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 Group I, claims 1-10, in the reply filed on 2/4/2026 is acknowledged.
Response to Amendment
In response to the amendment filed on 2/4/2026, Claims 11-34 have been cancelled, and Claims 1-10 and newly added Claim 35-45 are pending.
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 8, 10, 41, 43 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 8 recites the limitation "wherein said steel tubing" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The “steel tubing” is not recited in claim 1 of which claim 8 is dependent off of; the “steel tubing” is first referenced in claim 7.
Claim 10 recites the limitation " wherein said bendable magnet" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The “bendable magnet” is not recited in claim 1 of which claim 10 is dependent off of; the bendable magnet is first referenced in claim 9.
Claim 41 recites the limitation "wherein said steel tubing" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The “steel tubing” is not recited in claim 1 of which claim 41 is dependent off of; the “steel tubing” is first referenced in claim 7 and claim 40.
Claim 43 recites the limitation " wherein said bendable magnet" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The “bendable magnet” is not recited in claim 1 of which claim 43 is dependent off of; the bendable magnet is first referenced in claim 9 and claim 42.
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 1-5, 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20180333162 A1 Saab.
Regarding claim 1, Saab discloses a catheter system comprising: first (40, Fig. 18-22) and second catheters (240, Fig. 18-22), each catheter having a distal end including a magnet (first catheter (40) having a distal end (90, Fig. 18-22) including a magnet (58, Fig. 22, paragraph 58), second catheter (240) having a distal end (290, Fig. 18-22) including a magnet (258, Fig. 22, paragraph 58)), said magnet (58) of said first catheter (40) is the polar opposite of said magnet (258) used with said second catheter (240) (seen in Fig. 22, paragraph 59-60), each catheter having a lumen (first catheter (40) having a lumen (80, Fig. 18-22), second catheter (240) having a lumen (280, Fig. 18-22)), and said lumens are substantially aligned when said catheters are magnetically paired (Fig. 22, paragraph 52-62).
Regarding claim 2, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses wherein said distal ends (90, 290) are circular (Fig. 18-24).
Regarding claim 3, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses wherein said distal ends (90, 290) are mirror-images (Fig. 18-22).
Regarding claim 4, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses wherein said lumens (80, 280) are centrally located (Fig. 18-24).
Regarding claim 5, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 4, and further discloses wherein one of said distal ends is tapered and another of said distal ends has an opening configured to receive said tapered end and to lock said tapered end in place when said catheters are joined together (paragraph 52, the opening 282 of the retrograde catheter 240 can be different (e.g., larger, tapered, etc.) than the opening 82 of the antegrade catheter 40. For example, the opening 282 of the retrograde catheter 240 can be larger than the opening 82 of the antegrade catheter 40 to facilitate receipt of the wire 70 into the opening 282 and the lumen 280).
Regarding claim 35, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses wherein one of said magnets (58, 258) is an electromagnet (paragraph 58).
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saab in view of US 20150273212 A1 Berthiaume et al. (hereinafter Berthiaume).
Regarding claim 6, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 5.
Saab is silent on wherein said tapered end is frustoconical in shape and said opening is configured to match said frustoconical shape.
However, Berthiaume teaches an interventional medical system (Fig. 4a-c) comprising an implantable medical device (600) having a tapered distal end (624) in a frustoconical shape, and a delivery tool (700) having a distal opening (705) configured to match said frustoconical shape (as seen in Fig. 4b-c, paragraph 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of Berthiaume to have on wherein said tapered end is frustoconical in shape and said opening is configured to match said frustoconical shape, in order to provide a stronger securement between the two catheter instruments.
Claims 7-10, 40-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saab in view of US 5813996 A St. Germain et al (hereinafter St. Germain).
Regarding claim 7, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein at least one of said magnets are enclosed in a steel tubing.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (22b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (25b) that are enclosed in a steel tube (24b, col. 4 line 16-38, col. 5 line 3-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein at least one of said magnets are enclosed in a steel tubing in order to maintain durability and alignment of the magnets.
Regarding claim 8, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein said steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (22b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (25b) that are enclosed in a steel tube (24b, col. 4 line 16-38, col. 5 line 3-6), wherein the steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet (as seen in Fig. 2b, the distal end of magnet (25b) is not covered by the steel tubing (24b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein said steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet in order to provide a clear access way to the catheter and a complete and secure abutment of the magnetic elements of the catheter instruments.
Regarding claim 9, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein at least one of said magnets is bendable.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2a-b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2a-b) wherein the guidewire (11) is connected to extension wire (12) by an articulated magnetic coupling (20a, 20b, Fig. 2a-b, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), the magnetic coupling including a first magnet portion (22a, 22b, Fig. 2a-b) and a second magnetic portion (25a, 25b, Fig. 2a-b) and the magnetic portions may be articulated (abstract, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein at least one of said magnets is bendable in order to allow the distal end portion of the catheters to have more flexibility to travel through a patient’s vasculature without damaging the tissue.
Regarding claim 10, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein said bendable magnet is comprised of a plurality of segments.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2a-b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2a-b) wherein the guidewire (11) is connected to extension wire (12) by an articulated magnetic coupling (20a, 20b, Fig. 2a-b, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), the magnetic coupling including a first magnet portion (22a, 22b, Fig. 2a-b) and a second magnetic portion (25a, 25b, Fig. 2a-b), the magnetic portions may be articulated (abstract, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), and the articulated magnetic coupling comprising a plurality of segments (Fig. 2a-b, first magnetic portions (22a, 22b) and second magnetic portions (25a, 25b) are made of a series of magnetic segments (col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein said bendable magnet is comprised of a plurality of segments in order to provide a stronger and more evenly distributed magnetic attractive force for the catheter instruments.
Regarding claim 40, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein at least one of said magnets are enclosed in a steel tubing.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (22b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (25b) that are enclosed in a steel tube (24b, col. 4 line 16-38, col. 5 line 3-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein at least one of said magnets are enclosed in a steel tubing in order to maintain durability and alignment of the magnets.
Regarding claim 41, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein said steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (22b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2b) having a distal end comprising magnets (25b) that are enclosed in a steel tube (24b, col. 4 line 16-38, col. 5 line 3-6), wherein the steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet (as seen in Fig. 2b, the distal end of magnet (25b) is not covered by the steel tubing (24b)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein said steel tubing does not cover the distal end of said magnet in order to provide a clear access way to the catheter and a complete and secure abutment of the catheter instruments.
Regarding claim 42, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein at least one of said magnets is bendable.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2a-b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2a-b) wherein the guidewire (11) is connected to extension wire (12) by an articulated magnetic coupling (20a, 20b, Fig. 2a-b, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), the magnetic coupling including a first magnet portion (22a, 22b, Fig. 2a-b) and a second magnetic portion (25a, 25b, Fig. 2a-b) and the magnetic portions may be articulated (abstract, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein at least one of said magnets is bendable in order to allow the distal end portion of the catheters to have more flexibility to travel through a patient’s vasculature without damaging the tissue.
Regarding claim 43, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein said bendable magnet is comprised of a plurality of segments.
However, St. Germain teaches an intravascular guide wire system (abstract, col. 1 line 4-11) that comprises a guidewire (11, Fig. 2a-b) and an extension wire (12, Fig. 2a-b) wherein the guidewire (11) is connected to extension wire (12) by an articulated magnetic coupling (20a, 20b, Fig. 2a-b, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), the magnetic coupling including a first magnet portion (22a, 22b, Fig. 2a-b) and a second magnetic portion (25a, 25b, Fig. 2a-b), the magnetic portions may be articulated (abstract, col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17), and the articulated magnetic coupling comprising a plurality of segments (Fig. 2a-b, first magnetic portions (22a, 22b) and second magnetic portions (25a, 25b) are made of a series of magnetic segments (col. 3 line 27-48, col. 4 line 16-38, claim 17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of St. Germain to have wherein said bendable magnet is comprised of a plurality of segments in order to provide a stronger and more evenly distributed magnetic attractive force for the catheter instruments.
Claims 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saab in view of US 20140276715 A1 Shuman et al. (hereinafter Shuman).
Regarding claim 36, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein one of said ends includes a heater.
However, Shuman teaches a heated catheter system (abstract, paragraph 2, 6-9) that comprises a catheter with a heated catheter distal end (100, Fig. 1a) including a heater (130, Fig. 1a-b, paragraph 27-28, the movement of friction producing plug 130 against the inner wall of the thermally conductive catheter tip 170 generates heat).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of Shuman to have wherein one of said ends includes a heater in order to provide heat based therapy to tissue as disclosed by Shuman (paragraph 26-28).
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Saab and Shuman teaches the limitations of claim 36 and Shuman further discloses wherein said heater (130) is extendable and retractable (paragraph 28, the movement of the friction producing plug 130 may be axial along the longitudinal axis of the catheter body 110 as seen in Fig. 1a-b).
Claims 38-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saab in view of US 20120109148 A1 Bonner et al. (hereinafter Bonner).
Regarding claim 38, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein said distal end of said first instrument includes one or more loops defining an opening and said distal end.
However, Bonner teaches a system for removing implantable medical devices from a patient (abstract, paragraph 1, 5) that comprises an implantable medical device implantation and extraction system (146, Fig. 6-7) incorporating a catheter (48), a magnet (58) and a loop (164) having an opening at the distal end (Fig. 6-7, paragraph 50). The loop (164) supplements the magnetic connection between the magnet (58) of the catheter (48) and a magnet (42, Fig. 7) of leadless pacemaker (32, Fig. 7) (paragraph 50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of Bonner to provide a stronger mechanical connection to supplement the magnetic connection between the two catheter instruments.
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Saab and Bonner teaches the limitations of claim 38, and Bonner further discloses wherein said loops (164) enclose said magnet (42) of said second instrument (32) when said instruments are paired (Fig. 6-7, paragraph 50-53).
Claims 44-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saab in view of US 20090036872 A1 Fitzgerald et al. (hereinafter Fitzgerald).
Regarding claim 44, Saab discloses the limitations of claim 1.
Saab is silent on wherein one of said distal ends has a cutting end and another of said distal ends has an opening configured to receive said cutting end.
However, Fitzgerald teaches a catheter system (2, Fig. 1, abstract, paragraph 8) comprising two catheters (4, 5) having magnetized distal ends (4a, 6a, paragraph 27) wherein one of said distal ends has a cutting end (Fig. 6a-b, paragraph 42, 47-48) and another of said distal ends has an opening configured to receive said cutting end (paragraph 47-48).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Saab with the teachings of Fitzgerald to have wherein one of said distal ends has a cutting end and another of said distal ends has an opening configured to receive said cutting end in order to cut through tissue to establish communication between the two catheters as disclosed by Fitzgerald (paragraph 41, 44).
Regarding claim 45, the combination of Saab and Fitzgerald teaches the limitations of claim 44 and Fitzgerald further discloses wherein receiving end defines a chamber (paragraph 48, the lumen of the secondary catheter is used as a receptacle or receiving space for a cutting member) and said chamber is capped by said cutting end when said instruments are magnetically paired (paragraph 42, 46-48).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KHOA TAN LE whose telephone number is (703)756-1252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am - 4:30pm.
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.
/KHOA TAN LE/Examiner, Art Unit 3771 /MOHAMED G GABR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771