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 .
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.
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 7-10 and 18-22 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 7 recites the limitation "the first cutting line…the second cutting line" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the first cutting line and the second cutting line" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the first cutting line…the first cutting line" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 19 recites the limitation "the first cutting line and the second cutting line" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 9, 10 and 20-22 are necessarily rejected as being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2008/0287943 A1 to Weber et al. (Weber).
Regarding claim 1, Weber teaches a tip module (nozzle tip 110) for a skin treatment device (treatment apparatus 100) using RF energy ([0028] which states in part “The high frequency power supply 16 is operative to generate high frequency electrical current, typically in the radio-frequency (RF) region of the electromagnetic spectrum…”), comprising a housing having an open end (Fig. 10), a substrate (dielectric member 14) provided on the open side of the housing (Fig. 10), and an electrode (electrodes 12) provided on an outer surface of the substrate (see for example Figs. 1 and 2), wherein the electrodes is divided into a central electrode, an intermediate electrode and an outer electrode (see annotated Fig. 2 below), the intermediate electrode is divided into a plurality of intermediate parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below), and the out electrode is divided into a plurality of outer electrode parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below).
Regarding claim 11, Weber teaches a skin treatment device (treatment apparatus 100) using RF energy ([0028] which states in part “The high frequency power supply 16 is operative to generate high frequency electrical current, typically in the radio-frequency (RF) region of the electromagnetic spectrum…”), a main body ([0063] which states “Housing 102 provides a suitable interface for connection to a cable 104 that includes insulated and shielded conductors or wires (not shown) that electrically couple the delivery device 10 with the high frequency power supply 16.”), an RF generator (high frequency power supply 16) provided in the main body and configured to generate RF energy, a control unit (electrical circuit 11) provided in the main body ([0063] which states in part “A hollow interior of the housing 102 houses electrical connections (not shown) that electrically couple the delivery device 10 in the electrical circuit 11 with the high frequency power supply 16 (FIG. 5).”), a handpiece (Fig. 10) connected to the main body ([0063]) and configured to be held by a user ([0064] which states in part “A smoothly contoured grip portion 106 of the handpiece 100 is shaped to be gripped and handled by a clinician for manipulating the handpiece 100 to place the delivery device 10 at a location proximate to a patient’s skin surface 32 (FIG. 5).”), and a tip module (nozzle tip 110) detachable provided at an end of the handpiece ([0064] which states in part “The delivery device 10 may be integrated into a removable nozzle tip 110 so that the nozzle tips 110 may be easily interchanged for providing different treatments.”) wherein the tip module includes a housing having an open end (Fig. 10), a substrate (dielectric member 14) provided on the open side of the housing (Fig. 10), and an electrode (electrodes 12) provided on an outer surface of the substrate (see for example Figs. 1 and 2), wherein the electrodes is divided into a central electrode, an intermediate electrode and an outer electrode (see annotated Fig. 2 below), the intermediate electrode is divided into a plurality of intermediate parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below), and the out electrode is divided into a plurality of outer electrode parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
520
644
media_image1.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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2-10 and 12-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber in view of JP 2000024121 A to Kanehara (Kanehara, see machine translation).
Regarding claim 2, Weber teaches the tip module of claim 1, but not wherein when transmitting RF energy to skin tissue, a current density of the RF energy in the central electrode, each intermediate electrode part, and each outer electrode part is maintained within a preset range. Kanehara teaches an electrode structure (title “Electrode Structure”) that has an electrode structure which makes the current density uniform and reduces the energization stimulus irrespective of the type of energization ([0008]) by dividing the electrode into a plurality of electrodes including a central electrode, a plurality of intermediate electrode parts, and a plurality of electrode parts (Fig. 1) and the greater the number if divided electrodes, the more uniform the current density can be (pg. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Weber to include the electrode structure of Kanehara which maintains the current density within a preset range to prevent skin damage such as burns as taught by Kanehara (pg. 2).
Regarding claim 3, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 2, with Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3) and that the shape of the divided electrodes is not particularly limited and their area is preferably not more than 1cm2 from a viewpoint of preventing current concentration (pg. 3), but not specifically wherein an area of each intermediate electrode part is larger than an area of each of the outer electrodes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sized the electrodes so that an area of each intermediate electrode part is larger than an area of each of the outer electrodes, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 4, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 3, with Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3) and that the shape of the divided electrodes is not particularly limited and their area is preferably not more than 1cm2 from a viewpoint of preventing current concentration (pg. 3), but not specifically wherein a total area of the intermediate electrode parts is larger than a total area of the outer electrode parts. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sized total area so that a total area of the intermediate electrode parts is larger than a total area of the outer electrode parts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 5, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 3 as well as Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3), but not wherein the intermediate region and the outer region are formed along concentric round paths of different sizes. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of engineering design choice to make the electrode parts of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results.
Regarding claim 6, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 5 as well as Weber teaching wherein the intermediate electrode is divided into the intermediate electrode parts by a plurality of first cutting lines formed in a width direction of the path (the area between the electrode parts as shown in Fig. 2), and the outer electrode is divided into the outer electrode parts by a plurality of second cutting lines formed in the width direction of the path (the area between the electrode parts as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 7, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 6 as well as wherein a first cutting line is formed continuously with a second cutting line (Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 8, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 7 as well as Weber teaching the first cutting line and the second cutting line are formed radially (Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, the combination teaches the tip module of claim 7 as well as Weber teaching wherein the central electrode, the intermediate electrode parts, and the outer electrode parts is configured to independently and simultaneously transmit the RF energy by an external control unit ([0048-0049]).
Regarding claim 12, Weber teaches a skin treatment method (title “Treatment Apparatus and Methods for Inducing Microburn Patterns in Tissue”) using RF energy ([0028] which states in part “The high frequency power supply 16 is operative to generate high frequency electrical current, typically in the radio-frequency (RF) region of the electromagnetic spectrum…”), comprising contacting an RF electrode to skin tissue ([0064] which states “A smoothly contoured grip portion 106 of the handpiece 100 is shaped to be gripped and handled by a clinician for manipulating the handpiece 100 to place the delivery device 10 at a location proximate to a patient's skin surface 32 (FIG. 5).”), transmitting RF energy to the tissue through the RF electrode ([0064] which states in part “An activation button 108 is depressed and released for controlling the delivery of high frequency energy from the delivery device 10 to the tissue 34 (FIG. 5). “), and heating the tissue with the RF energy to treat the tissue ([0041] which states in part “As the transferred high frequency energy modifies the tissue 34, the forward end 12a of each individual electrode 12 may be advanced forward to define the microburns 13 and, thereby, create a path for advancement of the forward end 12a, as indicated diagrammatically by double-headed arrow 15 (FIG. 2).”), wherein a transmission interface (nozzle tip 110) that transmits the RF energy to the skin tissue is divided into a central electrode, an intermediate electrode and an outer electrode (see annotated Fig. 2 below), the intermediate electrode is divided into a plurality of intermediate parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below), and the out electrode is divided into a plurality of outer electrode parts (see annotated Fig. 2 below).
However, Weber does not teach transmitting RF energy to skin tissue, a current density of the RF energy in the central electrode, each intermediate electrode part, and each outer electrode part is maintained within a preset range.
Kanehara teaches an electrode structure (title “Electrode Structure”) that has an electrode structure which makes the current density uniform and reduces the energization stimulus irrespective of the type of energization ([0008]) by dividing the electrode into a plurality of electrodes including a central electrode, a plurality of intermediate electrode parts, and a plurality of electrode parts (Fig. 1) and the greater the number if divided electrodes, the more uniform the current density can be (pg. 3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Weber to include the electrode structure of Kanehara which maintains the current density within a preset range to prevent skin damage such as burns as taught by Kanehara (pg. 2).
Regarding claim 13, the combination teaches the method of claim 12 with Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3) and that the shape of the divided electrodes is not particularly limited and their area is preferably not more than 1cm2 from a viewpoint of preventing current concentration (pg. 3), but not specifically wherein an area of each intermediate electrode part is larger than an area of each of the outer electrodes. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sized the electrodes so that an area of each intermediate electrode part is larger than an area of each of the outer electrodes, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 14, the combination teaches the method of claim 13, with Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3) and that the shape of the divided electrodes is not particularly limited and their area is preferably not more than 1cm2 from a viewpoint of preventing current concentration (pg. 3), but not specifically wherein a total area of the intermediate electrode parts is larger than a total area of the outer electrode parts. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have sized total area so that a total area of the intermediate electrode parts is larger than a total area of the outer electrode parts, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 15, the combination teaches the method of claim 13 as well as Kanehara teaching that the size and shape of the electrode pattern portion are not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the target living body and purpose (pg. 3), but not wherein the intermediate region and the outer region are formed along concentric round paths of different sizes. Therefore, it would have been an obvious matter of engineering design choice to make the electrode parts of whatever form or shape was desired or expedient. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being with the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results.
Regarding claims 16 and 17, the combination teaches the method of claim 15 as well as Weber teaching wherein the intermediate electrode is divided into the intermediate electrode parts by a plurality of first cutting lines formed in a width direction of the path (the area between the electrode parts as shown in Fig. 2), and the outer electrode is divided into the outer electrode parts by a plurality of second cutting lines formed in the width direction of the path (the area between the electrode parts as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 18, the combination teaches the method of claim 17 as well as wherein a first cutting line is formed continuously with a second cutting line (Figs. 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 19, the combination teaches the method of claim 17 as well as Weber teaching the first cutting line and the second cutting line are formed radially (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 20, the combination teaches the method of claim 19, as well as Weber teaches wherein an area of a region through which a line extending from a center point to a perimeter of the transmission surface passes is in a relationship of the central region > the intermediate region part > the outer region part (Fig. 1).
Regarding claims 21 and 22, the combination teaches the method of claim 19 as well as Weber teaching wherein the central electrode, the intermediate electrode parts, and the outer electrode parts is configured to independently and simultaneously transmit the RF energy by an external control unit ([0048-0049]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITLYN E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-5845. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-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, Joanne M Rodden can be reached at (303) 297-4726. 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.
/KAITLYN E SMITH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights