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 Interpretation
Applicant is reminded that the use of reference characters in the claim language is to be considered as having no effect on the scope of the claims. (MPEP § 608.01 (m)).
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 11-15 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 11 recites “ A method for producing a deployable retractor (1), the method comprising: providing a casing (3) having a folded-in configuration and a folded-out configuration, in the folded-out configuration the casing (3) forms a completely encased channel (2), and the casing (3) comprising a double-walled textile (4) that encloses a fluid interior (6) having at least one fluid chamber (5), and producing the fluid interior (6) from a textile material; and coating the fluid interior (6) wherein the textile (4) is coated on the outside with an airtight film before the fluid interior (6) is coated “(emphasis added). As written, the claim requires both a double-walled textile and a textile material. It is unclear if these are distinct textiles (distinct materials) or referring to the same textile [material]. Further, if different textiles, the final recitation of “the textile is coated” is unclear as to which (the double-walled textile or the textile material) is referring to rendering the scope of the claim indefinite. For examination purposes, “a textile material” in line 7 of claim 11 will be interpreted as “the double-walled textile” and “the textile” of line 8 will be interpreted as “the double-walled textile”.
Dependent claims 12-15 are rejected under 112(b) as they contain all the deficiencies of claim 11 from which they depend.
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) 1-2, 6, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pribanic (US Publication NO. 2012/0130191 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Pribanic discloses a deployable retractor (access assembly 100, Fig. 1), comprising: a casing (body of assembly 100 which includes walls of elements 110, 120 and 130 shown in Fig. 1) having a folded-in configuration (contracted configuration shown in Fig. 1 where the folds in the tubular part 130 are exaggerated, [0028]) and a folded-out configuration (expanded configuration shown in Figure 2 where the folds in the tubular part are significantly straightened, [0030]), in the folded-out configuration (expanded configuration) the casing forms a completely encased channel (140, Fig. 1); and the casing comprises an at least partially double-walled textile (casing is hollow, formed by an outer wall and inner wall as shown in Fig. 3 and described as being formed from fabric in [0042]), which encloses a fluid interior (hollow space between walls which is inflated by fluid source as described in [0031]) having at least one fluid chamber (area in wall of tubular member 130, area in wall of top ring 110 and area in wall of bottom ring 120), which is fillable with a fluid via a connection (392, Fig. 1, [0029]) and which is emptied in the folded-in configuration and filled with the fluid in the folded-out configuration (fluid is absent when device is not inflated and present when device is inflated).
Regarding Claim 2, the fluid is a liquid (saline described in [0031]).
Regarding Claim 6, the channel (140) is waisted in the folded-out configuration (see figure below).
PNG
media_image1.png
398
363
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, the casing (body of retractor) in the folded-out configuration is uneven on an outside thereof and includes at least one of elevations or indentations (see below).
PNG
media_image2.png
434
661
media_image2.png
Greyscale
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) 4-5, 16, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pribanic (US Publication NO. 2012/0130191 A1) in view of Yaari et al. (US Publication No. 2020/0268410 A1).
Regarding Claim 4-5, Pribanic discloses the retractor as described in the rejection of claim 1. Pribanic is silent to the interior cavity of the retractor which accepts the fluid having a plurality of chambers or the outer and inner walls of the textile being connected to one another at contact areas.
Yaari discloses an inflatable device (Fig. 29B) in the analogous art of inflatable medical devices inserted into the body. Yaari discloses that the inflatable device comprises a plurality of chambers (2930) [0671] defined by double walls of the workspace device [0671-0674] and that the chambers are fluidly connected with one or more channels (2912) [0672]. The chambers are formed by the outer and inner walls of the retractor material being connected to one another at contact areas (“double sheets are connected at portions (e.g. by glue and/or heat and/or pressure treatment) to make the inflatable compartments 2930.”, [0671]). Yaari teaches multiple chambers or channels work to prevent catastrophic failure of the device if a single chamber is damaged [0356, 0540].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have multiple, fluidly-connected chambers within the inner and outer walls of Pribanic as taught by Yaari in order to prevent catastrophic failure of the retractor and to form them by connections/contact areas between the walls as taught by Yaari since it is a known method of forming a plurality of channels/chambers in a wall of an inflatable medical device.
Regarding Claim 18, as modified above, the fluid chambers (as modified by Yaari) are in fluid-dynamic exchange with one another.
Regarding Claim 16, Pribanic describes a method for operating the deployable retractor according to claim 1, the method comprising connecting a fluid source to the connection (tubing 392) and inflating the retractor with a material such as saline [0029, 0031]. However, Pribanic is silent to the fluid source being a syringe which is activated to inflate the retractor with the fluid.
Yaari discloses an device in the analogous art of inflatable medical devices. Yaari discloses using a syringe as the fluid source for inflating the device with saline [0532, 0656]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use a syringe as the fluid source of Pribanic as taught by Yaari in order to use a known fluid source to deliver inflating media such as saline into an inflatable medical device.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pribanic (US Publication NO. 2012/0130191 A1) in view of Yaari et al. (US Publication No. 2020/0268410 A1) in further view of Borsody (US Publication No. 2002/0022770 A1)
Regarding Claim 17, Pribanic in view of Yaari discloses the method as described in the rejection of claim 16 above. Yaari further discloses that the retractor compartments are inflated to a specific internal pressure of 100-200 mmHg thereby teaching that the pressure value when inflating is known by the user. However, neither Pribanic nor Yaari discuss explicit use of a sensor, wherein the sensor is connected to the connection, nor do Pribanic or Yaari discuss the method further comprises at least one of measuring a fluid pressure or connecting a control device to the connection, with which a working pressure of the fluid is set and controlled.
Borsody discloses an inflatable retractor in the same field of endeavor. Borsody teaches that intrinsic sensor devices within the inflation actuator may measure fluid pressure at the output source of the inflation actuator [0028] and shows the pressure gauge/sensor (35) attached to the connection to the retractor in Fig. 5. The use of the sensor acts to prevent a dangerous amount of pressure from being applied [0028].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect a pressure sensor to the connection of the retractor of Pribanic in view of Yari and monitor/measure fluid pressure with the sensor as taught by Borsody in order to prevent an undesired amount of pressure filling the retractor.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 7-8, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US Publication No. 2021/0298733 A1) in view of Heaven et al. (US Patent No. 5308327).
Regarding Claim 1, Tanaka discloses a deployable retractor (100, Fig. 1), comprising: a casing (115, Fig. 1, [0107]) having a folded-in configuration (contracted/flattened configuration shown in Fig. 1) and a folded-out configuration (expanded configuration shown in Figure 4), in the folded-out configuration (expanded configuration) the casing (115) forms a completely encased channel (140, Fig. 1, [0108]); and the casing (115) comprises an at least partially double-walled material (casing is hollow, formed by an outer wall and inner wall (145, 150) [0103], which encloses a fluid interior (hollow space between walls which is inflated by fluid source as described in [0110]) having at least one fluid chamber (area in wall of tubular member casing 115), which is fillable with a fluid via a connection (shown below, [0110]) and which is emptied in the folded-in configuration and filled with the fluid in the folded-out configuration (fluid is absent when device is not inflated and present when device is inflated).
PNG
media_image3.png
610
606
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Tanaka is silent to the material of the casing being a textile.
Heaven discloses an inflatable retractor in the same field of endeavor wherein the inflatable retractor is made from a fabric coated with a fluid impermeable layer coated textile material to accept the saline inflatable medium and expand to a filled configuration. Heaven teaches this material offers excellent strength and rigidity at high inflation pressures (col. 4; ln. 30-54 and col. 5; ln. 40-53)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the casing of Tanaka from Heaven as taught by Heaven in order to use a material shown as suitable in the art to fabricate inflatable retractors which allows the retractor to be sufficiently strong and rigid when inflated.
Regarding Claim 3, as modified with the material of Heaven, the textile (taught by Heaven) is at least one of inelastic or inextensible at least in the folded-out configuration (Heaven describes the structure can for a rigid shape when inflated, col. 4; ln. 52-55).
Regarding Claim 8, as modified with the material of Heaven, the textile (taught by Heaven) is coated with a liquid-impermeable coating (col. 4; ln. 30-54 and col. 5; ln. 40-53, Heaven).
Regarding Claim 20, as modified with the material of Heaven, the coating (taught by Heaven) is applied to at least one of inner walls of the fluid interior or an outside of the textile (this is inherent as the coating is applied to the fabric and would necessarily be applied to either the inside surface, the outside surface or both the inside or outside surfaces).
Regarding Claim 7, the casing (115, Tanaka) has a support plate (120) in a partial area (fig. 4, [0104] Tanaka)
Regarding Claim 19, the support plate (120, Tanaka) comprises a double plate (two plates 120 shown in Fig. 4, Tanaka), and the textile (115 as modified in the rejection of claim 1 above) is inserted between the two partial plates (120) of the double plate (shown in Fig. 4, Tanaka).
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka et al. (US Publication No. 2021/0298733 A1) in view of Heaven et al. (US Patent No. 5308327) in further view of Galloway et al. (US Publication NO. 2015/0366547 A1)
Regarding Claim 10, the retractor of Tanaka in view of Heaven is disclosed in the rejection of claim 1 above. Tanaka in view of Heaven is silent to the inner side of casing (115, Tanaka) having illuminants.
Galloway discloses an inflatable retractor in the same field of endeavor wherein the retractor has illuminants on or in the inner side of the wall of the retractor (LEDS shown in fig. 8b) in order to improve visibility [0102].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate illuminants into the inner wall of the casing of Tanaka in view of Heaven as taught by Galloway in order to improve visibility.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Prior art could not be found which disclose the step or coating the outside of the double-walled textile with an airtight film before the fluid interior of the double-walled textile is coated as required by claim 11.
The closest prior art, Kim et al. (US Patent No. 11572949 B1) describes creating an inflatable bellows structure from a thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU)-coated fabric (col. 6; ln. 18-28), however Kim does not describe the specific step of coating the outside of the double walled textile with an airtight film before coating the inner chambers (fluid interior).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACQUELINE T JOHANAS whose telephone number is (571)270-5085. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Fri. 9:00-5:00.
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, Eduardo Robert can be reached at 571-272-4719. 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.
/JACQUELINE T JOHANAS/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3773