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 Arguments
In view of the amendments and new added claims, lack of clarity issues has resulted in a 112(b) Rejection set forth below.
Upon further consideration of the References, the 103 Rejection has been withdrawn.
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 1-6, 8-10, 12-14, 16, 17, 23-27 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.
Claims 1 and 25 have been amended to the optical fiber spanning between the distal tip and proximal end and removing the limitation “terminates at the distal tip”. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, the fiber spans the housing distal to proximal end and may also be extending from the distal end or extending past the distal end. The claim is not limited to the fiber terminating at the distal end. Looking at the specification, the fibers 419 extend from the proximal end to the distal end and exit at the distal end of the probe 420 [0040]. New claims 26 and 27 recite “optical fiber either terminates at or extends from the distal tip”. It is not clear how the fiber can terminate at the distal end or extend from the distal end as the two options are structurally very different and it is not clear if the claims are directed to two different embodiments of the imaging probe. The specification [0040 and 0041] disclose that the fibers extend to the distal end of the probe and “exit at distal tip 421” [0041]. Does “exit” mean the fiber is extending from the distal end? Paragraph [0052] discloses “fiber spans between the distal tip and a proximal end of the housing and terminates at the distal tip”. Therefore, it is not clear from the claim language in view of the specification, if the fibers end or terminate at the distal tip or extend past the distal tip or is it two different embodiments of the arrangement of the optical fiber where the fiber may terminate at the distal end in one embodiment or extend past the distal end in another embodiment.
It is suggested claims 1 and 25 provide clarifying language (in view of the specification and figures) the arrangement of the fiber with respect to the housing and the configuration at the distal end of the housing as to whether the fiber terminates at the distal end or extends past the distal end.
An updated search has not resulted in the claimed arrangement of the imaging probe.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 BAISAKHI ROY whose telephone number is (571)272-7139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-3 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, Christopher Koharski can be reached at 571-272-7230. 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.
BR
/BAISAKHI ROY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3797
Prosecution Insights