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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04/07/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed April 7th, 2026 has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome the objections and rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed January 14th, 2026.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-9, filed April 7th, 2026, with respect to the cited art not rendering obvious the claimed combination of (a) modality selective switching between RFA and PFA power drivers to the same ablation output and (b) in line resistive isolation in the thermocouple sensing path to preserve thermocouple signal integrity during both modalities have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-20 have been withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 1 recites “a power generator that is capable of switching between different” should read -- a power generator configured to switch
Claim 1, line 8 recites “an in-line resistive isolator disposed in series with the second conductive wire and carried in” should read -- an in-line resistive isolator disposed in series with the second conductive wire and disposed in --;
Claim 1, line 10 recites “isolator configured to provide electrical isolation for the sensing circuit from ablation” should read -- isolator configured to provide electrical isolation for the sensing circuit from an ablation --;
Claim 1, line 13 recites “a first power driver configured to generate RFA waveform” should read -- a first power driver configured to generate a radiofrequency waveform --;
Claim 13, line 2 recites “deliver alternating RFA and PFA waveforms to adjacent electrodes on the catheter within a” should read -- deliver alternating radiofrequency and pulsed waveforms to adjacent electrodes on the catheter within a --;
Claim 18, line 1 recites “wherein the generator comprises distributed” should read – wherein the generator further comprises additional distributed --;
Claim 20, line 21 line “a second wire to be coupled to the second output port for sensing a thermocouple” should read -- a second conductive wire to be coupled to the second output port for sensing a thermocouple --.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 8-9 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, it is unclear if the “resistive element” is the same as the “in-line resistive isolator” as disclosed in claim 1. The specification discloses in Paragraph [0206] that the resistive element is placed in series, which is also described in claim 1 for the in-line resistive isolator. Therefore clarification is needed within the claim to determine if the “in-line resistive isolator” is the same as the “resistive element”. Claim 9 is rejected by virtue of dependency on claim 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7 and 10-20 are allowed. Claims 8-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
During the search of the prior art, Sharma in view of Sartler and Oskin were found to be relevant to the claimed invention. The examiner relied upon Sharma in view of Sartler and Oskin to disclose the power generator comprising a first and second output port, a thermocouple junction, a first and second power driver, a switching circuit coupled to the first and second power driver, and a control circuit.
However Sharma in view of Sartler and Oskin fails to disclose, teach, or suggest, in part the combination of “an in-line resistive isolator disposed in series with the second conductive wire and carried in part of a sensing circuit that includes the thermocouple junction, the in-line resistive isolator configured to provide electrical isolation for the sensing circuit from ablation energy surge to preserve thermocouple signal integrity during delivery of both radiofrequency ablation (RFA) energy and pulsed field ablation (PFA) energy; a first power driver configured to generate RFA waveform suitable for radiofrequency ablation (RFA); a second power driver configured to generate a pulsed waveform suitable for pulsed field ablation (PFA); a switching circuit coupled to the first power driver and the second power driver, the switching circuit configured to selectively connect, based on a selected ablation modality, the first power driver or the second power driver to the first output port on a selected ablation modality; and a control circuit configured to receive input indicating the selected ablation modality and to control the switching circuit to select a connection to the first power driver or the second power driver to the first output port based on the selected ablation modality.” as required by independent claim 1 and “a first power driver configured to generate a waveform suitable for radiofrequency ablation (RFA);a second power driver configured to generate a pulsed waveform suitable for pulsed field ablation (PFA); a switching circuit coupled to the first power driver and the second power driver, the switching circuit configured to selectively connect, based on a selected ablation modality, the first power driver or the second power driver to the first output port; and a control circuit configured to receive input indicating the selected ablation modality and to control the switching circuit to select a connection to the first power driver or the second power driver to the first output port based on the selected ablation modality; and a catheter configured to be connectable to the generator, the catheter comprising: a first conductive wire to be coupled to the first output port for delivery of ablation energy to an electrode of the catheter; a second wire to be coupled to the second output port for sensing a thermocouple signal at a thermocouple junction formed at the electrode of the catheter, wherein the thermocouple junction is formed by dissimilar metals to form the thermocouple junction; and an in-line resistive isolator disposed in series with the second conductive wire and carried in part of a sensing circuit that includes the thermocouple junction, the in-line resistive isolator configured to provide electrical isolation for the sensing circuit from ablation energy surge to preserve thermocouple signal integrity during delivery of both RFA energy and PFA energy” as required by independent claim 20.
There is no motivation (either in these references or elsewhere in the art) for making such specific and significant modifications thereto to arrive at claims 1 and 20.
Accordingly claims 1-7 and 10-20 are allowed. Claims 8-9 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Dana Stumpfoll whose telephone number is (703)756-4669. The examiner can normally be reached 9-5 pm (CT), M-F.
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, Joanne Rodden can be reached at (303) 297-4276. 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.
/D.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/JOANNE M RODDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights