DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species 3, claims 11-14,22,23 in the reply filed on 7/9/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 1-10,15-21 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 7/9/2026.
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 § 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) 11-14, 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nguyen et al U.S 9,254,144.
Claim 11: Nguyen et al disclose a thrombectomy apparatus as best seen in fig. 1 comprising: a non-locking syringe 12a/12b directly connected in fluid communication to a thrombectomy catheter 100/101 (it is noted that the syringe 12a,12b, in figure 1 can be considered as a non-locking syringe since it can be aspirated a target thrombus into the catheter 101. For-example; The depicted version of the disposable module 102a comprises disposable syringes (either custom made or standard off the shelf components) that serve as the fragmentation pump 12a and suction pump 12b. Where employed, the syringe(s) 12a, 12b are releasably connected or engaged with the reusable drive module 102b. In the depicted configuration, the drive module 102b includes the dual pump actuator 22 and the motor system 13 that drives the actuator 22. The syringes 12a, 12b can each comprise a piston and a cylinder, wherein the retraction of the piston draws fluid or other materials into the cylinder, and the advancement of the piston expels fluid and other materials from the cylinder; (67) In the depicted embodiment, the reusable drive module 102b can further comprise a base 39 on which is mounted the motor system 13 including the motor 16 and linkage mechanism 17, and the actuator 22. The base 39 can further comprise one or more syringe holders 39a to hold the syringe(s) 12a, 12b securely and releasably with respect to the base 39. The actuator 22 includes one or more plunger clips 22a that interface with the plunger(s) of the syringes(s) 12a, 12b such that, upon installation of the syringes 12a, 12b in the holders 39a, the clips 22a receive the syringe plungers and thereby facilitate driving the pistons of the syringes 12a, 12b via the motor system 13 (see col. 16, lines 50-58).
Claims 12-14: Nguyen et al disclose further comprising: at least one mechanical thrombectomy component 34, fig. 17 operably coupled to the thrombectomy catheter and configured to be disposed through a patient's blood-carrying vessel to a thrombus that is to be removed from the patient; wherein the at least one mechanical thrombectomy component comprises a clot retriever (see col. 8, lines 46-63); wherein the clot retriever comprises a clot entrapment cage (it is noted that a wire cage or dome, fig. 17, see col. 15, lines 43-67).
Claim 22: Nguyen et al disclose a thrombectomy method comprising: disposing a thrombectomy catheter 100/101 within a patient having at least one thrombus to be removed from the patient; hand manipulating a non-locking syringe 12a/12b, fig. 1 that is directly connected in fluid communication to the thrombectomy catheter to aspirate at least a part of the at least one thrombus (see col. 16, lines 50-58).
Claim 23: Nguyen et al disclose disposing at least one mechanical thrombectomy component 34 through the thrombectomy catheter; manipulating the at least one mechanical thrombectomy component to remove a part of the at least one thrombus from the patient via the at least one mechanical thrombectomy component (see col. 8, lines 46-63).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VI X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4699. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (6:30-4:30).
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, Darwin Erezo can be reached at 571-272-4695. 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.
/VI X NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights