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
In response to the amendment filed on 3/9/2026, claims 1-4 and newly added claims 5-12 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 5-6, filed 3/9/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) under Dejima et al (US 2008/0051631) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. 112 in view of the amendments to the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“the end of a sheath” in lines 1-2 should instead recite - - an end of a sheath - - to provide antecedent basis;
“connected to a distal end of the first flexible member” in line 18 should recite - - connected to the distal end of the first flexible member - - as the distal end was already defined in line 3; and
“connected to a distal end of the second flexible member” in lines 20-21 should recite - - connected to the distal end of the second flexible member - - as the distal end was already defined in line 10.
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 1-12 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 1 recites “a wire guide extending inwardly of the opening” lines 1-2 of the last paragraph. It is unclear which opening this limitation is referring to as there were previously two openings defined (the housing comprising an opening and an opening in the first actuator).
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the cap further comprises a third opening". This term would imply the cap comprises a first and second opening as well. However, no first and second openings have been introduced or claimed. It is unclear in claim 6 how many openings are required by the cap due to the term “third”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the first opening of the cap" and “the second opening of the cap”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the first and second openings”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim(s) 2-5, 8, 9, 11, 12 is/are rejected as being dependent on, and failing to cure the deficiencies of, their rejected respective parent claims.
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 KATHERINE M SHI whose telephone number is (571)270-5620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs, 8-5 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 on (571)272-4695. 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.
/KATHERINE M SHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights