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 .
Status of Claims
This office action is in reply to the amendment filed on January 15, 2026. Claims 1 has been amended. No additional claims have been added. No further claims have been cancelled. Claim 20 was previously withdrawn. Claim interpretation previously made under 35 USC 112(f) is maintained. The previous 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 112(b) rejections have been overcome however in view of the amendment a new rejection is provided and discussed in greater detail below. Claims 1-19 are currently pending and have been fully examined.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 12-15 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Skelton Moran et al. (JP 2012103711, translation included herewith).
In reference to claim 1, Skelton Moran et al. disclose an insertion tool (Figure 4) comprising:
a housing (26);
an elongated section (48) at least partially within the housing (see portion of translation disclosing, “a hollow shaft 48 that can move through the mounting tube 26 toward or away from the distal end of the instrument”);
a bendable section (16) coupled to the elongated section (Figure 4), wherein the elongated section and the bendable section include a guide path (formed as the inner space within each of the elongated section and the bendable section, Figure 5) for an implement (i.e. wire 64, Figure 7) for gas turbine engine part inspection, service, or repair, the guide path extends from a proximal end (i.e. lower end of the tool in Figures 4, 7 and 8) of the insertion tool, through the elongated section, to a distal tip (24) of the bendable section (Figure 4);
an actuator (i.e. “motor or solenoid”, which is equivalent to the actuator assembly, as previously interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), see section 6a in the previous non-final office action) configured to actuate the bendable section from a retracted state at least partially positioned within the housing to an extended state outside of the housing, via causing an axial displacement of the elongated section within the housing (see portion of translation disclosing, “Alternatively, solenoids or motors can be connected to different wires, and these solenoids are actuated at a suitable time to rotate the segment. With the solenoid or motor activated, the rotation of the segment in one or both directions can be performed in one quick movement or in steps, or the rotation can be started and then Stop and then start again in the same direction in a series of steps or in an incremental series of movements. The axis can be advanced when the segment moves constantly or temporarily or when it does not move at any time.”); and
a tensioning assembly (i.e. “tension control member 50”, which is equivalent to the tensioning assembly, as previously interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), see section 6b in the previous non-final office action) configured to tension the bendable section into a predefined shape in the extended state (see portion of translation disclosing, “This relative movement of the second cam can cause the wire (s) in the tool to be tensioned or relaxed to determine the angle of the segments to each other and lock the segments in the restricted position.”);
wherein the elongated section is coupled to the housing via a rotation interface (formed from 20, 32 and 30, Figure 4, which are equivalent to the rotation interface, as previously interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), see section 6c in the previous non-final office action) configured to cause a rotation of the bendable section during the actuation of the bendable section from the retracted state to the extended state (see portions of translation disclosing, “When in the position shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the instrument is shown in the retracted position. The movement of the main cam that causes the slot 36 to move through the fixing pin 34 causes the main cam to move toward the housing and also to pivot in the direction indicated by the arrow 52. As a result of this movement, the tool is inserted into the housing” and “Although an embodiment has been described in which the tool is used in only one form, the tool can be used in a plurality of second forms, in which case measurements are made, for example, the tool is advanced or rotated.” Figures 4 and 5).
In reference to claim 2, Skelton Moran et al. show that the bendable section is nonplanar when rigidized (see Figures 15 and 16).
In reference to claim 3, Skelton Moran et al. show that the rotation of the bendable section is around a longitudinal axis of the housing (Figures 4 and 5).
In reference to claim 4, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the rotation interface comprises a cam (20) and a follower (formed from 34, 32 and 30, Figure 4), and the cam comprises a nonlinear groove (36, Figure 4).
In reference to claim 5, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the follower of the rotation interface is on the housing (at least from element 30) and the nonlinear groove is on (note, the definition of the term “on” is defined according to www.meriam-webster.com as being; “used as a function word to indicate position in close proximity with” see definition 1c. Since, nonlinear groove 36 is located on 20 which is “in close proximity with” elongated section 48, it meets the definition above and thus the imitation of the claim) the elongated section (48, Figure 4).
In reference to claim 6, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the nonlinear groove comprises at least one linear portion and at least one curved portion, at least two portions of different curvatures (see lower and middle portions of 36, Figure 4), at least one compound curve, or at least one reverse curve (lower curve of 36 in Figure 4).
In reference to claim 7, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the amount of rotation of the bendable section is nonlinear to the amount of axial displacement of the elongated section (Figures 4 and 5).
In reference to claim 8, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the rotation interface is configured to cause the rotation of the bendable section with the axial displacement of the elongated section relative to the housing (see portions of translation disclosing, “When in the position shown in FIGS. 3 and 4, the instrument is shown in the retracted position. The movement of the main cam that causes the slot 36 to move through the fixing pin 34 causes the main cam to move toward the housing and also to pivot in the direction indicated by the arrow 52. As a result of this movement, the tool is inserted into the housing” and “Although an embodiment has been described in which the tool is used in only one form, the tool can be used in a plurality of second forms, in which case measurements are made, for example, the tool is advanced or rotated.” Figures 4 and 5).
In reference to claim 12, Skelton Moran et al. show that the housing comprises an insertion tip (upper tip of 26 [see figure below] or at 28 [Figure 4]) and the bendable section is within (i.e. at a lower end thereof) the insertion tip in the retracted state.
[AltContent: textbox (Bendable section)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Rod)][AltContent: textbox (Elongated section)][AltContent: textbox (Housing)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Insertion tip)]
PNG
media_image1.png
436
486
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In reference to claim 13, Skelton Moran et al. show that the elongated section comprises a rod (see figure above) coupled to the bendable section (see figure above) and the rod pushes into the insertion tip to actuate the bendable section to the extended state (see figure above).
In reference to claim 14, Skelton Moran et al. show that the bendable section comprises a plurality of rigidizable links (16) forming a rigidizable guide tube (see Figures 4, 10, 15, 19 and 20).
In reference to claim 15, Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the plurality of rigidizable links is coupled via a plurality of non-planar hinge points (see portion of translation disclosing, “The segments are shown locked together with a degree of extreme relative movement, but this does not necessarily have to occur or do not abut, It will be understood that it may occur through the tension. In addition, the segments are shown moving in only one direction. Segments that rotate first in the first direction and then in the opposite second direction can be used in any of the described embodiments or methods or operating sequences. For example, a segment having a pivot point separated from the side can be used, as in the middle region. In this way, the segments extend in a straight line and can then be continuously rotated in one or the other direction relative to each other as the instrument is inserted, and the wires are first turned around. Pull in one direction around the moving point and then in the opposite direction. The segments are shown as separate pieces, but at least two segments may be replaced by plastic hollow tubes, alternatively or additionally, for example, to form notches in the tubes, as appropriate. They can be integrated with each other by an elastic tube from which parts have been removed. The notch can leave a side pivot point or pivot point separated from the side, such as in the middle.”, see Figures 4, 10, 15, 19 and 20).
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 9-11 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skelton Moran et al. (JP 2012103711, translation included herewith) in view of Stoy et al. (2011/0098758).
In reference to claim 9, Skelton Moran et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above, but lack,
a locking mechanism for locking a position of the elongated section within the housing.
However, Stoy et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar insertion tool (400, Figure 26) that further comprises a locking mechanism (formed as a spring [440] loaded pin [438], Figure 27, which meets the limitation of the locking mechanism, as previously interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), see section 6d in the previous non-final office action) for locking a position of an elongated section (420) within a housing (410, paragraph 118).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the device, of Skelton Moran et al., with the known technique of including the locking mechanism, as taught by Stoy et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that more effectively prevents retraction of the elongated section/rod upon release of a movable handle (see paragraph 118).
In reference to claim 10, modified Skelton Moran et al. disclose that the locking mechanism, as taught by Stoy et al., is configured to automatically engage and lock the position of the elongated section upon the rotation of the bendable section to a predefined angle (see paragraph 118).
In reference to claim 11, Stoy et al. also disclose further comprising a release switch for releasing the locking mechanism to actuate the bendable section to the retracted state (see paragraph 118 for disclosing that, "It should be noted that, there may be provided various structure to release ratchet mechanism 426 and secondary ratchet 436 in order to draw pusher rod 420 proximally to reuse surgical instrument 400.").
Claims 16 and 17 Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skelton Moran et al. (JP 2012103711, translation included herewith) in view of Galea et al. (2014/0243983).
In reference to claim 16, Skelton Moran et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above, but lack,
the tensioning assembly comprises:
a rope coupled to the bendable section;
a rope connection within the elongated section; and
a spring coupled to the rope connection such that with the axial displacement of the elongated section, tensioning force is applied to the bendable section via the rope and the spring.
However, Galea et al. teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a tensioning assembly that comprises:
a rope (133) coupled to a bendable section (152, Figures 9a and 13b);
a rope connection (i.e. opening within 150 that receives rope 131 therein, Figure 9a) within an elongated section (150); and
a spring (132) coupled to the rope connection (at least through the connection of parts therebetween) such that with the axial displacement of the elongated section, tensioning force is applied to the bendable section via the rope and the spring (paragraphs 44 and 46).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the tensioning assembly, of Skelton Moran et al., with the known technique of providing a tensioning assembly comprising the rope, the rope connection and the spring, as taught by Galea et al., and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that more effectively keeps tension on the wire and that can be releasably locked as needed by a user (paragraph 44).
In reference to claim 17, Galea et al. disclose that the spring is positioned around a portion of the elongated section (i.e. around 104, Figure 7c) and asserts a return force between the housing and the elongated section opposite to force applied by the actuator to retract the bendable section in the absence of the force from the actuator (paragraph 44).
Claims 18 and 19 are Finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Skelton Moran et al. (JP 2012103711, translation included herewith) in view of Hatakeyama (9585720).
In reference to claim 18, Skelton Moran et al. disclose the claimed invention as previously mentioned above and further disclose that the rotation interface comprises a motorized rotation joint (see portion of translation disclosing, “With the solenoid or motor activated, the rotation of the segment in one or both directions can be performed in one quick movement or in steps, or the rotation can be started and then Stop and then start again in the same direction in a series of steps or in an incremental series of movements.”), but lack,
a controller is configured to rotate, via the motorized rotation joint, the bendable section according to a predetermined sequence, with the actuation the bendable section from the retracted state to the extended state.
However, Hatakeyama teach that it is old and well known in the art at the time the invention was made to provide a similar insertion tool (400, Figure 26) that includes a rotation interface comprises a motorized (at 72) rotation joint (55), and a controller (82) is configured to rotate, via the motorized rotation joint, a bendable section (52) according to a predetermined sequence, with the actuation the bendable section from the retracted state to the extended state (Column 7, Lines 45-57).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to modify the device, of Skelton Moran et al., with the known technique of including the controller and assuming arguendo the motorized rotation joint, as taught by Hatakeyama, and the results would have been predictable. In this situation, one could provide a more advantageous and versatile device that more effectively allows the bending section to be bent in a desired direction by a desired angular amount (Column 7, Lines 54-57).
In reference to claim 19, Hatakeyama discloses that the controller is further configured to rotate, via the motorized rotation joint, the bendable section according to a different predetermined sequence, with the actuation of the bendable section from the extended state to the retracted state (Column 7, Lines 54-57).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference as previously applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter as specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Specifically, applicant further defined claim 1 with additional limitations pertaining to a guide path.
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 J SCRUGGS whose telephone number is (571)272-8682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6-2.
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, David Posigian can be reached at 313-446-6546. 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 J SCRUGGS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3723