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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 8/13/2026 has been entered.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-17, and 19-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhao et al. (US 2014/0187949) in view of Neumann et al. (US 2017/0071671).
With respect to claims 1, 7, 15 and 19, Zhao et al. discloses a vascular therapy apparatus comprising: an electronic processing device ([0028]) comprising at least one electronic processor programmed to: retrieve an intravascular instrument model of an associated intravascular instrument to be used in an intravascular procedure ([0060]); retrieve a patient model of anatomy including at least vasculature of a patient who is to undergo the intravascular procedure ([0050]); and before and/during the intravascular procedure, model a passage of the associated intravascular instrument through vasculature of the associated patient using the instrument model and the patient model ([0052]); and output treatment information for the intravascular therapy procedure based on the modeled passage of the associated intravascular instrument through the vasculature of the associated patient, wherein the modeling of the passage of the associated intravascular instrument through the vasculature of the associated patient includes: modeling friction force on the associated intravascular instrument as a function of position along the associated intravascular instrument during the passage of the associated intravascular instrument through the vasculature ([0054-0055]). Zhao et al. discloses the subject matter substantially as claimed except for the use of a physics based model. However, Neumann et al. teaches in the same field of endeavor using physics based simulation models provides a personalized model of the patient ([0041]; [0044]; [0046]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Zhao et al. with physics based simulation models as taught by Neumann et al. in order to provide a personalized model for the patient. Zhao et al. discloses modeling tissue damage risk ([0053]; [0055-0056]; [0058-0059]).
With respect to claims 2 and 16, Zhao et al. discloses a plurality of difference candidate routes including a recommended route ([0057]).
With respect to claims 3 and 17, Zhao et al. discloses a plurality of different candidate associated instruments ([0048]; [0060]; [0062]).
With respect to claims 5 and 8, Zhao et al. discloses a visual rendering ([0031-0032]; [0050]; [0057]).
With respect to claims 9 and 20, Zhao et al. discloses receiving medical images ([0028]; [0031]).
With respect to claim 10, Zhao et al. discloses treatment information ([0055-0056]; [0062]).
With respect to claim 11, Zhao et al. discloses using the models to perform scenarios ([00062-0063]).
With respect to claim 12, Zhao et al. discloses diameter and stiffness ([0054]).
With respect to claim 13, Zhao et al. discloses geometrical layout ([0055]; [0066]; [0076]) and tissue information ([0058]; [0061]).
With respect to claim 14, Zhao et al. discloses a generic patient model or a patient specific model ([0050]).
With respect to claims 21-22, the Examiner notes the features of the patient model are outside the scope of the invention and considered as non-functional descriptive material which holds little patentable weight. The patient model is merely data that is retrieved and processed by the system/method. Therefore, Zhao et al. is interpreted to be capable of retrieving and processing the patient model.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7-17, and 19-22 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PETER LUONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1609. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-6.
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, Anhtuan T Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
/PETER LUONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
