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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed January 21, 2026 fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. It has been placed in the application file, but certain information referred to therein has not been considered. In particular, certain references have not been considered as indicated by the line-through on the initialed PTO-1449. There are no copies of the references that have not been considered.
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 2 and claims 12-15 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 2 lacks proper antecedent basis for “said handle receptacle” and “the received electrocautery handle”.
Claims 12-15 all lack antecedent basis for several elements. It is noted that these claims have been amended to depend from claim 10, and it appears they should depend from independent claim 11.
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 10-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vayser et al (10,456,190).
Regarding claim 1, Vayser et al provide an electrocautery device comprising a body (202,608,704, for example) having proximal and distal ends and a device connector (706, for example) at the proximal end of the body to connect to a handle (204, for example) of a electrocautery pencil. There is an airflow unit having at least one airflow channel (904 – Figure 9, for example) extending between the proximal and distal ends of the body, the channel including an airflow intake aperture (e.g. 904) proximal the distal end of the body with an airflow exit aperture at the proximal end of the body (not shown, but inherent). There is also a light unit having a light source (302,902, for example) proximal the distal end of the body, and an electrode (214,714 for example) disposed at the distal end of the body and positioned further away from the proximal end of the body than the airflow intake aperture and light source (see Figure 9, for example). There is also a conductive connector (i.e. 210,310, etc) configured to transmit electricity form the device connector to the electrode when the device is connected to an electrocautery pencil ( e.g. 204).
Regarding claim 2, there is a holding portion (e.g. 322,706) proximate said handle receptacle to hold the received handle securely (Figures 2 and 4 show the device assembled). Regarding claim 3, the electrode is positioned to extend from the airflow unit (Figure 9). Regarding claim 4, the light unit further comprises a power source and a light connecter (Figure 3B and Figure 8, for example). Regarding claim 5, Vayser et al also provide a heatsink (col. 2, lines 61-67, for example). Regarding claim 6, Vayser et al also disclose the use of insulative materials (col. 8, lines 56-67, for example). Regarding claim 7, the light unit is configure and positioned within the airflow channel (Figure 9). Regarding claim 8, see Figures which show various different claddings and holders (including the outer cladding/sheath) to maintain the light source and allow the flow of air through the body. Regarding claim 9, the claddings are deemed to broad read on “dividers” which are disposed lengthwise along the light members and form housings for the light source(s) and the air flow channels (Figure 9, for example).
Regarding claim 11, Vayser et al again provide an elongated electrocautery device having proximal and distal ends comprising a handle receptacle for receiving an electrocautery handle (Figures 2, 4 and 10, for example). There is an electrode channel for receiving an positioned an electrocautery electrode to the handle (Figures 2, 4 and 10) and an airflow channel (904 – Figure 9) to allow air to pass from the distal end of the device to the proximal end. The distal end of the device has a first aperture defining one end of the electrode channel (Figure 9) and a second aperture (904) defining one end of the airflow channel proximal the first aperture.
Claims 12-15 are assumed to be meant to depend from independent claim 11 based on the limitations that refer to similar limitations recited in independent claim 11. Regarding claim 12, there is a light source (902) positioned in the airflow channel (902) proximate the second aperture to allow the light source to emit light through out the second aperture (Figure 9). Regarding claim 13, there is inherently an airflow exit connector at the proximal end of the airflow channel for connection to the suction/vacuum source. Regarding claims 14 and 15, see above discussion of claims 5 and 6.
Claims 1-6, 8-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Albertal (2015/0359581).
Regarding claim 1, Albertal provides an electrocautery device having substantial all the same components of the instant application. The device includes a body (230,320,440,530, for example) having proximal and distal ends and a device connector (210,310,410,510, for example) at the proximal end of the body and configured to connect to a handle (e.g. 111) of an electrocautery pencil. There is an airflow unit having at least on airflow channel (808 – Figure 21A-21C, for example) the airflow unit including an airflow intake aperture (808) proximate the distal end of the body and an airflow exit aperture (inherently necessary, but not expressly shown) at the proximal end of the body. There is a light unit having a light source (806) proximate the distal end of the body and an electrode (222 and 804, for example) disposed at the distal end of the body and positioned further away from the proximal end of the body than the light source (Figure 21B, for example). And there is a conductive connector (210, etc) configured to transmit energy from the device connector to the electrode when the device is connected to an electrocautery pencil (Figure 2, for example).
Regarding claim 2, there is a holding portion proximate the handle receptacle to hold the received electrocautery handle securely (Figures 1 and 2, for example). Regarding claim 3, the electrode is positioned to extend from the airflow unit (808 – Figure 21A, for example). Regarding claim 4, the light unit comprises a power source and a light cable (Figure 3, for example). Regarding claim 5, Albertal discloses a heatsink (i.e. heat diffuser as at para. [0059]). Regarding claim 6, the device necessarily includes an insulator, such as the material for the body/handle and the aperture for providing the electrode as is generally known in the art. Regarding claim 8, there is a light holder (i.e. portion of 230 housing the light as in Figure 3) and air is inherently capable of flowing around the light. Regarding claim 9, see again Figures 3-5 which show the light source extending from the external surface allowing access for removal. Regarding claim 10, see Figure 21C which shows dividers (i.e. the body wall between the apertures 806 and 808) extending lengthwise for housing the airflow unit (808) and the lighting units (806).
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 7, 12 and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Albertal (2015/0359581) in view of the teaching of Vayser et al (10,456,190).
The Albertal device has been addressed previously. Regarding claims 7 and 12, Albertal fails to expressly disclose a light source that is provided in the airflow channel as required by these claims. Rather, Albertal provides an airflow channel that is separated from the light source channel.
Vayser et al, as addressed previously, provide a device having a distal electrode surrounded by a light source. In particular, the outer sheath of the device essentially acts as a channel that houses the light source (902) and the airflow channels (904). To have provided the Albertal device with a light source located within the airflow channel to allow for illumination and suction in the same channel would have been an obvious design consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Vayser et al fairly teach it is known to provide such an arrangement in an analogous device.
Regarding claim 16, Albertal et al provide an electrocautery device comprising a hollow body (as addressed above) having proximal and distal ends. There is an airflow channel defined by an air intake aperture (808) at the distal end of the hollow body and an air exit aperture (not labeled, but inherent) at the proximal end of the body. There is a light unit (806) near the distal end of the body, and there is an arm extending distally beyond the distal end of the hollow body and having an electrode connector (804) at the distal end of the arm (Figure 21B, for example). The arm may receive a variety of electrode tips (Figures 17 and 18, for example). There is a device connector at the proximal end of the body to connect to a handle of an electrocautery pencil and a conductive connector as addressed previously. As state above, Albertal fail to expressly disclose the light unit positioned in the airflow channel.
Vayser et al, as addressed previously, provide a device having a distal electrode surrounded by a light source. In particular, the outer sheath of the device essentially acts as a channel that houses the light source (902) and the airflow channels (904). To have provided the Albertal device with a light source located within the airflow channel to allow for illumination and suction in the same channel would have been an obvious design consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Vayser et al fairly teach it is known to provide such an arrangement in an analogous device.
Regarding claim 17, Vayser et al provide for multiple air intake apertures (904), and providing the Albertal device with multiple air intake apertures is deemed an obvious design consideration for the skilled artisan. Regarding claims 18 and 19, see above discussions regarding claims 5 and 6 as both Vayser et al and Albertal disclose these components. Regarding claim 20, both Vayser et al and Albertal disclose a light holder that secures the light source at the end of the body (see Figures).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Sims (12,508,067), Pathy (11,519,569), Kleyman et al (2021/0212748), Shvetsov et al (9,289,261) and Cheng (2011/0060332) disclose other electrosurgical pencil device having illumination and/or suction.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PEFFLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4770. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am-5 pm.
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, Linda Dvorak can be reached at (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 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.
/MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/M.F.P/January 27, 2026