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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
This is the first action for application #19/223901, Perforated Instrument Holder For Medical Instruments, In Particular Surgical Instruments, filed 5/30/25. Claims 1-22 are pending.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because there are two arrows in Figure 4c without a reference numeral.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 43 (Figure 5).
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the tongue comprising a longitudinal region that forms an angle of at least 90 degrees with the rear-engaging region (Claim 7); each free end forming a run-on slope and an edge region delimiting one of the plurality of holder openings (Claim 8); and the perforated support structure comprising a perforated instrument basket, an insert for a perforated instrument basket, or an insert for an instrument container (Claim 18) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-18, 21, and 22 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding Claim 1:
-A pre-assembly configuration is claimed in which the first flexible tongue extends through a first perforated opening and hooks behind at least a first connecting element. Then it is claimed that the base part is “further positionable in an assembly configuration”. The assembly configuration is defined as the first flexible tongue extending through a first perforated opening and hooking behind at least a first connecting element, and the second flexible tongue extending through a second perforated opening and hooking behind at least a second connecting element. First, the phrase “at least” used throughout is indefinite since it is not clear how each tongue could hook behind more than one connecting element at a time. Secondly, it is not clear if the two configurations (pre-assembly and assembly) are being defined as two separate configurations entirely, or if the pre-assembly configuration is the first position during installation of the device and then the assembly configuration is the second position. The first flexible tongue extending into the first opening and hooking behind the first connecting element is claimed in both configurations.
Regarding Claim 4:
-It is claimed that the tongues are notched out of the side limbs and the main limb. However, this is unclear since the tongues being notched out of the side limbs was already claimed in Claim 3. Claim 4 should therefore either depend from Claim 1, or only claim that the tongues are additionally notched from the main limb.
Regarding Claim 5:
-The phrase “at least the second connecting element” is indefinite since it is not clear how the second tongue could hook behind more than one connecting element.
Regarding Claim 7:
-It is claimed that tongues comprise a longitudinal region that forms an angle of at least 90 degrees with the rear-engaging region. This is unclear. First, the drawings do not identify which section is the “longitudinal region” so it is unclear which portion is being referred to. By viewing the figures, if the longitudinal region is the portion where numeral “34” is pointing to in Figure 2, then the angle is not at least 90 degrees with the rear-engaging region (36). The angle is depicted as less than 90 degrees.
Regarding Claim 8:
-The phrase “a run-on slope” is not clear. The rear engaging region is depicted as a flat flange.
Regarding Claim 21:
-It is claimed that the tongues are notched out of the side limbs and the main limb. However, this is unclear since the tongues being notched out of the side limbs was already claimed in Claim 20. Claim 21 should therefore either depend from Claim 19, or only claim that the tongues are additionally notched from the main limb.
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 of this title, 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 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2010/0026028 to Smith et al. (hereinafter ‘Smith’).
Regarding Claim 19, Smith teaches a device (Figure 6) comprising:
a base part (10); and
an instrument bearing part (630) that is releasably fastenable to the base part (10),
the base part (10) comprising a bent sheet metal part (Figures 1-6 showing the bends in the one-piece structure; para [0050] teaching metal) having a main limb (20; Figure 1) and side limbs (30,30) laterally adjoining the main limb (20), the side limbs comprising at least a first side limb and a second side limb (extending from opposite sides of 20; para [0035]),
the base part (10) further comprising at least one first flexible tongue (40) extending from the first side limb (30) and at least one second flexible tongue (40) extending from the second side limb (30; Figures 1 and 5),
the at least one first flexible tongue (40) and the at least one second flexible tongue (40) being resiliently deflectable relative to the side limbs (para [0037]),
the at least one first flexible tongue (40) comprising a first free end forming a first hook (50; Figure 5; para [0039]),
the at least one second flexible tongue (40) comprising a second free end forming a second hook (50; Figure 5; para [0039]), and
the first hook and the second hook extending inwardly toward one another (as depicted in Figure 5).
Smith does not specifically teach that the device is specifically for holding one or more medical instruments in an intended arrangement on an instrument holding system. However, Smith teaches that the device is for fastening objects, and particularly to a fastener clip for insertion into an engagement structure, such as “a wall, a plate or any suitable surface”. Additionally, the claims do not positively claim the medical instruments or instrument holding system. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). Therefore, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of skill in the art with a reasonable expectation of success that the device of Smith could be used in a variety of different environments, including fastening to the wall or plate of an instrument holding system.
Regarding Claim 20, Smith teaches the device for holding one or more medical instruments according to claim 19, wherein the at least one first flexible tongue (40) is notched out of at least the first side limb (30), and the at least one second flexible tongue (40) is notched out of at least the second side limb (30; as depicted in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 21, as best understood, Smith teaches the device for holding one or more medical instruments according to claim 20, wherein the at least one first flexible tongue (40) is notched out of at least the first side limb (30), and the at least one second flexible tongue (40) is notched out of at least the second side limb (30; as depicted in Figure 1). While not as easily visible from Figure 1 as the recesses directly surrounding the tongues in the side limbs, Figure 1 also reasonably depicts the tongues additionally being notched from the main limb. For example, if the structure of Figure 1 was flattened, it is obvious from viewing Figures 1 and 3 that the lower end of each tongue (40) is additionally notched out of the main limb (20) since the ends of the tongues (at 50) are curved in the same manner as the central portion of the main limb (20; see Figures 2 and 3).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claim 22 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With respect to Claims 1-18: While instrument holders for holding medical instruments on a perforated support structure is known in the art, the specific structure of the claimed device in combination with the structure and relationships of the perforated support structure is not taught. For example, US 2008/0314789 (Thomas) is one of the closest prior art publications. Thomas does teach a perforated support structure (12/14) with holder openings and a top and bottom side, and a device (10) having a base part (24) and an instrument bearing part (22) releasably fastenable to the base part (Figure 3). The base part has a main limb (34) and side limbs (72) with tongues (86 or 92) extending therefrom. While Smith teaches that the side limbs are elastically resilient, Smith does not specifically teach that the tongues are resiliently deflectable relative to the side limbs, or that the main limb is positionable against the top side of the perforated support structure. Additionally, Patent US 11,457,991 (Burmeister) meets most of the structure as claimed, but functionally works differently such that the base part is not resiliently deflectable from the pre-assembly configuration to the assembly configuration in response to a compressive force applied to the base part toward the top side of the perforated support structure.
With respect to Claim 22: While the prior art teaches individual recesses for the tongues, the prior art does not specifically teach the base part having a recess extending between the at least one first flexible tongue and the at least one second flexible tongue.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Prior art has been listed in the PTO-892 form.
US 2008/0314789 (Thomas) and US 11,457,991 (Burmeister) teach a perforated support structure and device with a resilient base part and instrument bearing part for holding a medical instrument. These are the closest prior art to the Applicant’s invention.
US 8,272,508 (Betternhausen et al.), US 6,382,575 (Frush et al.), US 6,244,447 (Frieze et al.) teach perforated support structures with devices mounted thereto with varying mounting structures.
US 12,419,717 (Weisser et al.) teaches a similar base part without tongues, and which is received through a bottom of the perforated structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to INGRID M WEINHOLD whose telephone number is (571)272-8822. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Tuesday 7:00am-5:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Terrell McKinnon can be reached on 571-272-4797. 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.
/INGRID M WEINHOLD/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3632
