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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takada et al. (US 20150088036 hereinafter “Takada”).
Regarding Claim 1, Takada teaches (Figs 1 and 4) a medical instrument (1) comprising:
a hollow coil body (5) comprising a winding wire spirally wound around a longitudinal axis of the coil body (see Fig 1 and 4, wire where 6 points to is spirally wound along longitudinal axis (same axis that 4 extends)); and
a cover member (13) covering the winding wire of the coil body (5, see Figs 1,4), wherein the cover member includes:
an outer cover portion (see annotated Fig 4) that covers an outer peripheral surface of the coil body (see annotated Fig 4), and an inner cover portion (see annotated Fig 4)that covers an inner peripheral surface of the coil body (see annotated Fig 4) and that is coupled to the outer cover portion through spaces (20) between adjacent turns of the winding wire of the coil body (see annotated Fig 4), the inner cover portion includes protrusions (see annotated Fig 4) that protrude radially inward from the coil body (5) beyond a common tangent line of the winding wire that is tangential to an inner surface of the coil body and is parallel to the longitudinal axis of the coil body (See Fig 4, the protrusions are parallel to longitudinal axis and tangential to a portion of the inner surface of the wire), and the protrusions are formed in a substantially annular shape (see Fig 4, protrusions are ‘annular’) around the longitudinal axis of the coil body, and are disposed intermittently along a longitudinal axis direction of the coil body (see Fig 4).
PNG
media_image1.png
627
673
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 4 (Takada)
Regarding Claim 3, Takada teaches the medical instrument according to claim 1, wherein at least one of the protrusions is curved in a convex shape that extends radially inward from the coil body (See annotated Fig 4, protrusions are convex shaped and extend radially inward from coil body 5).
Regarding Claim 4, Takada teaches the medical instrument according to claim 1, further comprising a spirally-arranged protruding portion (see annotated Fig 4) that is formed on the outer peripheral surface of the coil body (5) and that protrudes radially outward from the coil body (see annotated Fig 4), wherein the spirally-arranged protruding portion (see annotated Fig 4) includes gaps (gaps between spirally-arranged protruding portions are at the same spots where inner protrusions are located) disposed along the longitudinal axis direction of the coil body (5).
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takada (US 20150088036).
Regarding Claim 2, Takada teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Takada does not specify the medical instrument wherein the protrusions include a protrusion having a length in the longitudinal axis direction that is at least 2 times larger than a pitch of adjacent turns of the winding wire.
Takada does teach through embodiments of Fig 2 and Fig 3 that the length and thickness of the protrusions may vary (See [0027] and [0031-0032]) in order to vary the flexibility/bendability of the medical device. Further, it appears that one of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success in modifying the protrusions of the device of Takada embodiment Fig 4 to have a length in the longitudinal axis direction that is at least 2 times larger than a pitch of adjacent turns of the winding wire as it involves only adjusting the dimension of a component disclosed to require adjustment. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Takada Fig 4 by making the “protrusion having a length in the longitudinal axis direction that is at least 2 times larger than a pitch of adjacent turns of the winding wire” as a matter of routine optimization since it has been held that “where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kranys (US 5405338) teaches a catheter with a helically wound coil and a cover with an outer portion, inner portion and inner radial protrusions.
Sutton (US 5472435) teaches a catheter with a helically wound coil with a cover comprising outer protrusions.
Kato (US 20080004546) teaches a guidewire with a helical coil and multiple layers for an inner and outer cover portion.
Takada (US 20150088101) teaches a guidewire with a helical coil and multiple layers for an inner and outer cover portion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI whose telephone number is (571)272-6449. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571) 270-5246. 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.
/NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/WESLEY G HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights