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 .
Priority
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 18/447,854, now U.S. Patent No. 12,364,492, filed Aug. 10, 2023, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/500,844, now U.S. Patent No. 11,771,446, filed Oct. 13, 2021, which application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 63/093,540, filed Oct. 19, 2020.
Claim Objections
Claim 2, which is dependent on claim 1, recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel between a distal end of a C1 segment of the internal carotid artery and a proximal end of a C4 segment of an internal carotid artery.” (emphasis added). It is understood that applicant intended to recites wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel between a distal end of a C1 segment of the internal carotid artery and a proximal end of a C4 segment of [[an]]the internal carotid artery.” which is referred back to “an internal carotid artery” in claim 1 line 3.
Claim 3 recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C2 segment of the internal carotid artery.” (emphasis added). It would be clearer if the limitation of “with” is amended to read “within.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4 recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C3 segment of the internal carotid artery.” (emphasis added). It would be clearer if the limitation of “with” is amended to read “within.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 5 recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with the petrous segment of the internal carotid artery.” (emphasis added). It would be clearer if the limitation of “with” is amended to read “within.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites “further comprising occluding blood flow past the funnel expanding the funnel into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery.” It would be clearer if this limitation is amended to read “further comprising occluding blood flow past the funnel by expanding the funnel into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery.”
Claim 14, lines 3-4 recite “advancing a first catheter through vasculature of the patient at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon of the patient.” It would be clearer if this limitation is amended to read “advancing a first catheter through vasculature of the patient to a position at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon of the patient.”
Claim 16 recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C2 segment of the internal carotid artery.” (emphasis added). It would be clearer if the limitation of “with” is amended to read “within.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 17 recites “wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C3 segment of the internal carotid artery..” (emphasis added). It would be clearer if the limitation of “with” is amended to read “within.” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 11-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vale et al. (US 2017/0105743, hereinafter “Vale”) in view of Salmon et al. (US 12,144,940, hereinafter “Salmon”) as evidentiary reference.
Referring to claim 1, Vale discloses a method of extracting a thrombus (thrombus or clot 1 as shown in Figs. 1-2f) from a thrombus site in a cerebral artery of a patient (Figs. 1-2f. Figs. 2a-2c are reproduced below), the method comprising:
PNG
media_image1.png
258
832
media_image1.png
Greyscale
advancing a first catheter (intermediate catheter 7 as shown in Figs. 1-2c and disclose in paragraphs [0187]-[0189]) through vasculature of the patient into an internal carotid artery of the patient (in paragraph [0202] Vale discloses the clot receptor 4, which is at the distal end of intermediate catheter 7 as shown in in Figs. 1-2d, is position in middle cerebral arteries of the brain or in the internal carotid artery (“The intermediate catheter inner lumen may be as small as 0.75 mm or as large as 2.0 mm, but is preferably between 1.0 mm and 1.7 mm. The clot receptor distal end may be configured to expand to a diameter equal to or slightly larger than the target vessel in order to provide a seal, or to a diameter slightly smaller than the target vessel in cases where a low profile, deliverable device is a higher priority than a perfect seal. In one embodiment configured for use in middle cerebral arteries of the brain, the clot receptor distal end is configured to expand to a diameter of between 2 mm and 4 mm. In another embodiment such as might be used in the internal carotid artery, the clot receptor distal end is configured to expand to a diameter of between 4 mm and 7 mm.” (emphasis added)). Thus, Vale discloses the distal end of the intermediate catheter 7 is position in the internal carotid artery for the clot receptor 2 to receive clot 1 in the middle cerebral artery because it is well known that the middle cerebral artery is distal to the distal end of internal carotid artery. Extrinsic evidence, Figs. 9B and 17B of Chou reference, which are reproduced below, shows the middle cerebral artery (M1, M2, MCA) is distal of internal carotid artery (ICA));
PNG
media_image2.png
372
670
media_image2.png
Greyscale
advancing a funnel (distal section 4 of clot receptor 2 as shown in Figs. 1-2f) within the first catheter 7;
moving the funnel and the first catheter with respect to each other to place the funnel outside of the first catheter (Figs. 2a-2c);
expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery, thereby reducing blood flow past the funnel (para. [0187]: “The proximal end 5 of the expansile distal section 4 is configured to seal against the inner lumen of a distal section 6 of a catheter 7 through which it is advanced, while the distal end 8 of the expansile distal section is configured to seal against the wall of the blood vessel.”);
applying suction through the funnel to aspirate thrombus material (para. [0187]: “The proximal seal against the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7 enables an aspiration force (such as a vacuum or a negative pressure differential, as may be induced by retracting a syringe plunger or through a vacuum pump) to be transmitted through the intermediate catheter 7 to the clot receptor device 2 and thus to the clot.”);
advancing a clot-mobilizer 15 (Figs. 2d-2f) distally toward the thrombus 1;
engaging thrombus material 1 from the thrombus with the clot-mobilizer 15 (Figs. 2d-2f);
moving the clot-mobilizer 15 and thrombus material 1 proximally at least partially into the funnel 4 (Figs. 2e-2f); and
moving the funnel 4, the clot-mobilizer 15 and the thrombus material 1 proximally within the vasculature (para. [0189]: “withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.”).
Examiner notes that Vale discloses the funnel is for retrieving a clot in internal carotid artery or in middle cerebral artery (a portion of paragraph [0202] is reproduced above) but Vale fails to specifically disclose the funnel contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon. However, it is well known that the internal carotid artery includes several segments, which are cervical (C1), petrous (C2), lacerum (C3), cavernous (C4), clinoid (C5), ophthalmic (C6), communicating (C7) and carotid siphon (Figs. 9B and 17B of Chou reference, which are reproduced above, and col. 22, ln 19-25: “segments of the internal carotid artery including the cervical (C1), petrous (C2), lacerum (C3), cavernous (C4), clinoid (C5), ophthalmic (C6), and communicating (C7) segments of the internal carotid artery (ICA)” and col. 41, ln 2-8: “the carotid siphon “S-turn”, the “anterior genu” of the carotid siphon typically seen as part of the terminal internal carotid artery (ICA).”) Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to try to position the funnel 4 of clot receptor 2 at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon to retrieve a clot at a location distal to the carotid siphon, which is in the middle cerebral artery, since it has been held that choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions (i.e., the finite locations in the internal carotid artery), with a reasonable expectation of success (KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415-421, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395-97 (2007)).
Referring to claim 2, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of expanding the funnel 4 into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel between a distal end of a C1 segment of the internal carotid artery and a proximal end of a C4 segment of an internal carotid artery (as noted above, C1-C7 and carotid siphon are segments of internal carotid artery. Therefore, depending on the location of the clot, it would have been obvious to position the funnel at a segment near the lot to facilitate the retrieval of the clot).
Referring to claim 3, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C2 segment of the internal carotid artery (as noted above, C1-C7 and carotid siphon are segments of internal carotid artery. Therefore, depending on the location of the clot, it would have been obvious to position the funnel at a segment near the lot to facilitate the retrieval of the clot).
Referring to claim 4, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel within a C3 segment of the internal carotid artery (as noted above, C1-C7 and carotid siphon are segments of internal carotid artery. Therefore, depending on the location of the clot, it would have been obvious to position the funnel at a segment near the lot to facilitate the retrieval of the clot).
Referring to claim 5, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the step of expanding the funnel 4 into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel 4 within the petrous segment of the internal carotid artery (as noted above, C1-C7 and carotid siphon are segments of internal carotid artery. Therefore, depending on the location of the clot, it would have been obvious to position the funnel at a segment near the lot to facilitate the retrieval of the clot).
Referring to claim 6, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 1 to claim 5, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying suction after expanding the funnel into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.”).
Referring to claim 7, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 1 to claim 5, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying continuous or discrete aspiration after deploying the clot-mobilizer (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.” (emphasis added)).
Referring to claim 8, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 1 to claim 5, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying continuous aspiration after engaging the thrombus material with the clot-mobilizer (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.”)
Referring to claim 9, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 1 to claim 5, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying continuous aspiration after the funnel is positioned outside of the first catheter (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.” Vale discloses using a pump to apply suction through the funnel, thus, it would have been obvious to use the pump to apply a continuous aspiration during and after the funnel is deployed from the catheter 4 to ensure that small fragment of thrombus is evacuated from the site thereby preventing further clot at the downstream)
Referring to claim 11, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the funnel adapts its shape to the internal carotid artery as it moves out of catheter 7 as it moves proximally by lengthening as it narrows to retain the thrombus material at least partially within the funnel. (Figs. 2a-2f and 4-5 show funnel 4 of clot receptor 2 is expanded into an expanded configuration to contact the wall surface of the internal carotid artery). Vale further discloses funnel of the clot receptor is a self-expanding frame, which is formed from braiding of nitinol strands or wires (Fig. 3, para. [0200]: The frame structure 25 is in one embodiment a Nitinol structure laser cut from a tube or sheet, and in another embodiment is a wire structure, wound or braided from Nitinol or stainless steel or other such biocompatible metallic material as are commonly used in the construction of stents or snares.”). Based on Figs. 2d-3 and the disclosure in paragraph [0200] examiner contends that one of ordinary skill in the art will understand that the frame of the funnel would exhibit the characteristic of lengthening the length of the frame and the funnel is collapsed to retain the thrombus when the funnel is moved proximally toward the distal end of the catheter 7.
Referring to claim 12, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising occluding blood flow past the funnel by expanding the funnel into contact with the inner wall of the internal carotid artery (para. [0187]: “The proximal end 5 of the expansile distal section 4 is configured to seal against the inner lumen of a distal section 6 of a catheter 7 through which it is advanced, while the distal end 8 of the expansile distal section is configured to seal against the wall of the blood vessel.”)
Referring to claim 13, Vale discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first catheter (intermediate catheter 7 as shown in Figs. 1-2f) is a single catheter configured to deliver the funnel 4 and the clot-mobilizer 15 into the internal carotid artery.
Referring to claim 14, Vale discloses a method of extracting a thrombus from a thrombus site in a cerebral artery of a patient (see rejection of claim 1 above), the method comprising:
advancing a first catheter 7 through vasculature of the patient at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon of the patient (see rejection of claim 1 above);
advancing a funnel 4 within the first catheter 7 (Figs. 2a-2f and see rejection of claim 1 above);
moving the funnel 4 and the first catheter 7 with respect to each other to place the funnel outside of the first catheter (Figs. 2a-2f and see rejection of claim 1 above);
expanding the funnel 4 into contact with an inner wall of the petrous segment of the internal carotid artery (as noted in the rejection of claims 1-5 above, C1-C7 and carotid siphon are segments of internal carotid artery. Therefore, depending on the location of the clot, it would have been obvious to position the funnel at a segment near the lot to facilitate the retrieval of the clot);
reducing blood flow past the funnel (para. [0202]: “The intermediate catheter inner lumen may be as small as 0.75 mm or as large as 2.0 mm, but is preferably between 1.0 mm and 1.7 mm. The clot receptor distal end may be configured to expand to a diameter equal to or slightly larger than the target vessel in order to provide a seal, or to a diameter slightly smaller than the target vessel in cases where a low profile, deliverable device is a higher priority than a perfect seal.”);
applying suction through the funnel to aspirate thrombus material (see rejection of claim 1 above);
advancing a clot-mobilizer 15 distally toward the thrombus and distal the carotid siphon (see rejection of claim 1 above);
deploying the clot-mobilizer 15 (Figs. 2a-2f and see rejection of claim 1 above);
engaging thrombus material 1 from the thrombus with the clot-mobilizer (Figs. 2a-2f and see rejection of claim 1 above);
moving the clot-mobilizer 15 and thrombus material 1 proximally at least partially into the funnel 4 (Figs. 2a-2f and see rejection of claim 1 above); and
moving the funnel 4, the clot-mobilizer 15 and the thrombus material 1 proximally within the vasculature (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Referring to claim 15, Vale discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel between a distal end of a C1 segment of the internal carotid artery and a proximal end of a C4 segment of an internal carotid artery (see rejection of claim 2 above).
Referring to claim 16, Vale discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel with a C2 segment of the internal carotid artery (see rejection of claim 3 above).
Referring to claim 17, Vale discloses the method of claim 14, wherein the step of expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery comprises positioning the funnel within a C3 segment of the internal carotid artery (see rejection of claim 4 above).
Referring to claim 18, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 14 to claim 17, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying continuous aspiration after advancing a funnel within the first catheter (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.” Vale discloses using a pump to apply suction through the funnel, thus, it would have been obvious to use the pump to apply a continuous aspiration after the funnel is deployed from the catheter 4 to ensure that small fragment of thrombus is evacuated from the site thereby preventing further clot at the downstream).
Referring to claim 19, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 14 to claim 17, wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying continuous aspiration after the funnel is placed outside of the first catheter. (para. [0189] discloses “retracting the intermediate catheter 7 a short distance to deploy the clot receptor device 2, aspirating through the intermediate catheter 7 using a syringe or pump to suck blood and the target clot into the clot receptor device 2, withdrawing the mechanical thrombectomy device 15 into the clot receptor 2 while continuing to aspirate, withdrawing the clot receptor device 2 and its contents at least partially into the lumen of the intermediate catheter 7, withdrawing the intermediate catheter 7, clot receptor device 2, clot and mechanical thrombectomy device 15 through the guide or sheath 11 and out of the patient.” Vale discloses using a pump to apply suction through the funnel, thus, it would have been obvious to use the pump to apply a continuous aspiration during and after the funnel is deployed from the catheter 7 to ensure that small fragment of thrombus is evacuated from the site thereby preventing further clot at the downstream).
Claim(s) 10 and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vale et al. as applied to claim 1 and claim 14 above and further in view of Garrison et al. (US 2018/0116684, hereinafter “Garrison”).
Referring to claims 10 and 20, Vale discloses the method of any of claims 1 to claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the step of applying suction through the funnel comprises applying cyclical aspiration through the funnel.
Referring again to claims 10 and 20, however, in the same field of endeavor, which is a method of extracting a thrombus from a thrombus site in a cerebral artery of a patient (para. [0042]: “Disclosed herein are methods and devices that enable safe and rapid access to the complex neurovascular anatomies of the cerebral and intracranial arteries and removal of the occlusion.”), Garrison discloses applying cyclical suction through the lumen of a catheter increase the ability to aspirate the thrombus through the catheter (para. [0114]: “A cyclic aspiration mode may provide a jack-hammer type force on the thrombus and increase the ability to aspirate the thrombus through the catheter.”)
Referring still to claims 10 and 20, in view of Garrison’s teaching it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the application, to modify the pump of Vale to allow the surgeon to apply cyclical aspiration through the funnel so that it too would have the same advantage.
Referring to claims 21-22, Vale/Garrison discloses the method of claim 20, wherein the step of applying cyclical aspiration through the funnel comprises supplying a first rate of aspiration for a first duration and supplying a second rate of aspiration for a second duration and alternating the step of supplying the first rate of aspiration and supplying the second rate of aspiration after deploying the clot-mobilizer (Garrison: para [0114]: “In yet another aspiration source implementation, the aspiration source 600 provides a cyclic level of aspiration force, for example, an aspiration force that cycles between a high level of vacuum to a lower level of vacuum at a set frequency, or from a high level of vacuum to no vacuum, or from a high level of vacuum to a pressure source.”).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,771,446 (hereinafter “the patent”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all limitation in claim 1 of the application can be found in claim 1 of the patent.
The claims match-up with respect to one another as listed below:
U.S. Patent Application No. 18/919,184
U.S. Patent No. 11,771,446
Claim 1. A method of extracting a thrombus from a thrombus site in a cerebral artery of a patient, the method comprising:
advancing a first catheter through vasculature of the patient into an internal carotid artery of the patient;
advancing a funnel within the first catheter;
moving the funnel and the first catheter with respect to each other to place the funnel outside of the first catheter;
expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon, thereby reducing blood flow past the funnel;
applying suction through the funnel to aspirate thrombus material;
advancing a clot-mobilizer distally toward the thrombus;
engaging thrombus material from the thrombus with the clot-mobilizer;
moving the clot-mobilizer and thrombus material proximally at least partially into the funnel; and moving the funnel, the clot-mobilizer and the thrombus material proximally within the vasculature.
Claim 1. A method of extracting a thrombus from a thrombus site in a cerebral artery of a patient, the method comprising:
advancing a first catheter through an internal vasculature of the patient into an internal carotid artery of the patient;
advancing a funnel catheter within the first catheter, a funnel being disposed on a distal end of the funnel catheter;
moving the funnel catheter and the first catheter with respect to each other to place the funnel outside of the first catheter;
expanding the funnel into contact with an inner wall of the internal carotid artery at or proximal to a distal end of a carotid siphon, thereby reducing blood flow past the funnel;
applying suction through the funnel catheter to the funnel to aspirate thrombus material;
advancing a clot-mobilizer distally through the first catheter toward the thrombus site and beyond the carotid siphon; deploying the clot-mobilizer;
engaging thrombus material from the thrombus with the clot-mobilizer;
moving the clot-mobilizer and thrombus material proximally at least partially into the funnel; and moving the funnel, the clot-mobilizer and the thrombus material proximally within the vasculature.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUAN V NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-5962. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 AM - 5:30 PM.
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.
/TUAN V NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771