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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on November 4, 2024, and on May 29, 2025 is acknowledged. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 14-15 are objected to because of the following informalities: “wherein the flush port” closer to the shaft” should read “wherein the flush port is closer to the shaft”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 15, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being taught by US 20130345701 A1 (Allen et al.).
Regarding Claim 1, Allen teaches a surgical instrument [230] comprising:
a housing [236a] including an inner space (see Fig. 9);
and a shaft [236b] extending from the housing and communicating with the inner space, wherein the housing comprises a flush port [234a] that is a through hole for a cleaning solution to enter the inner space of the housing from outside of the housing, and at least one aperture [232] from which the cleaning solution flows to the outside of the housing (see para. 0053, “When the ports 232, 234a are opened, a cleaning solution or sterilization fluid delivered under pressure”) (although Williams describes the pump being delivered through aperture 232 and exiting through port 234a, there is no teaching of any structural difference between the two ports and as such the device would also be capable of delivering the fluid in the reverse direction) and wherein the flush port is situated at a position such that a center axis of the shaft is interposed between the flush port and the at least one aperture (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 4, Allen teaches the flush port [234a] is situated in an area of the housing closer to the shaft [234b] than to the at least one aperture [232] (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 7, Allen teaches a surgical instrument comprising:
a housing [236a] including an inner space (see Fig. 9);
and a shaft [236b] extending from the housing and communicating with the inner space, wherein the housing comprises a flush port [234a] that is a through hole for a cleaning solution to enter the inner space of the housing from outside of the housing (see para. 0053, “When the ports 232, 234a are opened, a cleaning solution or sterilization fluid delivered under pressure”) (although Williams describes the pump being delivered through aperture 232 and exiting through port 234a, there is no teaching of any structural difference between the two ports and as such the device would be capable of delivering the fluid in the reverse direction), and wherein the flush port is situated in an area of the housing closer to the shaft than to a center of the housing in a direction in which the shaft extends (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 9, Allen teaches the housing includes at least one aperture [232] from which the cleaning solution flows to the outside of the housing, and wherein the at least one aperture is situated at a position such that a center axis of the shaft is interposed between the at least one aperture and the flush port (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 12, Allen teaches a surgical instrument comprising:
a housing [236a] that defines an inner space (see Fig. 9);
and a shaft [236b] that is in fluid communication with the inner space, wherein the housing comprises a flush port [234a] and at least one aperture [232], and wherein a center axis of the shaft is interposed between the flush port and the at least one aperture (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 15, Allen teaches the flush port [234a] is closer to the shaft [234b] than to the at least one aperture [232] in a direction of the center axis of the shaft (see Fig. 9).
Regarding Claim 5, 10 and 16, Allen teaches the shaft [236b] is connected to the housing [236a] at a proximal end of the shaft, and wherein the shaft comprises a discharge hole [234b] in a distal end of the shaft (see Fig. 9; see also para. 0054, “The port 234b may be positioned at any location along the shaft member 236b including proximal and distal ends of the shaft member 236b”).
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, 8, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20130345701 A1 (Allen et al.) in view of US 20120296316 A1 (Imuta).
Regarding Claims 2, 3, 8, 13, and 14, Allen is silent about whether the flush port is situated such that an axis of the flush port passes and extends through a position in the inner space that is different from a position where the center axis of the shaft passes through the inner space.
However, Imuta teaches a surgical device where the flush port [314] is situated such that an axis of the flush port passes and extends through a position in the inner space that is different from a position where the center axis of the shaft [C1] passes through the inner space (see para. 0095; see also Fig. 12).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Allen in view of Imuta so as to situate the flush port as claimed. Arranging the specific location and axial direction of the fluid port to optimize fluid flow throughout the device is within ordinary skill in the art, as recognized by Imuta, and doing so could serve to encourage more effective cleaning of the housing.
Claim(s) 6, 11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20130345701 A1 (Allen et al.) in view of US 20080119870 A1 (Williams).
Regarding Claims, 6, 11, and 17, Allen does not explicitly teach a tube, wherein the housing further comprises a main flush port, and wherein the tube is in fluid communication with the main flush port and extends through the inner space of the housing and coaxially along an inside of the shaft.
However, Williams teaches a tube [476], wherein the housing further comprises a main flush port [478], and wherein the tube is in fluid communication with the main flush port and extends through the inner space of the housing [401] and coaxially along an inside of the shaft [416] (see para. 0130; see also Figs. 2C-2D).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Allen in view of Williams to further include a tube in fluid communication with a main flush port extending through the inner space of the housing and coaxially along an inside of the shaft. Doing so would allow for the main flush port to be used to effectively clean the shaft.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTIAN M SARCENO ROBLES whose telephone number is (571)272-8786. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Joseph Stoklosa can be reached at (571) 272-1213. 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.
/C.S./ Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights