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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 05/11/2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1-2, 5, 10, and 12 have been amended and claims 15-18 have been added. Thus, claims 1-18 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 7-11, filed 05/11/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-2, 5, and 12-13 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Forber et al (US 5733294 A), herein referenced to as “Forber” have been fully considered and are persuasive.
The applicant amended claim 1 to change “the bundling portion” to “ring-shaped member”. The applicant argues that with this change that Forber discloses only the bending and reversal of the wires and not the ring-shaped member between the accommodated state and the expanded state.
The examiner agrees. Furthermore, Forber notes that the bands/rings when being deployed are pulled towards the central band and the reversal or twisting of the first ring-shaped member such that the second end being on the near side (or proximally closer, as established by structural relationship with “the basket includes a first ring-shaped member at which the plurality of wires are bundled and fixed at a distal portion of the basket and a second ring-shaped member at which the plurality of wires are bundled and fixed at a proximal portion of the basket”) in the accommodated state to the second end being on the distal side/far side in the state where the basket is out of the outer tube is not possible due to the wires being shape-trained to pull the rings medially (see col. 5, lines 16-25).
The USC 102 and 103 rejections of the claims have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In claim 15, the limitation “the plurality of wires are bundled only at the first ring-shaped member and the second ring-shaped member” fails to comply with the written description requirement. The specification fails to adequately explicitly state that plurality of wires cannot be bundled elsewhere from the first and second ring-shaped members. The claim is interpreted as such due to the use of the term “only” which in the limitation acts as an adverb modifying the verb “bundled”. The definition of only according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary is “Solely, Exclusively”, which follows the definition and intent the applicant describes on page 6 of their remarks “It is clear that the specification/drawings of the present application disclose only the baskets having two bundling portions at the ring-shaped portions (51, 52)”. Hence, bundled at the ring-shaped members to the exclusion of all else, hence a negative limitation.
It is noted that any negative limitation or exclusionary provisions must have basis in the original disclosure. The mere absence of a positive recitation is not basis for an exclusion. See MPEP 2173.05(i).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-14 and 16-18 are allowable.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the prior art of record fails to teach or render obvious a medical device comprising, inter alia, an outer tube having a distal end and a proximal end, a basket disposed in an inner cavity of the outer tube and having a plurality of wires, the basket being expandable when having come out of the outer tube; the basket includes a first ring-shaped member at which the plurality of wires are bundled and fixed at a distal portion of the basket, and a second ring-shaped member at which the plurality of the wires are bundled and fixed at a proximal portion of the basket, the basket is configured so that in a state where the basket is accommodated in the outer tube, the first ring-shaped member has a first end being an end portion on a far side with respect to the second ring-shaped member and a second end being an end portion on a near side with respect to the second ring-shaped member; and the basket is configured so that in a state where an entirety of the basket has come out of the outer tube and no external force is applied to the basket, the second end is positioned on a distal side with respect to the first end. Forber et al (US 5733294 A) teaches a basket with an outer tube and a first ring-shaped member and a second ring-shaped member which the plurality of wires are bundled, with one at the proximal end and one at the distal end. However, Forber doesn’t teach or render capable the first and second ends of the first ring-shaped member switching positions as bands/ring-shaped members are shape-trained to be pulled medially by the wires. Additionally, this process of motion is shown to be an axial only motion due to the process of formation detailed between Figs. 3-4 and through the compression of the blood vessel on the device (see col. 5, lines 23-26). Vu et al (US 20210282789 A1) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and a basket with ring-shaped members, however, the ends of the first ring-shaped member are not taught to be capable of switching position, as the eversion that takes place, states that there is withdrawing within or below, which is incompatible with the transposing as claimed. Chanduszko et al (US 7842053 B2) teaches a medical device (Figs. 4-8) with an outer tube, a basket with a plurality of wires and ring-shaped members, however the first ring-shaped member does not have the first and second ends of the first ring-shaped member switching positions. While the second ring-shaped member seems to be able to functionally transpose, it does not result in the ends switching side, but rather aligning at a medial position. Furthermore, the movement is limited by a connection 26 between the ring-shaped members 28 + 30 (see Fig. 4). Dela (US 9820844 B2) teaches a medical device with ring-shaped members and a basket of a plurality of wires, however, the ring-shaped members are only capable of sliding but not transposing due to being slid on a tube. Makower et al (US 6638293 B1) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and a basket with a plurality of wires with a cone-shaped member that transposes (see Figs. 13A-13B), however this is not a ring-shaped member, furthermore this element is on the proximal end of the device rather than the distal end of the device and it is the flow of blood that causes the inversion/transposal of 48b, rather than “and no external force is applied to the basket” as claimed. Chanduszko (US 7318833 B2) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and ring-shaped members, but the ring-shaped members transpose but not within resulting in the ends switching side but aligning at a medial position, as limited by the length of the device. Glimsdale (US 20210145422 A1) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and a basket with ring-shaped members but is silent to the change of the positioning of the ring-shaped members.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chanduszko et al (US 7842053 B2) teaches a medical device (Figs. 4-8) with an outer tube, a basket with a plurality of wires and ring-shaped members, however the first ring-shaped member does not have the first and second ends of the first ring-shaped member switching positions.
Makower et al (US 6638293 B1) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and a basket with a plurality of wires with a cone-shaped member that transposes (see Figs. 13A-13B)
Chanduszko (US 7318833 B2) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and ring-shaped members
Glimsdale (US 20210145422 A1) teaches a medical device with an outer tube and a basket with ring-shaped members but is silent to the change of the positioning of the ring-shaped members
Dela (US 9820844 B2) teaches a medical device with ring-shaped members and a basket of a plurality of wires, however, the ring-shaped members are only capable of sliding but not transposing due to being slid on a tube
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 RAIHAN R KHANDKER whose telephone number is (571)272-6174. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 5:00 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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 571-272-4695. 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.
RAIHAN R. KHANDKER
Examiner
Art Unit 3771
/RAIHAN R KHANDKER/Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights