DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1, 3, 6, 8, and 17-18 are amended. Claims 2, 5, and 7 are canceled. A complete action on the merits of pending claims 1, 3-4, 6, and 8-20 appears below.
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 .
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/21/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Acknowledgment is made to Applicant’s amendments filed on 07/21/2026 which are entered. With regards to the claim objections and 35 USC 112(b) rejections documented in the Non-Final Office Action sent on 04/21/2026, they are overcome through Applicant’s amendments filed on 07/21/2026 and are withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 13 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Applicant canceled claim 5, but did not change the dependency of claims 13-14, which depended upon now canceled claim 5. Claims 13-14 should now depend upon claim 1 which was amended to recite the limitations previously recited in now canceled claim 5.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim(s) 1, 9, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pederson (US 2018/0133435 A1), in view of Wilson (US 6425898 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Pederson discloses, a system for releasing of medical implants. Pederson teaches, a delivery device (Figures 1-2, medical device system (100); Paragraph [0047]) for a spring coil (Figures 1-2, medical device (130); Paragraph [0048]), comprising:
a delivery unit (Figures 1-2, elongate shaft (110) & securement member (140); Paragraphs [0047]-[0052]);
a spring coil unit (Figures 1-2, medical device (130) & second portion (174) of release mechanism (170); Paragraphs [0048] & [0054]), wherein a proximal end of the spring coil unit is detachably connected to a distal end of the delivery unit (Paragraph [0054]); and
an introducer sheath unit (Figures 1-2, microcatheter (190); Paragraph [0049]), comprising an introducer sheath (See annotated Figure 2 below, (Introducer sheath)), wherein the spring coil unit and the delivery unit are disposed in the introducer sheath (Paragraph [0049]);
wherein the introducer sheath unit further comprises a first cone tube (See annotated Figure 2 below, (First cone tube)), wherein the first cone tube is disposed at a distal end of the introducer sheath unit (As seen in Figures 1-2, the (First cone tube) is clearly at a distal end of microcatheter (190)), and a diameter of the first cone tube gradually decreases from a proximal end of the first cone tube to a distal end of the first cone tube (Figures 1-2 and 5-6 clearly show the (First cone tube) as tapering, where a diameter of the (First cone tube) gradually decreases from a proximal end of the (First cone tube) to a distal end of the (First cone tube)), wherein the proximal end of the first cone tube is connected to the introducer sheath (As seen in the Figures the proximal end of the (First cone tube) is indeed connected to the (Introducer sheath)).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein the delivery unit comprises: a push rod; and a flexible connection assembly, wherein a proximal end of the flexible connection assembly is connected to a distal end of the push rod, and a distal end of the flexible connection assembly is detachably connected to the proximal end of the spring coil unit; and wherein the flexible connection assembly comprises: a heat shrink tube, wherein a first end of the heat shrink tube is sleeved on the distal end of the push rod; and a conveying elastic member, wherein a proximal end of the conveying elastic member is connected to a second end of the heat shrink tube, and the spring coil unit is detachably connected to a distal end of the conveying elastic member.
Wilson discloses, a delivery apparatus for an endovascular implant. Wilson teaches, a delivery unit (Figure 5, shaft (10)) comprises: a push rod (Figure 5, proximal portion (16)); and a flexible connection assembly (Figure 5, joint (17) & distal portion (18)) (Col. 5, line 15-44), wherein a proximal end of the flexible connection assembly is connected to a distal end of the push rod (Figure 5; Col. 5, line 35-38), and a distal end of the flexible connection assembly is detachably connected to the proximal end of an implant (Figure 4, stent (50); Col. 5, line 45-Col. 6, line 21); and
wherein the flexible connection assembly (joint (17) & distal portion (18)) comprises: a heat shrink tube (Figure 5, joint (17); Col. 5, line 35-37 discloses, “The two portions are joined together at joint 17 by… heat fusing…”), wherein a first end of the heat shrink tube is sleeved on the distal end of the push rod (As seen in Figure 5, the proximal end of joint (17) is indeed sleeved on the distal end of proximal portion (16)); and a conveying elastic member (Figure 5, distal portion (18); Col. 5, line 27-35 and line 42-44), wherein a proximal end of the conveying elastic member is connected to a second end of the heat shrink tube (Figure 5 and Col. 5, line 35-38), and the implant is detachably connected to a distal end of the conveying elastic member (Col. 5, line 45-Col. 6, line 21).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the delivery unit of Pederson such that the delivery unit comprises a push rod and a flexible connection assembly, wherein a proximal end of the flexible connection assembly is connected to a distal end of the push rod, and a distal end of the flexible connection assembly is detachably connected to the proximal end of the spring coil unit, and wherein the flexible connection assembly comprises a heat shrink tube, wherein a first end of the heat shrink tube is sleeved on the distal end of the push rod, and a conveying elastic member, wherein a proximal end of the conveying elastic member is connected to a second end of the heat shrink tube, and the spring coil unit is detachably connected to a distal end of the conveying elastic member, as taught by Wilson, as both references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the delivery unit of Pederson such that the delivery unit comprises a push rod and a flexible connection assembly, wherein a proximal end of the flexible connection assembly is connected to a distal end of the push rod, and a distal end of the flexible connection assembly is detachably connected to the proximal end of the spring coil unit, and wherein the flexible connection assembly comprises a heat shrink tube, wherein a first end of the heat shrink tube is sleeved on the distal end of the push rod, and a conveying elastic member, wherein a proximal end of the conveying elastic member is connected to a second end of the heat shrink tube, and the spring coil unit is detachably connected to a distal end of the conveying elastic member, as taught by Wilson, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, the push rod provides the necessary rigidity or stiffness needed to effectively push out the implant/spring coil unit and the flexible connection assembly provides the necessary combination of flexibility, to navigate tortuous vessels, and column strength to effectively push out the implant/spring coil unit (Col. 5, lines 38-44 of Wilson).
PNG
media_image1.png
608
1076
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Pederson further teaches, wherein the spring coil unit (medical device (130) & second portion (174) of release mechanism (170)) comprises a spring coil (Figures 1-2, medical device (130); Paragraph [0048]), a first interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7, second portion (174) of release mechanism (170); Paragraph [0054]) is connected to a proximal end of the spring coil (Figures 2 and 5-7; Paragraph [0054]), and the distal end of the delivery unit (elongate shaft (110) & securement member (140)) is provided with a second interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7, first portion (172) of release mechanism (170)) configured to engage with or separate from the first interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7; Paragraph [0054]).
Regarding claim 17, Pederson further teaches, wherein the first interlocking member (second portion (174) of release mechanism (170)) and the second interlocking member (first portion (172) of release mechanism (170)) each comprise an interlocking notch (See annotated Figure 7 below, (Notch)) and an interlocking protrusion (See annotated Figure 7 below, (Protrusion)), the interlocking protrusion of the second interlocking member is inserted into the interlocking notch of the first interlocking member, and the interlocking protrusion of the first interlocking member is inserted into the interlocking notch of the second interlocking member (As seen in Figures 2 and 5-7 and described in paragraph [0054], it is clear that the (Protrusion) of first portion (172) is inserted into the (Notch) of second portion (174), and the (Protrusion) of second portion (174) is inserted into the (Notch) of first portion (172)).
PNG
media_image2.png
460
793
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 20, Pederson further teaches, wherein the spring coil (medical device (130)) and the first interlocking member (second portion (174) of release mechanism (170)) are made of biocompatible metal or alloy (Paragraph [0063]).
Claim(s) 3-4 and 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pederson, in view of Wilson, and further in view of Buiser (US 2008/0234723 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Pederson teaches, the introducer sheath (Introducer sheath) comprises a delivery tube (The (Introducer sheath) section of microcatheter (190) is considered as the delivery tube), wherein the delivery tube is connected to the proximal end of the first cone tube (As seen in Figures 1-2 and 5-6 the proximal end of the (First cone tube) is indeed connected to the (Introducer sheath)/delivery tube).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein the introducer sheath comprises a straight tube and a second cone tube, a diameter of the straight tube is smaller than a diameter of the delivery tube, and a proximal end of the delivery tube is connected to a distal end of the straight tube through the second cone tube.
Wilson teaches, aspects of the delivery device for the spring coil according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Buiser teaches, wherein the introducer sheath (introducer sheath (20)) comprises a delivery tube (Figure 2A, main body elongated section (210)), a straight tube (Figure 2A, first proximal elongated section (200)), and a second cone tube (Figure 2A, tapering region between first proximal elongated section (200) and main body elongated section (210)), a diameter of the straight tube (first outer diameter (230)) is smaller than a diameter of the delivery tube (second outer diameter (242)) (Paragraph [0028]), a distal end of the delivery tube is connected to the proximal end of the first cone tube (Figure 2A, distal section (220); Paragraph [0028]), and a proximal end of the delivery tube is connected to a distal end of the straight tube through the second cone tube (Figure 2A; Paragraph [0028]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the introducer sheath of modified Pederson by Wilson such that the introducer sheath comprises a delivery tube, a straight tube, and a second cone tube, a diameter of the straight tube is smaller than a diameter of the delivery tube, a distal end of the delivery tube is connected to the proximal end of the first cone tube, and a proximal end of the delivery tube is connected to a distal end of the straight tube through the second cone tube as taught by Buiser, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the introducer sheath of modified Pederson by Wilson such that the introducer sheath comprises a delivery tube, a straight tube, and a second cone tube, a diameter of the straight tube is smaller than a diameter of the delivery tube, a distal end of the delivery tube is connected to the proximal end of the first cone tube, and a proximal end of the delivery tube is connected to a distal end of the straight tube through the second cone tube as taught by Buiser, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, the larger delivery tube/main body gives structural integrity for pushing, the first cone tube/distal taper enables smooth traversal of the vessel (atraumatic), and the straight tube with proximal narrowing from the delivery tube through the second cone tube aids in production and use (guide-wire attachment).
Regarding claim 4, Pederson teaches, the introducer sheath (Introducer sheath), the delivery unit (elongate shaft (110) & securement member (140)), and the spring coil unit (medical device (130) & second portion (174) of release mechanism (170)).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein the introducer sheath is provided with a limiting member configured to position the delivery unit within the introducer sheath.
Wilson teaches, aspects of the delivery device for the spring coil according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Buiser teaches, the introducer sheath (Figure 3, sheath (23)) is provided with a limiting member (Figure 3, narrowed region (300)) configured to position a guide wire (delivery unit) within the introducer sheath (Paragraphs [0038]-[0039]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the introducer sheath of modified Pederson by Wilson such that it is provided with a limiting member configured to position the delivery unit within the introducer sheath as taught by Buiser, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the introducer sheath of modified Pederson such that it is provided with a limiting member configured to position the delivery unit within the introducer sheath as taught by Buiser, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to facilitate heating and twisting of the sheath wall at the limiting member, thereby allowing the introducer sheath to be locked to and unlocked from a delivery unit to facilitate shipment, storage, and subsequent use by a physician (Paragraph [0039] of Buiser).
Regarding claim 11, modified Pederson teaches, wherein the straight tube, the delivery tube, the first cone tube, and the second cone tube are made of polymer materials (Paragraph [0040] of Buiser).
Regarding claim 12, modified Pederson teaches, wherein the straight tube, the delivery tube, the first cone tube, and the second cone tube are made of polyolefin materials (Paragraph [0040] of Buiser, where polypropylene (PP) is considered a polyolefin).
Claim(s) 6, 8, 13-16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pederson, in view of Wilson, and further in view of Hebert (US 2018/0289375 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Pederson teaches, the push rod (elongate shaft (110)).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein a diameter of the push rod gradually decreases from a proximal end of the push rod to the distal end of the push rod.
Wilson teaches, the delivery unit comprised of the push rod and the flexible connection assembly according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Hebert discloses, delivery systems for vascular surgical implants. Hebert teaches, a diameter of a push rod (Figure 7, pusher wire (88)) gradually decreases from a proximal end of the push rod to the distal end of the push rod (Paragraphs [0228] and [0230]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the push rod of modified Pederson such that a diameter of the push rod gradually decreases from a proximal end of the push rod to the distal end of the push rod as taught by Hebert, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the push rod of modified Pederson such that a diameter of the push rod gradually decreases from a proximal end of the push rod to the distal end of the push rod as taught by Hebert, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, the taper acts as a proximal stop to prohibit proximal movement of the flexible connection assembly over the push rod (Paragraph [0216] of Hebert).
Regarding claim 8, Pederson teaches, the delivery device for the spring coil according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein the conveying elastic member comprises: a conveying spring, wherein a proximal end of the conveying spring is connected to the heat shrink tube; and a developing spring, wherein a proximal end of the developing spring is connected to a distal end of the conveying spring, and the developing spring is coated with developer.
Wilson teaches, the conveying elastic member (distal portion (18)) comprises: a conveying spring (Col. 5, line 32-35, discloses that distal portion (18), “These materials may be utilized as single or multi-layer structures, and may also include reinforcement wires, braid wires, coils, filaments or the like.” As such, distal portion (18) is indeed a conveying spring through coil structure), wherein a proximal end of the conveying spring is connected to the heat shrink tube (Figure 5; Col. 5, line 35-38). However, Wilson does not teach a developing spring, wherein a proximal end of the developing spring is connected to a distal end of the conveying spring, and the developing spring is coated with developer.
Hebert teaches, a conveying elastic member (Figure 20A, coil (110) & compression coil (192); Paragraphs [0229] & Paragraph [0262]-[0263]) comprises: a conveying spring (coil (110); Paragraph [0229]); and a developing spring (compression coil (192); Paragraphs [0263]-[0264]), wherein a proximal end of the developing spring is connected to a distal end of the conveying spring (Figure 20A; Paragraphs [0267] and [0269]), and the developing spring is coated with developer (Paragraph [0264]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the delivery unit of modified Pederson as set in claim 1 by Wilson such that the conveying elastic member comprises a conveying spring, wherein a proximal end of the conveying spring is connected to the heat shrink tube, and a developing spring, wherein a proximal end of the developing spring is connected to a distal end of the conveying spring, and the developing spring is coated with developer, as taught by Wilson and Hebert, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the delivery unit of modified Pederson as set in claim 1 by Wilson such that the conveying elastic member comprises a conveying spring, wherein a proximal end of the conveying spring is connected to the heat shrink tube, and a developing spring, wherein a proximal end of the developing spring is connected to a distal end of the conveying spring, and the developing spring is coated with developer, as taught by Wilson and Hebert, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, the conveying elastic member provides the necessary combination of flexibility, to navigate tortuous vessels, and column strength to effectively push out the implant/spring coil unit (Col. 5, lines 38-44 of Wilson). Furthermore, the conveying spring attaches and retains the detachment/interlocking member on the distal end of the delivery unit (Paragraph [0229] of Hebert) and the developing spring provides distal push force for spring coil unit release and deployment, and allow users/surgeons to monitor placement in real-time (Paragraphs [0263]-[0269] of Hebert).
Regarding claim 13, modified Pederson teaches, wherein a length of the push rod ranges from 600 mm to 2000 mm, and a diameter of the push rod ranges from 0.5 mm to 2 mm (Paragraph [0230] of Hebert discloses that pusher wire (88) (push rod), “The pusher wire 88 has a length (including arms) between about 20 cm and about 400 cm, more narrowly between about 100 cm and about 300 cm, for example about 200 cm. Suitable diameters for the pusher wire 88 can range from about 0.006 inches to about 0.040 inches, more narrowly between about 0.008 inches and about 0.035 inches. The overall diameter of the pusher wire 88 may taper from proximal to distal, for example about 0.014 inches tapering to about 0.003 inches.” Which meets the claimed ranges of a length of 600mm-2000mm and a diameter of 0.5mm-2mm).
Regarding claim 14, modified Pederson teaches, wherein the push rod is made of biocompatible metal or alloy (elongate shaft (110) of Pederson, Paragraph [0063]; proximal portion (16) of Wilson, Col. 5, line 23-27; and pusher wire (88) of Hebert, Paragraph [0228]).
Regarding claim 15, Pederson in view of Wilson and further in view of Hebert teach the claimed invention except for, “wherein an outer diameter of the conveying spring ranges from 1 mm to 2 mm, and a length of the conveying spring ranges from 8 mm to 20 mm.” It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to construct the conveying spring as having an outer diameter ranging from 1 mm to 2 mm and a length ranging from 8 mm to 20 mm, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involve only routine skill in the art. In re Aller.
Regarding claim 16, modified Pederson teaches, wherein the conveying spring is made of biocompatible metal or alloy (distal portion (18) of Wilson, Col. 5, line 27-35; coil (110) of Hebert, Paragraph [0229]).
Regarding claim 18, Pederson teaches, wherein the spring coil unit (medical device (130) & second portion (174) of release mechanism (170)) comprises a spring coil (Figures 1-2, medical device (130); Paragraph [0048]), a first interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7, second portion (174) of release mechanism (170); Paragraph [0054]) is connected to a proximal end of the spring coil (Figures 2 and 5-7; Paragraph [0054]), and the distal end of the delivery unit (elongate shaft (110) & securement member (140)) is provided with a second interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7, first portion (172) of release mechanism (170)) configured to engage with or separate from the first interlocking member (Figures 2 and 5-7; Paragraph [0054]); and
wherein the second interlocking member (first portion (172) of release mechanism (170)) comprises a support rod (See annotated Figure 7 above, (Support rod))
Pederson fails to teach, the support rod is inserted into a distal end of the developing spring.
Wilson teaches, aspects of the conveying elastic member according to claim 8 (See above rejection of claim 8).
Hebert teaches, a distal end (Figure 20A, distal end (194); Paragraph [0263]) of the developing spring (compression coil (192)), wherein the distal end of the developing spring receives has inserted within it a support rod (Figure 20A, elongated member (196)) of a locking/engaging member (Figure 20A, ball (298)) (Paragraph [0263]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the delivery unit of modified Pederson such that the support rod is inserted into a distal end of the developing spring as taught by Hebert, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular implant delivery devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the delivery unit of modified Pederson such that the support rod is inserted into a distal end of the developing spring as taught by Hebert, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to retain the detachment/interlocking member on the distal end of the delivery unit.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pederson, in view of Wilson, further in view of Buiser, and even further in view of Que (US 2008/0306503 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Pederson teaches, the introducer sheath (Introducer sheath).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein the limiting member is a locking thread disposed on the introducer sheath.
Wilson teaches, aspects of the delivery device for the spring coil according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Buiser teaches, the limiting member (narrowed region (300)). However, Buiser’s limiting member is not a locking thread disposed on the introducer sheath.
Que discloses, a device for delivering an occlusive element such as a vaso-occlusive coil. Que teaches, an introducer sheath (Figure 1A, elongate sheath (30); Paragraph [0030]) is provided with a limiting member (Figure 1A, locking member (90); Paragraph [0033]) configured to position a delivery unit (Figure 1A, elongate releasing member (40); Paragraph [0031]) within the introducer sheath (Paragraph [0033]); and wherein the limiting member (locking member (90)) is a locking thread (Figure 1A, threads (38)) disposed on the introducer sheath (Paragraph [0033]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the limiting member of modified Pederson as a locking thread disposed on the introducer sheath as taught by Que, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the limiting member of modified Pederson as a locking thread disposed on the introducer sheath as taught by Que, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to fixedly secure the delivery unit relative to the introducer sheath (Paragraph [0033] of Que).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pederson, in view of Wilson, and further in view of Buiser2 (US 2007/0142859 A1).
Regarding claim 19, Pederson teaches, the spring coil (medical device (130)).
Pederson fails to teach, wherein a fiber bundle is disposed on the spring coil.
Wilson teaches, aspects of the delivery device for the spring coil according to claim 1 (See above rejection of claim 1).
Buiser2 discloses, embolic coils. Buiser2 teaches, a fiber bundle (Figures 1B-1C, fiber bundles (18)) is disposed on a spring coil (Figures 1A-1D, embolic coil body (12)) (Paragraphs [0066]).
A person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to modify the spring coil of modified Pederson to have fiber bundles disposed on it as taught by Buiser2, as all the references and the claimed invention are directed to endovascular devices. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring coil of modified Pederson to have fiber bundles disposed on it as taught by Buiser2, as such a modification would have been predictable, namely, to improve deliverability and prevent sticking in the catheter (Paragraph [0024] of Buiser2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/21/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that amended claim 1 is patentable because the combination of the push rod, heat shrink tube, and conveying elastic member improves adaptability and passability in a manner that “simply cannot be predicted by one skilled in the art viewing the collective teachings of the cited references,” and that none of the references teach or suggest the use of a heat shrink tube as part of the delivery unit.
This argument is unpersuasive because, Wilson expressly discloses a heat-fused joint (Col. 5, lines 35-37: “The two portions are joined together at joint 17 by… heat fusing…”) that joins a proximal push-rod portion to a distal flexible/elastic portion capable of including coils, and teaches that this construction provides the combination of proximal rigidity for pushing and distal flexibility plus column strength for navigating tortuous vessels (Col. 5, lines 38-44). The modification of Pederson’s delivery unit with Wilson’s segmented push-rod and heat-fused flexible connection assembly is therefore the application of a known technique to a known device ready for improvement to yield the predictable result of improved navigability and pushability. No evidence of unexpected results has been provided.
Applicant’s characterizations of the individual release mechanisms of Pederson, Buiser, Wilson, Hebert, Que, and Buiser2 are also unpersuasive. Claim 1 requires only that the proximal end of the spring coil unit be “detachably connected” to the distal end of the delivery unit. Pederson already discloses such a detachable interlocking connection (Paragraph [0054]; Figures 2 and 5-7). Differences in the precise manner of release beyond detachability are outside the scope of the claim as written.
The remaining references were cited solely for dependent features (sheath geometry, limiting member, fiber bundles, materials, and dimensions). Applicant’s arguments directed to those references therefore do not overcome the primary combination of Pederson and Wilson that renders amended claim 1 obvious.
See updated rejections above.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 OSAMA NEMER whose telephone number is (571)272-6365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571)272-4696. 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.
/O.N./Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /TAN-UYEN T HO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3771
