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 § 103
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4, 7 and 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schwammenthal et al (2018/0169313) in view of Kantrowitz (3,585,985).
Schwammenthal et al teaches an intravascular blood pump, comprising:
a pump portion (see at least par. 0002) that includes a collapsible blood conduit 30 and one or more collapsible impellers 28 at least partially disposed within the collapsible blood conduit; and
PNG
media_image1.png
295
331
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
589
453
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a pressure sensor carrier (depicted) secured to the pump portion, the pressure sensor carrier including a carrier body (depicted) that includes a recessed region (for 56) in a first side of the carrier body. The pressure sensor inherently connected to one or more sensor connections and facing outward relative to the carrier body as shown.
However, it is unclear if Schwammenthal et al teaches all of:
“a pressure sensor secured at least partially within the recessed region such that a pressure sensitive face is facing outward relative to the carrier body; one or more sensor connections that are coupled to, in communication with, and extending proximally from the pressure sensor, the one or more sensor connections secured within the recessed region, an encapsulating material disposed at least partially in the recessed region and about the pressure sensor and the one or more connection to help stabilize the pressure sensor and the one or more sensor connections relative to the carrier body”.
Kantrowitz also teaches an intravascular blood pump (cardiac assisting device) which has a pressure sensor (24, 24’) facing outwardly and secured within a recessed region of a pressure sensor carrier 22 as shown below.
PNG
media_image3.png
209
531
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
119
135
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Column 2, lines 52-64, states the pressure transducer (24, 24’) has insulated electrical leads. Column 4, lines 39-46, teaches the pressure transducer is a semiconductor strain gauge type fitted into said recessed region (shown) in the end of the device and the junction is sealed with a coating of polyurethane solution interpreted as an encapsulating material disposed at least partially in the recessed region and about the pressure sensor and the one or more connection to help stabilize the pressure sensor and the one or more sensor connections relative to the carrier body.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have substitution the entire pressure sensor configuration of Schwammenthal et al for that of Kantrowitz to obtain predictable results. See MPEP 2143. The substitution fulfills, “a pressure sensor secured at least partially within the recessed region such that a pressure sensitive face is facing outward relative to the carrier body; one or more sensor connections that are coupled to, in communication with, and extending proximally from the pressure sensor, the one or more sensor connections secured within the recessed region, an encapsulating material disposed at least partially in the recessed region and about the pressure sensor and the one or more connection to help stabilize the pressure sensor and the one or more sensor connections relative to the carrier body”.
If the underlined language, “an encapsulating material disposed at least partially in the recessed region and about the pressure sensor and the one or more connection to help stabilize the pressure sensor and the one or more sensor connections relative to the carrier body” is not inherently taught by Kantrowitz et al, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art that the polyurethane solution could have been used to flow through the junction to stabilize the pressure sensor and one or more sensor connections to the recessed region.
Claim 2, referring to at least figure 13B, the pressure sensor carrier is secured distal to a distal end of the collapsible blood conduit (the stent).
Claim 3, the pressure sensor carrier is secured to a non-expandable distal end portion of the pump portion; see all included figures.
Claim 4, “the pressure sensor carrier is secured to radially central hub region in the distal end portion” is best shown by Kantrowitz.
Claim 7, the sensor connections run within the catheter of the collapsible blood conduit interpreted as fulfilling “wherein the one or more sensor connections are secured to the collapsible blood conduit”. The conduit blood conduit extends the entire length of the blood pump including the pressure sensor carrier.
Claims 11-12, Kantrowitz best shows the pressure sensor carrier is secured to the pump portion and the pressure sensitive faces radially outward orthogonal to a long axis of the pump.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 8-10 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The combination rejection of Schwammenthal et al (2018/0169313) in view of Kantrowitz teaches all limitations of the claim(s) from which they depend, but fails to teach:
Claim 5, the blood pump of claim 1, wherein the one or more sensor connections are secured to an expandable distal strut that extends distally from a distal end of the collapsible blood conduit.
Claim 8, the blood pump of claim 7, wherein the one or more sensor connections are secured to an outer surface of the collapsible blood conduit.
Claim 10, the blood pump of claim 1, wherein the recessed region includes a distal recess region and a proximal recess region, the distal recess region at least partially surrounding the pressure sensor, the distal recess region having a width that is greater than the proximal recess region, wherein the one or more connections are disposed in the proximal recess region.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRUCE EDWARD SNOW whose telephone number is (571)272-4759. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 am - 5:00 pm Monday through Thursday.
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, Melanie Tyson can be reached at 5712729062. 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.
/BRUCE E SNOW/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Prosecution Insights