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 Objections
Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities: “fed on a time” should read “fed one at a time” Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 21-23, 25-35, 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zergiebel, US 20160095585 in view of Sorrentino, US 20100057107.
Regarding claim 21, Zergiebel discloses: A powered surgical clip applier (Fig. 1, surgical instrument 10) comprising:
a housing (Fig. 2, outer shell housing 110);
an elongated member (Fig. 1, adapter assembly 200) extending distally from the housing;
wherein a first motor ([0139] “Power-pack core assembly 106 further includes a first motor 152, a second motor 154, and a third motor”) is actuated to effect powered movement of one or both of a) the feed mechanism or the b) jaw closing mechanism.
Zergiebel does not explicitly disclose: a first jaw and a second jaw) at a distal portion of the elongated member, at least the first jaw movable with respect to the second jaw to close a clip supported by the first and second jaws;
a feed mechanism to feed a clip to the first and second jaws, the feed mechanism movable between a first position and a second position, wherein in the second position, the feed mechanism effects advancement of the clip to the first and second jaws; and
a jaw closing mechanism to effect movement of at least the first jaw toward a closed position to close the clip supported by the first and second jaws;
Sorrentino teaches: a first jaw (Fig. 71-74, jaws 106 left) and a second jaw ((Fig. 71-74, jaws 106 right) at a distal portion of the elongated member, at least the first jaw movable with respect to the second jaw to close a clip supported by the first and second jaws (see Fig. 74);
a feed mechanism (Fig. 9, advancer 162 and/or follower 166) to feed a clip (clips “c”) to the first and second jaws, the feed mechanism movable between a first position and a second position ([0160-0167, specifically, “[0160] As seen in FIGS. 9 and 16-20, shaft assembly 104 further includes an advancer plate 162 reciprocally supported beneath pusher bar 156.”), wherein in the second position, the feed mechanism effects advancement of the clip to the first and second jaws ([0160-0167], specifically [0165], “As will be described in greater detail below, clip follower 166 is positioned behind the stack of surgical clips "C" and is provided to urge the stack of clips "C" forward during an actuation of clip applier 100.”); and
a jaw closing mechanism [0222] “As seen in FIGS. 72-74, during the final stage of the initial stroke of trigger 108, drive channel 168 and strap 167 are moved in a distal direction relative to jaws 106 such that a distal edge of drive channel 168 engages against camming surfaces 106b of jaws 106 causing jaws 106 to close and form the clip "C1" positioned therebetween. As seen in FIG. 74, pusher 156c of pusher bar 156 remains at a distal position, in contact with a backspan of said clip "C" during the formation thereof.”) to effect movement of at least the first jaw toward a closed position to close the clip supported by the first and second jaws;
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the clip applying jaw mechanism as taught by Sorrentino with the motorized surgical instrument of Zergiebel, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this alteration is that it allows for the primary device to be used to perform a different function, thereby increasing the usefulness of the device. It should be noted that while Zergiebel does not specifically discuss clip appliers, it is discussed that the end effector is in fact interchangeable and disposable so as to allow the user to utilize the same power mechanism with multiple end effectors – ([0007] “A number of surgical device manufacturers have developed product lines with proprietary powered drive systems for operating and/or manipulating the surgical device. In many instances the surgical devices include a powered handle assembly, which is reusable, and a disposable end effector or the like that is selectively connected to the powered handle assembly prior to use and then disconnected from the end effector following use in order to be disposed of or in some instances sterilized for re-use.”).
Regarding claim 22, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the first motor is positioned within the housing ([0139] “Power-pack core assembly 106 further includes a first motor 152, a second motor 154, and a third motor”).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the first motor is remotely actuated ([0151-0153]).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the feed mechanism (Sorrentino- Fig. 9, advancer 162 and/or follower 166) includes an advancer (Sorrentino- Fig. 9, advancer 162), wherein distal movement of the advancer feeds a distalmost clip of a row of clips into the first and second jaws (Sorrentino- [0160-0167]).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the surgical clip applier includes a plurality of clips arranged in a linear row, the clips fed one a time to the first and second jaws by the feed mechanism (Sorrentino- [0160-0167]).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the jaw closing mechanism includes a camming member movable in a distal direction to cooperate with a camming surface on the first and second jaws to close the jaws (Sorrentino- [0222] “As seen in FIGS. 72-74, during the final stage of the initial stroke of trigger 108, drive channel 168 and strap 167 are moved in a distal direction relative to jaws 106 such that a distal edge of drive channel 168 engages against camming surfaces 106b of jaws 106 causing jaws 106 to close and form the clip "C1" positioned therebetween. As seen in FIG. 74, pusher 156c of pusher bar 156 remains at a distal position, in contact with a backspan of said clip "C" during the formation thereof.”).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the jaw closing mechanism includes an advancer, wherein the advancer effects distal movement of a camming member to move at least the first jaw toward second jaw to close the clip positioned between the first and second jaws (Sorrentino- [0222] “As seen in FIGS. 72-74, during the final stage of the initial stroke of trigger 108, drive channel 168 and strap 167 are moved in a distal direction relative to jaws 106 such that a distal edge of drive channel 168 engages against camming surfaces 106b of jaws 106 causing jaws 106 to close and form the clip "C1" positioned therebetween. As seen in FIG. 74, pusher 156c of pusher bar 156 remains at a distal position, in contact with a backspan of said clip "C" during the formation thereof.”)..
Regarding claim 29, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the advancer effects distal movement of a camming member of the jaw closing mechanism to move at least the first jaw toward second jaw to close the clip positioned between the first and second jaws (Sorrentino- [0222] “As seen in FIGS. 72-74, during the final stage of the initial stroke of trigger 108, drive channel 168 and strap 167 are moved in a distal direction relative to jaws 106 such that a distal edge of drive channel 168 engages against camming surfaces 106b of jaws 106 causing jaws 106 to close and form the clip "C1" positioned therebetween. As seen in FIG. 74, pusher 156c of pusher bar 156 remains at a distal position, in contact with a backspan of said clip "C" during the formation thereof.”)..
Regarding claim 30, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the first motor effects in an initial stroke advancement of the feed mechanism (Fig. 9, advancer 162 and/or follower 166) to feed the clip and in a subsequent stroke advancement of the jaw closing mechanism to close the first and second jaws ([0222] “As seen in FIGS. 72-74, during the final stage of the initial stroke of trigger 108, drive channel 168 and strap 167 are moved in a distal direction relative to jaws 106 such that a distal edge of drive channel 168 engages against camming surfaces 106b of jaws 106 causing jaws 106 to close and form the clip "C1" positioned therebetween. As seen in FIG. 74, pusher 156c of pusher bar 156 remains at a distal position, in contact with a backspan of said clip "C" during the formation thereof.”).
Regarding claim 31, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: a spring (Fig. 7, spring 136) to return the feed bar to a first position and wherein the motor automatically reverses to retract the camming member after closure of the first and second jaws ([0151] “The actuation of push button switch 172a, corresponding to an upward actuation of toggle control button 30, causes controller circuit board 142 to provide appropriate signals to motor 152 to retract a staple sled and open tool assembly 404 of SULU 400.”).
Regarding claim 32, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the first motor moves only the jaw closing mechanism and a second motor moves only a feed bar of the feed mechanism to feed a distalmost clip of a row of clips into the first and second jaws ([0142] “Rotation of motor shafts 152a, 154a, 156a by respective motors 152, 154, 156 function to drive shafts and/or gear components of adapter 200 in order to perform the various operations of surgical device 100. In particular, motors 152, 154, 156 of power-pack core assembly 106 are configured to drive shafts and/or gear components of adapter 200 in order to selectively move tool assembly 404 of SULU 400 relative to proximal body portion 402 of SULU 400, to rotate SULU 400 about a longitudinal axis “X”, to move cartridge assembly 408 relative to anvil assembly 406 of SULU 400, and/or to fire staples from within cartridge assembly 408 of SULU 400.”).
Regarding claim 33, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the second motor is activated prior to activation of the first motor ([0142]).
Regarding claim 34, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: the first motor reverses to retract one or both of the feed mechanism and the jaw closing mechanism ([0151]).
Regarding claim 35, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: a reverse motor for moving one or both of the feed mechanism or jaw closing mechanism in a proximal direction ([0151]).
Regarding claim 38, the modified Zergiebel further discloses: actuation of the first motor effects rotation of a gear mechanism (Zergiebel - [0142] “Rotation of motor shafts 152a, 154a, 156a by respective motors 152, 154, 156 function to drive shafts and/or gear components of adapter 200 in order to perform the various operations of surgical device 100. In particular, motors 152, 154, 156 of power-pack core assembly 106 are configured to drive shafts and/or gear components of adapter 200 in order to selectively move tool assembly 404 of SULU 400 relative to proximal body portion 402 of SULU 400, to rotate SULU 400 about a longitudinal axis “X”, to move cartridge assembly 408 relative to anvil assembly 406 of SULU 400, and/or to fire staples from within cartridge assembly 408 of SULU 400.”) to effect powered movement of one or both of a) the feed mechanism (Fig. 9, advancer 162 and/or follower 166) or the b) jaw closing mechanism ([0222]).
Claims 24, 36-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zergiebel, US 20160095585 in view of Sorrentino, US 20100057107, further in view of Heinrich, US 20050131390.
Regarding claim 24, the modified Zergiebel discloses the device of claim 21.
The modified Zergeibel does not explicitly: he surgical clip applier is mountable to a robot arm for robotic control of positioning of the surgical clip applier position.
Heinrich teaches: the surgical clip applier is mountable to a robot arm for robotic control of positioning of the surgical clip applier position ([0066], “FIG. 11 is a perspective view, with portions broken away, of a robotic system coupled to a loading unit, including an end effector for applying vessel clips”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the robotic attachment feature as taught by Heinrich with the motorized surgical instrument of Zergiebel, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this alteration is that it allows for remote control and machine operated surgical tools, which increases the utility of the device, as a surgical robot does not require training and does not get tired, sick, etc..
Regarding claim 36, the modified Zergiebel discloses the device of claim 21.
The modified Zergeibel does not explicitly: the surgical clip applier includes a connection portion, the connection portion including a connector connectable to a robot arm for mounting of the surgical clip applier to the robot arm so that the surgical clip applier can be robotically manipulated by the robot arm to adjust a position of the surgical clip applier via a first communication from a remote central processing unit to the robot arm.
Heinrich teaches: the surgical clip applier includes a connection portion, the connection portion including a connector connectable to a robot arm for mounting of the surgical clip applier to the robot arm so that the surgical clip applier can be robotically manipulated by the robot arm to adjust a position of the surgical clip applier ([0066], “FIG. 11 is a perspective view, with portions broken away, of a robotic system coupled to a loading unit, including an end effector for applying vessel clips”).via a first communication from a remote central processing unit (Fig. 7, actuation assembly 612) to the robot arm.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the robotic attachment feature as taught by Heinrich with the motorized surgical instrument of Zergiebel, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this alteration is that it allows for remote control and machine operated surgical tools, which increases the utility of the device, as a surgical robot does not require training and does not get tired, sick, etc..
Regarding claim 37, the modified Zergiebel discloses the device of claim 21.
The modified Zergeibel does not explicitly: the surgical clip applier is mountable to a robot arm, and a remote central processing unit selectively activates the first motor..
Heinrich teaches: the surgical clip applier is mountable to a robot arm ([0066], “FIG. 11 is a perspective view, with portions broken away, of a robotic system coupled to a loading unit, including an end effector for applying vessel clips”), and a remote central processing unit selectively activates the first motor.. (Fig. 7, actuation assembly 612).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to combine the robotic attachment feature as taught by Heinrich with the motorized surgical instrument of Zergiebel, thereby combining prior art elements to achieve a predictable result. The benefit of this alteration is that it allows for remote control and machine operated surgical tools, which increases the utility of the device, as a surgical robot does not require training and does not get tired, sick, etc..
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL JEREMY LEEDS whose telephone number is (571)272-2095. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs, 0730-1730.
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, Anna Kinsaul can be reached at 571-270-1926. 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.
/DANIEL JEREMY LEEDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731