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 .
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 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.
Status of the Claims
The current office action is made responsive to claims filed 11/20/2024.
Claims 1-20 are pending. A complete action on the merits appears below.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the recitation of “font connecting unit” on Page 4 Lines 6-7 should be written “front connecting unit”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “font connecting unit” should be written “front connecting unit”. For examination purposes, this claim limitation will be interpreted as “front connecting unit” in accordance with the disclosure in its entirety. 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.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reiterer (US 20220117649 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Reiterer teaches a handpiece (Fig. 1a; apparatus 10) for a treatment apparatus (Fig. 1a; instrument 11), comprising:
a first housing (Fig. 2b and 4d; walls forming second mount 27);
a second housing (Fig. 2b and 4d; wall section 52 forming stop 51) coupled to the first housing to define an energy transfer space (Fig. 2b and 4d; mounting bore 35) on an inner side, and configured to separate a refrigerant transfer space (Fig. 2b and 4d; second mount 27 is taught as the space containing line 28) on an outer side;
a cover (Fig. 2b and 4d; mounting wall 40) configured to cover the refrigerant transfer space of the second housing;
an energy transfer element (Fig; 2b and 4d; form-fit section 26 having electrode 15) provided in the energy transfer space; and
a refrigerant hose (Fig. 2b and 4d line 28 is taught as being a hose) provided in the refrigerant transfer space.
Regarding claim 2, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 1, wherein the energy transfer element comprises at least one heating element that generates heat upon transferring energy (Fig. 2b and 4d; electrode 15).
Regarding claim 3, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 2, wherein heat from the heating element is transferred to the refrigerant transfer space through a portion of the second housing (In accordance with MPEP 2114 this currently taught structure of the heating element, the refrigerant transfer space, and the second housing, would have the property of transferring heat of the currently provided claim limitation, as this limitation is a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention, and as this prior art structure is capable of performing this intended use based on the recited characteristics of this element, currently reads on the provided claim limitation, unless otherwise shown that the prior art does not possess these characteristics).
Regarding claim 4, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 3, wherein the second housing comprises a separation wall comprising a concave portion recessed from an outer side (Fig. 2b and 4d; the wall between mount 25 and mount 27 is shown as separating the two sections and being concave on at least one side as broadly as is currently claimed).
Regarding claim 5, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 4, wherein the heating element is adjacent to the separation wall (Fig. 2b and 4d; form-fit section 26 is shown as being next to the wall between mount 25 and mount 27).
Regarding claim 7, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 6, wherein the first housing and the second housing are formed to extend a predetermined length, and the handpiece further comprises a cap (Fig. 2b and 4d; channel- shaped region 44) configured to couple with front end portions of the first housing and the second housing.
Regarding claim 8, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 7, further comprising a neck portion, which has a smaller width than other portions in an outer side formed by coupling the first housing, the second housing and the cover, so as to be held in a user’s hand (Fig. 2b and 4d; distal end 29).
Regarding claim 9, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 6, further comprising a support wall provided on a rear side of the second housing and formed extending laterally (Fig. 1a; proximal section 21).
Regarding claim 16, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 15, wherein a portion of the heating element is configured to be in contact with the separation wall inside the energy transfer space (Fig. 2b and 4d; form-fir section 26 is shown as being next to the wall between mount 25 and mount 27).
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.
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.
Claims 6, 10-11, 15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reiterer (US 20220117649 A1) in view of Stringham (US 20130023866 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Reiterer teaches the handpiece of claim 5.
However, further comprising at least one rib protruding on an inner side of the cover and configured to radially support the refrigerant hose.
Stringham teaches a surgical tool having a surgical handpiece having internal electronic components and a fluid flow for providing cooling fluid to the distal portion of the device (Abstract, [0124]).
Stringham further teaches the electronic components of the device (Fig 9; circuit board 150) as being positioned so that coolant from the fluid flow (Fig. 9; tube 140) may circulate around said electronic components to draw heat out of the components and keep that handpiece from becoming uncomfortably hot ([0135]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the circuit board being positioned adjacent to the tube containing coolant within the handpiece, as is taught by Stringham, into the apparatus for delivering fluid and containing electronic components as is taught by Reiterer, to produce the predictable result of keeping the handpiece from being uncomfortably hot, as is taught by Stringham, as it has been held that the incorporation and/or combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 10, Reiterer as modified teaches the handpiece of claim 9.
However, Reiterer fails to teach the handpiece, further comprising: a font connecting unit configured to support a front end portion of the refrigerant hose; and a rear connecting unit configured to support a rear end portion of the refrigerant hose.
Stringham further teaches the tool having a section located at a distal position of the surgical handpiece (Fig. 9- 10C; primary section 90) which is configured to support the cooling fluid flow (Fig. 9-10C; heat sink 120) and a section which is located at a proximal position of the surgical handpiece (Fig. 9-10C; secondary section 100) which is configured to support the cooling fluid flow (Fig. 9-10C; tube 140).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the handpiece for providing fluid to a distal end as having a proximal section and a distal section for supporting the cooling fluid flow, as is taught by Stringham, into the apparatus for providing fluid to a distal portion of an apparatus as is taught by Reiterer, to produce the predictable result of providing fluid to a distal portion of a handpiece, as is taught by Stringham, as it has been held that the incorporation and/or combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 11, in accordance with the above modification of claim 10, Stringham teaches the handpiece of claim 10, wherein the front connecting unit comprises a front end portion (Fig. 9; tip 30) penetrating the cap (Fig. 8-10C; retaining structure 170), and a first stepped portion (Fig. 10A-C; adjustment member 174) supported on the cap, and the rear connecting unit comprises a rear end portion (Fig. 11A; center hold 240) penetrating the support wall (Fig. 8-10C; divider 110), and a second stepped portion (Fig. 8-9; secondary case 160) protruding radially and supported on the support wall.
Regarding claim 15, Stringham teaches the handpiece of claim 14, wherein the at least one rib (Fig. 9; circuit board 150 [0135] teaches the circuit board as being provided to position against the coolant structure) is configured to support the insulation hose against the separation wall.
Regarding claim 19, in accordance with the above modification of claim 10, Stringham teaches the handpiece of claim 7, further comprising a tip module (Fig. 9-10C; active thermal element 20) comprising a rear side configured to couple with the cap, and a front side configured to transfer energy to skin tissue ([0098], [0102]).
Regarding claim 20, in accordance with the above modification of claim 10, Stringham teaches the handpiece of claim 19, wherein the tip module is detachably coupled to the cap ([0094).
Claims 12-14 and 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reiterer (US 20220117649 A1) in view of Stringham (US 20130023866 A1) and Duong (US 20040267248 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Reiterer as modified teaches the handpiece of claim 11.
However, Reiterer fails to teach the handpiece further comprising an insulation hose provided in the refrigerant transfer space and configured to surround at least a portion of the refrigerant hose.
Duong teaches a device for providing a cooling fluid to a distal outlet (Abstract).
Duong further teaches the device having a tube (Fig. 7; fluid delivery assembly 40 having orifice tube 46) for containing the fluid flow wherein the tube contains a vacuum tube (Fig. 7; vacuum tube 54) which provides insulation so as to provide non-cooling areas as desired ([0036]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have incorporated the tubing for providing cooling fluid as having a portion which provide insulation as desirable, as is taught by Duong, into the apparatus which provides cooling fluid as is taught by Reiterer, to produce the predictable result of providing insulation in a cooling device as is desirable, as is taught by Duong, as it has been held that the incorporation and/or combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results is an obvious modification. MPEP 2141(III).
Regarding claim 13, in accordance with the above rejection of claim 10, Stringham teaches the handpiece of claim 12, wherein the hose comprises a first end supported on the front connecting unit, and a second end supported on the rear connecting unit ([0103], [0125]- [0126]).
In accordance with the above rejection of claim 12, Duong teaches the hose as being an insulation hose that forms together with the refrigerant hose, a first air gap in a radial direction ([0036]).
Regarding claim 14, Duong teaches the handpiece of claim 13, wherein the first air gap is sealed by the refrigerant hose and the insulation hose ([0036]).
Duong further teaches the air gap as further being sealed by the outer portion of the device, referred to as an outer sheath ([0036]- [0037]).
In accordance with the above rejection of claim 10, Stringham further teaches the outer portion of the device as being comprised of the front connecting unit (Fig. 9-10C; primary section 90), and the rear connecting unit (Fig. 9-10C; secondary section 100).
Regarding claim 17, Reiterer as modified in accordance with the above rejection of claim 12 teaches the handpiece of claim 16, wherein the concave portion of the separation wall is configured to be in contact with an outer surface of the insulation hose (Fig. 2b and 4d; the wall between mount 25 and mount 27, in accordance with the above modification of claim 12, the portion of Reiterer the refrigerant transfer space having the refrigerant hose further comprises an insulation hose).
Regarding claim 18, The handpiece of claim 17, further comprising a second air gap formed between an inner surface of the cover and an outer surface of the hose (Fig. 8-10C; a void 72 is shown between the handle portion 40 and the tube 140 and heat sink 120 which comprise tubing for the fluid flow).
In accordance with the above rejection of claim 12, the hose is taught as being an insulation hose ([0036]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDSAY REGAN LANCASTER whose telephone number is (571)272-7259. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8-4 EST.
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 on 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.
/L.R.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights