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 05/07/2026 has been entered. In the present application, claims 1, 4-19 are currently pending. Claims 2-3 have been canceled. Claims 17-19 are newly added. Claims 1, 4,-16 have been amended.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 05/07/2026, with respect to the pending claims have been fully considered. Applicant has amended the independent claims with the newly added limitation stating, “wherein the first rotational drive wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism including at least one continuous toothed gear surface formed on the first drive wheel body portion and configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion.” Such newly added limitation changes the scope of the claims and renders the previously rejection moot. Therefore the objections and rejections identified in the non-final office action, dated, have been withdrawn.
However upon further consideration, new grounds of rejections are made below. Please see the rejections under 35 U.S.C. §102 below for further explanation.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation is:
a user input control element, in claim 11, which has structural support in Applicant’s specification stating, “One or more user input control elements may be provided to control rotation of the rotational drive wheel(s) based on user input to the user input control elements. For example, the steering control mechanism may comprise one or more rotatable control wheels, switches, levers or buttons which may be configured to control rotation of the rotational drive wheel(s) based on user input to these elements - e.g. by transmission of torque to the rotational drive wheel(s). An assembly including such user input control elements in the steering control mechanism may be referred to as a user control assembly. … Furthermore, the effective loading on the steering control mechanism required to steer the wires may also depend on the apparent diameter of the drum elements. For example by providing a larger apparent diameter of the drum elements, a larger input force (for example, in the case of a steering mechanism including a user input control element such as a rotatable control wheel, a large rotational force applied to the control wheel) may be required to provide steering response. Conversely, by providing a smaller apparent diameter of the drum element, a smaller input force may be required to provide a steering response. … The term 'user control assembly' is used herein to define an assembly (such as a steering control mechanism) including one or more user input control elements (for example one or more rotatable control wheels, switches, levers or buttons) configured to control bending of the steering section by suitable tensioning of the steering wire portions.”
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 and 4-19 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 the limitation "wherein the first rotational drive wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism including at least one continuous toothed gear surface formed on the first drive wheel body portion and configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion” in lines 10-12. As the limitation is currently written it is unclear whether 1.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the first rotation drive wheel is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion, or 2.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the ratchet mechanism is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Therefore claim 1 is indefinite. Additionally, claims 4-13 and 17-19 are also rejected because of their dependency on the rejected base claim 1. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the first" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the first steering wire.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "wherein the first rotational drive wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism including at least one continuous toothed gear surface formed on the first drive wheel body portion and configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion” in lines 12-14. As the limitation is currently written it is unclear whether 1.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the first rotation drive wheel is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion, or 2.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the ratchet mechanism is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Therefore claim 14 is indefinite. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recite the limitation “a steering section” in line 17. However line 4 of claim 14 also introduced the term “a steering section.” Therefore it is unclear whether the limitation in line 17 is introducing a distinct and separate ‘steering section’ or merely referencing the same ‘steering section’ as previously introduced in line 4. It is suggested to amend the limitation in line 17 to state “the steering section.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "wherein the first rotational drive wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism including at least one continuous toothed gear surface formed on the first drive wheel body portion and configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion” in lines 8-11. As the limitation is currently written it is unclear whether 1.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the first rotation drive wheel is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion, or 2.) the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the ratchet mechanism is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Therefore claim 15 is indefinite. Additionally, claim 16 is also rejected because of their dependency on the rejected base claim 15. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
Claims 1, 11, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Luke T. Jungles (US2018/0028786) hereinafter Jungles.
Regarding Claim 1, Jungles discloses a steering control mechanism (abstract – device 100) configured for controlling bending of a steering section (Fig. 1steerable catheter body 104) of an endoscope ([0002] “Embodiments disclosed herein generally relate to steerable catheters, including endoscopes.”)) in a first plane ([0024] first plane) via a first steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 116/118) and a second steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 136/138) the steering control mechanism (abstract – device 100) comprising:
a first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Fig. 3) comprising a first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) and a second drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3), the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) comprising a first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) coupled to the first steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 116/118, [0026]), and the second drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) comprising a second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025]) coupled to the second steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 136/138, [0026]),
wherein the first rotational drive wheel(see annotated Fig. 3) is configured to provide one-way relative co-axial rotation ([0025-0026] rotation around shaft 114) of the first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) and the second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025]), and
wherein the first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Fig. 3) comprises a ratchet mechanism (see annotated Fig. 3) including at least one continuous tooth gear surface (see annotated Fig. 3) formed on the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) and configured to engage with (Examiner’s Note: Examiner is interpreting this limitation as “the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the first rotation drive wheel is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Examiner is also interpreting the phase “engage with” broadly. Here Jungles teaches the first rotational wheel ‘engages with‘ the second drive wheel body portion, as identified as gear 150 and annotated in Fig. 3 below, because gear 150 fits inside aperture 124b.) a portion (see annotated Fig. 3) of the second drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
975
1110
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, Jungles discloses the steering control mechanism according to claim 1 further comprising a user input control element (Figs. 1-2 user controlling control wheel 110, 130, Examiner’s note: As previously stated above, the ‘user input control element’ is being interpreted as having a structure similar to, but not limited to, as a control wheel, switch, lever, or button. Here Jungles has the similar structure in control wheel 110,130.) arranged to control rotation of the first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Fig. 3) based on user input to the user input control element (Figs. 1-2 user controlling control wheel 110, 130).
configured for controlling bending of a steering section (Fig. 1steerable catheter body 104) of an endoscope ([0002] “Embodiments disclosed herein generally relate to steerable catheters, including endoscopes.”)) in a first plane ([0024] first plane) via a first steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 116/118) and a second steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 136/138) the steering control mechanism (abstract – device 100) comprising:
Regarding Claim 15, Jungles discloses a method of assembling a steering control mechanism (abstract – device 100), steering control mechanism (abstract – device 100) comprising:
a first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Fig. 3) comprising first (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) and second drive wheel body portions (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3), the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) comprising a first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) coupled to a first steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 116/118, [0026]), and the second drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) comprising a second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025]) coupled to a second steering wire (Fig. 2 wires 136/138, [0026]),
wherein the first rotational drive wheel(see annotated Fig. 3) is configured to provide one-way relative co-axial rotation ([0025-0026] rotation around shaft 114) of the first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) and the second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025]), wherein the first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Fig. 3) comprises a ratchet mechanism (see annotated Fig. 3) including at least one continuous tooth gear surface (see annotated Fig. 3) formed on the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3) and configured to engage with (Examiner’s Note: Examiner is interpreting this limitation as “the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the first rotation drive wheel is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Examiner is also interpreting the phase “engage with” broadly. Here Jungles teaches the first rotational wheel ‘engages with‘ the second drive wheel body portion, as identified as gear 150 and annotated in Fig. 3 below, because gear 150 fits inside aperture 124b.) a portion (see annotated Fig. 3) of the second drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3), and wherein the method includes at least one step of rotating ([0025-0027]) the first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) relative to the second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025]).
PNG
media_image1.png
975
1110
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, Jungles discloses the method according to claim 15 wherein the at least one step of rotating the first drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 115, [0025]) relative to the second drum element (see annotated Fig. 3, near groove 135, [0025])is performed to achieve or set a predetermined tension in one or both of the first steering wire and the second steering wire forming part of the steering control mechanism ([0024-0026] “With this structural configuration, a user can access each of the gears 150 to turn it and thereby adjust the slackness and/or tension of a control wire attached to the gear. This ability remains when the spools are assembled together, and when they are engaged to their respective control wheels 110, 130, provided that the spools are aligned in a predetermined manner (required for post-assembly adjustment of the inner spool 132”).
PNG
media_image1.png
975
1110
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 17, Jungles discloses the e steering control mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the at least one continuous toothed gear surface (see annotated Fig. 3) is formed within a recessed portion (see annotated Fig. 3) of the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image2.png
975
1110
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 18, Jungles discloses the e steering control mechanism according to claim 1, wherein the at least one continuous toothed gear surface (see annotated Fig. 3) is formed on a circumferentially extending internal surface (see annotated Fig. 3) of the first drive wheel body portion (Fig. 3 gear 150, see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image3.png
975
1110
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 1 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Leong et al. (US2019/0350440) hereinafter Leong.
Regarding Claim 1, Leong discloses a steering control mechanism (abstract – endoscope 102) configured for controlling bending of a steering section (Figs. 1-13 flexible tip 124) of an endoscope (Figs. 1-13 endoscope 102) in a first plane (col. 4 line 9-17] “Flexible tip 124, in contrast, may be formed of an extruded polymer material profile formed to include three distinct lumens and cut to provide single-plane flexibility.”) via a first steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 208) and a second steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 210) the steering control mechanism (abstract – endoscope 102) comprising:
a first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) comprising a first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) and a second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804), the first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) comprising a first drum element (Figs. 8a-b near body 806) coupled to (via aperture 818) the first steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 208), and the second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804) comprising a second drum element (Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846) coupled to (via aperture 856) the second steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 210),
wherein the first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) is configured to provide one-way relative co-axial rotation (via shaft 812) of the first drum element (Figs. 8a-b near body 806) and the second drum element (Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846) , and
wherein the first rotational drive wheel l (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) comprises a ratchet mechanism (Figs. 8a-b near inward surface 822) including at least one continuous tooth gear surface (Figs. 8a-b inward surface 822) formed on the first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) and configured to engage with (Examiner’s Note: Examiner is interpreting this limitation as “the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the ratchet mechanism is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Examiner is also interpreting the phase “engage with” broadly. Here Leong teaches the first rotational wheel ‘engages with‘ the second drive wheel body portion, as identified as wheel 804, because surface 852 fits inside inner surface 822. [col. 12 lines 47-62] “Engagement ring portion 844 of third control wheel 804 projects axially inwardly from the body 842 and includes a radially outward surface 852 that includes a toothed or notched configuration for engaging radially inward surface 822 of engagement ring 820 of first control wheel 800. This mating notched relationship causes third control wheel 804 to rotate in response to movement of control lever 112.”) a portion (Figs. 8a-b near outward surface 852) of the second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804).
PNG
media_image4.png
1350
1230
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Leong discloses an imaging endoscopy system (Fig. 1 system 100), comprising:
a base unit (Fig. 1 monitor 106);
a hand controller (Fig. 1 endoscope 102 near grip portion 111) including a steering control mechanism (Fig. 1 control wheel assembly 204 near control lever 112) configured for controlling bending of a steering section (Fig. 3b near reference numeral 310) of an endoscope (Fig. 1 endoscope 102) in a first plane ([col. 4 line 9-17] “Flexible tip 124, in contrast, may be formed of an extruded polymer material profile formed to include three distinct lumens and cut to provide single-plane flexibility.”) via a first steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 208) and a second steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 210) the steering control mechanism (abstract – endoscope 102) comprising:
a first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) comprising a first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) and a second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804), the first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) comprising a first drum element (Figs. 8a-b near body 806,) coupled to (via aperture 818) the first steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 208), and the second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804) comprising a second drum element (Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846,) coupled to (via aperture 856) the second steering wire (Fig. 2a control wire 210),
wherein the first rotational drive wheel (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) is configured to provide one-way relative co-axial rotation (via shaft 812) of the first drum element (Figs. 8a-b near body 806) and the second drum element (Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846,) , and
wherein the first rotational drive wheel l (see annotated Figs. 8a-b) comprises a ratchet mechanism (Figs. 8a-b near inward surface 822) including at least one continuous tooth gear surface (Figs. 8a-b inward surface 822) formed on the first drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b first control wheel 800) and configured to engage with (Examiner’s Note: Examiner is interpreting this limitation as “the first rotational wheel comprises a ratchet mechanism and the ratchet mechanism is configured to engage with a portion of the second drive wheel body portion. Examiner is also interpreting the phase “engage with” broadly. Here Leong teaches the first rotational wheel ‘engages with‘ the second drive wheel body portion, as identified as wheel 804, because surface 852 fits inside inner surface 822. [col. 12 lines 47-62] “Engagement ring portion 844 of third control wheel 804 projects axially inwardly from the body 842 and includes a radially outward surface 852 that includes a toothed or notched configuration for engaging radially inward surface 822 of engagement ring 820 of first control wheel 800. This mating notched relationship causes third control wheel 804 to rotate in response to movement of control lever 112.”) a portion (Figs. 8a-b near outward surface 852) of the second drive wheel body portion (Figs. 8a-b third control wheel 804).
an umbilical section (Fig. 1 data cable 104) for releasably connecting the base unit (Fig. 1 monitor 106) and the hand controller (Fig. 1 endoscope 102 near grip portion 111); and
an insertion section (Fig. 1 shaft 110) having a proximal end (near proximal portion 122) connected to the hand controller (Fig. 1 endoscope 102 near grip portion 111) and a distal end (Fig. 1 flexible tip 124) for insertion into a subject, the distal end (Fig. 1 flexible tip 124) having a steering section (Fig. 3b near reference numeral 310) and a distal tip (Fig. 3b near image capturing sub-assembly 306), wherein bending of the steering section (Fig. 3b near reference numeral 310) is controllable by user input to the steering control mechanism (Fig. 1 control wheel assembly 204 near control lever 112).
PNG
media_image4.png
1350
1230
media_image4.png
Greyscale
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 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Leong in view of Wilder et al. (US12539022) hereinafter Wilder.
Regarding Claim 9, Leong discloses the steering control mechanism according to claim1, wherein the first drum element (Leong – Figs. 8a-b near body 806, see annotated Figs. 8a-b) and the second drum element (Leong – Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846, see annotated Figs. 8a-b) are coupled respectively to their respective the first (Leong – Fig. 2a control wire 208) and the second steering wire (Leong – Fig. 2a control wire 210) by a portion of the first steering wire (Leong – Fig. 2a control wire 208) and the second steering wire (Leong – Fig. 2a control wire 210) being fixed relative to the respective first drum element (Leong – Figs. 8a-b near body 806, see annotated Figs. 8a-b) and the second drum element (Leong – Figs. 8a-b near flange region 846, see annotated Figs. 8a-b) respectively via a mechanical fixing element (Leong – apertures 818 and 856 respectively).
Leong is silent whether the mechanical fixing element comprises a ferrule.
However Wilder, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the mechanical fixing element comprises a ferrule (Wilder – [col. 5 lines 26-48] “Cam 70 may include a first side 70a and a second side 70b, as shown in FIGS. 3 and 4. First actuating wire 100a (FIG. 2) may include a ferrule (not shown) at its proximal most end. The ferrule may have a diameter greater than a diameter of a distal portion of first actuating wire 100a. The ferrule may be seated in a slot 80 (e.g., a recess or opening) (FIG. 5) formed in an outer surface of first side 70a. Seating the ferrule in slot 80 may fix first actuating wire 100a relative to cam 70. A portion of first actuating wire 100a may be received by a recess 82 (FIG. 5) to allow first actuating wire 100a to extend from slot 80, into recess 82, and wrap around all or a portion of a circumference of cam 70. Second side 70b of cam 70 may have a similar configuration. For example, a slot 80′ may be formed in an outer surface of second side 70b of cam 70, and a ferrule (not shown) of second actuating wire 100b may be received in slot 80′. The ferrule may have a diameter greater than a diameter of a distal portion of second actuating wire 100b. A portion of second actuating wire 100b may be received by a recess 82′ (FIG. 6) to allow second actuating wire 100b to extend from slot 80′ and wrap around all or a portion of a circumference of cam 70 in a direction opposite the direction of first actuating wire 100a.”)
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Leong with the teachings of Wilder to have the mechanical fixing element comprises a ferrule for the benefit of fixing the wire to a cam element such as the first and second drum element (Wilder – [col. 5 lines 26-48]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-8, 10, 12-13, and 19 are 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 so long as their respective base claims also overcome the 35 U.S.C. §112(b) claim rejections identified above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Ian P. Collins (US4593679);
Cummins et al. (US2018/0353311); and
Emmanuel Hallauer (US12533010).
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 MEGAN E MONAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7330. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8am - 5pm.
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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MEGAN ELIZABETH MONAHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights