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 .
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 2 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 208, 220. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim discloses all of the claimed features as follow:
“a catheter;
a computing device, the computing device including a processor and a memory, the memory storing thereon instructions that when executed by the processor:
receive information from the catheter;
identify, from the received information, movement of a distal portion of the catheter caused by physiological forces;
orient, based on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter towards a target” [see column 17 lines 55-67, claim 18 lines 1-19].
Claim 13 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 208, 220. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim discloses all of the claimed features as follow:
identify, from information received from a catheter, movement of a distal portion of the catheter, including movement caused by physiological forces;
orient, based in part on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter towards a target [see column 17 lines 55-67, claim 18 lines 1-19].
Claim 19 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 16 of U.S. Patent No. 12, 208, 220. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the patented claim discloses all of the claimed features as follow:
identify, from information received from a catheter, movement of a distal portion of the catheter, including movement caused by physiological forces;
articulate, based in part on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter in a direction towards a target [see column 19 lines 37-38, claim 20 lines 1-19].
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) 2-4, 7-8, 11-14, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Altman et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0106147).
Regarding claim 2, Altman et al disclose a system, comprising:
a catheter (28) [see 0024-0025, 0040-0044];
a computing device, the computing device including a processor and a memory, the memory storing thereon instructions that when executed by the processor:
receive information from the catheter [see 0024, 0040, 0042] by disclosing a processor receives signals from position sensors in the catheters [see abstract];
identify, from the received information, movement of a distal portion of the catheter caused by physiological forces (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0008, 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0072] and by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008];
orient, based on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter towards
a target [see 0010, 0024-0025, 0044] by disclosing the positioning processor is operative to maneuver the imaging catheter responsively to signals produced by the position sensor of the operative catheter [see 0025]
Regarding claim 3, Altman et al disclose comprising the memory storing thereon further instructions, that when executed by the processor, determine an orientation of the distal portion of the catheter relative to a target [see 0027, 0041-0042].
Regarding claim 4, Altman et al disclose wherein the orientation of the distal portion of the catheter is determined using image analysis [see 0065, 0068] by disclosing during a medical procedure the system 20 can continuously track and display the three-dimensional position of the catheter 28, using the catheter 27 to produce near real-time images of the catheter 28 and its target area [see 0065].
Regarding claim 7, Altman et al disclose wherein the physiological forces are caused by respiration and cardiac functions [see 0057].
Regarding claim 8, Altman et al disclose wherein the received signals are during navigation of the catheter towards the target [see 0065, 0068] by disclosing during a medical procedure the system 20 can continuously track and display the three-dimensional position of the catheter 28, using the catheter 27 to produce near real-time images of the catheter 28 and its target area [see 0065]
Regarding claim 11, Altman et al disclose receive images depicting the distal portion of the catheter and a target [see 0008, 0013-0015] by disclosing displacing the operative catheter and responsively to the current position of the operative catheter, automatically varying the field of view of the imaging catheter to include a predetermined target [see 0008];
identify the distal portion of the catheter and the target in the images [see 0008, 0013-0014] by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008];
confirm that the distal portion of the catheter is proximate to the target [see 0008] by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008].
Regarding claim 12, Altman et al disclose wherein the images are fluoroscopic or ultrasound images [see 0008, 0013] by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008].
Regarding claim 13, Altman et al disclose a system, comprising:
a computing device, the computing device including a processor and a memory, the memory storing thereon instructions that when executed by the processor:
identify, from information received from a catheter, movement of a distal portion of the catheter, including movement caused by physiological forces (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0008, 0072] and by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008];
orient, based in part on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter towards a target [see 0010, 0024-0025, 0044] by disclosing the positioning processor is operative to maneuver the imaging catheter responsively to signals produced by the position sensor of the operative catheter [see 0025]
Regarding claim 14, Altman et al disclose determine an orientation of the distal portion of the catheter relative to the target [see 0027, 0041-0042].
Regarding claim 16, Altman et al disclose wherein the physiological forces are caused by respiration and cardiac functions [see 0057, 0072] (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0008, 0072]
Regarding claim 17, Altman et al disclose determine a cyclic timing of the movement of the distal portion of the catheter due to physiological forces [see 0057, 0072] (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0008, 0072]
Regarding claim 18, Altman et al disclose detect, based on identified movement of the distal portion of the catheter due to physiological forces, a heart rate and a respiration rate (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0008, 0072]
Regarding claim 19, Altman et al disclose a system for maintaining orientation of a catheter towards a target, comprising:
a computing device, the computing device including a processor and a memory, the memory storing thereon instructions that when executed by the processor:
identify, from information received from a catheter, movement of a distal portion of the catheter, including movement caused by physiological forces (forces that are created due to moving structure such as the heart) [see 0008, 0072] by disclosing moving structure, such as the heart [see 0072] and by disclosing ultrasound imaging can verify that an ablation catheter is in place and in contact with tissue to be ablated [see 0008];
articulate, based in part on the identified movement, the distal portion of the catheter in a direction towards a target [see 0010, 0024-0025, 0044] by disclosing the positioning processor is operative to maneuver the imaging catheter responsively to signals produced by the position sensor of the operative catheter [see 0025]
Regarding claim 20, Altman et al disclose determine an orientation of the distal portion of the catheter relative to a target [see 0027, 0041-0042] and wherein the orientation of the distal portion of the catheter is determined using image analysis [see 0065, 0068] by disclosing during a medical procedure the system 20 can continuously track and display the three-dimensional position of the catheter 28, using the catheter 27 to produce near real-time images of the catheter 28 and its target area [see 0065].
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.
Claim(s) 5, 15, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altman et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0106147) in view of Kozuka et al (Pub. No.: US 2014/0236000).
Regarding claims 5, 15, 21, Altman et al don’t disclose determine a three-dimensional angle between a current orientation of the distal portion of the catheter and an orientation where a vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target.
Nonetheless, Kozuka et al disclose determine a three-dimensional angle between a current orientation of the distal portion of the catheter and an orientation where a vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target [see 0095, 0101, abstract] by disclosing displays in a plane by a two-dimensional vector the catheter tip-end rotation angle calculated by the catheter tip-end rotation angle calculation unit [see 0095]
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivated to combine Altman et al and Kozuka et al by determining a three-dimensional angle between a current orientation of the distal portion of the catheter and an orientation where a vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target; to perform a smooth catheter manipulation.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altman et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0106147) in view of Kozuka et al (Pub. No.: US 2014/0236000) as applied to claim 5 above and further in view of Frisco et al (Pub. No.: US 2010/0249507)
Regarding claim 6, Altman et al and Kozuka et al don’t disclose articulate the distal portion of the catheter to achieve the orientation where the vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target.
Nonetheless, Frisco et al disclose articulate the distal portion of the catheter to achieve the orientation where the vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target [see 0010, 0063-0064] by disclosing displaying a graphical representation of the transformed first vector along with a current image captured by the image capturing device on a display screen so as to indicate a direction to steer the tip of the endoscopic device towards the first landmark [see 0010, 0063-0064].
Frisco et al disclose graphical representations of the vectors point in directions that the endoscope tip is to be steered in order to move towards associated landmarks such as anatomic structures in a patient [see abstract].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivated to combine Altman et al, Kozuka et al and Frisco et al by articulating the distal portion of the catheter to achieve the orientation where the vector extending from the distal portion of the catheter intersects the target; in order to provide guidance to the operator for navigating the endoscope 110 to a target site within the patient [see 0043, Frisco et al].
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altman et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0106147) in view of Viswanathan (Pub. No.: US 2004/0068173)
Regarding claim 9, Altman et al don’t disclose present on a user interface a virtual catheter tip and a virtual target.
Nonetheless, Viswanathan discloses present on a user interface a virtual catheter tip and a virtual target [see 0006, 0043, figs 58-59] by disclosing the user can identify a target location and the interface uses the virtual device model to determine the control parameter(s) to cause the actual device to reach the target [see 0006]; the user interface in target mode, showing the target cursor, the target, and the virtual device and showing the virtual device extending to a selected target [see 0025-0026].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivated to combine Altman et al and Viswanathan by using a user interface a virtual catheter tip and a virtual target; for identifying a target point to which the virtual medical device configures itself to [see 0006, Viswanathan].
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altman et al (Pub. No.: US 2007/0106147) in view of Viswanathan (Pub. No.: US 2004/0068173) as applied to claim 9 above and further in view of Duindam et al (Pub. No.: US 2020/0078103).
Regarding claim 10, Altman et al and Viswanathan don’t disclose present an indicator on the user interface when the physiological forces are in approximately the same phase of their cycle as when the distal portion of the catheter was confirmed oriented at the target.
Nonetheless, Duindam et al disclose present an indicator on the user interface when the physiological forces are in approximately the same phase of their cycle as when the distal portion of the catheter was confirmed oriented at the target [see 0055, 0071, 0085-0089] by disclosing friction forces [see 0086].
Therefore, it is obvious to one skilled in the art at the time the invention was filed and would have been motivated to combine Altman et al, Viswanathan and Duindam et al by presenting an indicator on the user interface when the physiological forces are in approximately the same phase of their cycle as when the distal portion of the catheter was confirmed oriented at the target; to increase visualization.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOEL F BRUTUS whose telephone number is (571)270-3847. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat, 11:00 AM to 7:00 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, Pascal Bui-Pho can be reached at 571-272-2714. 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.
/JOEL F BRUTUS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3798