DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on April 21, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 11-13 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 21, 2026.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1 (line 1) “useless should be deleted.
In claim 1 (line 6) “wing being” should recite –wings being--.
In claim 2 (line 2) “the bottom” should recite –a bottom”.
In claim 2 (line 4) “the top of the” should recite –a top of each--.
In claim 3 (line 1) “the side of the” should recite –a side of each--.
In claim 4 (line 1) “the edge of the” should recite –an edge of each--.
In claim 5 (line 2) “the tube” should recite –the pipe--.
In claim 5 (line 3) “the side” should recite –a side--.
In claim 7 (line 6) “the point” should recite –a point--.
In claim 7 (line 15) “Pi, and” should recite --P di,ϴ in the first place rectangular coordinate system, and --.
In claim 8 (line 4) “in the plane… the part” should recite –wherein in the plane… a part--.
In claim 9 (line 2) “the laser” should recite –a laser--.
For the purpose of examining the application, it is assumed that appropriate correction has been made.
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 1-3, 5, 6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Richard Wolf (JP 09-117413).
As to claim 1, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint made by removing parts of a pipe, characterized by comprising:
a first sub-joint 2”, two opposite sides of which are each provided with a rotation slot 34 and a rotary joint 31 protruding from the rotation slot;
a second sub-joint 1” provided with two protruding rotation wings 39 corresponding to each rotation slot, and a rotation interface 36 for the rotary joint to be embedded which is formed between the two rotation wings; the rotation wings being embedded into the rotation slot and capable of rotating along a slot wall of the rotation slot with the rotary joint as a rotation center;
wherein two opposite sides of the first sub-joint located between the two rotation slots are each provided with an engaging par 33, and the second sub-joint is provided with a corresponding engaged part 37; the engaging part and the engaged part being fitted with each other to prevent the first sub-joint and the second sub-joint from being separated (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 2, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein the rotary joint 31 is circular and is connected to a bottom of the rotation slot 34 through a joint root, and an obtuse angle is formed at the connection between the joint root and the bottom of the rotation slot; correspondingly, an obtuse angle is also formed at a top of each rotation wing 39; when the rotation wing rotates to a maximum angle, the top of the rotation wing and the bottom of the rotation slot coincide with each other (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 3, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein a side of each rotation wing 39 facing the slot wall of the rotation slot 34 has an arc-shaped edge, wherein the edge is formed as: part of a circle; or, part of an ellipse; or, part of a spline curve (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 5, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein the plane graphic formed by deploying the flexible joint along the outer surface of the pipe follows the following rules, that is, the edge of a part of the rotation wing 39 on a side facing the slot wall of the rotation slot 34 is an arc-shaped line, which is:
part of a circle; or
part of an ellipse, wherein the projection of the ellipse on the rotation plane of the flexible joint constitutes a part of a circle; or
a spline curve, the projection of which on the rotation plane of the flexible joint constitutes a part of a circle when the plane graphic covers the outer surface of the pipe (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 6, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein the plane graphic formed by deploying the flexible joint along the outer surface of the pipe follows the following rules, that is, the graphic corresponding to the rotary joint 31 is:
part of a circle; or
part of an ellipse; or
a spline curve, the projection of which on the rotation plane of the flexible joint constitutes a part of a circle when the plane graphic covers the outer surface of the pipe (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 8, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein at least a part of the plane graphic corresponding to the rotation wing 39 is a straight line, and the straight line is parallel to the axis of the pipe;
wherein in the plane graphic corresponding to the rotation slot 34, a part corresponding to the straight part of the rotation wing is also a straight line (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 9, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein the distance between the two straight lines is a cutting width of a laser used for removing parts of the pipe (Figures 4,6; abstract).
As to claim 10, Richard Wolf discloses a bending section for surgical instruments, characterized by comprising a plurality of flexible joints (Figures 4,6; abstract).
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Richard Wolf in view of Kaneko (US 10,687,695).
As to claim 4, Richard Wolf discloses a flexible joint wherein an edge of each rotation wing 39 comprises two curves (Figures 4,6; abstract).
Richard Wolf fails to disclose a flexible joint wherein one section of the edge of the rotation wing facing the slot wall of the rotation slot is a straight line located between the two curves; wherein the distance between the intersection of the extending lines of the two curves in a direction facing the straight line and the straight line is smaller than the distance between the edge of the rotation wing on the side facing the slot wall of the rotation slot and the slot wall of the rotation slot.
Kaneko teaches a flexible joint wherein one section of an edge of a rotation wing 21a of a second sub-joint 21 facing a slot wall of a rotation slot 22c of a first sub-joint 22 is a straight line located between two curves; wherein the distance between the intersection of the extending lines of the two curves in a direction facing the straight line and the straight line is smaller than the distance between the edge of the rotation wing on the side facing the slot wall of the rotation slot and the slot wall of the rotation slot; the narrowing width of the rotation wing providing for a gap between the distal end of the rotation wing and a bottom of the rotation slot in a fully-bent position, preventing jamming between the first and second sub-joints (Figure 8A; C4 L18-31). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible joint disclosed by Richard Wolf wherein each rotation wing comprises a narrowing width with a straight line distal edge, as taught by Kaneko, in order to provide for a gap between the distal end of the rotation wing and a bottom of the rotation slot in a fully-bent position, preventing jamming between the first and second sub-joints.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
As to claim 7, Richard Wolf discloses the claimed flexible joint with the exception of wherein a point corresponding to the rotation center of the rotary joint on the deployed plane is taken as the origin, and the lengthwise direction of the pipe is taken as the y-axis, to establish a first plane rectangular coordinate system; in the cross section of the pipe, the center of the pipe is taken as the origin, and a direction away from the rotary joint is taken as the y-axis to establish a second plane rectangular coordinate system, then in the plane graphic corresponding to the rotation wing, the movement trajectory of the point Pdi,ϴ that is far from the edge of the rotary joint and closest to the first sub-joint satisfies:
x di,ϴ = RT * atan (xbi,ϴ /di);
y di,ϴ = y bi,ϴ
where ϴ is the rotation angle of the point P di,ϴ itself relative to the rotation wing having not rotated, x di,ϴ is the x-axis coordinate of the point P di,ϴ in the first plane rectangular coordinate system, RT is an outer diameter of the pipe, x bi,ϴ is the x-axis coordinate of the point P di,ϴ in the second plane rectangular coordinate system, and di is the distance from the center of the pipe to the outer surface of the pipe;
y di,ϴ is the y-axis coordinate of the point P di,ϴ in the first place rectangular coordinate system, and y bi,ϴ and is the y-axis coordinate of the point P di,ϴ in the second plane rectangular coordinate system.
There is no teaching or suggestion, absent the applicant’s own disclosure, for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the flexible joint disclosed by Richard Wolf to have the above mentioned elemental features. Furthermore, such modifications would not be obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL P FERGUSON whose telephone number is (571)272-7081. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (10:00 am-7:00 pm 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, Anna Momper can be reached at (571)270-5788. 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.
05/02/26
/MICHAEL P FERGUSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619
Prosecution Insights