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 .
Status of Claims
In the present application, claims 1-17 have been admitted in the claim set dated 09/09/2024 and examined below.
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 4, 6, 13, and 14 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 4 recites the term “gradually” in line 2, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear the exact amount of how much the width of the first surface increases in relation to the distance between the nozzle and an outer periphery of the first surface. It is suggested to omit the term “gradually” from the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 recites the term “gradually” in line 2, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear the exact amount of how much the width of the second surface increases in relation to the distance between the nozzle and an outer periphery of the first surface. It is suggested to omit the term “gradually” from the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the term “gradually” in line 2, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear the exact amount of how much the width of the first surface decreases in relation to the distance between the nozzle and the outer periphery of the first surface. It is suggested to omit the term “gradually” from the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the term “gradually” in line 2, which is a relative term and renders the claim indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, it is unclear the exact amount of how much the width of the second surface decreases in relation to the distance between the nozzle and the outer periphery of the first surface. It is suggested to omit the term “gradually” from the claim. 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 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Tajima et al. (US2020/0000320) hereinafter Tajima.
Regarding Claim 1, Tajima discloses an endoscope (Fig. 1 endoscope 10) comprising:
an observation window (Figs. 1-9 observation window 51) disposed in a distal end portion (Figs. 1-9 distal end portion 23) of an insertion portion (Figs. 1-9 insertion unit 20);
a nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) disposed in the distal end portion (Figs. 1-9 distal end portion 23); and
a cover (Figs. 1-9 distal end member 56) configured to cover the distal end portion (Figs. 1-9 distal end portion 23), a distal end surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of distal end member 56) of the cover (Figs. 1-9 distal end member 56) includes:
a first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) surrounding the observation window (Figs. 1-9 observation window 51), the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) having a first planar shape when viewed in a cross-section taken about a line(Fig. 2 near line VIII) connecting the observation window (Figs. 1-9 observation window 51) and the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54);
a second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) disposed radially outside the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65), the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) having a curved shape when viewed in the cross-section (Fig. 2 near line VIII); and
a third surface (Figs. 1-9 surface 561) disposed radially outside of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571), the third surface (Figs. 1-9 surface 561) having a second planar shape.
Regarding Claim 2, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) is an inside rounded corner region (Figs. 1-9 first chamfer 571, [0036] “The first chamfer 571 is a conical surface.”).
Regarding Claim 3, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) comprising a first width (see annotated Fig. 3) where a distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to an outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) of the first surface is longest and a second width (see annotated Fig. 3) where the distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to the outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) is shortest, the first width (see annotated Fig. 3) is greater than the second width (see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
620
1216
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein a width (see annotated Fig. 3) of the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) gradually increases as a distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to an outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) of the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) becomes longer.
PNG
media_image2.png
620
1216
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) comprising a first width (see annotated Fig. 3) where a distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to an outer periphery of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) is longest and a second width (see annotated Fig. 3) where the distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to the outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) is shortest, the first width (see annotated Fig. 3) is greater than the second width (see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image3.png
620
1216
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein a width (see annotated Fig. 3) of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) gradually increases as a distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to an outer periphery of the first surface (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) becomes longer.
PNG
media_image4.png
620
1216
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein one or more of a first outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) of the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) and a second outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) are circular (Figs. 1-9) .
Regarding Claim 8, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein one or more of a first outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) of the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) and a second outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) are elliptical.
Regarding Claim 9, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the distal end surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of distal end member 56) of the cover (Figs. 1-9 distal end member 56) further comprises a fourth surface (Fig. 5 surface of edge 513), an inner periphery of the fourth surface (Fig. 5 inner periphery of the surface of edge 513) contacts the observation window (Figs. 1-9 observation window 51), and an outer periphery of the fourth surface (Fig. 5 outer periphery of the surface of edge 513) contacts the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65).
Regarding Claim 10, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein a portion of the first surface (Figs 1-9 portion of surface of observation bonding portion 65) and a portion of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 portion of surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) extend in a direction toward the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54).
Regarding Claim 11, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 10, wherein in the portion of the first surface (Figs 1-9 portion of surface of observation bonding portion 65) and the portion of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 portion of surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) are each equidistant from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54).
Regarding Claim 12, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) comprising a first width (see annotated Fig. 3) where a distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to an outer periphery of the first surface (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) is shortest and a second width (see annotated Fig. 3) where the distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to the outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) is longest, the first width (see annotated Fig. 3) is greater than the second width (see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image5.png
623
1216
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 13, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 12, wherein a width of the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) gradually decreases (Fig. 3 illustrates the surface of portion 65 having a downward slope) as the distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to the outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) becomes longer.
PNG
media_image6.png
620
769
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 14, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 12, wherein a width of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) gradually decreases (Fig. 3 illustrates the surface of body 57 and chamfer 571 having a downward slope) as the distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to the outer periphery (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) becomes longer.
PNG
media_image7.png
620
918
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 15, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 1, wherein:
the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) comprising a first width (see annotated Fig. 3) where a first distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to a first outer periphery of the first surface (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of observation bonding portion 65) is longest, and a second width (see annotated Fig. 3) where the first distance is shortest,
the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) comprising a third width (see annotated Fig. 3) where a second distance from the nozzle (Figs. 1-9 nozzle 54) to a second outer periphery of the second surface (Figs. 1-9 outer periphery of the surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) is longest, and a fourth width (see annotated Fig. 3) where the second distance is shortest,
the first surface (Figs 1-9 surface of observation bonding portion 65) having a fifth width (see annotated Fig. 3) in a first portion of the first surface (Figs 1-9 a portion of surface of observation bonding portion 65) between the first width (see annotated Fig. 3) and the second width (see annotated Fig. 3), wherein the first width (see annotated Fig. 3) and the second width (see annotated Fig. 3) are greater than the fifth width (see annotated Fig. 3); and
the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) having a sixth width (see annotated Fig. 3) in a second portion of the second surface between the third width (see annotated Fig. 3) and the fourth width (see annotated Fig. 3), wherein the third width (see annotated Fig. 3) and the fourth width (see annotated Fig. 3) are greater than the sixth width (see annotated Fig. 3).
PNG
media_image8.png
708
1516
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 16, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 2, wherein the second surface (Figs. 1-9 surface of cylindrical body 57 to include first chamfer 571) is with a radius of curvature of more than 0.5 mm ([0070] “…the observation window 51 and the illumination window 52 are recessed from the end surface. It is desirable that C be 0.2 mm or more and 0.5 mm or less. It is desirable that C be 0.01 mm or more and 0.3 mm or less.”).
Regarding Claim 17, Tajima discloses the endoscope according to claim 9, wherein the fourth surface (Fig. 5 surface of edge 513) has a third planar shape parallel to the second planar shape of the third surface (Figs. 1-9 surface 561).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure:
Yagyu et al. (US2024/0188811);
Horie et al. (US2023/0113437); and
Kawamoto et al. (US2022/0304553).
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