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 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 1 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 1 recites the limitation "from the first position.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “a volume of action.” It is unclear what is meant by “a volume of action,” what comprises “action,” and if the volume is to be acted on or has been acted on. This limitation is indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art cannot be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “with a critical structure of the prostate that is one of a urethra, a prostate capsule and neuro-vascular bundles around the prostate.” It is unclear if the limitation claims one of a urethra, prostate capsule, or neuro-vascular bundle or one of a urethra or prostate capsule and neuro-vascular bundles. This limitation is indefinite because one of ordinary skill in the art cannot be reasonably apprised of the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1 & 19 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 12324623 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because patent claim 1 further limits and/or includes additional elements which encompass application claims 1 and 19. In addition, claim 1 of the instant application further limits and/or includes additional elements which encompass application claim 19. Therefore, patent claim 1 anticipates application claims 1 & 19.
Instant Application 19203311
Claim 1
US Patent 12324623
Claim 1
A method of treating prostatic tissue in a patient affected by a prostate disease, comprising the following steps:
A method of treating prostatic tissue in a patient affected by a prostate disease, the method comprising the following steps:
(a) trans-perineally introducing at least one energy delivery device reaching at least one prostate lobe requiring treatment;
trans-perineally introducing at least one energy delivery device reaching at least a first position in one prostate lobe requiring treatment, wherein the at least one energy delivery device comprises at least one frontal-emission optical fiber;
(b) delivering energy from an energy source through the at least one energy delivery device to a first volume of tissue of said prostate, until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated and a cavity is formed in the prostate tissue;
delivering laser energy from a laser source through the frontal-emission optical fiber to a first volume of tissue of said prostate, said first volume being in front of a tip of said frontal-emission optical fiber, until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated and a cavity is formed in the prostate tissue;
(c) pulling back the energy delivery device from the first position to a second position;
(a) pulling back the energy delivery device from the first position to a second position;
(d) delivering energy from the energy source through the energy delivery device to a second volume of tissue of said prostate while the energy delivery device is in the second position, until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated and the cavity is enlarged; and
(b) delivering energy from the energy source through the energy delivery device to a second volume of tissue of said prostate while the energy delivery device is in the second position, until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated and the cavity is enlarged;
(e) repeating steps (c) and (d), if needed;
(c) repeating steps (a) and (b), if needed;
(f) removing the energy delivery device from the prostate.
removing the energy delivery device from the prostate.
Claims 1 & 19 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 10945789 B2 in view of U.S. Patent No. 12324623 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because patent claim 1 further limits and/or includes additional elements which encompass application claims 1 and 19, and it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify U.S. Patent No. 10945789 with (c) repeating steps (a) and (b), if needed, as taught by U.S. Patent No. 12324623. As the Supreme Court has explained, use of known techniques to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way, supports a conclusion of obviousness. See KSR, 550 U.S. at 418, 82 USPQ2d at 1396. In addition, claim 1 of the instant application further limits and/or includes additional elements which encompass application claim 19. Therefore, instant application claim 19 is also obvious over U.S. Patent No. 10945789 in view of U.S. Patent No. 12324623.
Instant Application 19203311
Claim 1
US Patent 10945789
Claim 1
A method of treating prostatic tissue in a patient affected by a prostate disease, comprising the following steps:
A method of treating benign prostatic hyperplasia in a patient in need of said treatment, comprising the following steps:
(a) trans-perineally introducing at least one energy delivery device reaching at least one prostate lobe requiring treatment;
trans-perineally introducing at least one laser energy delivery fiber through a perineal area of the patient in a first position in a prostate of the patient, wherein the laser energy delivery fiber has a laser emitting fiber tip;
(b) delivering energy from an energy source through the at least one energy delivery device to a first volume of tissue of said prostate, until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated and a cavity is formed in the prostate tissue;
delivering laser energy from a laser source through the laser emitting fiber tip to a first volume of prostrate tissue placed in front of the laser emitting fiber tip, until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated and a cavity is formed in the prostate tissue;
(c) pulling back the energy delivery device from the first position to a second position;
pulling back the laser energy delivery fiber from the first position to a second position;
(d) delivering energy from the energy source through the energy delivery device to a second volume of tissue of said prostate while the energy delivery device is in the second position, until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated and the cavity is enlarged; and
delivering energy from the laser energy source through the laser emitting fiber tip to a second volume of prostate tissue placed in front of the laser emitting fiber tip while the laser energy delivery fiber is in the second position, until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated and the cavity is enlarged;
(e) repeating steps (c) and (d), if needed;
(f) removing the energy delivery device from the prostate.
removing the laser energy delivery fiber from the prostate;
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-9, 11-12, 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd (US Pre Grant Publication 2017/0215854 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Todd teaches a method of treating prostatic tissue in a patient affected by a prostate disease, comprising the following steps:
(a) trans-perineally introducing at least one energy delivery device (150, Fig. 19) reaching at least one prostate lobe ([0160]; mechanical coring probe 150 inserted transperineally into prostate) requiring treatment;
(b) delivering energy from an energy source through the at least one energy delivery device ([0099]; power generator produces pneumatic or electrical energy to drive cutting core) to a first volume of tissue of said prostate (tissue volume at furthest depth of cavity 216), and a cavity (216, Fig. 20) is formed in the prostate tissue ([0159-0161]; access tool 170 creates puncture; coring probe 150 inserted into puncture site for tissue removal forming cavity 216);
(c) pulling back the energy delivery device from the first position to a second position (necessitated by coring probe 150 to form cavity);
(d) delivering energy from the energy source through the energy delivery device to a second volume of tissue of said prostate while the energy delivery device is in the second position, and the cavity is enlarged ([0161], Fig. 23; cavity 216 is shown as an elongated cavity, [0153], Fig. 11-12; blade 123 uses cut-out windows 122 for tissue removal at the tip of distal portion of device; necessitates pulling back device to elongate cavity 216); and
(e) repeating steps (c) and (d), if needed;
(f) removing the energy delivery device from the prostate ([0161], Fig. 23; device 260 inserted in vicinity of the cavities to deliver sealants, plug; necessitates removal of energy device to seal cavity),
but does not disclose,
until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated,
until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated.
However, Todd discloses a method for removing core prostate tissue using a laser and further teaches,
until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated ([0011], [0118]; discloses procedures using lasers and cites BPH treated without burning lasers; well known in the art that lasers vaporize or sublimate tissue),
until said second volume is vaporized or sublimated ([0011], [0118]; discloses procedures using lasers and cites BPH treated without burning lasers; well known in the art that lasers vaporize or sublimate tissue).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd, with a first volume that is vaporized or sublimated and a second volume that is vaporized or sublimated. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve surgical treatment by using minimally invasive non-mechanical forms of energy to precisely control and ablate tissue (Todd, [0011]).
Regarding claim 2, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the energy source comprises a laser source.
However, Todd further teaches a cauterizing probe, wherein the energy source comprises a laser source ([0083]; cauterizing probe can emit laser energy).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd, with an energy source that comprises a laser source. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve surgical treatment by using minimally invasive non-mechanical forms of energy to precisely control and ablate tissue (Todd, [0011]).
Regarding claim 3, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, and teaches further comprising the step of removing vapor or gas resulting from the tissue vaporization or sublimation while energy is delivered through the at least one energy delivery device ([0123]; severed tissue suctioned out of the body by aspiration pipe 108 which is integrated into cutting core 124).
Regarding claim 4, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, and teaches further comprising the step of removing vapor or gas resulting from the tissue vaporization or sublimation through the at least one energy delivery device ([0123]; severed tissue suctioned out of the body by aspiration pipe 108 which is integrated into cutting core 124).
Regarding claim 5, Todd teaches the method of claim 4, and further teaches wherein the step of removing vapor or gas comprises the step of applying a negative pressure through the at least one energy delivery device ([0123]; severed tissue suctioned out of the body by aspiration pipe 108).
Regarding claim 6, Todd teaches the method of claim 4, and further teaches wherein the step of removing vapor or gas comprises the step of circulating a clean fluid medium in the cavity ([0060]; fluid irrigation).
Regarding claim 7, Todd teaches the method of claim 4, and further teaches wherein the step of removing vapor or gas comprises the step of fluidly coupling a vacuum pump to a pathway of the at least one energy delivery device ([0060], [0123], Fig. 4; probe’s vacuum suction system connected to aspiration pipe 108).
Regarding claim 8, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, and teaches further comprising the steps of:
introducing an inflatable balloon in the urethra of the patient ([0164], Fig. 25; balloon 220 advanced up urethral canal);
inflating said inflatable balloon ([0167], Fig. 27; balloon 220 after inflation);
deflating said inflatable balloon after sublimation or vaporization of the tissue ([0166-0167], Fig. 28; balloon 220 applies pressure and induces hemostasis; hemostasis occurs after cavity formation and necessitates deflation after tissue removal); and
removing the inflatable balloon from the urethra ([0167]; balloon 220 deflated and removed).
Regarding claim 9, Todd teaches the method of claim 8, and teaches further comprising the step of circulating a fluid in the balloon ([0082]; balloons inflated with coolant fluid).
Regarding claim 11, Todd teaches the method of claim 8, and further teaches wherein said balloon has at least one enlarged terminal end adapted to maintain the balloon in position during treatment (Fig. 27; balloons 220 and 222 each appear to have one enlarged terminal end).
Regarding claim 12, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, and teaches further comprising the steps of:
introducing a trans-rectal imaging probe in the rectum of the patient ([0066]; transrectal ultrasound system deployed to visualize); and
performing the treatment under imaging control through the trans-rectal imaging probe ([0067]; start with insertion of camera and transrectal ultrasound).
Regarding claim 19, Todd teaches a method of removing tissue from an organ of a patient, the method comprising the following steps:
introducing at least one energy delivery device (150, Fig. 19) in a first position in an organ of the patient ([0160], Fig. 20; mechanical coring probe 150 inserted transperineally into prostate; first position is furthest depth of cavity 216);
delivering energy from an energy source through the energy delivery device ([0099]; power generator produces pneumatic or electrical energy to drive cutting core) to a first volume of tissue of said organ (tissue volume at furthest depth of cavity 216), and a cavity (216, Fig. 20) is formed in the organ tissue ([0159-0161]; access tool 170 creates puncture; coring probe 150 inserted into puncture site for tissue removal forming cavity 216);
removing the energy delivery device from the organ ([0161], Fig. 23; device 260 inserted in vicinity of the cavities to deliver sealants, plug; necessitates removal of energy device to seal cavity),
but does not disclose,
until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated.
However, Todd further teaches,
until said first volume is vaporized or sublimated ([0011], [0118]; discloses procedures using lasers and cites BPH treated without burning lasers; well known in the art that lasers vaporize or sublimate tissue).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd, with a first volume that is vaporized or sublimated and a second volume that is vaporized or sublimated. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve surgical treatment by using minimally invasive non-mechanical forms of energy to precisely control and ablate tissue (Todd, [0011]).
Regarding claim 20, Todd teaches the method of claim 19, and teaches further comprising the step of reducing the volume of the cavity ([0161], Fig. 23; device 260 inserted in vicinity of the cavities for hemostasis; delivers sealants, plugs (reduces volume of cavity)).
Regarding claim 21, Todd teaches the method of claim 19, and teaches further comprising the step of introducing in said cavity at least one of: a medicament ([0161]; hemostatic agent), a drug, a slow-absorption drug, a radioactive seed, a chemotherapeutic agent, nanoparticles, a drug carrier, an expandable basket.
Claim(s) 10, 13-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd (US Pre Grant Publication 2017/0215854 A1), in view of Hoey et al (2018/0193080 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Todd teaches the method of claim 9, but does not disclose further comprising the step of controlling a temperature of the fluid circulating in the balloon.
However, Hoey teaches a system and a method for transperineal vapor ablation of prostatic tissue. Hoey is analogous to the claimed invention because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of treating prostate disorders using temperature-controlled fluids.
Hoey teaches further comprising the step of controlling a temperature of the fluid circulating in the balloon ([0072]; auxiliary controller (chiller)).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, as taught by Todd, with a step of controlling a temperature of the fluid circulating in the balloon, as taught by Hoey. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by circulating cooled saline near ablation tissue to prevent ablation damage to adjacent tissues (Hoey, [0033]).
Regarding claim 13, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising the steps of:
introducing at least one temperature sensing device in the prostate; and
detecting the temperature in at least one location inside the prostate during energy delivering.
However, Hoey teaches further comprising the steps of:
introducing at least one temperature sensing device (126, Fig. 1B) in the prostate; and
detecting the temperature in at least one location inside the prostate during energy delivering ([0033]; thermocouple needle 126 measures the temperature of the prostate during vapor delivery).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, as taught by Todd, with steps of introducing at least one temperature sensing device in the prostate; and detecting the temperature in at least one location inside the prostate during energy delivering, as taught by Hoey. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by circulating cooled saline near ablation tissue to prevent ablation damage to adjacent tissues (Hoey, [0033]).
Regarding claim 14, Todd, in view of Hoey, teaches the method of claim 13, but does not disclose further comprising the step of controlling the energy source based upon temperature information from the temperature sensing device.
However, Hoey teaches further comprising the step of controlling the energy source based upon temperature information from the temperature sensing device ([0036]; auxiliary controller monitors temperatures and prevents therapy delivery when temperature exceeds specified bounds).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd and Hoey, with a step of controlling the energy source based upon temperature information from the temperature sensing device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by preventing additional ablation therapy when temperature limits are exceeded to ensure that periprostatic tissues are not damaged (Hoey, [0035]).
Regarding claim 15, Todd, in view of Hoey, teaches the method of claim 13, but does not disclose wherein the step of introducing at least one temperature sensing device comprises the step of introducing said temperature sensing device between a volume of action of the energy delivery device and a critical structure of the prostate.
However, Hoey further teaches, wherein the step of introducing at least one temperature sensing device comprises the step of introducing said temperature sensing device between a volume of action of the energy delivery device and a critical structure of the prostate ([0035-0036]; thermocouples inserted into tissue outside the prostate (prostate therapy interpreted as a volume of action); temperature monitoring necessitates inserting thermocouples between periprostatic tissues and prostate).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd and Hoey, with a step of introducing at least one temperature sensing device comprises the step of introducing said temperature sensing device between a volume of action of the energy delivery device and a critical structure of the prostate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by preventing additional ablation therapy when temperature limits are exceeded to ensure that periprostatic tissues are not damaged (Hoey, [0035]).
Regarding claim 16, Todd, in view of Hoey, teaches the method of claim 15, but does not disclose wherein the critical structure of the prostate is one of a urethra, a prostate capsule and neuro-vascular bundles around the prostate.
However, Hoey teaches wherein the critical structure of the prostate is one of a urethra, a prostate capsule and neuro-vascular bundles around the prostate ([0035]; periprostatic tissues comprise prostatic capsule).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd and Hoey, with a critical structure of the prostate that is one of a urethra, a prostate capsule and neuro-vascular bundles around the prostate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by preventing additional ablation therapy when temperature limits are exceeded to ensure that periprostatic tissues are not damaged (Hoey, [0035]).
Regarding claim 17, Todd, in view of Hoey, teaches the method of claim 13, but does not disclose wherein the temperature sensing device is introduced trans-perineally in the prostate.
However, Hoey teaches wherein the temperature sensing device is introduced trans-perineally in the prostate ([0033], Fig. 1B; vapor delivery needle 122 inserted trans-perineally into prostate; thermocouple 126 inserted adjacent to vapor delivery needle 122).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the system, as taught by Todd and Hoey, with a temperature sensing device that is introduced trans-perineally in the prostate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by measuring temperature at multiple points outside of the prostate to ensure that the adjacent periprostatic tissues are not damaged (Hoey, [0035]).
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todd (US Pre Grant Publication 2017/0215854 A1), in view of Hoey et al (2018/0193080 A1), and in further view of Rabiner et al (2002/0107446 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Todd teaches the method of claim 1, but does not disclose further comprising the step of performing a trans-rectal massage of the prostate after formation of said cavity, promoting cavity collapse.
Todd further teaches the step of introducing a trans-rectal imaging probe in the rectum of the patient ([0066]; transrectal ultrasound system deployed to visualize), but does not disclose the step of performing a trans-rectal massage of the prostate after formation of said cavity, promoting cavity collapse,
as claimed.
However, Rabiner teaches a system and a method for tissue ablation using an ultrasonic probe. Rabiner is analogous to the claimed invention because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of using mechanical vibrations to collapse a cavity.
Rabiner further teaches, the step of performing a trans-rectal massage of the prostate after formation of said cavity, promoting cavity collapse ([0002]; ultrasonic probes produce high frequency sound vibrations (massage); high energy ultrasound frequency results in fragmentation of tissues e.g. cavitation accompanied by expansion and collapse of the formed cavities).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system, as taught by Todd, with a step of performing a trans-rectal massage of the prostate after formation of said cavity, promoting cavity collapse, as taught by Rabiner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make these modifications to improve minimally invasive prostate treatments by accelerating the rebounding process of ablated tissue i.e. closing of cavitated tissue to control bleeding (Todd, [0112]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DWANE COLLARD whose telephone number is (571)272-6553. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am-6 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, Ben Klein can be reached at (571) 270-5213. 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.
/DWANE COLLARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3792
/Benjamin J Klein/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3792
