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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-20 are pending and are currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a processing unit” in claims 9 and 13.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: change “to second device” to “to the second device” (i.e., previously recited). 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, 4-7, 9-10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Edidin (US 2012/0100729).
Regarding claim 1, Edidin discloses a method of connecting a medical device (disposable unit 206, figure 4a | disposable imaging unit [0020]) to a control unit (base unit 208, figure 4a), comprising: coupling a connector (see portion of 206 at disposable unit interface 202, figure 4a) of the medical device to a port (see portion of 208 at base unit interface 204, figure 4a) on the control unit, wherein the connector is removably coupled to the port (see figure 4a), and wherein coupling the connector to the port includes: inserting a first prong (304, figure 4a) of the connector into a first opening (302, figure 4a) of the port; inserting a second prong (304, figure 4a) of the connector into a second opening (302, figure 4a) of the port; and operatively coupling an electrical wire (corresponding trace, wire…[0033]) of the connector to an electrical interface (212, figure 4a) of the control unit, wherein the electrical interface is disposed between the first opening and the second opening such that a straight line extends through the first opening, the second opening, and the electrical interface (best seen with figures 2b and 4a).
Regarding claim 4, Edidin further discloses the connector includes an electrical connection portion (210…each be coupled to a corresponding…wire [0033]), and wherein the electrical wire is electrically coupled to the electrical connection portion ([0033]).
Regarding claim 5, Edidin further discloses the electrical connection portion is disposed between the first prong and the second prong (see figures 2b and 4a).
Regarding claim 6, Edidin further discloses a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection portion (see figures 2b and 4a).
Regarding claim 7, Edidin further discloses the electrical connection portion is recessed relative to an end of the first prong and an end of the second prong (see 304 vs. 210, figure 4a).
Regarding claim 9, Edidin further discloses the control unit includes a processing unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a processor [0024] | 508, figure 5a) coupled to the electrical interface (electrical connectors 552 operably coupled to the system control module 508 [0055]), the processing unit being configured to receive imaging data from an imager (camera module 570, figure 5a) of the medical device, through the electrical wire and the electrical interface (control…imaging unit 504 [0052]).
Regarding claim 10, Edidin discloses a method of coupling a first medical device (disposable unit 206, figure 4a | disposable imaging unit [0020]) to a second device (base unit 208, figure 4a), comprising: inserting a connector (see portion of 206 at disposable unit interface 202, figure 4a) of the first medical device into the second device, wherein inserting the connector into the second device includes: inserting a first prong (304, figure 4a) of the connector into a first opening (302, figure 4a) of the second device; inserting a second prong (304, figure 4a) of the connector into a second opening (302, figure 4a) of the second device; and seating an electrical connection portion (210, figure 4a) of the connector against an electrical interface (212, figure 4a) of the second device, wherein, upon seating the electrical connection portion against the electrical interface, data is transmitted from the first medical device to the second device (carrying power or data [0033]), wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector is between the first prong and the second prong such that a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection portion (see figures 2b and 4a).
Regarding claim 16, Edidin further discloses the electrical connection portion is recessed relative to an end of the first prong and an end of the second prong (see 304 vs. 210, figure 4a).
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-11, 13, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Noguchi (US 2006/0116550).
Regarding claim 1, Noguchi discloses a method of connecting a medical device (100, figure 3 | 100A, figure 9) to a control unit (71, figures 3 or 9), comprising: coupling a connector (43, figure 3 or 143, figure 9) of the medical device to a port (72, figure 3 | 172, figure 10) on the control unit, wherein the connector is removably coupled to the port (see figures 3 or 10), and wherein coupling the connector to the port includes: inserting a first prong (44a, figures 6 or 9) of the connector into a first opening (see 74, figures 6 or 10) of the port; inserting a second prong (55a-b, 56, or 57, figures 6 or 9-10) of the connector into a second opening (best seen in 75, figures 7 or 10) of the port; and operatively coupling an electrical wire (45, figure 7 or 35b, figure 10) in the connector to an electrical interface (see 73, figure 7 | 104, figure 10) in the control unit, wherein the electrical interface is disposed between the first opening and the second opening (see figures 6-7 | see figures 9-10) such that a straight line extends through the first opening, the second opening, and the electrical interface (see figures 6-7 | or see figures 9-10).
Regarding claim 2, Noguchi further discloses the connector is fixedly attached (interpreted “fixedly attached” to mean a coupling/connection | see connection between 22 and 24, figure 5) to a handle (22, figure 5) of the medical device.
Regarding claim 3, Noguchi further discloses the connector of the medical device is removably coupled to the port of the control unit by a friction fit (43 is pressed into 72…connected [0085]).
Regarding claim 4, Noguchi further discloses the connector includes an electrical connection portion (45a, figure 6), and wherein the electrical wire (45, figure 7) is electrically coupled to the electrical connection portion.
Regarding claim 5, Noguchi further discloses the electrical connection portion is disposed between the first prong and the second prong (see 45a is between 44a and 55a-b or 56-57, figure 6).
Regarding claim 6, Noguchi further discloses a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection portion (see figures 6-7).
Regarding claim 7, Noguchi further discloses the electrical connection portion is recessed relative to an end of the first prong and an end of the second prong (see 45a vs. 44a and 55a-b or 56-57, figure 6).
Regarding claim 9, Noguchi further discloses the control unit includes a processing unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a processor [0024] | 78, figure 8) coupled to the electrical interface (104, figure 10 | reproduces the CCD signal…[0116]), the processing unit being configured to receive imaging data from an imager (31, figure 3) of the medical device, through the electrical wire and the electrical interface (transfer to 78 [0100]).
Regarding claim 10, Noguchi discloses a method of coupling a first medical device (100A, figure 9) to a second device (71, figure 9), comprising: inserting a connector (143, figure 9) of the first medical device into the second device, wherein inserting the connector into the second device (see figure 9) includes: inserting a first prong (44a, figure 9) of the connector into a first opening (see 74, figure 10) of the second device; inserting a second prong (55a-b, 56, or 57, figures 9-10) of the connector into a second opening (best seen in 75, figure 10) of the second device; and seating an electrical connection portion (102, figure 10) of the connector against an electrical interface (104, figure 10) of the second device, wherein, upon seating the electrical connection portion against the electrical interface, data is transmitted from the first medical device to the second device (transmitting the video signal [0113]), wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector is between the first prong and the second prong such that a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection portion (see figures 9-10).
Regarding claim 11, Noguchi further discloses coupling the second device to a third device (72 is arranged to the endoscope control device 71 [0040] | see 172 and 71, figure 10), wherein the second device is a socket (see 172, figure 10), wherein the third device is a control unit (71, figure 10; endoscope control device 71 [0085]).
Regarding claim 13, Noguchi further discloses the third device includes a processing unit (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a processor [0024] | 78, figure 8) coupled to the electrical interface (104, figure 10 | reproduces the CCD signal…[0116]), the processing unit being configured to receive imaging data from an imager (31, figure 3) of the first medical device, through the electrical connection portion and the electrical interface (transfer to 78 [0100]).
Regarding claim 15, Noguchi further discloses the connector of the first medical device is removably coupled to second device by a friction fit (43 is pressed into 72…connected [0085] | interpreted 143 to be pressed into 172, see figure 10).
Regarding claim 16, Noguchi further discloses the electrical connection portion is recessed relative to an end of the first prong and an end of the second prong (see 102 vs. 44a and 55a-b or 56-57, figure 10).
Regarding claim 17, Noguchi discloses a method of coupling a medical device (100a, figure 9) to a control unit (71, figure 9), comprising: coupling a socket to the control unit (72 is arranged to the endoscope control device 71 [0040] | see 172 and 71, figure 10); inserting a first prong (44a, figure 9) of a connector of the medical device into a first opening (see 74, figure 10) of the socket; inserting a second prong (55a-b, 56, or 57, figures 9-10) of the connector into a second opening (best seen in 75, figure 10) of the socket; and coupling an electrical connection (102, figure 10) of the connector to an electrical interface (104, figure 10) of the socket, wherein the electrical connection of the connector is between the first prong and the second prong of the connector such that a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection (see figures 9-10).
Regarding claim 18, Noguchi further discloses the connector of the medical device is removably coupled to the socket of the control unit by a friction fit (43 is pressed into 72…connected [0085] | interpreted 143 to be pressed into 172, see figure 10).
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.
Claim(s) 8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edidin (US 2012/0100729) as applied to claims 4 and 10 above, and further in view of Carnevali (US 2015/0244126).
Regarding claim 8, Edidin discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 4. Edidin is silent regarding the electrical interface of the control unit includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin, and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Carnevali teaches a docking connector (3, figures 3-5) with a plurality of biasing electrical contacts (11, figures 3-5), typically biasing pogo pins or biasing leaf spring contacts ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to modify the electrical interface and electrical connection portion of Edidin with biasing pogo pins and biasing leaf spring contacts respectively as taught by Carnevali ([0035]). Doing so would provide an alternative structure of electrical contacts ([0035]). The modified method would comprise the electrical interface of the control unit includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin ([0035]; Carnevali), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad (biasing leaf spring contacts…[0035] | the Examiner interpreted the pin and contacts to be used together) corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Regarding claim 14, Edidin discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 10. Edidin is silent regarding the electrical interface includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin, and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Carnevali teaches a docking connector (3, figures 3-5) with a plurality of biasing electrical contacts (11, figures 3-5), typically biasing pogo pins or biasing leaf spring contacts ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to modify the electrical interface and electrical connection portion of Edidin with biasing pogo pins and biasing leaf spring contacts respectively as taught by Carnevali ([0035]). Doing so would provide an alternative structure of electrical contacts ([0035]). The modified method would comprise the electrical interface includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin ([0035]; Carnevali), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad (biasing leaf spring contacts…[0035] | the Examiner interpreted the pin and contacts to be used together) corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Claim(s) 8, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (US 2006/0116550) as applied to claims 4 and 10 and 17 above, and further in view of Carnevali (US 2015/0244126).
Regarding claim 8, Noguchi discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 4. Noguchi is silent regarding the electrical interface of the control unit includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin, and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Carnevali teaches a docking connector (3, figures 3-5) with a plurality of biasing electrical contacts (11, figures 3-5), typically biasing pogo pins or biasing leaf spring contacts ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to modify the electrical interface and electrical connection portion of Noguchi with biasing pogo pins and biasing leaf spring contacts respectively as taught by Carnevali ([0035]). Doing so would provide an alternative structure of electrical contacts ([0035]). The modified method would comprise the electrical interface of the control unit includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin ([0035]; Carnevali), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad (biasing leaf spring contacts…[0035] | the Examiner interpreted the pin and contacts to be used together) corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Regarding claim 14, Noguchi discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 10. Noguchi is silent regarding the electrical interface includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin, and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Carnevali teaches a docking connector (3, figures 3-5) with a plurality of biasing electrical contacts (11, figures 3-5), typically biasing pogo pins or biasing leaf spring contacts ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to modify the electrical interface and electrical connection portion of Noguchi with biasing pogo pins and biasing leaf spring contacts respectively as taught by Carnevali ([0035]). Doing so would provide an alternative structure of electrical contacts ([0035]). The modified method would comprise the electrical interface includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin ([0035]; Carnevali), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad (biasing leaf spring contacts…[0035] | the Examiner interpreted the pin and contacts to be used together) corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Regarding claim 20, Noguchi discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 17. Noguchi is silent regarding the electrical interface of the socket includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin, and wherein the electrical connection of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Carnevali teaches a docking connector (3, figures 3-5) with a plurality of biasing electrical contacts (11, figures 3-5), typically biasing pogo pins or biasing leaf spring contacts ([0035]).
It would have been obvious to modify the electrical interface and electrical connection portion of Noguchi with biasing pogo pins and biasing leaf spring contacts respectively as taught by Carnevali ([0035]). Doing so would provide an alternative structure of electrical contacts ([0035]). The modified method would comprise the electrical interface of the socket includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin ([0035]; Carnevali), and wherein the electrical connection of the connector includes at least one electrical pad (biasing leaf spring contacts…[0035] | the Examiner interpreted the pin and contacts to be used together) corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin.
Claim(s) 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noguchi (US 2006/0116550) as applied to claims 11 and 17 above, and further in view of Miller (US 2009/0269962).
Regarding claims 12 and 19, Noguchi discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claims 11 and 17. Noguchi is silent regarding the socket is coupled to the control unit by one or more fasteners.
Miller teaches a plug connector (100, figure 2) that is mated into a receptacle (200, figure 2) through equipment panel (300, figure 2). The receptacle is assembled to an equipment panel and secured thereto by fasteners (244, figure 5; [0034]).
It would have been obvious to modify the method of Noguchi to have a socket coupled to the control unit by one or more fasteners (244, figure 5; [0034]) as taught by Miller. Doing so would secure the socket to the control unit.
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.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10-12, 14-15, and 17-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 and 4-16 of U.S. Patent No. 12,329,355. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
* The claims are mapped to Viering (US 12,329,355).
Regarding claim 1, Viering discloses a method of connecting a medical device to a control unit (claim 1), comprising: coupling a connector of the medical device to a port on the control unit (claim 1), wherein the connector is removably coupled to the port (claim 1), and wherein coupling the connector to the port (claim 1) includes: inserting a first prong of the connector into a first opening of the port (claim 1); inserting a second prong of the connector into a second opening of the port (claim 1); and operatively coupling an electrical wire of the connector to an electrical interface of the control unit (claim 1), wherein the electrical interface is disposed between the first opening and the second opening such that a straight line extends through the first opening, the second opening, and the electrical interface (claim 1).
Regarding claim 2, Viering further discloses the connector is fixedly attached to a handle of the medical device (claim 2).
Regarding claim 3, Viering further discloses the connector of the medical device is removably coupled to the port of the control unit by a friction fit (claim 4).
Regarding claim 4, Viering further discloses the connector includes an electrical connection portion (claim 5), and wherein the electrical wire is electrically coupled to the electrical connection portion (claim 5).
Regarding claim 5, Viering further discloses the electrical connection portion is disposed between the first prong and the second prong (claim 6).
Regarding claim 8, Viering further discloses the electrical interface of the control unit includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 7), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 7).
Regarding claim 10, Viering discloses a method of coupling a first medical device to a second device (claim 8), comprising: inserting a connector of the first medical device into the second device (claim 8), wherein inserting the connector into the second device (claim 8) includes: inserting a first prong of the connector into a first opening of the second device (claim 8); inserting a second prong of the connector into a second opening of the second device (claim 8); and seating an electrical connection portion of the connector against an electrical interface of the second device (claim 8), wherein, upon seating the electrical connection portion against the electrical interface (claim 8), data is transmitted from the first medical device to the second device (claim 8), wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector is between the first prong and the second prong such that a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection portion (claim 8).
Regarding claim 11, Viering further discloses coupling the second device to a third device (claim 8), wherein the second device is a socket (claim 9), wherein the third device is a control unit (claim 9).
Regarding claim 12, Viering further discloses the socket is coupled to the control unit by one or more fasteners (claim 10).
Regarding claim 14, Viering further discloses the electrical interface includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 11), and wherein the electrical connection portion of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 11).
Regarding claim 15, Viering further discloses the connector of the first medical device is removably coupled to second device by a friction fit (claim 12).
Regarding claim 17, Viering discloses a method of coupling a medical device to a control unit (claim 13), comprising: coupling a socket to the control unit (claim 13); inserting a first prong of a connector of the medical device into a first opening of the socket (claim 13); inserting a second prong of the connector into a second opening of the socket (claim 13); and coupling an electrical connection of the connector to an electrical interface of the socket (claim 13), wherein the electrical connection of the connector is between the first prong and the second prong of the connector such that a straight line extends through the first prong, the second prong, and the electrical connection (claim 13).
Regarding claim 18, Viering further discloses the connector of the medical device is removably coupled to the socket of the control unit by a friction fit (claim 14).
Regarding claim 19, Viering further discloses the socket is coupled to the control unit by one or more fasteners (claim 15).
Regarding claim 20, Viering further discloses the electrical interface of the socket includes at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 16), and wherein the electrical connection of the connector includes at least one electrical pad corresponding to each of the at least one spring loaded pogo pin (claim 16).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAMELA F WU whose telephone number is (571)272-9851. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8-4 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, Michael Carey can be reached at 571-270-7235. 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.
PAMELA F. WU
Examiner
Art Unit 3795
June 25, 2026
/RYAN N HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights