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 1-21 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 first operating member” and “an operating device” in claim 1; “a support member” in claim 2; “a lock mechanism” and “a lock release member” in claims 19-20; “a movement suppression mechanism” in claim 20.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 16, the limitation “a distal end among the plurality of nodal portions” is unclear. It is unclear what feature/component the “distal end” is referring to.
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) 1-3, 11, 16-18, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000), in view of Bakos (US 2010/0010298).
Regarding claim 1, Miyamoto discloses an auxiliary device for an endoscope (see 2, figure 9) that includes an insertion part (51, figure 9) having a bendable part (see 52, figure 9) and an endoscope operating part (50, figure 9) provided at a base end side of the insertion part (see figure 9), the auxiliary device comprising: a cylindrical bendable body (see 13, figure 2) that is configured to cover (overtube…[0049]) and bend an end part on a bendable part side of a flexible part between the bendable part and the endoscope operating part in the insertion part (see location of 15 relative to 51, figures 26 | the cylindrical body 13 of figure 2 may be located over 51 that is proximal to 52 in figure 9) and that is attachable to and detachable from the end part (endoscope…inserted…[0049]); elongated wires (12, figure 2) that is connected to the bendable body (fastened…of the distal end portion 15 [0065]) and that is capable of bending the bendable body (bend in two directions [0065]); and an operating device (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a rotational movement member 41, an accommodating member 42, a second operating member 43, a reinforcing member 44, and a locking part 45 [0059] | bending control lever 45, proximal handle 44, bending lock lever 46, the distal portion of 44, and endoscope lock button 47, figure 2; [0064]) that is connected to the first operating member, wherein the first operating member is exposed between the bendable body and the operating device (wires pass through the inside of the insertion portion 5…across the center of the first lumen 3 [0065] | interpreted the wires to be exposed to the internal lumen/channel by being inside the insertion portion 5), and both ends of the bendable body in an axial direction are located closer to the flexible part than the bendable part (see location of 15 relative to 51, figures 26 | the cylindrical body 13 of figure 2 may be located over 51 that is proximal to 52 in figure 9), and at least one of both ends of the bendable body is supported at the end part of the flexible part (see location of 15 relative to 51, figure 26a). Miyamoto is silent regarding a first operating member that is connected to the bendable body and that is capable of bending the bendable body.
Bakos teaches a flexible overtube (12, figure 1) coupled to a steerable segment (46, figure 1) that is coupled to an actuation handle (300, figure 1). The overtube has a lumen (38a, figure 1) that receives a pull cable for actuating the steerable segment ([0045]). The pull cable (136, figure 1) is contained within a coil pipe assembly (210, figure 1).
It would have been obvious to modify the device with a pull cable (136, figure 1) contained within a coil pipe assembly (210, figure 1) beyond the bendable body to the operating device as taught by Bakos. Doing so would contain the pull cable inside the coil pipe assembly ([0045]). The modified device would have a first operating member (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a wire and a guide member | 136 and 210, figure 1; Bakos; [0045]) that is connected to the bendable body and that is capable of bending the bendable body (actuation [0045]).
Regarding claim 2, Miyamoto further discloses a support member (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a cylindrical shape that covers the outer peripheral surface | 5, figure 3; Miyamoto) that is configured to support at least one of both ends of the bendable body at the end part of the flexible part (broadly interpreted “support” to mean to hold/connect the bendable body 13 to the operating device 44, figure 2) and that is configured separately from the bendable body (interpreted bending portion 13 are and insertion portion 5 are separate; bending portion 13 is provided at the distal end side of the insertion portion 5 [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Miyamoto further discloses the support member is configured to support at least an end on a base end side of both ends of the bendable body at the end part (bending portion 13 is provided at the distal end side of the insertion portion 5 [0050]).
Regarding claim 11, Miyamoto further discloses the bendable body has a plurality of cylindrical nodal portions (11, figure 2; Miyamoto) arranged in the axial direction (see figure 2), and each of the nodal portions supports an adjacent nodal portion to be rotationally movable (see 11, figure 2).
Regarding claim 16, Miyamoto and Bakos further disclose the first operating member has a wire (12, figure 2; Miyamoto | 136, figure 1; Bakos) that is inserted through the plurality of nodal portions (see 12 in 11, figure 2; Miyamoto) and that is supported by the nodal portion provided at a distal end among the plurality of nodal portions (wires…fastened to the distal end portion 15 [0065]; Miyamoto), and a guide member (210, figure 1; Bakos) that is provided between the bendable body and the operating device (see 210, figure 1; Bakos) and through which the wire is inserted (see 136 inside of 210, figure 1; Bakos).
Regarding claim 17, Miyamoto further discloses the operating device includes a rotational movement member (bending control lever 45, figure 2; Miyamoto) that is connected to the first operating member (connected to the proximal end side of the bending wire [0064]) and that is rotationally movable (see figure 2), an accommodating member (proximal handle 44, figure 2) that accommodates the rotational movement member (see 45 that is attached/held by 44, figure 2), and a second operating member (bending lock lever 46, figure 2) that is provided to protrude from the accommodating member (see 44 and 46, figure 2) and that is connected to the rotational movement member (fastens the position of the bending control lever 45 [0064]), a protruding end of the second operating member is configured to be movable along a portion of a circumference (see 46, figure 2) of a virtual circle centered on a rotational movement axis of the rotational movement member (see rotational movement axis of 45-46, figure 2), and the accommodating member has, on an inside of the virtual circle, a region that is grippable with three or four fingers other than a thumb (see proximal end of 44, figure 2 | 3-4 fingers may be placed around the proximal end of 44, which would be inside the virtual circle created by the circumferential movements of 46), which is placed on the second operating member, of one hand of an operator (a thumb can be used to control 46, figure 2).
Regarding claim 18, Miyamoto further discloses the accommodating member has a first surface on one end side in a direction of the rotational movement axis (see sides of 44, figure 2; Miyamoto), a second surface on the other end side in the direction of the rotational movement axis (see sides of 44, figure 2; Miyamoto), and a third surface connecting the first surface and the second surface (see sides of 44, figure 2), and the second operating member is provided to protrude from the third surface (see 46, figure 2 | 46 protrudes in the down direction).
Regarding claim 21, Miyamoto further discloses a locking part (47, figure 2; Miyamoto) that is provided on any one of the first surface or the second surface (see sides of 44, figure 2) and that is lockable to the endoscope (see figure 8).
Claim(s) 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000) and Bakos (US 2010/0010298) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Adair (US 5,630,782).
Regarding claim 4, Miyamoto and Bakos disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 3. They are silent regarding the support member is provided between an inner peripheral surface of the bendable body and an outer peripheral surface of the flexible part.
Adair teaches an endoscope (E, figure 4) with an attachable viewing head (VH, figure 4). The viewing head is attached to the endoscope by utilizing internal threads (58, figure 4) on the viewing head and corresponding external thread (60, figure 4) on the endoscope.
It would have been obvious to modify the support member to have a smaller diameter with external threads (60, figure 4) at its distal end and to modify the bendable body to have internal threads (58, figure 4) as taught by Adair. Doing so would provide an alternative way to attach the bendable body to the support member (see 58 and 60, figure 4). The modified device would have the support member is provided between an inner peripheral surface of the bendable body and an outer peripheral surface of the flexible part (see location of 60 with respect to 58, figure 4; Adair | endoscope…inserted…[0049]; Miyamoto).
Regarding claim 5, Miyamoto further discloses the support member has a cylindrical shape (see shape of 5, figure 2; Miyamoto) that covers the outer peripheral surface of the flexible part (endoscope…inserted…[0049]).
Regarding claim 6, Miyamoto further discloses the support member has flexibility (see 5, figure 2; Miyamoto).
Claim(s) 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000) and Bakos (US 2010/0010298) and Adair (US 5,630,782) as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Tilson (US 2023/0014281).
Regarding claim 7, Miyamoto and Bakos disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 6. They are silent regarding a slit that extends in the axial direction is provided on an outer peripheral surface of the support member.
Tilson teaches an outer tube (5261y, figure 52a-b) that slides over the outer rigidizing device (5200, figure 52a). The outer tube can include a plurality of flexures or linkages to enhance flexibility of the tube ([0312]). The outer tube can have a slit down the longitudinal length thereof so as to snap onto the outer rigidizing device ([0312]).
It would have been obvious to modify the support member to have a slit down the longitudinal length as taught by Tilson ([0312]). Doing so would allow the support member to snap onto the endoscope ([0312]). The modified device would have a slit (slit [0312]; Tilson) that extends in the axial direction (down the longitudinal length…[0312]) is provided on an outer peripheral surface of the support member (outer tube can have a slit…[0312]).
Regarding claim 8, Adair further teaches a protrusion (external thread 60, figure 4; Adair) that extends in a circumferential direction (see 60, figure 4) is provided on the outer peripheral surface of the support member.
Regarding claim 9, Adair further teaches a plurality of the protrusions are arranged in the axial direction (external threads 60, figure 4; Adair) on the outer peripheral surface of the support member.
Regarding claim 10, Adair further teaches the plurality of protrusions include a first protrusion of which a protrusion height is a first height (see diameter of E proximal to 60, figure 4; Adair) and a second protrusion (see height of threads 60, figure 4) of which a protrusion height is a second height smaller than the first height (diameter of 60 is smaller than the diameter of E proximal to 60, see figure 4).
Claim(s) 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000) and Bakos (US 2010/0010298) as applied to claim 11, and further in view of Kabe (US 2014/0135685).
Regarding claim 12, Miyamoto and Bakos discloses all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 11. They are silent regarding a first nodal portion, which is one of two adjacent nodal portions, has an engagement hole portion, a second nodal portion, which is the other of the two nodal portions, has an engagement protrusion that engages with the engagement hole portion, and the first nodal portion and the second nodal portion are supported by each other so as to be relatively rotationally movable through the engagement between the engagement hole portion and the engagement protrusion.
Kabe teaches a catheter (10, figure 1) with a flexible tubular catheter body (14, figure 1) and a handle (12, figure 1). There is a steerable assembly (28, figures 3) within the distal region (16, figures 3) of the catheter body. The steerable assembly may have a segment (29, figure 5 | 129, figures 9-10) with cylindrical elements (130, figure 10) that are configured to move in relation to an adjacent cylindrical element by a revolute joint ([0055]). Each of these joints are a bearing joint, where each cylindrical element has two ball portions (132, figures 9-10) and two mating socket portions (134, figures 9-10). The ball portions are shaped to fit within the socket portion, where they roll against each other during rotation of the joint ([0055]).
It would have been obvious to modify the bendable body to have the flexible segment (129, figures 9-10) with ball portions (132, figures 9-10) and socket portions (134, figures 9-10) as taught by Kabe. Doing so would provide ease of assembly of the bendable body ([0055]). The modified device would have a first nodal portion (11, figure 2; Miyamoto | 130, figures 9-10; Kabe), which is one of two adjacent nodal portions, has an engagement hole portion (see mating socket portions 134, figures 9-10; Kabe), a second nodal portion (see 130, figures 9-10; Kabe), which is the other of the two nodal portions, has an engagement protrusion (ball portions 132, figure 9-10; Kabe) that engages with the engagement hole portion (see figures 9-10; Miyamoto), and the first nodal portion and the second nodal portion are supported by each other so as to be relatively rotationally movable through the engagement between the engagement hole portion and the engagement protrusion (ball portions are shaped to fit within the socket portions…rotation of the joint [0055]; Miyamoto).
Regarding claim 13, Kabe further teaches a specific nodal portion (see 130, figure 9; Kabe) to which two nodal portions are adjacent has an engagement protrusion (132, figure 9) that engages with an engagement hole portion (134, figure 9) of one of the two nodal portions, and an engagement hole portion (134, figure 9) that engages with an engagement protrusion (132, figure 9) of the other of the two nodal portions.
Claim(s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000) and Bakos (US 2010/0010298) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in in view of Surti (US 2013/0131450).
Regarding claim 14, Miyamoto and Bakos disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 11. They are silent regarding the plurality of nodal portions are integrally formed.
Surti teaches an overtube (102, figure 1) that is a flexible, substantially tubular body having a lumen disposed therethrough ([0030]). The overtube includes side notches (108 and 110, figure 2 | 802, figure 8) to aid in flexibility and bendability at strategic locations along the overtube ([0030]).
It would have been obvious to modify the auxiliary device of Miyamoto and Bakos to have the plurality of nodal portions created by notches (108 and 110, figure 2 | 802, figure 8) as taught by Surti. Doing so would be an alternative way to provide flexibility and bendability at strategic locations along the device ([0030]). The modified device would have the plurality of nodal portions are integrally formed (see 108 and 110, figure 2 | 802, figure 8 | notches…[0030]).
Regarding claim 15, Surti further teaches a slit that extends in the axial direction is provided on an outer peripheral surface of the bendable body (see 108 and 110, figure 2 | 802, figure 8; Surti).
Claim(s) 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miyamoto (US 2007/0198000) and Bakos (US 2010/0010298) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Isobe (US 2023/0126521).
Regarding claim 17, Miyamoto and Bakos disclose all of the features in the current invention as shown above in claim 1. They are silent regarding the operating device includes a rotational movement member that is connected to the first operating member and that is rotationally movable, an accommodating member that accommodates the rotational movement member, and a second operating member that is provided to protrude from the accommodating member and that is connected to the rotational movement member, a protruding end of the second operating member is configured to be movable along a portion of a circumference of a virtual circle centered on a rotational movement axis of the rotational movement member, and the accommodating member has, on an inside of the virtual circle, a region that is grippable with three or four fingers other than a thumb, which is placed on the second operating member, of one hand of an operator.
Isobe teaches an operation lever (27, figures 1-3) that moves the pulling wire (51, figure 2). The operation lever (27, figure 2) acts on an operation mechanism (33, figure 2), which also includes a main support shaft (35, figure 2), a rotation member (36, figure 2), the rack (40, figure 2), and a rack guide (41, figure 2). There is a switching mechanism (32, figure 1) with a switching operation member (30, figure 2), a support shaft (32a, figure 2), a lever (32b, figure 2), a lock click (32c, figure 2), and a spring (32d, figure 2). The spring is fixed on one end to the lever (32b, figure 2), and the other end to an internal fixed part (20b, figure 2) of the operation portion (12, figure 2). The switching mechanism switch between a state in which the lock click (32c, figures 2-3) and the gear train of the rack (40, figures 2-3) are engaged with each other or released ([0060]). Movement of the rack (40, figures 2-3) also moves the drive power transmission mechanism (34, figure 2), which includes a first link member (42, figure 2), a fist link shaft (42a, figure 2), a second link shaft (42b, figure 2), a second link member (43, figure 2), the wire coupling member (44, figure 2), and the wire guide (45, figure 2).
It would have been obvious to modify the device to have an operation mechanism (33, figure 2), a switching mechanism (32, figure 2), and a drive power transmission mechanism (34, figure 2) as taught by Isobe to move the first operating member. Doing so would allow switching between a state that is locked (engaged) or a state that is unlocked (released; [0060]). The modified device would have the operating device includes a rotational movement member (36, figures 2-3; Isobe) that is connected to the first operating member (36…moves the pulling wire…[0103]; Isobe) and that is rotationally movable (see figures 2-3), an accommodating member (20, figures 2-3; Isobe | 44, figure 2; Miyamoto) that accommodates the rotational movement member, and a second operating member (27, figure 2; Isobe) that is provided to protrude from the accommodating member and that is connected to the rotational movement member (see figures 2-3; Isobe), a protruding end of the second operating member is configured to be movable along a portion of a circumference of a virtual circle centered on a rotational movement axis of the rotational movement member (see figures 2-3; Isobe), and the accommodating member has, on an inside of the virtual circle, a region that is grippable with three or four fingers other than a thumb (see proximal end of 20, figures 2-3; Isobe | see proximal end of 44, figure 2; Miyamoto | 3-4 fingers may be placed around the proximal end of 20 in figure 2 of Isobe or 44 in figure 2 of Miyamoto, which would be inside the virtual circle created by the circumferential movements of 27, figures 2-3 of Isobe), which is placed on the second operating member, of one hand of an operator (see 27, figures 2-3; Isobe).
Regarding claim 18, Miyamoto and Isobe further disclose the accommodating member has a first surface on one end side in a direction of the rotational movement axis (see sides of 44, figure 2; Miyamoto), a second surface on the other end side in the direction of the rotational movement axis (see sides of 44, figure 2; Miyamoto), and a third surface connecting the first surface and the second surface (see sides of 44, figure 2), and the second operating member is provided to protrude from the third surface (see 27, figures 2-3 of Isobe).
Regarding claim 19, Isobe further teaches the accommodating member is provided with a lock mechanism (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a lock member 424 and ratchet grooves 410A | see 32c and 40, figure 2; Isobe) that locks a rotational movement position of the rotational movement member in a plurality of stages ([0060]; see 36a, 40 and 32c, figures 2-3; Isobe), and a lock release member (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a raised member that is pressed | see 30, figures 2-3; Isobe) that releases the lock through the lock mechanism is provided on the third surface ([0060]; Isobe).
Regarding claim 20, Isobe further teaches the accommodating member includes a lock mechanism (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a lock member 424 and ratchet grooves 410A | see 32c and 40, figure 2; Isobe) that locks a rotational movement position of the rotational movement member in a plurality of stages ([0060]; see 36a, 40 and 32c, figures 2-3; Isobe), a lock release member (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as a raised member that is pressed | see 30, figures 2-3; Isobe) that releases the lock through the lock mechanism (see figures 2-3), and a movement suppression mechanism (this element is interpreted under 35 USC 112f as bending ribs | 41-42, figure 2) that suppresses movement of the rotational movement member to a reference position in a case in which the lock release member is operated (41 is support member that guides linear movement [0067]; 42 is connected to the rack 40 and is the first link member in the drive power transmission mechanism [0069]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Rogers (US 2008/0287963) discloses a guide; Verbeek (US 2011/0065990) has a flexible tube.
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
August 21, 2026
/RYAN N HENDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3795
Prosecution Insights