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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,405,920. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of claim 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,405,920 anticipate the claims of the application. Accordingly, the application claims are not patentably distinct from the patent claims. Here, the more specific patent claims encompass the broader application claims. Following the rationale in In re Goodman cited in the preceding paragraph, where applicant has once been granted a patent containing a claim for the specific narrow invention, applicant may not obtain a second patent with a claim for the generic or broader invention without first submitting an appropriate terminal disclaimer.
18/812,390
US 10,405,920
1. A method of ablating cardiac tissues comprising: selecting a maximum radiofrequency (RF) power to be delivered by an electrode within a range of approximately 25 W to approximately 100 W; selecting a maximum allowable temperature, of tissue to be ablated, within a range of approximately 55 °C to approximately 65 °C; selecting an irrigation rate for providing irrigation fluid to the electrode within a range of approximately 8 to approximately 30 ml/min; and performing an ablation of the tissue using the selected values for a time period between approximately 1 second and approximately 6 seconds.
1. A method, comprising: selecting a maximum radiofrequency (RF) power to be delivered by an electrode within a range of 70 W-100 W; selecting an allowable force on the electrode within a range of 5 g-50 g; selecting a maximum allowable temperature, of tissue to be ablated, within a range of 55° C.-65° C.; selecting an irrigation rate for providing irrigation fluid to the electrode within a range of 8-30 ml/min; and performing an ablation of the tissue using the selected values for a time period between 1 s and 6 s.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the selected values include: maximum RF power of approximately 90 W and maximum allowable temperature of approximately 60 °C.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the selected values are: maximum RF power 90 W, allowable force between 10 g and 20 g, maximum allowable temperature 60° C., and irrigation rate 15 ml/min, and wherein the power is delivered for 3 s so as to provide a lesion having a depth between 1 mm and 3 mm.
6. The method according to claim 1, and comprising measuring at respective times a temperature of the tissue, and, when the temperature exceeds the selected maximum allowable temperature, reducing a level of an RF power delivered by the electrode.
6. The method according to claim 1, and comprising measuring at respective times a temperature of the tissue, and, when the temperature exceeds the selected maximum allowable temperature, reducing a level of an RF power delivered by the electrode.
10. Apparatus, comprising: an electrode; a power control module configured to select a maximum radiofrequency (RF) power to be delivered by the electrode within a range of approximately 25 W to approximately 90 W; and a processor coupled to the power control module and configured to: select a maximum allowable temperature, of tissue to be ablated, within a range of approximately 55 °C to approximately 65 °C.; select an irrigation rate for providing irrigation fluid to the electrode within a range of approximately 8 ml/min to approximately 30 ml/min; and perform an ablation of the tissue using the selected values for a time period of any duration from approximately 1 second and approximately 6 seconds.
8. Apparatus, comprising: an electrode; a power control module configured to select a maximum radiofrequency (RF) power to be delivered by the electrode within a range of 70 W-100 W; and a processor coupled to the power control module and configured to: select an allowable force on the electrode within a range of 5 g-50 g; select a maximum allowable temperature, of tissue to be ablated, within a range of 55° C.-65° C.; select an irrigation rate for providing irrigation fluid to the electrode within a range of 8-30 ml/min; and perform an ablation of the tissue using the selected values for a time period between 1 s and 6 s.
11. The apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the selected values include: maximum RF power of approximately 90 W and maximum allowable temperature of approximately 60 °C and irrigation flow rate of approximately 8 ml/min.
10. The apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the selected values are: maximum RF power 90 W, allowable force between 10 g and 20 g, maximum allowable temperature 60° C., and irrigation rate 15 ml/min, and wherein the power is delivered for 3 s, and is then reduced to 50 W so as to provide a lesion having a depth between 4 mm and 5 mm.
18. The apparatus according to claim 10, wherein the processor is configured to: measure at respective times a temperature of the tissue, and, when the temperature exceeds the selected maximum allowable temperature, reduce a level of an RF power delivered by the electrode.
13. The apparatus according to claim 8, wherein the processor is configured to measure at respective times a temperature of the tissue, and, when the temperature exceeds the selected maximum allowable temperature, to reducing a level of an RF power delivered by the electrode.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIGIST S DEMIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5345. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached at 571-2721213. 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.
/TIGIST S DEMIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights