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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Choi (US PGPub 2016/0235491).
Regarding Claim 1, Choi teaches a magnetic robot (Paragraph 0011, 0031, and 0033) comprising:
a body (10; Figure 1, 5, and 8; Paragraph 0035); and
a work member (20, which includes 20a and 20b; Paragraph 0100-0103) connected to the body (10) so as to be positioned in an anterior region of the body (10; Figure 5), and provided to be rotatable about a longitudinal center of the work member (10; Figure 5-9; Paragraph 0101),
wherein the body (10; Figures 5-9) includes:
a housing part (10, catheter) having a preset length in a forward-rearward direction so as to form an inner space (see annotated Figure 8 below); and
a connection part (ball and socket part; see annotated Figure 8, provided below) positioned at a front end portion of the housing part (10) so as to protrude toward a longitudinal central axis of the housing part (see annotated Figure 8 below wherein socket extends toward the longitudinal central axis to keep the ball within the socket), and having a connection hole (the hole formed by the socket) formed at an inner center of the connection part (see annotated Figure 8, provided below), and
PNG
media_image1.png
520
522
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the work member (20) includes:
a body part (20c and the shaft connecting to the ball) having a preset length in the forward- rearward direction (Figures 5-8), and having at least one region provided with a magnetic body (Paragraph 0100); and
a fastening part (20a) extending rearward from a rear end of the body part (20a and the shaft) so as to be inserted into the connection hole (as a ball and socket configuration, see Paragraph 0101; Figure 8, annotated and provided above).
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(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US PGPub 2016/0235491) as applied to claim above, and further in view of Tillander (US Patent 3,674,014)
Regarding Claim 2, Choi teaches the magnetic robot of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the work member further includes:
a separation prevention part coupled to a rear end of the fastening part so as to be positioned in the inner space of the housing part, and having at least a partial region in which a section of the partial region, which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the work member, is larger than an area of the connection hole.
Tillander teaches a magnetically guidable catheter tip (abstract; Figure 3) comprising:
a body (5; Figure 3) and a work member (4A; Figure 3),
wherein the body (5) has a housing part and a connection part (see annotated Figure 3 provided below, and wherein the work member (4a) comprising a body part and a fastening part (see annotated Figure 3 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
476
646
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the work member (4a) further includes a separation prevention part (see annotated Figure 3 above) coupled to a rear end of the fastening part (See Figure 3 provided above) so as to be positioned in the inner space of the housing part (5), and having at least a partial region in which a section of the partial region, which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the work member (4a), is larger than an area of the connection hole (as seen in Figure 3 above the separation prevention part is larger than an area of the connection hole/part (distal hole of housing) of the housing (5) so that the work member (4a) is retained within the housing (5)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the ball and socket connection of Choi, to include the teachings of Till, mainly the fastening and separation parts teachings, for the advantage that the separation part maintains the work member connection to the body and the fastening part would allow the work member to extend and retract axially slightly from the distal end of the body in order to have greater reach and precision with the work member.
Regarding Claim 3, Choi teaches the magnetic robot of claim 1, wherein
a section of the connection hole, which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the connection hole, has a circular shape (Figure 8, so that the ball doesn’t eject from the socket),
a section of the fastening part, which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the fastening part, has a circular shape (Figure 8, the ball), and
Choi but fails to disclose
a diameter of the fastening part is smaller than a diameter of a central region of the connection hole by a preset length.
Tillander teaches a magnetically guidable catheter tip (abstract; Figure 3) comprising:
a body (5; Figure 3) and a work member (4A; Figure 3),
wherein the body (5) has a housing part and a connection part (see annotated Figure 3 provided below, and wherein the work member (4a) comprising a body part and a fastening part (see annotated Figure 3 below),
PNG
media_image2.png
476
646
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a section of the connection hole (11; Figure 4), which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the connection hole, has a circular shape (see Figures 1-3 in which the connection hole is the distal end of body 5),
a section of the fastening part (see annotated Figure 3 above and see element 8 in Figure 4), which is perpendicular to a longitudinal direction of the fastening part (8), has a circular shape (Figures 1-3)
a diameter of the fastening part (8; Figure 4) is smaller than a diameter of a central region of the connection hole (11; see Figure 4) by a preset length (as best seen in Figure 4 so that the working tip 4 is actuatable relative to the body (5)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the part before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Choi to include the teachings of Tillander, for the advantage of the fastening part would allow the work member to extend and retract axially and radially slightly from the connection hole of the body in order to have greater reach and precision with the work member.
Claim(s) 4-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US PGPub 2016/0235491) and Tillander (US Patent 3,674,014) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Schneider (US PGPub 2009/0306651)
Regarding Claim 4-7, Choi teaches the magnetic robot of Claim 3, but fails to disclose wherein a diameter of the connection hole is larger in a front end portion of the connection part than in a longitudinal central region of the connection part (Claim 4), wherein the front end portion of the connection part has a structure that widens outward from a rear side to a front side (Claim 5) and wherein a diameter of the connection hole is larger in a rear end portion of the connection part than in a longitudinal central region of the connection part (Claim 6) and wherein the rear end portion of the connection part has a structure that widens outward from a front side to a rear side (Claim 7).
Schneider teaches a catheter for medical procedures such as ablation (abstract) wherein the catheter has a body (108; Figure 4) defining an inner space (118; Figure 4) and a connection part (114; Figure 4) disposed on the distal end of the body (108; Figure 4), the connection part (114) protruding towards the central axis of the body, wherein the connection part (114) comprises a connection hole (126) at the distal end (best seen in Figure 12), wherein a diameter of the connection hole (126; Figure 4 and 12) is larger in a front end portion of the connection part than in a longitudinal central region of the connection part (114; as seen in Figures 4 and 12), wherein the front end portion of the connection part (114) has a structure that widens outward from a rear side to a front side (as seen in Figures 4 and 12, the distal opening is tapered outwards) and wherein a diameter of the connection hole (126) is larger in a rear end portion of the connection part than in a longitudinal central region of the connection part (as seen in Figure 4, the rear end of tip 114 also expands open to section 118 and is larger than the lip formed by 114) and wherein the rear end portion of the connection part has a structure that widens outward from a front side to a rear side (as seen in Figure 4 and 12).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the teachings of Schneider to the combination of references disclosed above for the advantage of a tapered/flared distal and proximal ends allows for an abutment surface of the work member body part at the distal end and an abutment surface of the separation prevention part at the proximal end of the connection part. This allows for the work member and separation prevention part to be seated into the connection part as the work member and separation prevention part is moved proximally or distally but does not allow for the work member to be released from the distal end of the housing body.
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi (US PGPub 2016/0235491) as applied to claim above, and further in view of DeFonzo (US PGPub 2008/0312578).
Regarding Claim 8-9, Choi teaches the magnetic robot of claim 1, wherein a fluid or drug can be delivered out of the distal end of the body (10; see Paragraph 0111-0112; Figure 9) but fails to disclose at least one communication hole is formed at an outer circumference of the housing part (Claim 8) and wherein the communication hole is inclined forward at a preset angle from the inner space to an outside (Claim 9).
DeFonzo teaches a medical catheter (abstract) having a housing part (44; Figure 6A) with a distal end (47; Figure 6A), wherein at least one communication hole (46) is formed at an outer circumference of the housing part (44; s seen in Figure 5-6A) and wherein the communication hole (46) is inclined forward at a preset angle from the inner space to an outside (as seen in Figure 6A; Paragraph 0152).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Choi such that the distal end has angled fluid communication holes, as taught by DeFonzo for the advantage of facilitating fluid in the direction of blood flow (Paragraph 0152; DeFonzo) and to help direct fluid towards to work member to assist in breaking up any thrombus.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED GAMIL GABR whose telephone number is (571)272-0569. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571) 270-5953. 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.
/MOHAMED G GABR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771