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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Invention III (Claims 13-27) in the reply filed on April 16, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election of Claims 13-27 has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). As such, Claims 1-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions I and II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
The present rejection(s) reference specific passages from cited prior art. However, Applicant is advised that the rejections are based on the entirety of each cited prior art. That is, each cited prior art reference “must be considered in its entirety”. Therefore, Applicant is advised to review all portions of the cited prior art if traversing a rejection based on the cited prior art.
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.
Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”).
Regarding Claim 13, Stibich discloses:
An endoscope storage and/or transportation device (Stibich FIG. 3, cabinet 40) comprising:
at least one compartment (Stibich FIG. 3, void 42 within cabinet 40) for at least one endoscope to be inserted (Stibich paragraph [0027], “objects which may be considered for use in the methods, cabinets and support structures provided herein may include medical items which are kept within a hospital, including medical equipment”), the at least one compartment having one or more internal surfaces (Stibich FIG. 3, shelving 46; Stibich FIG. 2, shelf 34 having suspension nubbles 35) that can come into contact with an inserted endoscope (Stibich paragraph [0032], “suspension nubbles 35 are conical, which may be advantageous for minimizing the amount of contact with an object placed therein”); and
one or more blue light illumination sources disposed in the at least one compartment, the one or more blue light illumination sources being located and oriented to emit blue light onto one or more internal surfaces of the at least one compartment that can come into contact with an inserted endoscope (Stibich FIG. 3, disinfection device 50; Stibich paragraph [0031], “a disinfection device to be used in the cabinet comprising the shelving, basket or tray has a germicidal light source”; Stibich paragraph [0043], “Ranges of light which are known to be germicidal include ultraviolet light between approximately 200 nm and approximately 320 nm, particularly 220 nm and between 260 nm and 265 nm, and visible violet-blue light (also known as high-intensity narrow-spectrum (HINS) light) between approximately 400 nm and approximately 470 nm, particularly 405 nm.”).
Regarding Claim 14, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich further discloses the device being one of a drying and storage cabinet (Stibich FIG. 3, fans 49; Stibich paragraph [0062], “the fans may be configured to drawn air in or out of the cabinet”; Stibich paragraph [0063], “the cabinets described herein may include dehumidifiers and/or cooling devices to control the humidity and temperature of the interior of the cabinet”) and a mobile endoscopy trolley.
Regarding Claim 15, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich further discloses wherein the one or more blue light emission sources being configured to emit light with a wavelength between 400 nm and 470 nm (Stibich paragraph [0043], “Ranges of light which are known to be germicidal include…visible violet-blue light (also known as high-intensity narrow-spectrum (HINS) light) between approximately 400 nm and approximately 470 nm, particularly 405 nm.”).
Regarding Claim 16, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 15, as described above.
Stibich further discloses wherein the blue light emission sources being configured to emit light with a wavelength of 405 nm (Stibich paragraph [0043], “Ranges of light which are known to be germicidal include…visible violet-blue light (also known as high-intensity narrow-spectrum (HINS) light) between…particularly 405 nm.”).
Regarding Claim 17, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich further discloses at least one of a door (Stibich FIG. 3, door 43) and a slideable compartment tray.
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.
Claims 18 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”) in view of Nath et al. (US PGPUB 2022/0143235 – “Nath”).
Regarding Claim 18, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 17, as described above.
Regarding the feature of a switch connecting a power source with the one or more blue light illumination sources, the switch being switchably connected with the door or the slideable compartment tray such as to turn on the one or more blue light illumination sources when the door is closed or the compartment tray is slid into the endoscope storage and/or transportation device, Stibich discloses turning off the light illumination source if the door to the cabinet is opened (Stibich FIG. 1, block 32 Stibich paragraph [0054], “if the door to the cabinet is opened during operation of the disinfection device, power supply to the disinfection device will be terminated as set forth in block 32 of FIG. 1”). However, Stibich does not explicitly states that the disinfection device/light is turned on by a switch in the door when the cabinet door is closed.
Nath teaches a sterilization cabinet have a disinfectant lamp that turns on when the cabinet door closes (Nath FIG., 1, doors 124, 126 on safety cabinet 100; Nath FIG. 11, UV lamp 180; Nath paragraph [0051], “interior lighting system 150 constructed according to principles of the present disclosure in which the light source comprises an ultraviolet (“UV”) lamp 180. The ultraviolet lamp 180 can emit wavelengths in the ultraviolet range. In embodiments, the UV lamp 180 can comprise any suitable device configured to emit UV light, such as a commercially-available UV-C (germicidal) lamp, for example”; Nath paragraph [0058], “the interior lighting system 150 can be operatively associated with power switches for turning on or off the plurality of electrical lamps. For example, the switch may be operatively triggered by the first and/or second doors 124, 126 so that the interior lighting system 150 turns on when the doors are opened and turns off when the doors are closed. In embodiments where the light sources comprise UV lamps, the switch can be configured to turn the interior lighting system on when the doors are closed to disinfect the interior compartment and contents of the safety cabinet and to turn the UV lamps off when a door of the safety cabinet is opened to protect those located near the safety cabinet from exposure to the UV light.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nath’s cabinet door power switch with the device disclosed by Stibich. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a decontamination cabinet having the convenience/safety feature of a door switch that turns the disinfecting lamp on and off when the door closes and opens (see Nath paragraph [0058]).
Regarding Claim 21, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich further discloses a sensor for sensing the presence of at least one inserted endoscope/object (Stibich paragraph [0064], “a system for identifying objects may include a weight sensor in one or more of the support structures of the cabinet. In particular, a weight sensor may be used to verify whether the weight of an object placed on or in the support structure is in an appropriate range for what it has been identified as via a scanning system of the cabinet. In addition or alternatively, a support structure of the cabinet may be designated for receipt of a particular object (or a particular type of object, such as a type of medical device) and the weight sensor may be used to verify whether the weight of an object placed in or on the support structure is in an appropriate range for the object which support structure is designated”).
Stibich does not explicitly disclose one or more mechanical and/or optical sensors configured for sensing the closing and opening of the compartment and/or the endoscope storage and/or transportation device, and/or the presence of at least one inserted endoscope.
Nath teaches one or more mechanical and/or optical sensors configured for sensing the closing and opening of the compartment and/or the endoscope storage and/or transportation device (Nath FIG., 1, doors 124, 126 on safety cabinet 100; Nath paragraph [0058], “the interior lighting system 150 can be operatively associated with power switches for turning on or off the plurality of electrical lamps. For example, the switch may be operatively triggered by the first and/or second doors 124, 126 so that the interior lighting system 150 turns on when the doors are opened and turns off when the doors are closed”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Nath’s cabinet door power switch with the device disclosed by Stibich. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a decontamination cabinet having the convenience/safety feature of a door switch that turns the disinfecting lamp on and off when the door closes and opens (see Nath paragraph [0058]).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”) in view of Larsson (US PGPUB 2020/0214548 – “Larsson”).
Regarding Claim 19, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Although Stibich discloses closable loading ports for receiving objects to be disinfected (see Stibich FIG. 3, loading port 45; Stibich paragraph [0057], “cabinet 40 may include one or more loading ports with closable doors along its exterior sidewalls to access one or more of tray 44, shelving 46 and/or baskets 48 as an additional or alternative manner in which to load one or more objects into the cabinet”), Stibich does not explicitly disclose automated means for inserting and/or extracting the at least one endoscope into or from the compartment.
Larsson is analogous art directed to disinfecting endoscopes, and teaches automated means (Larsson FIG. 2, robotic device 70) for inserting and/or extracting the at least one endoscope(Larsson FIG. 2, tray 41 holding endoscope; see Larsson FIG. 3) into or from the compartment (Larsson FIG. 2, disinfection device 50; see also Larsson FIG. 4).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Larsson’s robotic loading mechanism with the device disclosed by Stibich. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a disinfecting device that is robotic, in order to improve accuracy of movement of the endoscope being cleaned, options to control the device locally or remotely, etc. as provided by robotics.
Regarding Claim 20, Stibich in view of Larsson teaches the features of Claim 19, as described above.
Larsson further teaches wherein the automated means comprises at least one of a robotic arm (Larsson FIG. 4 robot arm 71 of robotic device 70) and an automated sled (Larsson FIG. 4, tray 41).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”) in view of Nath et al. (US PGPUB 2022/0143235 – “Nath”) and Noguchi et al. (US PGPUB 2007/0107152 – “Noguchi”).
Regarding Claim 22, Stibich in view of Nath teaches the features of Claim 21, as described above.
Although Nath teaches activating and deactivating blue light illumination of the at least one cabinet in reaction to sensor signals by the one or more mechanical and/or optical sensors (Nath paragraph [0058], “the interior lighting system 150 can be operatively associated with power switches for turning on or off the plurality of electrical lamps. For example, the switch may be operatively triggered by the first and/or second doors 124, 126 so that the interior lighting system 150 turns on when the doors are opened and turns off when the doors are closed”), Nath does not explicitly teach that this process of activating/deactivating the light is by a controller.
Noguchi teaches the process of disinfecting an endoscope (Noguchi FIG. 1, endoscope 20 being inserted into disinfecting apparatus 2) is activated by a controller (Noguchi FIG. 3, controller 26; Noguchi paragraph [0107], “processing for washing, rinsing, disinfecting, re-rinsing, and dehydrating processes for the endoscope 20 is activated under the control of the controller 26”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Noguchi’s controller with the device taught by Stibich in view of Nath. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a device that disinfects the endoscope/tool following a “predetermined processing” (see Noguchi paragraph [0107]).
Claims 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”) in view of Rasooly et al (US PGPUB 2013/0303996 – “Rasooly”).
Regarding Claim 23, Stibich discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich discloses the application of blue light to sanitize the device (Stibich paragraph [0031], “a disinfection device to be used in the cabinet comprising the shelving, basket or tray has a germicidal light source”; Stibich paragraph [0043], “Ranges of light which are known to be germicidal include ultraviolet light between approximately 200 nm and approximately 320 nm, particularly 220 nm and between 260 nm and 265 nm, and visible violet-blue light (also known as high-intensity narrow-spectrum (HINS) light) between approximately 400 nm and approximately 470 nm, particularly 405 nm.”).
However, Stibich does not explicitly disclose a controller configured to control the application of disinfecting light to being done one of continuously and intermittently.
Rasooly is analogous art in the field of catheter/instrument disinfection (Rasooly Abstract, “A system for disinfecting or sterilizing a catheter is provided.”) that teaches a controller (Rasooly FIG. 4, controller 180) configured to control the application of disinfecting light (Rasooly FIG. 4, UV light source 130, 140) to being done one of continuously and intermittently (Rasooly paragraph [0028], “controller 180 preferably configured the light sources 130 and 140 to emit UV light for approximately two minutes per disinfection cycle (continuously or intermittently in pulse width modulation), but can alternatively configure the light sources 130 and 140 to emit UV light in any suitable manner.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Rasooly’s processor-controlled sterilization system with the device disclosed by Stibich. A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a system having a controller that optimizes power usage (see Rasooly paragraph [0029].
Regarding Claim 24, Stibich in view of Rasooly teaches the features of Claim 23, as described above.
Rasooly further teaches wherein where the blue light is applied intermittently, intermittent application of blue light durations of alternating application and non-application of blue light being set with predetermined values (Rasooly paragraph [0028], “the controller 180 preferably configured the light sources 130 and 140 to emit UV light for approximately two minutes per disinfection cycle (continuously or intermittently in pulse width modulation”).
Claims 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stibich et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0360977 – “Stibich”) in view of Chen (US PGPUB 2023/0390430).
Regarding Claim 25, Chen discloses the features of Claim 13, as described above.
Stibich discloses internal surfaces that can come into contact with an inserted endoscope (Stibich FIG. 3, showing shelving 46 within a disinfection cabinet 40 upon which an endoscope can be placed when inserted into the cabinet 40).
Stibich does not explicitly disclose one or more photosensitizers incorporated into the least one internal surfaces.
Chen is analogous art in the field of equipment sterilization that teaches one or more photosensitizers incorporated into the least one internal surfaces (Chen FIG. 1A, showing photosensitizer solution 104 being applied to a surface of a structure 110).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chen’s photosensitizers with the blue light utilized in Stibich paragraph [0043] (cited above in the rejection of Claim 13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)). A person having ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to combine these prior art elements according to known methods to yield the predictable result of a disinfection (pathogen inactivation) that strengthens/accelerates the disinfection power of visible light (see Chen Abstract, “An applicator…is arranged to apply one or more photosensitizers to surfaces. The applicator includes at least one light source and the one or more photosensitizers. Light combined with the photosensitizers creates singlet oxygen and other radical species which are toxic to viruses and other pathogens.”).
Regarding Claim 26, Stibich in view of Chen teaches the features of Claim 25, as described above.
Chen further teaches wherein the one or more photosensitizers are selected from a groups consisting of tetrapyrrol derivatives and synthetic analogues (Chen paragraph [0005], “All known and contemplated photosensitizers are intended to be part of this invention including but not limited to all types of methylene blue derivatives and methylene blue itself, xanthene dyes and derivatives, chlorophyll derivatives, tetrapyrrole structures, porphyrins, chlorins, bacteriochlorins, phthalocyanines, texaphyrins, prodrugs such as aminolevulinic acids, phenothiaziniums, squaraine, boron compounds, various transition metal complexes, hypericin, riboflavin, curcumin, titanium dioxide, psoralens, tetracyclines, flavins such as riboflavin, riboflavin derivatives, erythrosine, erythrosine derivatives, and the like.”).
Regarding Claim 27, Stibich in view of Chen teaches the features of Claim 26, as described above.
Chen further teaches wherein the tetrapyrrol derivatives and synthetic analogues comprise at least one of meso-tetraarylporphyrins, phthalocyanines, porphycans, texaphyrins, and safirins (Chen paragraph [0005], “All known and contemplated photosensitizers are intended to be part of this invention including but not limited to all types of methylene blue derivatives and methylene blue itself, xanthene dyes and derivatives, chlorophyll derivatives, tetrapyrrole structures, porphyrins, chlorins, bacteriochlorins, phthalocyanines, texaphyrins, prodrugs such as aminolevulinic acids, phenothiaziniums, squaraine, boron compounds, various transition metal complexes, hypericin, riboflavin, curcumin, titanium dioxide, psoralens, tetracyclines, flavins such as riboflavin, riboflavin derivatives, erythrosine, erythrosine derivatives, and the like.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIM BOICE whose telephone number is (571)272-6565. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:00pm Eastern.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at (571)272-4963. 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.
JIM BOICE
Examiner
Art Unit 3795
/JAMES EDWARD BOICE/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANH TUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795 05/08/2026
Prosecution Insights