use with a surgical stapler comprising a body that is curved and comprise an arcuate slot and In the alternative, if it can be argued that Williamson fails to disclose having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot –
Huitema teaches (as seen in Figure 7, Figure 70 and Figure 103) a cartridge (142; 3600; 21000) for use with a surgical instrument (10), the cartridge (142; 3600; 21000) comprising a curved body (21010); (b) a deck (21012) defined by the curved body (21010) and configured to clamp tissue against an anvil (120; 21060); and an arcuate slot (21045) disposed in the deck (21012) and Huitema et al. teaches a similar a staple cartridge (342) with deck (390) with an elongate slot (fig. 12) disposed in the deck (390) and configured to slidably receive a knife therethrough, the deck (390) having a raised surface (ridge 315) that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends (V-shaped portions 314) and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot and teaches ridge 515 which forms a perimeter protrusion, ridge 615 with first and second protrusion ends (614/613), [0299-0305], figs. 12-13 and 16-18), ridges 2851, ridges 2951 with “angled portions 2954 which extend inwardly and proximally, straight portions 2955 which extend longitudinally, and angled portions 2956 which extend inwardly and distally” along with having different heights on portions of the ridges or gaps to aid in gripping tissue ([0314-0315] figs. 56-58), lateral sidewalls 3617/3717 with raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends ([0339-0342], fig. 70-74 and 81), projections 3324 ([0368-0370], fig. 67), and also projections 5124 ([0370-0372], figs. 88-89). Huitema et al. also teaches having a raised surface (2014 or ramps 3614’/3614’’) that extends continuously between first and second protrusion ends (2053 [0310, 0342], figs. 55, 70-71, and 81).
Huitema et al. states: “sloped surface 2014 can comprise a radiused surface. In various instances, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise an angled surface. In certain instances, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise a concave surface and/or a convex surface. In at least one instance, as illustrated in FIG. 55, the sloped surface 2014 can comprise a distal concave surface which transitions into a flat, angled surface which transitions into a proximal convex surface, for example [0310] …ridges 2951 extending from the deck 2911 on a first side of the longitudinal slot 2915 can comprise a mirror image of the ridges 2951 extending from the deck on a second side of the longitudinal slot 2915” [0315]… cartridge body 3610 can further include ramps 3614′ and 3614″ [0338]
Given the teachings of Williamson to have protrusions on both sides of a knife slot and a raised surface that extends between the first and second protrusion ends, it 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 to modify the having a raised surface that extends continuously between the first and second protrusion ends and there is a first and second protrusion on both sides of the elongate slot and have the staple cartridge body that curved with an arcuate slot, to enter curved/angle areas better, grasp curved tissue, have better tissue gripping (avoid slipping), ensure tissue gets stapled at the end of the cartridge, and/or for having different gaps/height portions for improved gripping purposes as taught by Huitema et al. Also, protrusions and a arcuate slot are equivalent structures known in the art. Therefore, because these two stapler cartridges were art-recognized- equivalents before the effective filling date of the applicant's claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to substitute a curved stapler cartridge with protrusions for a linear stapler cartridge.
Regarding claim 27, Huitema discloses (as seen in Figure 7, Figure 70 and Figure 103) a plurality of raised protrusions (113; 114; 115) arranged on the deck (21012), wherein the raised protrusions (113; 114; 115) are laterally offset from the elongate slot (21045) and are configured to engage tissue (as seen in Figure 7, Figure 70 and Figure 103).
Regarding claim 28, Huitema discloses (as seen in Figure 7, Figure 70 and Figure 103) wherein each of the raised protrusions (113; 114; 115) wraps at least partially around at least a portion of an adjacent staple opening (184).
Regarding claim 29, Huitema discloses (see Figure 8) wherein at least some of the raised protrusions (113; 114; 115) include a first end that wraps at least partially around an end portion of a first staple opening (184), and an opposed second end that wraps at least partially around an end portion of a second staple opening (see Figure 8.
Regarding claim 30, Huitema discloses (see Figure 74) wherein the first end is connected with the second end by a recessed bridge portion (3817).
Regarding claim 31, Huitema discloses (see Figure 49) wherein the plurality of raised protrusions (113; 114; 115) comprises a plurality of first raised protrusions (2755’) and at least one second raised protrusion (2755”), wherein the at least one second raised protrusion (2755”) has a greater maximum height relative to the deck (21012) than the first raised protrusions (see Paragraph 0335).
Regarding claim 32, Huitema discloses (see Figure 55) wherein the at least one second raised protrusion (2755”) is located between the end of the elongate slot (21045) and a corresponding end of the deck (21012).
Regarding claim 37, Huitema discloses wherein the elongate protrusions (113; 114; 115) extend arcuately along the arcuate slot (see Paragraph 0458).
Regarding claim 38, Huitema discloses wherein each of the elongate protrusions (113; 114; 115) extends from a first end of the elongate slot (21045) to an opposed second end of the elongate slot (as seen in Figure 58).
Claims 23-24, 27-32, and 36-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) in view of Schwemberger et al. (U.S. Pub. No. US 20050139634 A1) and further in view of Kostrzewski (U.S. Pub. No. US 20100213240 A1) OR in the alternative - Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) in view of Huitema (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0297223) in view of Schwemberger et al. (U.S. Pub. No. US 20050139634 A1) and further in view of Kostrzewski (U.S. Pub. No. US 20100213240 A1).
Regarding claim 23-24, 27-32, and 36-38, Williamson discloses all of the elements of the current invention as stated above except for the explicit disclosure of a pin opening defined in the deck adjacent to the first slot end or the second slot end of the elongate slot, wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin therethrough and a staple cartridge for use with a surgical stapler comprising a body that is curved and comprise an arcuate slot.
Schwemberger et al. teaches a similar surgical stapler (20, figs. 1-4) having a staple cartridge (26) for use with a surgical stapler (20) comprising a body that is curved (C-shaped [0045-0047]) and comprise an arcuate slot (199 [0055]) and a pin opening (143/144) defined in the deck adjacent to the first slot end or the second slot end of the elongate slot, ([0047], figs. 4-6), wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin (125/124) therethrough ([0043-0047, 0065-0067, 0079-0084, 0090-0091], figs. 1-8 and 39-42).
Kostrzewski also teaches a similar surgical stapler (100, figs. 1-4) having a staple cartridge (132) for use with a surgical stapler (100) comprising a body that is curved (C-shaped) and comprise an arcuate slot ([0038-0043], figs. 1-4) and a pin opening defined in the deck adjacent to the first slot end or the second slot end of the elongate slot, (at 146 [0043], fig. 4), wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin (148) therethrough ([0038-0045], figs. 1-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filling date of the applicant's claimed invention, to have modified Williamson to incorporate the disclosure of Schwemberger et al. and/or Kostrzewski to construct a staple cartridge comprising a body that is curved and comprise an arcuate slot and a pin opening defined in the deck adjacent to an end of the elongate slot, wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin therethrough. Prior art Schwemberger et al. and Kostrzewski both illustrate that a staple cartridge comprising a curved body and an arcuate slot with a pin opening defined in the deck adjacent to an end of the elongate slot, wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin therethrough is an equivalent structure known in the art and using a pin to help grip tissue is a common use. Therefore, because these two stapler cartridges (with sliding pins) were art-recognized- equivalents before the effective filling date of the applicant's claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious to substitute a curved stapler cartridge having a pin opening defined in the deck adjacent to an end of the elongate slot, wherein the pin opening is configured to slidably receive a pin therethrough for a linear stapler cartridge.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25-26 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious a surgical stapling device comprising all the structural and functional limitations and further comprising, amongst other limitations/features, a raised annular surface extending circumferentially about the pin opening such that the raised surface is disposed on diametrically opposed sides of the pin opening, wherein the raised annular surface is configured to directly contact and clamp tissue against the anvil. Though Williamson (U.S. Patent No. 5,452,837) and Huitema (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0297223) teache having a plurality of protrusions on a cartridge deck on both sides of a knife slot for gripping tissue they fail to teach having a raised annular surface extending circumferentially about the pin opening such that the raised surface is disposed on diametrically opposed sides of the pin opening, wherein the raised annular surface is configured to directly contact and clamp tissue against the anvil and it would not be obvious to modify the deck to include a raised annular surface extending circumferentially about the pin opening such that the raised surface is disposed on diametrically opposed sides of the pin opening, wherein the raised annular surface is configured to directly contact and clamp tissue against the anvil since having the raised surface all the way around the pin slot would require modifying the clamping mechanism, the deck and the pin aperture and one of ordinary skill would recognize that a the raised surface all the way around the pin slot creates extra gripping at the distal end of the cartridge and around the pin as well as preventing tissue from entering the pin slot. Having the efficiency and enhanced gripping of the added raised surface all the way around the pin slot provides an effective clamping and compressive healing closure of a surgical area.
While various features of the claimed subject matter are found individually in the prior art, a skilled artisan would have to include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed subject matter, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971). There is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine or modify the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention, and thus obviousness would not be proper. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21, 23-32, and 34-42 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on all new 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ) issues, specification, claim, and drawing objections and all of the references applied (combination of references) 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 ROBERT LONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3864. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9am-5pm, 8-9pm (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, SHELLEY SELF can be reached at (571) 272-4524. 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.
/ROBERT F LONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731