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 .
A complete action on the merits of pending claims 1, 2-8, and 10-20 appears herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Viswanathan teaches an energy delivery apparatus with a first electrically insulating layer 42 made of PTFE and a second electrically insulating layer 44 made of polyimide. Viswanathan [0032]. Viswanathan does not teach that the insulator portions are made of a heat shrink material. Viswanathan's insulating layers are described as dielectric coatings, not heat shrink materials.”
Examiner respectfully contends that, even if Viswanathan does not explicitly describe insulating layers (42 and 44) as being made of heat shrink materials, said layers can still be made of heat shrink materials. Viswanathan, as further discussed in the rejection to claims 1 and 11 below, teaches insulating layers (42) and (44) can be made from PTFE and Polyimide respectively. Attached evidentiary reference “PTFE and Heat-Shrink Tubing” teaches PTFE has heat-shrinking properties. Attached evidentiary reference “Polyimide Chemistry Sealing Insulation and Protection teaches P84 Polyimide is an insulative material that has heat shrinking properties. (Please see the insulating material section) Attached evidentiary reference “Rigid High Temperature Heat-Shrinkable Polyimide Tubes with Functionality as Reducer Couplings” teaches heat-shrinkable tubes formed from polyimide. (Please see the abstract and page 2) Therefore, as best understood by examiner, the materials taught by Viswanathan (polyimide and PTFE) are both insulating and heat-shrinking materials.
Applicant further argues “Furthermore, Viswanathan does not teach that the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion are "butted and recovered together at the tapered section of the core wire" as recited by claims 1 and 20 as amended.”
Examiner respectfully disagrees and contends that, as further discussed in the rejection to claim 1 below, Viswanathan teaches the first insulator portion (Fig. 2, Char. 42) and the second insulator portion (Fig. 2: the structure formed by layer (44) and coating (49)) are butted and recovered together at the tapered section of the core wire (Fig. 2: Insulating layer (42) abuts and recovers together with both layer (44) and coating (49) at a tapered section of electrical conductor (16))
Applicant further argues “Furthermore, the Office's mapping of the "second insulator portion" to "the structure formed by layer (44) and coating (39)" is improper because coating 39 serves distinct functions (securing components, lubricity, radiopaque filler) and is structurally distinct from layer 44. Viswanathan [0028].”
Examiner respectfully contends that, since layer (44) and coating (39) of Viswanathan are adjacent to and layered on each other, as shown in Fig. 2, one of ordinary skill in the art could consider the structure formed by layer (44) and coating (39) as a single “portion.”
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 2, 11, and 15-19 regarding the prior art reference Lettice (US 2002/0120259 A1) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on Lettice for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6-8, 10-12, and 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Viswanathan (US 2009/0138009 A1).
Regarding claims 1 and 11, Viswanathan teaches radiofrequency guidewire comprising:
a core wire having a tapered section; (Fig. 2, Char. 16: electrical conductor)
a first insulator portion having a first insulator property and a first insulator length; (Fig. 2, Char. 42: second electrically insulating layer) and
a second insulator portion having a second insulator property and a second insulator length; (Fig. 2: The structure formed by layer (44) and coating (39); Par. [0028] and [0032])
wherein the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion are positioned along the core wire so as to form an overlap portion aligned with the tapered section of the core wire; (Fig. 2)
wherein the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion are made of a heat shrink material; (Par. [0032]: The first electrically insulating material (42) can comprise PTFE and the second electrically insulating layer (44) can comprise polyimide; PTFE and Polyimide are both heat shrink materials. (Please see attached evidentiary references “PTFE and FEP Heat-Shrink Tubing,” “Polyimide Chemistry Sealing Insulation and Protection,” and “Rigid High Temperature Heat-Shrinkable Polyimide Tubes with Functionality as Reducer Couplings”)) and
wherein the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion are butted and recovered together at the tapered section of the core wire. (Fig. 2)
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, teaches the first insulator property is made of one color. (Absent a statement that the electrically insulating layer (42) is transparent, said layer would comprise at least some color.)
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, teaches the first insulator length and the second insulator length define an overall core wire length. (Fig. 2: Layer (42), Layer (44), and coating (39) overlap each other and would define an overall core wire length of at least the portions of conductor (16) coated with the insulating layers/coatings.)
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, teaches the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion are overlapped (Layer (42) overlaps at least a portion of layer (44)) to maintain a constant outer diameter. (Fig. 2 and Par. [0028]: Layer (42) and coating (29) abut each other and have roughly the same diameter.)
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, teaches the overlap portion is insulated. (Par. [0032])
Regarding claims 10 and 18, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, teaches the overlap portion includes an orientation in which the first insulator portion is on top of the second insulator portion at the tapered section of the core wire. (Fig. 2)
Regarding claim 19, Viswanathan, as applied to claim 11 above, teaches the guidewire is inserted into an external device. (Par. [0046])
Regarding claim 20, the method steps for making the radiofrequency guidewire would be intuitive to the structure provided in Viswanathan, given that the method steps of claim 20 appear to make the radiofrequency guidewire of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 4, 5, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Viswanathan (US 2009/0138009 A1), as applied to claims 3 and 12 respectively above, and further in view of Cosman (US 7,976,542 B1).
Regarding claim 4 and 13, Viswanathan, as applied to claims 3 and 12 above, is silent regarding the second insulator property is a different color than the first insulator property color.
Cosman, in a similar field of endeavor, teaches a catheter comprising a first and second insulative coating; (Fig. 5, Char. 271 and 274 respectively) wherein the first and second insulative coatings are different colors from each other. (Col. 9, Lines 61-65)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified Viswanathan, as applied to claims 3 and 12 above, to incorporate the teachings of Cosman, and configure coating (39) of Viswanathan and layer (42) of Viswanathan to be different colors from each other. Doing so would allow for easy differentiation between the two coatings.
Regarding claim 5 and 14, the combination of Viswanathan/Cosman, as applied to claims 4 and 13 above, teaches the color change of the first insulator portion and the second insulator portion creates a visual marker on the core wire. (The change in colors would create a visual indication for a user, marking the point on the core wire where layer (42) ends and coating (39) begins)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS SHEA BORSCH whose telephone number is (571)272-5681. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 7:30AM-5:30PM 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, Joanne Rodden can be reached at 3032974276. 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.
/N.S.B./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOANNE M RODDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights