DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Claims 1-20 as originally filed on 05/06/2024 are pending, and have been examined on the merits.
Claim Objections
3. Claims 3-6 & 13-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
a. In claim 3, line 3, the recitation of “the crown spine portion” should instead recite --the at least one crown spine portion--.
b. In claim 3, lines 4-5, the recitation of “the hinge” should instead recite --the at least one hinge--.
c. In claim 4, lines 2-3, the recitation of “the hub” should instead recite --the central hub--.
d. In claim 5, lines 2-3, the recitation of “the hub” should instead recite --the central hub--.
e. In claim 6, lines 5-6, the recitation of “at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled to” should instead recite -- at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled--.
f. In claim 13, line 3, the recitation of “the crown spine portion” should instead recite --the at least one crown spine portion--.
g. In claim 13, line 4, the recitation of “the hinge” should instead recite --the at least one hinge--.
h. In claim 14, line 2, the recitation of “the hub” should instead recite --the central hub--.
i. In claim 15, lines 5-6, the recitation of “at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled to” should instead recite -- at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 2 & 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
6. Claim 2 recites the limitation “substantially parallel” in line 2. The term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Clarification is required.
7. Claim 12 recites the limitation “substantially parallel” in line 2. The term “substantially” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Clarification is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-7, 9, 11-15, 17, & 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0307992 to Haverkost et al. (“Haverkost”).
10. Regarding claim 1, and with reference to FIG. 3 (reproduced below), Haverkost discloses a joint of an end effector of a medical probe, the end effector comprising:
a crown [distal section (40) comprising distal collar (48) with integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) extending therefrom - see ¶[[0094] (“the distal section 40 may be also be a laser cut from a straight hypotube to form a distal collar 48 with a plurality of tines or arms 50a, 50b, 50c (not shown in FIG. 2) (collectively, 50) extending proximally therefrom”)];
at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3] extending along a longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18) - ¶[0088]; FIG. 2], comprising a deployed position [expanded configuration] and delivery position [collapsed configuration] relative to the longitudinal axis [see ¶[0094] (“The proximal section 38 and the distal section 40 of the expandable frame 36 may be moved from the collapsed configuration into the expanded configuration shown in FIG. 2…”)], and comprising a first material [the tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) may be comprised of spring steel or nitinol - e.g., ¶[0094]]; and
PNG
media_image1.png
402
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 3 of Haverkost
at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c), each of which comprises a plurality of links (52a, 52b, 52c) - ¶’s [0094]-[0096], & [0106] (“the link 52 may be configured to engage an adjacent link to form a chain of links 52 having a plurality of pivotable hinge points between adjacent links 52, as shown in the intermediate section 42 of the expandable frame 36 in FIGS. 2 and 3. It is further contemplated that other coupling mechanisms besides hooks and apertures may be used to releasably couple and/or pivotably couple adjacent links and/or the intermediate section 42 to the proximal and/or distal section 38, 40”); FIGS. 3,6] coupling the at least one spine [any of (46a, 46b, 46c), respectively] to the crown [to any of tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c), respectively, that are integrally-formed with distal collar (48); NOTE: in summary, each of spines (46a, 46b, 46c) is respectively coupled to the tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c)/collar (48) forming the crown via respective hinges (54a, 54b, 54c); FIGS. 3-6], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c)] comprising a second material [polymer] different from the first material [spring steel or nitinol] [NOTE: as broadly as claimed, each link (52) of a strut (54) comprises a cutting element (20), which may comprise, e.g., a polymer, which is a material different from the spring steel or nitinol of the spine (the first material) as noted above; see, e.g., ¶’s [0085], [0093], [0096]; & FIG. 6; note also ¶’s [0155]-[0165] which describe myriad suitable materials].
11. Regarding claim 2, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38) - FIG. 3] being expandable from the delivery position [collapsed configuration], where the at least one spine is substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18)], to the deployed position [expanded configuration], where the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c)] bows outwardly from the longitudinal axis [clearly shown in FIG. 3], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c), each of which comprises a plurality of links (52a, 52b, 52c)] flexing in response to expansion between the delivery and the deployed positions of the at least one spine [e.g., ¶[0106]].
12. Regarding claim 3, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c)] comprising a spine distal end [the distal end of a tine/arm (46) that couples with the proximal end of its corresponding hinge/strut (54) - FIG. 3], and the crown comprises at least one crown spine portion [any of integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown extending proximally therefrom - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c)] coupling the spine distal end to the at least one crown spine portion [each strut (54) couples the distal end of a spine (46) to a corresponding proximal end of tine (50) - ¶[0106]; FIGS. 3, 6], the crown spine portion and the spine distal end being separated by a hinge gap [broadly, the gap/distance covered by each hinge/strut (54) and its associated links (52) - FIG. 3], the hinge gap covered [bridged] at least by the hinge [by the hinge/strut (54) and its associated links (52) - FIG. 3].
13. Regarding claim 4, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 3 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the crown comprising a central hub [distal collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], and the at least one crown spine portion defining at least one projection protruding away from the hub [any of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) extending proximally from collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], the at least one projection [(50)] comprising a width at a proximal end of the at least one projection which is approximately equal to a width of the spine [(46)] distal end [the width of the tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) is approximately equal to the width of the tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) - FIG. 3].
14. Regarding claim 5, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 3 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the crown comprising a central hub [distal collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], and the at least one crown spine portion defining at least one projection protruding away from the hub [any of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) extending proximally from collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], the at least one projection [(50)] being approximately coplanar with the central hub [(48)] [e.g., in a longitudinal direction at the point where the projection (50) extends from hub (48) - FIG. 3].
15. Regarding claim 6, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses at least one coupling member [loop or hook (70) of a single link or plurality of links - ¶’s [0096], [0106]; FIG. 6] extending at least partially through the at least one hinge [the loop/hook (70) is a partial extension of a link of the at least one hinge - ¶[0106]; FIGS. 3, 6], the crown defining at least one opening [the proximal end of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown includes an aperture engaged by the hook (70) - ¶[0106]; FIG. 6], the at least one coupling member [(70)] extending through the at least one opening [aperture] to couple the at least one coupling member [(70)] to the crown [to the proximal end of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown], and the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38)] comprising at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled to [see ¶[0106]; FIG. 6].
16. Regarding claim 7, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses at least one coupling member [loop or hook (70) of a single link or plurality of links - ¶’s [0096], [0106]; FIG. 6] extending at least partially through the at least one hinge [the loop/hook (70) is a partial extension of a link of the at least one hinge - ¶[0106]; FIGS. 3, 6], the at least one coupling member comprising polyester yarn [see ¶[0164] concerning the components of the expandable frame (36) being comprised of polyester yarns] and/or a plurality of links [(52a, 52b, 52c)] flexibly interconnected.
17. Regarding claim 9, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the first material and/or the crown comprising nitinol [both the tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) and the tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) may be comprised of spring steel or nitinol - e.g., ¶[0094]].
18. Regarding claim 11, and with reference to FIG. 3 (reproduced below), Haverkost discloses a medical probe comprising:
a tubular shaft [shaft (18) - ¶[0088]; FIG. 2] defining a longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18) - ¶[0088]; FIG. 2] and having a tubular shaft end [distal end of shaft (18) - FIG. 2]; and
an end effector [expandable frame (36) - FIGS. 2-3] coupled to the tubular shaft end [at proximal collar (44) - see FIG. 2], the end effector comprising:
a crown [distal section (40) comprising distal collar (48) with integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) extending therefrom - see ¶[[0094] (“the distal section 40 may be also be a laser cut from a straight hypotube to form a distal collar 48 with a plurality of tines or arms 50a, 50b, 50c (not shown in FIG. 2) (collectively, 50) extending proximally therefrom”)];
PNG
media_image1.png
402
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 3 of Haverkost
at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3] extending along the longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18) - ¶[0088]; FIG. 2], comprising a deployed position [expanded configuration] and delivery position [collapsed configuration] relative to the longitudinal axis [see ¶[0094] (“The proximal section 38 and the distal section 40 of the expandable frame 36 may be moved from the collapsed configuration into the expanded configuration shown in FIG. 2…”)], and comprising a first material [the tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) may be comprised of spring steel or nitinol - e.g., ¶[0094]]; and
at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c), each of which comprises a plurality of links (52a, 52b, 52c) - ¶’s [0094]-[0096], & [0106] (“the link 52 may be configured to engage an adjacent link to form a chain of links 52 having a plurality of pivotable hinge points between adjacent links 52, as shown in the intermediate section 42 of the expandable frame 36 in FIGS. 2 and 3. It is further contemplated that other coupling mechanisms besides hooks and apertures may be used to releasably couple and/or pivotably couple adjacent links and/or the intermediate section 42 to the proximal and/or distal section 38, 40”); FIGS. 3,6] coupling the at least one spine [any of (46a, 46b, 46c), respectively] to the crown [to any of tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c), respectively, that are integrally-formed with distal collar (48); NOTE: in summary, each of spines (46a, 46b, 46c) is respectively coupled to the tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c)/collar (48) forming the crown via respective hinges (54a, 54b, 54c); FIGS. 3-6], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c)] comprising a second material [polymer] different from the first material [spring steel or nitinol] [NOTE: as broadly as claimed, each link (52) of a strut (54) comprises a cutting element (20), which may comprise, e.g., a polymer, which is a material different from the spring steel or nitinol of the spine (the first material) as noted above; see, e.g., ¶’s [0085], [0093], [0096]; & FIG. 6; note also ¶’s [0155]-[0165] which describe myriad suitable materials].
19. Regarding claim 12, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38) - FIG. 3] being expandable from the delivery position [collapsed configuration], where the at least one spine is substantially parallel to the longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18)], to the deployed position [expanded configuration], where the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c)] bows outwardly from the longitudinal axis [clearly shown in FIG. 3], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c), each of which comprises a plurality of links (52a, 52b, 52c)] flexing in response to expansion between the delivery and the deployed positions of the at least one spine [e.g., ¶[0106]].
20. Regarding claim 13, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c)] comprising a spine distal end [the distal end of a tine/arm (46) that couples with the proximal end of its corresponding hinge/strut (54) - FIG. 3], and the crown comprises at least one crown spine portion [any of integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown extending proximally therefrom - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c)] coupling the spine distal end to the at least one crown spine portion [each strut (54) couples the distal end of a spine (46) to a corresponding proximal end of tine (50) - ¶[0106]; FIGS. 3, 6], the crown spine portion and the spine distal end being separated by a hinge gap [broadly, the gap/distance covered by each hinge/strut (54) and its associated links (52) - FIG. 3], the hinge gap covered [bridged] at least by the hinge [by the hinge/strut (54) and its associated links (52) - FIG. 3].
21. Regarding claim 14, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 13 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses the crown comprising a central hub [distal collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], and the at least one crown spine portion defining at least one projection protruding away from the hub [any of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) extending proximally from collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3], the at least one projection [(50)] being approximately coplanar with the central hub [(48)] [e.g., in a longitudinal direction at the point where the projection (50) extends from hub (48) - FIG. 3].
22. Regarding claim 15, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses at least one coupling member [loop or hook (70) of a single link or plurality of links - ¶’s [0096], [0106]; FIG. 6] extending at least partially through the at least one hinge [the loop/hook (70) is a partial extension of a link of the at least one hinge - ¶[0106]; FIGS. 3, 6], the crown defining at least one opening [the proximal end of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown includes an aperture engaged by the hook (70) - ¶[0106]; FIG. 6], the at least one coupling member [(70)] being flexible [Haverkost discloses that the expandable frame (36) (which includes the links) may be made from flexible materials - e.g., ¶’s [0156] (nitinol alloys), [0163] (fabric), [0164] (textile)] and extending through the at least one opening [aperture] to couple the at least one coupling member [(70)] to the crown [to the proximal end of the integrally-formed tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c) of the crown], and the at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38)] comprising at least one anchor point to which an end of the at least one coupling member is coupled to [see ¶[0106]; FIG. 6].
23. Regarding claim 17, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 11 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost further discloses a central plug [(44)] disposed proximal the at least one spine [FIGS. 2-3].
24. Regarding claim 18, and with reference to FIG. 3 (reproduced below), Haverkost discloses a medical probe comprising:
a tubular shaft [distal collar (48) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3] defining a longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of distal collar (48), which shares the longitudinal axis of shaft (18) - FIG. 2] and having a tubular shaft end [the proximal end of distal collar (48)]; and
an end effector [expandable frame (36) - FIGS. 2-3] comprising:
at least one spine [any one of tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) of proximal section (38) - ¶[0094]; FIG. 3] extending along a longitudinal axis [longitudinal axis of shaft (18) - ¶[0088]; FIG. 2], comprising a deployed position [expanded configuration] and delivery position [collapsed configuration] relative to the longitudinal axis [see ¶[0094] (“The proximal section 38 and the distal section 40 of the expandable frame 36 may be moved from the collapsed configuration into the expanded configuration shown in FIG. 2…”)], and comprising a first material [the tines/arms (46a, 46b, 46c) may be comprised of spring steel or nitinol - e.g., ¶[0094]]; and
PNG
media_image1.png
402
592
media_image1.png
Greyscale
FIG. 3 of Haverkost
at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c), each of which comprises a plurality of links (52a, 52b, 52c) - ¶’s [0094]-[0096], & [0106] (“the link 52 may be configured to engage an adjacent link to form a chain of links 52 having a plurality of pivotable hinge points between adjacent links 52, as shown in the intermediate section 42 of the expandable frame 36 in FIGS. 2 and 3. It is further contemplated that other coupling mechanisms besides hooks and apertures may be used to releasably couple and/or pivotably couple adjacent links and/or the intermediate section 42 to the proximal and/or distal section 38, 40”); FIGS. 3,6] coupling the at least one spine [any of (46a, 46b, 46c), respectively] to the tubular shaft end [to the proximal end of distal collar (48) via any of tines/arms (50a, 50b, 50c), respectively, that are integrally-formed with distal collar (48)], the at least one hinge [any of struts (54a, 54b, 54c)] comprising a second material [polymer] different from the first material [spring steel or nitinol] [NOTE: as broadly as claimed, each link (52) of a strut (54) comprises a cutting element (20), which may comprise, e.g., a polymer, which is a material different from the spring steel or nitinol of the spine (the first material) as noted above; see, e.g., ¶’s [0085], [0093], [0096]; & FIG. 6; note also ¶’s [0155]-[0165] which describe myriad suitable materials].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
25. 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.
26. The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
27. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haverkost in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0054192 to Beeckler et al. ("Beeckler").
28. Regarding claim 8, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 1 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost does not, however, disclose:
the at least one hinge comprising a shrinkable tube.
Beeckler, in a similar field of endeavor, relates to expandable assembly catheters [e.g., ¶[0002]]. More particularly, Beeckler teaches a basket catheter (10) comprising elongated resilient support elements (48) [¶’s [0088]-[0089]; FIG. 4] including hinges (28) that may be covered with a suitable covering (54), e.g., a thermoplastic polymer resin shrink wrap (PET) [shrinkable tube] [see ¶’s [0089]-[0092]; FIG. 5].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Haverkost such that the at least one hinge be covered with a known, art-recognized, & suitable covering, such as the thermoplastic polymer resin shrink wrap (PET) (or shrinkable tube) of Beeckler, so as to provide a covering/protection for the hinge.
29. Claims 10, 16, & 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haverkost in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2001/0009976 to Panescu et al. ("Panescu").
30. Regarding claims 10, 16, & 19, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claims 1, 11, & 18, respectively, for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost does not, however, disclose:
[claims 10 & 16] the at least one spine having at least one electrode coupled thereto such that the at least one electrode is configured to electrophysiologically map a tissue, ablate the tissue, or both map and ablate the tissue; nor
[claim 19] the at least one spine having at least one electrode coupled thereto.
Panescu, in a similar field of endeavor, relates to systems and methods for guiding or locating diagnostic or therapeutic elements in interior regions of the body [¶[0001]]. More particularly, Panescu teaches a locating probe (14) comprising a composite, three-dimensional basket structure including spline elements (20) assembled together by a distal hub (16) and a proximal base (18). Each spline (20) carries a number of electrodes (22) thereon for, e.g., mapping and ablation, navigation, and pacing [¶’s [0047]-[0049], [0054], [0134], [0137]; FIG. 2A]. Panescu teaches that the system can be used during the diagnosis or treatment of intravascular ailments, in association, for example, with angioplasty or atherectomy techniques [¶[0043]].
Given that the device of Haverkost is also used in, e.g., angioplasty procedures [e.g., ¶[0080]], it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Haverkost such that the at least one spine have at least one electrode coupled thereto such that the at least one electrode is configured to both map and ablate tissue, as taught by Panescu, since such a modification would provide the benefit/advantage of reliable and precise positioning of the device in proximity to desired tissue treatment locations.
31. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Haverkost in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0354364 to Bar-Tal et al. ("Bar-Tal") [made of record in Applicant’s 05/06/24 IDS].
32. Regarding claim 20, Haverkost discloses all of the limitations of claim 18 for the reasons set forth in detail (above) in the Office Action.
Haverkost does not, however, disclose:
wiring extending through the at least one hinge.
Bar-Tal, in a similar field of endeavor, relates to catheters comprising conducting elements that perform, e.g., simultaneously, a plurality of functions, including functioning as electromagnetic sensors (used to ascertain the location and/or orientation of the catheter), as electrodes for acquiring ECG signals from tissue, or passing ablating signals into tissue, and for measuring impedance, temperature, strain, and/or other relevant parameters [e.g., ¶[0035]].
More particularly, Bar-Tal teaches a basket catheter (22) comprising a basket (20) of splines (28) that is connected to a console (36) [¶[0041]; FIG. 1]. Bar-Tal further teaches that it was known to connect the conducting elements (24) disposed on the surface of each of the splines to the console (36) via a wire (42) which passes through the interior of the spline [¶[0043]].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Haverkost such that the at least one spine have conducting elements (e.g., electrodes) mounted thereon for performing various functions including, e.g., determining catheter location and/or orientation, acquiring ECG signals from tissue, or passing ablating signals into tissue, and for measuring impedance, temperature, strain, and/or other relevant parameters, so as to facilitate navigation/positioning of the device in proximity to desired tissue treatment locations, as well as to provide a practitioner with useful feedback concerning conditions at a target location (through sensor feedback) during treatment.
As modified such that the at least one spine of Haverkost have conducting elements (e.g., electrodes) mounted thereon, it would have likewise been obvious to route wires connecting to the conducting elements (e.g., electrodes) through the at least one spine (and the at least one hinge coupled thereto), since such a particular known, wire routing technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art, as clearly demonstrated by Bar-Tal, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to the known device of Haverkost/Bar-Tal, and the results (routing a wire from a component disposed on a spline to a proximal location (e.g., to a console)) would have been entirely predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Conclusion
33. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bradford C. Blaise whose telephone number is (571)272-5617. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8 AM-5 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Linda Dvorak can be reached on 571-272-4764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Bradford C. Blaise/Examiner, Art Unit 3794