DETAILED ACTION
This action is pursuant to claims filed on 1/29/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. A first action on the merits of claims 1-20 is as follows.
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 .
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.
Claims 14, 19, and 20 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.
Claim 14 is rejected because it is unclear if “a sheath” in line 2 is the same “a sheath” that is introduced in claim 12. Due to this uncertainty, the claim is indefinite. For the purposes of compact prosecution, it will be treated as the same sheath.
Claim 19 is rejected because it states that the “connector is disposed at a position spaced apart from the transmission member.” Claim 12, on which claim 19 depends, requires the transmission member to be pressed against the connector. It is unclear how the connector must contact the transmission member and also be spaced apart from it. For the purposes of compact prosecution, this will be interpreted as a part of the connector is spaced from the transmission member.
Claim 20 is rejected because “the elastic bodies” lacks antecedent basis. Only a single elastic body has been introduced in claim 12. For the purposes of compact prosecution, this will be interpreted as the single elastic body.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Wales et al. (hereinafter ‘Wales’, US 20250134543 A1).
Regarding independent claim 11, Wales discloses a handle assembly (handle assembly 106), comprising:
a handle body (spool 4118a in Fig. 8);
a transmission member configured to transmit a high-frequency current (wire 4138; [0065]: the wire 4138 couples to the electrosurgical generator; [0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire to the distal portion of the medical device);
a connector (plug 4010) being conductive ([0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire, so the plug must be conductive) and extending in a direction intersecting the transmission member (extends in the claimed direction as seen in Fig. 8); and
a spring (spring 4128) disposed in a compressed state between the transmission member and the connector (in a compressed state between wire and plug as seen in Fig. 8),
wherein when the transmission member and the spring contact with each other (spring 4128 contacts the wire 4138 as seen in Fig. 8), the transmission member, the spring, and the connector are electrically connected ([0066]: the plug, spring, and wire are all electrically connected; they are in contact and the current is sent through them).
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) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wales in view of Suzuki et al. (hereinafter ‘Suzuki’, US 9375257 B2).
Regarding independent claim 1, Wales discloses a handle assembly (handle assembly 106), comprising:
a handle body (spool 4118a in Fig. 8);
a transmission member configured to transmit a high-frequency current (wire 4138; [0065]: the wire 4138 couples to the electrosurgical generator; [0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire to the distal portion of the medical device);
a connector (plug 4010) being conductive ([0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire, so the plug must be conductive) and extending in a direction intersecting a longitudinal axis of the transmission member (extends in the claimed direction as seen in Fig. 8); and
an elastic body (spring 4128),
wherein the elastic body contacts the transmission member (spring 4128 contacts the wire 4138 as seen in Fig. 8), and
the transmission member is slidable ([0025]: the wire is pulled or actuated and may be movable via manipulation of one or more portions of the handle).
Wales further discloses that the spring maintains electrical contact between the plug and the wire even when the wire is rotated ([0066]).
However, Wales shows the plug as connected to the spool, which would mean the plug moves with the wire when there is a push or pull on the spool.
Suzuki teaches a high-frequency treatment instrument comprising a flexible tube for insertion into the body and a treatment portion on the distal end ([Abstract]). As shown in Fig. 1, the device comprises an operative portion 8, like the spool of Wales, and a connection 21for connection to a cable ([Col 4, lines 10-24]). The operative wire 13 is connected to the sliding portion 18 for actuation ([Col 4, lines 25-30]). In the embodiment shown in Fig. 1, the operative wire would slide through the plug since the plug is fixed relative to the sliding portion. Suzuki teaches alternate embodiments in which the plug is integral to the sliding member, which is the same embodiment as that of Wales, as seen in Fig. 10. While the embodiment in Fig. 1 has the operative wire as a separate piece from the conductive coil, the embodiment of Fig. 10 shows that the operative wire 41 can also be conductive ([Col 8, lines 12-18]). Suzuki further states that the embodiments described are merely exemplary and that additions, omissions, substitutions, and other modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention. Thus, since Suzuki teaches that the plug and sliding member can be integral so that they both slide together, or separate which would cause the wire to move independently of the plug, it would be obvious to separate the plug portion from the sliding portion in Wales. It has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. This would also maintain operability since the spring of Wales ensures that electrical contact is maintained through the independent movement of the wire ([0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to separate the plug from the spool of Wales as taught by Suzuki which would result in the wire sliding relative to the plug since constructing a formerly integral structure into various elements involves only routine skill in the art and such a construction is a known equivalent to an integral formation as also taught by Suzuki.
Regarding claim 2, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein
a first end of the connector has a plug (plug end 4134) capable of connecting a power cable that transmits the high-frequency current ([0066]: the plug may couple to an energy source that generates an electrical current),
a second end (coupler 4126)
Wales further states that the spring maintains the electrical contact between the wire and the coupler 4126 ([0066]).
However, Wales is silent to the connector having an insertion passage through which the wire extends and the elastic body forcing the wire to the side of the passage.
Suzuki further teaches that the plug can take many forms such as that shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 10. The embodiment shown in Fig. 10 shows a similar plug to that of Wales, which has a bottom portion that has an insertion passage for the wire to extend through. The insertion passage 27’ is structured to allow the operative wire to electrically connect to the plug 22 ([Col 5, lines 42-59]). Modifying the plug of Wales such that it forms an insertion passage for the wire to extend through is merely a change in the shape of the component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Changing the shape of the plug of Wales to a known plug shape as taught by Suzuki would simply lead to the expected outcome of electrical contact around the exterior surface of the wire. This would additionally result in the spring pressing the wire against the other side of the passage since the spring is a compressed coil spring as shown in Fig. 8 of Wales. The spring maintains electrical contact since the spring pushes down onto the wire, since that is function of a compressed coil spring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the plug of Wales to form an insertion passage as taught by Suzuki to provide for electrical contact of the wire against the plug, resulting the spring pressing the wire into the surface of the passage.
Regarding claim 3, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1.
However, Wales is silent to the structure of the wire 4138.
Suzuki further teaches that the operative wire can be made of a core wire made of a material with superior mechanical characteristics and a conductive film forming a pipe around the core wire with high conductivity as seen in Fig. 15 ([Col 9, lines 20-25]). The high frequency current is applied to the conductive film 51 and the mechanical characteristics are secured because of the core wire 54 ([Col 9, lines 26-30]). This results in the same functional effect as the second embodiment which are decreased impedance which leads to efficient application of current to the treatment portion and also maintains the diameter of the sheath which makes it possible to keep the patients’ burden low, and makes fast and easy treatment possible ([Col 9, lines 31-32], [Col 7, lines 48-59]). Modifying the wire of Wales to have this structure would create a pipe through which a core wire passes, and would result in the spring contacting the pipe since that is the outside of the wire, and the pipe being pressed against the connector as seen in Fig. 8 of Wales. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wire of Wales to have a conductive sheath and a core wire which provides for superior mechanical characteristics as well as decreased impedance which results in efficient and easy treatment.
Regarding claim 4, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein the elastic body is a coiled compression spring (the spring is a coiled compression spring as seen in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 5, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein the elastic body is sandwiched between the transmission member and the connector in a state in which the elastic body is compressed (as seen in Fig. 8 of Wales, the spring is sandwiched between the flange 4130 and the wire 4138 and the spring is in a compressed state; the spring is not pulled to be extended and thus it is in a compressed state, the claim is not specific to how compressed the spring must be).
Regarding claim 6, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein
the connector has a first end having a plug (plug end 4134) capable of connecting a power cable that transmits the high frequency current ([0066]: the plug may couple to an energy source that generates an electrical current), and a second end against which the transmission member is pressed (coupler 4126 which is pressed against the wire as seen in Fig. 8),
the connector has a flange (flange 4130) located between the plug and the transmission member (between the plug portion and wire as seen in Fig. 8),
the elastic body is sandwiched between the transmission member and the flange in a state in which the elastic body is compressed (as seen in Fig. 8, the spring is in a compressed state and between the transmission member and the flange; the claim is not specific to how compressed the spring must be and the spring is not pulled as seen in Fig. 8), and
the elastic body urges the transmission member toward the second end (the coil spring maintains downward pressure on the wire, thus it is urged in the same direction as the second end).
While it is the examiner’s opinion that Wales discloses the embodiment of claim 6, combining with Suzuki to form an insertion passage would result in all of the claim limitations being met as well.
Suzuki further teaches that the plug can take many forms such as that shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 10. The embodiment shown in Fig. 10 shows a similar plug to that of Wales, which has a bottom portion that has an insertion passage for the wire to extend through. The insertion passage 27’ is structured to allow the operative wire to electrically connect to the plug 22 ([Col 5, lines 42-59]). Modifying the plug of Wales such that it forms an insertion passage for the wire to extend through is merely a change in the shape of the component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Changing the shape of the plug of Wales to a known plug shape as taught by Suzuki would simply lead to the expected outcome of electrical contact around the exterior surface of the wire. This would additionally result in the spring urging and pressing the wire against the other side of the passage since the spring is a compressed coil spring as shown in Fig. 8 of Wales. The spring maintains electrical contact since the spring pushes down onto the wire, since that is function of a compressed coil spring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the plug of Wales to form an insertion passage as taught by Suzuki to provide for electrical contact of the wire against the plug, resulting the spring pressing the wire into the surface of the passage which is on the second end of the plug.
Regarding claim 7, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 6, wherein
the elastic body is a compression spring (4128 is a compression spring as seen in Fig. 8); and
at least a part of the connector is inserted through the compression spring (portion 4126 is inserted into the compression spring as seen in Fig. 8).
Regarding claim 8, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 2, wherein in a state in which the transmission member is pressed against the second end of the connector by the elastic body, the transmission member is deflected toward the second end of the connector (the spring 4128 of Wales exerts downward pressure as described above and the downward pressure pushes and deflects the transmission member downward toward the second end of the connector).
Regarding claim 9, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein in a state in which the transmission member is pressed against the connector (as stated in the rejection of claim 2 described above, the plug can form an insertion passage through which the transmission member extends and is pressed against the connector; also, as shown in Fig. 8 of Wales, the transmission member is contacting and thus pressed against the plug), the transmission member is slidable relative to the connector in a direction around the longitudinal axis of the transmission member ([0066]: the spring allows the wire to rotate and maintain electrical contact; thus the wire can rotate and slide along the connector).
Regarding claim 10, the Wales/Suzuki combination discloses the handle assembly according to claim 1, wherein in a state in which the transmission member is pressed against the connector (as stated in the rejection of claim 2 described above, the plug can form an insertion passage through which the transmission member extends and is pressed against the connector; also, as shown in Fig. 8 of Wales, the transmission member is contacting and thus pressed against the plug), the transmission member is slidable relative to the connector in a direction along a longitudinal axis of the transmission member (as stated in the rejection of claim 1 above, the transmission member is slidable relative to the connector along a longitudinal axis of the wire).
Claim(s) 12-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wales in view of Takahashi et al. (hereinafter ‘Takahashi’, US 20250049519 A1) and in further view of Suzuki.
Regarding independent claim 12, Wales discloses an endoscope treatment tool (Fig. 1), comprising:
a sheath (shaft 108; [0006]: shaft radially surrounds the wire and thus forms a sheath);
an end effector disposed at a distal end of the sheath (end effector 110 disposed on distal end of the sheath as seen in Fig. 1);
a transmission member configured to transmit high frequency current (wire 4138; [0065]: the wire 4138 couples to the electrosurgical generator; [0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire to the distal portion of the medical device); and
a handle (handle assembly 106) connected to a proximal end of the sheath (connected to proximal end of the sheath as seen in Fig. 1);
wherein the handle includes
a connector (plug 4010) being conductive ([0066]: current is sent from the plug to the wire, so the plug must be conductive) and extending in a direction intersecting the transmission member (extends in the claimed direction as seen in Fig. 8), and
an elastic body (spring 4128),
wherein the transmission member is slidable ([0025]: the wire is pulled or actuated and may be movable via manipulation of one or more portions of the handle).
However, Wales does not explicitly disclose a long member wherein the transmission member transmits high-frequency current to the long member.
Takahashi teaches a surgical instrument that includes an end effector with opposing jaws, a wrist hub, and a shaft connected to the wrist ([Abstract]). Takahashi further teaches that the elongate element 47 is used to actuate the jaws ([0107]). The elongate element is made of a rod 47d which connects to a flexible wire 47c, and then to another rod 47b which connects to the first jaw ([0110]). The structure of this element can be seen in Figs. 11, 17 and 18. Furthermore, the elongate member 47 is made of electrically conductive material ([0110]). Utilizing an elongate element that contains a stiff rod connected to a flexible wire allows for the wire to bend in response to articulation of the wrist while maintaining the strength of the rod along the shaft ([0110]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wire of Wales to form a stiff transmission portion connected to a flexible wire long member such that the flexible portion can bend in response to wrist articulation while also maintaining the strength of the rigid section. This would result in the transmission member conducting high-frequency current to the long member since they are connected in line as seen in Fig. 17 and made of conductive material.
However, the Wales/Takahashi combination is silent to the spring pressing transmission member against the connector and the transmission member being slidable relative to the connector in a state in which the transmission member is pressed against the connector.
Suzuki teaches a high-frequency treatment instrument comprising a flexible tube for insertion into the body and a treatment portion on the distal end ([Abstract]). As shown in Fig. 1, the device comprises an operative portion 8, like the spool of Wales, and a connection 21for connection to a cable ([Col 4, lines 10-24]). The operative wire 13 is connected to the sliding portion 18 for actuation ([Col 4, lines 25-30]). In the embodiment shown in Fig. 1, the operative wire would slide through the plug since the plug is fixed relative to the sliding portion. Suzuki teaches alternate embodiments in which the plug is integral to the sliding member, which is the same embodiment as that of Wales, as seen in Fig. 10. While the embodiment in Fig. 1 has the operative wire as a separate piece from the conductive coil, the embodiment of Fig. 10 shows that the operative wire 41 can also be conductive ([Col 8, lines 12-18]). Suzuki further states that the embodiments described are merely exemplary and that additions, omissions, substitutions, and other modifications can be made without departing from the scope of the invention. Thus, since Suzuki teaches that the plug and sliding member can be integral so that they both slide together, or separate which would cause the wire to move independently of the plug, it would be obvious to separate the plug portion from the sliding portion in Wales. It has been held that constructing a formerly integral structure in various elements involves only routine skill in the art. Nerwin v. Erlichman, 168 USPQ 177, 179. This would also maintain operability since the spring of Wales ensures that electrical contact is maintained through the independent movement of the wire ([0066]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to separate the plug from the spool of Wales as taught by Suzuki which would result in the wire sliding relative to the plug since constructing a formerly integral structure into various elements involves only routine skill in the art and such a construction is a known equivalent to an integral formation as also taught by Suzuki.
Suzuki further teaches that the plug can take many forms such as that shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 10. The embodiment shown in Fig. 10 shows a similar plug to that of Wales, which has a bottom portion that has an insertion passage for the wire to extend through. The insertion passage 27’ is structured to allow the operative wire to electrically connect to the plug 22 ([Col 5, lines 42-59]). Modifying the plug of Wales such that it forms an insertion passage for the wire to extend through is merely a change in the shape of the component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art, absent any showing of unexpected results. In re Dailey et al., 149 USPQ 47. Changing the shape of the plug of Wales to a known plug shape as taught by Suzuki would simply lead to the expected outcome of electrical contact around the exterior surface of the wire. This would additionally result in the spring pressing the wire against the other side of the passage since the spring is a compressed coil spring as shown in Fig. 8 of Wales. The spring maintains electrical contact since the spring pushes down onto the wire, since that is function of a compressed coil spring. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the shape of the plug of Wales to form an insertion passage as taught by Suzuki to provide for electrical contact of the wire against the plug, resulting the spring pressing the wire into the surface of the passage.
Regarding claim 13, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein
a first end of the connector has a plug (plug end 4134) capable of connecting a power cable that transmits the high frequency current ([0066]: the plug may couple to an energy source that generates an electrical current),
a second end of the connector has an insertion passage extending in a longitudinal axis direction of the handle (in the combination as explained above, the bottom end of the connector forms an insertion passage),
the connector has a flange (flange 4130) located between the plug and the transmission member (between the plug portion and wire as seen in Fig. 8),
the elastic body is sandwiched between the transmission member and the flange in a state in which the elastic body is compressed (as seen in Fig. 8, the spring is in a compressed state and between the transmission member and the flange; the claim is not specific to how compressed the spring must be and the spring is not pulled as seen in Fig. 8), and
the elastic body biases the transmission member toward the second end (in the combination as stated above, the spring pushed the transmission member downward into the surface of the insertion passage).
Regarding claim 14, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein the long member is inserted through the sheath (as highlighted in Takahashi below, the long member is inserted into the sheath), and the end effector rotates relative to the sheath (Wales [0062]: rotation of the knob rotates the wire which rotates the end effector – thus the end effector rotates relative to the sheath).
PNG
media_image1.png
584
916
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein the long member has a wire (Takahashi [0110]: 47c is a flexible wire).
Regarding claim 16, Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 15.
However, while the combination is silent to the structure of the transmission member.
Suzuki further teaches that the operative wire can be made of a core made of a material with superior mechanical characteristics and a conductive film forming a pipe around the core wire with high conductivity as seen in Fig. 15 ([Col 9, lines 20-25]). The high frequency current is applied to the conductive film 51 and the mechanical characteristics are secured because of the core wire 54 ([Col 9, lines 26-30]). This results in the same functional effect as the second embodiment which are decreased impedance which leads to efficient application of current to the treatment portion and also maintains the diameter of the sheath which makes it possible to keep the patients’ burden low, and makes fast and easy treatment possible ([Col 9, lines 31-32], [Col 7, lines 48-59]). Modifying the transmission of the Wales/Takahashi combination to have this structure would create a pipe through which a strong core element passes, and would result in the spring contacting the pipe since that is the outside of the wire, and the pipe being pressed by the spring as seen in Fig. 8 of Wales into the connector as explained in the combination. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wire of Wales to have a conductive sheath/pipe and a core wire which provides for superior mechanical characteristics as well as decreased impedance which results in efficient and easy treatment.
Regarding claim 17, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein
the connector has an insertion passage through which the transmission member passes (the insertion passage is formed and the transmission member passes through it as explained in the combination above), and
the elastic body applies a biasing force to electrically connect the transmission member to at least a part of the insertion passage (as explained in the rejection above, the spring exerts downward pressure on the transmission member and this biasing force creates contact with the insertion passage; as seen in Suzuki Figs. 10 and 14, the insertion passage contacts the wire on the top and bottom, so the spring force would simply maintain that contact; Wales [0066]: the spring maintains electrical contact between the wire and the plug).
Regarding claim 19, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein
the connector is disposed at a position spaced apart from the transmission member (the top of the connector 4134 is spaced apart from the transmission wire 4138 as seen in Fig. 8 of Wales; the claim is not specific to which part of the connector is spaced away from the transmission wire), and
the elastic body applies a biasing force to the transmission member to electrically connect the transmission member to the connector ([0066]: the spring provides for constant electrical contact between the plug and wire throughout rotation of the wire; thus the spring presses on the wire to maintain contact).
Regarding claim 20, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool of claim 12, wherein the elastic body is arranged on both sides of the transmission member (Wales [0066]: the spring maintains contact with the wire as it rotates; thus as the wire rotates from one side to the other, the spring contacts both sides).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination as applied to claim 12, in further view of WB Jones (WB Jones, “Understanding Compression Spring End Types”, https://web.archive.org/web/20221210022719/https://www.springsfast.com/products/compression-springs/understanding-compression-spring-end-types/).
Regarding claim 18, the Wales/Takahashi/Suzuki combination discloses the endoscope treatment tool according to claim 12, wherein
the elastic body is a coil spring (the elastic body is a coil spring as seen in Wales Fig. 8), and
a pitch of seat coils at the bottom ends of the coil spring is narrower than that of other parts (as seen in Fig. 8 of Wales, the pitch of the seat coils is narrower than the rest of the spring since to coils contact each other).
However, the it is unclear if the top of the spring is a closed like the bottom.
WB Jones teaches the different types of spring ends. While not specifically directed towards endoscopic tools, the art is applicable because it discusses ways to improve spring function which is an obvious benefit to the spring of the combination. WB Jones states that the most commonly used type of spring is a spring with closed ends where the space between the last two coils is reduced so they touch each other (Page 1). This allows the spring to sit flat on the ends (Page 1). Allowing the springs to sit flatter aids in reducing buckling (Page 1). Additionally, WB Jones further states that for smaller springs and large production, closed and unground springs are best (Page 1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the spring of the combination such that both ends are closed, which makes the pitch seat narrower on the ends, to allow for a flat sitting spring that reduces buckling.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM E MOSSBROOK whose telephone number is (703)756-1936. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 at (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.
/W.M./ Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOSEPH A STOKLOSA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights