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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species VI: an elevator assembly having a rotating plate, slide, and frame as illustrated in Figs. 9-11D, in the reply filed on 04/07/2026 is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
The amendment field 07/20/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 14-17, and 21-35 are currently pending in the application. Claims 2-13 and 18-20 are canceled. Claims 21-35 are newly added.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the independent claims has been amended with new limitations. Such newly added limitations change the scope of the claims, renders the previous rejection identified in the non-final office action dated 04/21/2026 moot, and requires a new ground of rejection. As such the previous rejections identified in the non-final office action 04/21/2026 have been withdrawn. A new ground of rejection is presented below.
Please see section 35 U.S.C. §102 and 35 U.S.C. §103 below for further explanation.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 includes a typo. The limitation in claim 1 should be amended to state, “…wherein the instrument is extendable through the second lumen…”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1 and 21-35 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 1 recites the limitation "the lumen" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the first lumen.” Appropriate correction is required. Claims 21-28 depend from claim 1 and are also rejected because of their dependency on the rejected base claim 1.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the plate" twice in lines 8 and 10, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the rotatable plate.” Appropriate correction is required. Claims 30-35 depend from claim 29 and are also rejected because of their dependency on the rejected base claim 29.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "the slide" three times in lines 9, 10, and 11, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation in line 8 to omit the word “member,” so the limitation states, “a slide rotatable plate.” If Applicant chooses to make Examiner suggested amendment, then it is also suggested to reflect such amendment in claims 33-34. Appropriate correction is required. Claims 30-35 depend from claim 29 and are also rejected because of their dependency on the rejected base claim 29.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "the plate" twice in lines 1 and 2, respectively. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the rotatable plate.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 34 recites the limitation “lumen” in line 1. However claim 29, which claim 34 directly depends from, previously introduces the term “a lumen” in line 6. Therefore it is unclear whether the limitation in claim 34 is referencing the previously introduced ‘lumen’ of claim 29 or introducing a new and distinct ‘lumen.’ It is suggested to amend the limitation to state, “the lumen.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 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 1 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yamaya et al. (US2003/0040657).
Regarding Claim 1, Yamaya discloses, a device (Figs. 74-85E fourteenth embodiment endoscope) comprising:
a shaft (Fig. 74 insertion unit 302) having a distal end (Fig. 74 near distal component assembly 305) and a first lumen (Fig. 74 instrument passage channel 315), the lumen terminating in a distally-facing opening (Fig. 74 near reference numeral 310,[0547]), wherein an instrument (Figs. 74-79a treatment instrument 359) is extendable through the first lumen (Fig. 74 instrument passage channel 315) and out the distally-facing opening (Fig. 74 near reference numeral 310,[0547]); and
an elevator (Figs. 74-79a first treatment instrument swing stand 310 and angling wire 341) for engaging the instrument (Figs. 74-79a treatment instrument 359), the elevator (Figs. 74-79a first treatment instrument swing stand 310 and angling wire 341) including:
an actuator (Figs. 74-79a angling wire 341) extending through at least a portion ([0535], Figs. 76 and 79a) of the shaft (Fig. 74 insertion unit 302); and
a rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) coupled to the actuator (Figs. 74-79a angling wire 341), wherein the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) is angled such that a distal portion (see annotated Fig. 79a) of the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) is more distal than a proximal portion (see annotated Fig. 79a) of the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a), wherein the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) is rotatable about ([0516] “In the present embodiment, the first treatment instrument swing stand 310 moves in the rightward and leftward directions of the endoscope…”) a longitudinal axis of the shaft (Fig. 74 longitudinal axis of insertion unit 302), wherein the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) includes a second lumen (Fig. 79a treatment instrument passage hole 357) aligned with the first lumen (Fig. 74 instrument passage channel 315, [0547]), wherein the instrument (Figs. 74-79a treatment instrument 359) is extendable though the second lumen (Fig. 79a treatment instrument passage hole 357), and wherein the rotation of the rotatable plate (see annotated Fig. 79a) is configured deflect the instrument(Figs. 74-79a treatment instrument 359).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 21, Yamaya discloses, the device of claim 1, wherein the distal portion (see annotated Fig. 79a) and the proximal portion (see annotated Fig. 79a) are longitudinally fixed relative to (Examiner’s note: Examiner is interpreting the phrase “fixed relative to” broadly. Here, Yamaya discloses the distal portion and the proximal portion, as annotated below, are fixed relative to the shaft because they can not move in the up/down direction and rotation shafts 358 limit their movement because they are fixed to distal component assembly 305. [0516]. Also see arrows near reference numeral 310 in Fig. 74. ) the shaft (Fig. 74 insertion unit 302).
PNG
media_image1.png
496
725
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.
Claim 22 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yamaya in view of Calabrese et al. (US2018/0249895) hereinafter Calabrese.
Regarding Claim 22, Yamaya disclose the device of claim 21 but is silent as to further include wherein the rotatable plate includes a recess, wherein the elevator further includes a slide member positioned within the recess.
However Calabrese, in the same field of endeavor teaches, wherein the rotatable plate (Figs. 1-8b elevator 140) includes a recess (Figs. 1-8b indentation 168 [0027]), wherein the elevator (Figs. 1-8b tip 108 near elevator 140) further includes a slide member (Figs. 1-8b protrusion 170, [0034]) positioned within the recess (Figs. 1-8b indentation 168 [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Yamaya to include a recess within the rotatable plate, as taught by Calabrese, for the benefit of having the rotatable plate configured “…to exert a holding or gripping force on [an] instrument” (Calabrese – [0027]).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Yamaya to include a slide member positioned within the recess, as taught by Calabrese, for the benefit of “…holding or locking …[an]…instrument…” once the instrument is in a desired orientation (Calabrese – [0034]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 14-17 are allowable.
Claims 23-35 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the cited 35 U.S.C. §112(b) rejections as suggested above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to teach, among other features, a device, comprising: a shaft having a distal end and a first lumen, the first lumen terminating in a distal-facing opening, wherein an instrument is extendable through the first lumen and out of the distal-facing opening, and an elevator for engaging the instrument, the elevator including: a first actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a rotatable plate coupled to the first actuator, wherein the rotatable plate is angled such that a distal portion of the rotatable plate is more distal relative to a proximal portion of the rotatable plate, wherein the rotatable plate includes: a second lumen configured to align with the first lumen, and a recess; a second actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a slide member coupled to the second actuator, wherein the slide member is positioned within the recess and includes a third lumen configured to align with the first lumen; and a frame fixedly positioned within the shaft, wherein the rotatable plate is rotatably coupled to the frame.
The prior art also fails to teach, among other features, a device, comprising: a shaft having a distal end and a working channel, the working channel terminating in a distal-facing opening, wherein an instrument is extendable through the working channel and out of the distal-facing opening; and an elevator for engaging the instrument, the elevator including: a rotatable plate including a lumen; a first actuator configured to rotate the rotatable plate; a slide rotatable plate; and a second actuator configured to longitudinally move the slide, wherein rotation of the rotatable plate changes an orientation of the slide, and wherein longitudinal movement of the slide exerts a force on the instrument against a wall of the working channel to change an orientation of the instrument.
Matsui et al. (US6458074) teaches the above except for wherein the rotatable plate includes: a second lumen configured to align with the first lumen, and a recess; a second actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a slide member coupled to the second actuator, wherein the slide member is positioned within the recess and includes a third lumen configured to align with the first lumen.
Koji Yamaya (US2007/0112249) teaches the above except for wherein the rotatable plate includes: a recess; a second actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a slide member coupled to the second actuator, wherein the slide member is positioned within the recess and includes a third lumen configured to align with the first lumen.
Yamaya et al. (US2003/0040657) teaches the above except for the rotatable plate includes: a second lumen configured to align with the first lumen, and a recess; a second actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a slide member coupled to the second actuator, wherein the slide member is positioned within the recess and includes a third lumen configured to align with the first lumen.
Calabrese et al. (US2018/0249895) teaches the above except for a rotatable plate coupled to the first actuator, wherein the rotatable plate is angled such that a distal portion of the rotatable plate is more distal relative to a proximal portion of the rotatable plate, wherein the rotatable plate includes: a second lumen configured to align with the first lumen, and a recess; a second actuator extending through at least a portion of the shaft; a slide member coupled to the second actuator, wherein the slide member is positioned within the recess and includes a third lumen configured to align with the first lumen; and a frame fixedly positioned within the shaft, wherein the rotatable plate is rotatably coupled to the frame.
There is no reason or suggestion provided in the prior art to modify the above prior art to have the additional features as claimed above, and the only reason to modify the references would be based on Applicant’s disclosure, which is impermissible hindsight reasoning.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEGAN E MONAHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7330. 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, Michael Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/MEGAN ELIZABETH MONAHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights