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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 11 and all claims depending therefrom are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11 recite the following new matter:
“…wherein a first roller, a second roller, and a third roller of the first plurality of rollers are configured to simultaneously engage the first bladder against a rigid structure, the rigid structure defining a void positioned along a pumping path of the irrigation pump head, and wherein, during rotation of the irrigation pump head, the second roller is positioned between the first and third rollers and passes over the void such that engagement of the first bladder by the second roller is reduced or eliminated before the second roller re-engages the first bladder after passing the void…”.
The portions of the written description relevant to this limitation are reproduced below, with emphasis added:
[0071] In an embodiment of the present invention, a peristaltic pump may consist of elements that pinch and articulate along the closed flexible fluid conduit created, in part, by an aspiration bladder, to force fluid through the conduit. At least two pinches, such as rollers, wipers, cams, or shoes, may sequentially engage and pinch the conduit against a rigid structure and articulate along the conduit length to cause fluid flow. Before the lead pincher disengages the conduit, a subsequent pincher may engage the conduit and articulate along it to ensure continued fluid flow. During disengagement, a momentary disruption of downstream flow may occur as fluid fills the void as the conduit regains its pre-deformed shape. Similarly, upstream flow may be disrupted as the subsequent pincher engages the conduit and fluid is displaced. These disruptions may result in flow and/or pressure pulses both upstream and downstream flow. The present invention may eliminate such pulses upstream of the pump rather than merely mitigating such pulsation.
[0072] As may be known to those skilled in the art, one typical method to mitigate such pulsation may involve shaping a rigid structure to control the manner in which the pinchers engage and disengage the conduit to lessen the severity of pulsation by increasing pulse duration. Similarly, larger sections of bladder tubing may be used, as well as varying pump speed to cancel out known pulsations. Pulsation may also be diminished by employing a void in a rigid structure portion such that as three pinchers are simultaneously engaging the flexible conduit, the middle pincher momentarily encounters the rigid structure void thus reducing or eliminating its pinch before fully re-engaging the conduit. […]
As seen above, in para [0072], the method apparently corresponding to the claimed invention “may be known to those skilled in the art” to mitigate pulsation. However, Applicant’s invention appears to be intended to "eliminate … pulses upstream of the pump rather than mitigating such pulsation" (emphasis added).
Therefore, a skilled artisan would conclude that Applicant did not possess both the structure to mitigate pulsation and eliminate pulses upstream of the pump at the same time. Indeed, Applicant’s invention appears to function without requiring the very structure that Applicant’s own invention recites – i.e., the three rollers, with a second roller that passes over a void such that engagement of the first bladder by the second roller is reduced or eliminated before the second roller re-engages the first bladder after passing the void.
Moreover, the written description makes no mention of rollers that are claimed to be "configured to simultaneously engage the first bladder against a rigid structure" (rather, the three rollers simultaneously engaging the flexible conduit with the middle roller encountering the void in the rigid structure; see para [0072]) nor that the void of the rigid structure is "positioned along a pumping path of the irrigation pump head", as claimed.
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, 11 and all claims depending therefrom 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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected for reciting the indefinite limitation:
“…wherein a first roller, a second roller, and a third roller of the first plurality of rollers are configured to simultaneously engage the first bladder against the rigid structure portion, the rigid structure portion defining a void positioned along a pumping path of the irrigation pump head, and wherein, during rotation of the irrigation pump head, the second roller is positioned between the first and third rollers and passes over the void such that engagement of the first bladder by the second roller is reduced or eliminated before the second roller re-engages the first bladder after passing the void…”
It is unclear how the first, second and third rollers could simultaneously engage the first bladder against a rigid structure, while the second roller also passes over a void in the same structure (thus not engaging the first bladder against the rigid structure).
Further, a skilled artisan would not be able to determine what specific structure is positively recited in the claims to permit the first, second and third rollers to be "configured to simultaneously engage the first bladder against a rigid structure portion, the rigid structure portion defining a void positioned along a pumping path of the irrigation pump head" as claimed. For example, the claimed invention recites a rigid structure merely in the context of what the rollers are "configured to" do, but the rigid structure itself is not a positively recited feature. For this reason, the metes and bounds of the claimed invention are ambiguously defined.
Allowable Subject Matter
Notwithstanding the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b), the closest prior art does not appear to disclose or render obvious the inventions recited in claims 1, 4-6, 9-16 and 19-29.
The closest prior art is Chen et al (U.S. Pub. 2020/0256331 A1, hereinafter “Chen”), in view of Baxter (U.S. Pat. 9,291,159 B2, hereinafter “Baxter”), further in view of Farivar (U.S. Pub. 2014/0081197 A1, hereinafter “Farivar”), further in view of Koslov (U.S. Pub. 2006/0245964 A1, hereinafter "Koslov").
However, this prior art does not appear to disclose the tapered wall thickness of the first and second bladders that provides the respective ramps where the plurality of rollers engage and disengage the first bladder and second bladders, respectively, in combination with the other structure and function(s) of the claimed limitations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/26/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a), Applicant’s arguments are not found persuasive. Applicant asserted that support for the claim limitations can be found in paras [0071], [0072] and [0074] (see Remarks, pgs. 8-9). However, these paragraphs are deficient in disclosing the claimed invention, as explained in the rejections above; these rejections substantially repeat the same rejections previously applied, which did not appear to be substantively addressed by Applicant in the Remarks.
Regarding the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), Applicant’s arguments are not found fully persuasive specifically regarding the first, second and third rollers being configured to “simultaneously engage” the first bladder when the second roller subsequently passes over the void such that its engagement is reduced or eliminated. Applicant asserted that the claim amendments overcame this rejection, but no claim amendments were made to specifically address the claim language in question.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT J MEDWAY whose telephone number is (571)270-3656. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 8:30 AM to 5:00 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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/SCOTT J MEDWAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783 09/21/2026
Prosecution Insights