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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The exceedingly large number of references cited in the multiple Information Disclosure Statements have been afforded a cursory review, similar to what would be expected of a classification search of the prior art. Should there be any references of particular relevance to the instant application claims, applicant is respectfully requested to identify such references for further consideration by the examiner.
Additionally, a number of references have not been considered, as indicated on the attached PTO-1449’s, for failing to provide a listing with a discernible name and/or date as the citations were provided in a foreign language.
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.
Claims 1, 2 and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wiener et al (2019/0282292).
Regarding claim 1, Wiener et al provide a generator for an ablation device configured to generate electrical pulses (para. [0139], for example) and coupled to at least one electrode (para. [0037], for example). The generator comprises a power supply unit (211 – Figure 10) and a switching unit (170 – Figure 10, for example). The generator is configured to limit leakage current to the electrode (para. [0132], for example).
Regarding claim 2, the generator is configured to limit the leakage current to below 10 micro-amps (para. [0230], for example).
Claims 1, 2 and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Krieg et al (2022/0023631).
Krieg et al provide a generator for an ablation device, the generator configured to generate pulses (Title, Abstract, for example). The generator comprises a power supply unit (157 – Figure 1B) and a switching unit (para. [0026], [0029], [0064] and [0085-0090], for example) and the generator is configured to limit leakage current to the electrode (para. [0061], for example).
Regarding claim 2, Krieg et al discloses the particular IEC code for leakage which is known to be less than 10 micro-amps (see Wiener et al discussion above). Regarding claim 8, Krieg et al disclose a DC/DC converter (para. [0104], for example). Regarding claim 9, the DC/DC converter is coupled between the power supply unit and the switching unit (e.g. when the switching unit is a footswitch). Regarding claim 10, see paragraph [0098], ,for example. Regarding claims 11-13, see paragraphs [0081-0083] which discusses the particular transformer isolation, to which the DC/DC converter is connected, that includes a discharge capacitor and a safety discharge resistor to disconnect the generator from the electrode. Regarding claims 14 and 15, see paragraph [0090] which discusses the use of a thyristor as well as the discharge of the output capacitor in less than 50 nanoseconds. Regarding claim 16, see discussion at paragraphs [0081-0083], for example. Regarding claim 17, see discussion at paragraph [0042], for example.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiener et al (‘292) in view of the teaching of Shelton, IV et al (10,755,813).
Wiener et al disclose the generator as addressed previously, but fail to disclose the use of semiconductor switches. It is noted that Wiener et al provide several different types of switches, both within the generator and between the generator and the electrode (i.e. footswitch).
Shelton, IV et al disclose a similar electrosurgical generator system, and specifically teach that it is known to provide a variety of different types of switches for the system, including semiconductor switches. See, for example, column 42, lines 50-60).
To have provided the Wiener et al device, which includes numerous different switches, with a well-known switch such as a semiconductor switch for operation of the generator would have been an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Shelton, IV et al fairly teach the known use of semiconductor switches in a similar electrosurgical generator apparatus.
Claims 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krieg et al (‘631) in view of the teaching of Vacha et al (10,363,079).
Krieg et al discloses the use of a DC/DC converter within the generator system, but fails to expressly disclose the relationship to the windings and the specific conversion ratio of the converter.
Vacha et al disclose another electrosurgical generator apparatus that includes a DC/DC converter for coupling a power supply to an electrosurgical instrument. Figure 5 of Vacha et al shows the DC/DC converter including two windings (3T) for connection through a transformer. Additionally, Vacha et al specifically teach the conversion ratio for the converter may be 1:6 (col. 13, line 10, for example). The examiner maintains the specific voltage levels would be an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art and would depend on the specific device and/or procedure used with the generator.
To have provided the Krieg et al DC/DC converter with the specific winding structure and conversion ratio required by the claims would have been an obvious consideration for one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention since Vacha et al generally teach such a structure and conversion ratio are generally known in the electrosurgical generator field.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 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 prior art fails to disclose the specific switch structure including top and bottom transistor and resistive elements as required by claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Friedrichs et al (10,869,712) disclose another generator system that includes means to limit leakage current in a pulsed delivery system. Hubelbank et al (10,524,851) discloses an electrosurgical generator that includes a switch circuitry designed to reduce RF leakage current. Albu (9,806,627) disclose another RF generator system including a DC/DC converter connected via windings (Figure 3, for example), and Vankov (9,018,983) also disclose a DC-DC converter connected via windings in an electrosurgical generator. Zieve et al (5,190,517) disclose another generator for delivering pulsed energy including means to limit leakage current (Abstract, for example).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL PEFFLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-4770. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8 am-5 pm.
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) 272-1213. 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.
/MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/M.F.P/ July 11, 2026
Prosecution Insights