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 .
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
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.
No claim limitation has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) because each term (e.g., ‘elongated member’) connotes sufficient structure to a POSITA. See MPEP § 2181. If applicant contends otherwise, please point to supporting disclosure.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 11,534,171 in view of Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”). Claim 1 of the reference patent recites all of the limitations of instant claim 1 except positively reciting first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period. However, in the same field of endeavor, magnetic anastomosis devices, Harrison teaches first and second elongated magnetic implants (310, 320; [0077, 0078, 0081]) configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the system of the reference patent with first and second elongated magnetic implants, as taught by Harrison, to provide means for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of the digestive system.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 15 of U.S. Patent No. 11,534,171. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 under examination are anticipated, respectively, by claim 15 of the reference patent.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 11,832,820 in view of Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”). Claim 12 of the reference patent recites all of the limitations of instant claim 1 except positively reciting first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period. However, in the same field of endeavor, magnetic anastomosis devices, Harrison teaches first and second elongated magnetic implants (310, 320; [0077, 0078, 0081]) configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the system of the reference patent with first and second elongated magnetic implants, as taught by Harrison, to provide means for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of the digestive system.
Every limitation in the application under examination is recited in the conflicting reference patent claims and the differences between the claims are highlight below by bolding all limitations that differ and having explanations in parentheses. As shown in the mapping below, claims of the reference patent includes all of the limitations of claims of the instant application, while also reciting further limitations.
Instant Application
US Patent No. 11,534,171 in view of Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”)
1. A system for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract of a patient, the system comprising: first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period; and a positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient; and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the first elongated magnetic implant through a wall of the digestive tract to position the first elongated magnetic implant to a desired site of the anastomosis.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the distal tip is configured to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the distal tip is pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin, the distal tip forming a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
1. A positioning wand for assisting in positioning at least one of a first magnetic implant and a second magnetic implant configured for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract of a patient, the positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient; and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the at least one of the first and second magnetic implants through a wall of the digestive tract to translate the at least one of the first and second magnetic implants along an inner surface of the wall of the digestive tract to a desired site of the anastomosis, the distal tip being pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin to form a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin, and configured for placement against an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract and to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract.
14.The system of claim 11, wherein the distal tip comprises a frame pivotally engaged with the distal end of the elongated member via a pin, the frame forming a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
2. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the distal tip comprises a frame pivotally engaged with the distal end of the elongated member via the pin, the frame forming the hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
15. The system of claim 14, wherein the distal tip comprises at least one cylindrical body pivotally engaged with the frame via a cylindrical body pin extending along a central cylindrical body longitudinal axis of a corresponding cylindrical body such that the cylindrical body is rotatable about the central cylindrical longitudinal axis.
3. The positioning wand of claim 2, wherein the distal tip comprises at least one cylindrical body pivotally engaged with the frame via a cylindrical body pin extending along a central cylindrical body longitudinal axis of a corresponding cylindrical body such that the at least one cylindrical body is rotatable about the central cylindrical longitudinal axis.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the distal tip is configured to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract.
4. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the distal tip is configured to be moveable in response to the contact pressure upon contact with the wall of the digestive tract to lighten the contact pressure.
17. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member includes at least one flexible portion and at least one rigid portion.
5. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the elongated member includes at least one flexible portion and at least one rigid portion.
18. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a tubular structure defining a channel extending along a longitudinal axis of the elongated member, the channel being configured to receive a guide wire therein, the guide wire being connected to the distal tip to form a flexible connection between the distal end of the elongated member and the distal tip.
6. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a tubular structure defining a channel extending along a longitudinal axis of the elongated member, the channel being configured to receive a guide wire therein, the guide wire being connected to the distal tip to form a flexible connection between the distal end of the elongated member and the distal tip.
19. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a plurality of tubular structures provided in a telescopic configuration.
7. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a plurality of tubular structures provided in a telescopic configuration.
10. The system of claim 1, wherein the distal tip comprises a sensor for detecting a magnetic field.
9. The positioning wand of claim 1, wherein the distal tip comprises a sensor for detecting a magnetic field.
1. A system for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract of a patient, the system comprising: first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period; and a positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient; and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the first elongated magnetic implant through a wall of the digestive tract to position the first elongated magnetic implant to a desired site of the anastomosis.
11. The system of claim 1, wherein the distal tip is configured to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract.
12. The system of claim 11, wherein the distal tip is pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin, the distal tip forming a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
15. A system for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract, the system comprising: first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period; and a positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient; and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising: a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the first magnetic implant through a wall of the digestive tract to translate the first magnetic implant along an inner surface of the wall of the digestive tract to a desired site of the anastomosis, the distal tip being pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin to form a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin, and configured for placement against an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract and to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract.
14. The system of claim 11, wherein the distal tip comprises a frame pivotally engaged with the distal end of the elongated member via a pin, the frame forming a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
16. The system of claim 15, wherein the distal tip comprises a frame pivotally engaged with the distal end of the elongated member via the pin, the frame forming the hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin.
15. The system of claim 14, wherein the distal tip comprises at least one cylindrical body pivotally engaged with the frame via a cylindrical body pin extending along a central cylindrical body longitudinal axis of a corresponding cylindrical body such that the cylindrical body is rotatable about the central cylindrical longitudinal axis.
17. The system of claim 16, wherein the distal tip comprises at least one cylindrical body pivotally engaged with the frame via a cylindrical body pin extending along a central cylindrical body longitudinal axis of a corresponding cylindrical body such that the at least one cylindrical body is rotatable about the central cylindrical longitudinal axis.
5. The system of claim 1, wherein at least one of the first and second elongated magnetic implants comprises a flat compression surface.
18. The system of claim 15, wherein at least one of the first and second elongated magnetic implants comprises a flat compression surface.
17. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member includes at least one flexible portion and at least one rigid portion.
19. The system of claim 15, wherein the elongated member includes at least one flexible portion and at least one rigid portion.
18. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a tubular structure defining a channel extending along a longitudinal axis of the elongated member, the channel being configured to receive a guide wire therein, the guide wire being connected to the distal tip to form a flexible connection between the distal end of the elongated member and the distal tip.
20. The system of claim 15, wherein the elongated member comprises a tubular structure defining a channel extending along a longitudinal axis of the elongated member, the channel being configured to receive a guide wire therein, the guide wire being connected to the distal tip to form a flexible connection between the distal end of the elongated member and the distal tip.
19. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a plurality of tubular structures provided in a telescopic configuration.
21. The system of claim 15, wherein the elongated member comprises a plurality of tubular structures provided in a telescopic configuration.
Claims of Instant Application
US Patent No. 11,832,820 in view of Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”)
1. A system for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract of a patient, the system comprising: first and second elongated magnetic implants configured to magnetically couple to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween and form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period; and a positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient; and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the first elongated magnetic implant through a wall of the digestive tract to position the first elongated magnetic implant to a desired site of the anastomosis.
19. The system of claim 1, wherein the elongated member comprises a plurality of tubular structures provided in a telescopic configuration.
12. A positioning wand for assisting in positioning at least one of a first magnetic implant and a second magnetic implant configured for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract of a patient, the positioning wand comprising: an elongated member sized and configured to have at least a portion thereof to be inserted into an abdominal cavity of the patient, the elongated member comprising a plurality of tubular structures coupled to each other in a telescopic configuration to lengthen the elongated member to a deployable configuration and to shorten the elongated member to a retracted configuration (omission does not affect the ability to form an anastomosis); and a distal tip provided at a distal end of the elongated member and comprising a guide magnet configured to magnetically couple with the at least one of the first and second magnetic implants through a wall of the digestive tract to translate the at least one of the first and second magnetic implants along an inner surface of the wall of the digestive tract to a desired site of the anastomosis, the distal tip being configured for placement against an outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract to be moveable in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the outer surface of the wall of the digestive tract (omission does not affect the ability of the system to form an anastomosis).
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(s) 1, 3, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”).
Regarding claims 1 and 20, Harrison discloses a system for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract. The system includes first and second elongated magnetic implants (310, 320; [0077, 0078, 0081]), wherein the length is longer than the width and the implants may be polygonal in shape and have a flat surface. The implants are capable of being magnetically coupled to each other through the two adjacent walls of the digestive tract to compress a portion of the two adjacent walls therebetween to form a necrotic area that becomes surrounded by a scarred edge following a healing time period. The first and second magnetic implants are configured for forming an anastomosis between two adjacent walls of a digestive tract. Harrison discloses a positioning wand including an elongated member (110; Fig. 4, 5) that is sized and capable of having at least a portion inserted into an abdominal cavity. A distal tip is provided at a distal end of the elongated member and includes a guide magnet (118) that is capable of magnetically coupling with the first magnetic implant through a wall of the digestive tract to position the first magnetic implant to a desired site of the anastomosis. The distal tip and at least a portion of the elongated member are sized and configured to be inserted into the abdominal cavity of the patient laparoscopically [0052].
Regarding claim 3, Harrison discloses that at least one of the first and second elongated magnetic implants includes a housing capable of enclosing a magnet therein; wherein a housing surrounds a magnetic core (318; [0085]).
Regarding claim 5, Harrison discloses that at least one of the first and second elongated magnetic implants includes a flat compression surface [0077].
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.
Claim(s) 2, 4 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison.
Regarding claim 2, Harrison discloses that the first and second elongated magnetic implants have an aspect ratio ranging between about 1:4 and about 1:15; wherein the implants may be polygonal in shape [0077]. However, Harrison does not expressly disclose the claimed aspect ratio. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the magnetic implants with an aspect ratio between about 1:4 and about 1:15 since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform different than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Garner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Harrison would not operate differently with the claimed aspect ratio and would function appropriately and accommodate tissue engagement and facilitate the formation of an anastomosis. Further, applicant places no criticality of the range claimed, indicating simply that the aspect ratio “may” be within the claimed ranges (specification [0160]).
Regarding claim 4, Harrison discloses that the first and second elongated magnetic implants have a polygonal in shape [0077]. However, Harrison does not expressly disclose the claimed elliptic shape. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the magnetic implants with an elliptic shape since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform different than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Garner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of Harrison would not operate differently with the claimed aspect ratio and would function appropriately and accommodate tissue engagement and facilitate the formation of an anastomosis. Further, applicant places no criticality of the range claimed, indicating simply that the implants “may” have an elliptic shape, a circular shape, an elongated shape, a rectangular shape, an octagonal shape, or any other polygonal shape (specification [0160]).
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Harrison discloses an additional tool or instrument (120; Fig. 1; [0071]) that that may include an electromagnet that is capable of being engaged with an electric circuit to provide a variable magnetic strength to the electromagnet and capable of being magnetic when subjected to an electric current. Since additional tool and positioning wand are the same (see Fig. 1), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the guide magnet of the positioning wand with the electromagnet of the additional tool, as this modification involves the simple substitution of one magnetic material for another for the predictable result of providing a magnet.
Regarding claim 9, Harrison discloses that the guide magnet of the distal tip includes a non-permanent magnet (118), e.g. iron [0110].
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison in view of Ryou et al. (US 2017/0265866A1, “Ryou”).
Regarding claim 6, Harrison does not disclose that the first and second elongated magnetic implants include fluorescent or radiopaque dye or marker to aid optical or fluoroscopic visualization thereof.
In the same field of endeavor, magnetic anastomosis devices, Ryou teaches magnetic anastomosis devices (18) that are radiopaque and echogenic can be positioned using fluoroscopy, direct visualization and ultrasound. The devices can be ornamented with radiopaque paint or other markers to help identify the polarity of the devices during placement [0039]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the first and second elongated magnetic implants of Harrison with radiopaque dye or marker, as taught by Ryou, to help identify the polarity of the devices during placement through the use of fluoroscopy and direct visualization [0039].
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison in view of Acker et al. (US 6,332,089, “Acker”).
Regarding claim 10, Harrison does not disclose that the distal tip includes a sensor for detecting a magnetic field.
In the same field of endeavor, magnetic probes, Acker teaches a distal tip of a magnetic probe that includes a sensor (531; Fig. 10). The sensor may include magnetic field transducers that are sensitive to a field component in a given local direction (C15;L5-30). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the distal tip of Harrison with a sensor, as taught by Acker, to provide a means for detecting magnetic fields of magnetic material such that the wand may home in on the site probe or implant (C15;L5-30).
Claim(s) 11, 12, 14, 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harrison et al. (US 2020/0138438A1, “Harrison”) in view of Motai et al. (US 2017/0333022A1, “Motai”).
Regarding claim(s) 11, 16 and 17, Harrison but does not disclose a distal tip that is capable of being moved in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the wall of the digestive tract.
In the same field of endeavor, gastric pressing tools, Motai teaches a positioning wand. The positioning wand includes an elongated member (311; Fig. 10, 11, [0065]). A distal tip (312) is provided at a distal end of the elongated member. The distal tip is capable of being moved in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the wall of the digestive tract and capable of being introduced into the abdominal cavity [0068]. The elongated member includes at least one flexible portion (elastic body that provides a flexible and biasable connection; [0065]) and at least one rigid portion (311). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positioning wand of Harrison with a passive bending part proximal to the distal tip, as taught by Motai, to provide means for maneuvering the wand to a small treatment site while avoiding damage to local tissue.
Regarding claim 12 and 14, Harrison does not disclose that the distal tip is pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin, the distal tip forming a hinge about the pin. In the same field of endeavor, gastric pressing tools, Motai teaches a positioning wand. The positioning wand includes an elongated member (342; Fig. 16). A distal tip (312) is provided at a distal end of the elongated member. The distal tip is capable of being moved in response to a contact pressure upon contact with the wall of the digestive tract and capable of being introduced into the abdominal cavity [0068]. The distal tip is pivotally engaged with the elongated member via a pin (342a). The distal tip forms a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin. The distal tip includes a frame (341) pivotally engaged with the distal end of the elongated member via a pin. The frame forms a hinge pivoting back and forth about the pin. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the positioning wand of Harrison with a passive bending part proximal to the distal tip, as taught by Motai, to provide means for maneuvering the wand to a small treatment site while avoiding damage to local tissue.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Gagner et al. (US 2011/0144560A1) discloses first and second magnetic implants used to form an anastomosis.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOCELIN C TANNER whose telephone number is (571)270-5202. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4pm.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571)272-4696. 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.
/JOCELIN C TANNER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights