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 .
This action is in response to the non-provisional application filed on 12/12/2024. Claims 1-13 are pending. Claim 1 is independent.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
The art rejection below is/are made as best understood because of the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection stated above.
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) 1-4, 9, and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Calomeni et al. (US Pub. No.: 2017/0325950).
Regarding claims 1-4, 9, and 11, Calomeni discloses [claim 1] control handle (18, Fig. 1, 4-6, and 9 and Paras. [0050]-[0051], [0072]-[0078], [0082], and [0086]-[0089]) for controlling functions of a delivery system for implanting a medical device (16, Fig. 1), wherein the delivery system comprises: - an elongate delivery catheter (12, Fig. 1), and - a mandrel (14, Figs. 1 and 9) being displaceable longitudinally relative to the delivery catheter (Para. [0050]); wherein the control handle comprises: - a locking mechanism (148, Fig. 9 and Para. [0089]), and - a handle housing (120, Fig. 4); wherein the locking mechanism is configured for being switchable between a locked configuration and an unlocked configuration such that, in the locked configuration, the mandrel is fixed relative to the locking mechanism such that the mandrel is not displaceable relative to the locking mechanism beyond a predetermined abutment position due to a mechanical mandrel abutment blockage, whereas, in the unlocked configuration, the mandrel is movable in the longitudinal direction relative to the locking mechanism beyond the predetermined abutment position due to the mandrel abutment blockage being released ([0082], [0086]-[0089]: release of the locking element 148 results in relative movement between the mandrel and the handle / locking mechanism; [0089]: locking element 148 has the function of a mandrel abutment blockage); [claim 2] wherein the locking mechanism is configured for being switched between the locked configuration and the unlocked configuration by rotating an unlock actuation member (156, Fig. 4 and Para. [0099]) relative to the handle housing; [claim 3] wherein a rotation axis of the unlock actuation member is aligned with a longitudinal axis of the control handle (Fig. 4 and Para. [0099]); [claim 4] wherein the locking mechanism is configured for being switched between the locked configuration and the unlocked configuration by unscrewing the unlock actuation member (Fig. 4 and Paras. [0099]-[0101]); [claim 9] wherein the control handle further comprises a haptic locker feedback mechanism (156 provides a haptic locker feedback to a user of the control handle upon the locking mechanism being displaced relative to the handle housing beyond at least one locker feedback position upon switching from the locked configuration to the unlocked configuration, Para. [0099]-[0101]), the haptic locker feedback mechanism being configured for generating a haptic locker feedback to a user of the control handle upon the locking mechanism being displaced relative to the handle housing beyond at least one locker feedback position upon switching from the locked configuration to the unlocked configuration; [claim 11] a control handle according to claim 1, an elongate delivery catheter (12, Fig. 1) mechanically connected to the control handle; and a mandrel (14, Figs. 1 and 9) being controlled by the control handle such as to be displaceable longitudinally relative to the delivery catheter (Para. [0050]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-8, 10, and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20210196494 A1 Longo; Michael A. et al. disclose a deployment handle for delivery of implants
US 20180280173 A1 Jimenez, JR.; Teodoro S. et al. discloses a stent delivery system.
US 9554929 B2 Arbefeuille; Samuel et al. disclose a vascular prosthesis delivery device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING RUI OU whose telephone number is (571)270-5036. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am -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, 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.
/JING RUI OU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights