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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 8/13/2025 . As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 49 has been amended, and claim(s) 70-71 have been added. Thus, claims 49, 51, 54-56, 58-65, and 67-71 are presently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/13/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument regarding the independent claims on page 7-10:
Applicant argues that the prior art relied upon in the preceding office action does not teach the following limitations of the presently amended claims:
"insufflator configured to generate a flow of gases for delivery to a body cavity"
Examiner notes that broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim term "insufflator" to a person of ordinary skill in the art, not inconsistent with the disclosure, may be best provided by Merriam-Webster's dictionary: "[that which introduces] a flow of gas into a body cavity"
Accordingly, as Poll's bulb 110 is configured to dispense bursts of gas through assembly 10, which is disposed in an operating cavity of a person, the bulb 110 can be considered an insufflator. Fig 6 demonstrates that as air from bulb 110, and other sources, is conveyed across a lens of assembly 10, it is conveyed into the operating cavity the assembly 10 is disposed in.
"the recirculation circuit is configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity and to direct the gases into the gases pathway between the insufflator and the humidifier such that the gases are reintroduced into the body cavity, and wherein the humidifier is positioned within the recirculation circuit such that the humidifier receives gases from both the insufflator and from the body cavity"
Applicant particularly argues that the prior art of Poll's tubing 230 232 and branch 48 do not direct gases for reintroduction into the body, instead alleging that those elements and bulb 110 direct air to a lens of the view optimization assembly 10 and therein cannot be considered to reintroduce gas from the body cavity, through the gases pathway and certain claim elements, and back to the body cavity.
Examiners notes fig 6 of Poll which demonstrates that the gas which is blown past the lens of the view optimization assembly 10, removing accumulated droplets continues to travel past the lens of assembly 10 and into the cavity which the assembly 10 is disposed in. Paragraph 45+108+124-126+141-147 that the gas conveyed from the body cavity at coupling 20 is reintroduced to the body cavity by the assembly 10.
Applicant argues that a person of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify the invention of Poll with the teachings of Inoue, as expressed in the previous office action, for the following reasons:
"Poll teaches away from such a modification [because] Poll's bulb 110 is configured to direct air to the view optimization assembly 10 to clear liquid droplets Off the lens [and including] a humidifier to humidity gases traveling along branch 48 -- would increase the chances of liquid droplets condensing on the lens Of the view optimization assembly 10 [which to address this liquid droplet concern] Poll's system already includes a moisture trap 236 upstream of the bulb 110 to remove moisture from the gases flow."
Examiner notes that liquid droplets to be removed from a lens of view optimization assembly 10, as well as the filtrate of moisture trap 236 are both forms of condensate or otherwise known as moisture which has exited a gaseous/vapor state to become a liquid that condenses on surfaces such as tubing or a camera lens. Examiner further notes that a humidifier, such as that taught by Inoue maintains a desired moisture in vapor form and removes the condensate. Examiner notes in paragraph 158 of Poll it is taught that in Poll's disclosed use case, when gas transitions from the body cavity to the operating room a risk of condensate increases due to the change in ambient temperature in a OR that is cold relative to the body cavity, accordingly when gas is conveyed from this cold OR space back into the body, such as when incidentally blowing across a lens of a camera disposed in the body cavity, the risk of condensate formation decreases due to the relative increase in ambient temperature. Accordingly, the proposed modification of Poll in view of Inoue, presented below, does not go against the teachings of Poll and its moisture trap being disposed prior to a pump for conveying gas across a lens, as the incorporated humidifier of Inoue supports Poll’s direction towards reducing condensate exposure to the lens of its camera by maintaining a humidity, therein a vapor state of condensable media, for filling a body cavity with gas of a desirable quality.
In light of examiner’s discussion of the remarks above, and the examiner's rejection as necessitated by the amendment, below, the presently amended claims stand rejected in light of the prior art previously relied upon.
Regarding applicant’s argument regarding dependent claims on page 10:
Applicant argues that their preceding arguments render the independent claims allowable, and consequently likewise the dependent claims are allowable.
See examiner's rejection as necessitated by the amendment, below, and examiner's discussion of the arguments toward the independent claims, above, which together present the disclosure/teachings of the prior art relied upon for rejecting the present dependent claims.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) filed 8/13/2025 have been considered by the examiner.
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 49, 51, 54-55, and 58 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 8-9, 10-11 of U.S. Patent No. 10,912,901, henceforth written as ‘901 in view of Tran (Pub. No. 2014/0100517).
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 49, 901’ teaches a system for laparoscopic surgery, the system comprising: a insufflator configured to generate a flow of gases for delivery to a body cavity; a humidifier in fluid communication with the insufflator and configured to at least humidify the flow of gases received from the insufflator; a gases pathway configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the humidifier and from the humidifier to the body cavity; a recirculation circuit connecting the body cavity to the gases pathway, wherein the recirculation circuit is configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity and to direct the gases into the gases pathway between the insufflator and the humidifier such that the gases are reintroduced into the body cavity: and wherein the humidifier is positioned within the recirculation circuit such that the humidifier receives gases from both the insufflator and from the body cavity; and a filtration unit positioned along the recirculation circuit, the filtration unit comprising a filter and a pump, wherein the filter is configured to remove smoke and other debris from the gases flowing through the recirculation circuit (see claim 1 of 901’), and wherein the pump comprises an inlet and an outlet, wherein the pump is configured to create a pressure differential between the inlet and the outlet; (see claim 1 of 901’) a condensate management system configured to minimize condensate from the gases flowing through the recirculation circuit, the condensate management system comprising a heated conduit, (see claim 8 of 901’) the condensate management system positioned along the recirculation circuit upstream of the filtration unit such that gases leaving the body cavity and flowing through the recirculation circuit passes through the condensate management system before passing through the filtration unit (see claim 1 of 901’);
Regarding claim 51, 901’ discloses wherein the gases flowing from the humidifier to the body cavity are humidified (see claim 1 of 901’).
Regarding claim 54, 901’ discloses wherein the filtration unit comprises a flow generator portion (see claim 1 of 901’).
Regarding claim 55, 901’ discloses wherein the filtration unit comprises an inlet, an outlet, and a filtration portion, wherein the filtration portion is positioned between the inlet and the flow generator portion, wherein the gases from the body cavity are drawn in to the filtration unit through the inlet and toward the gases pathway through the outlet (see claim 1 of 901’).
Regarding claim 58, 901’ discloses wherein the condensate management system is positioned along a portion of the recirculation circuit extending between the body cavity and the filtration unit (see claim 1 of 901’).
Claims 61 and 64 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 8-9, 10-11 of ‘901 and further in view of US 20030028139 A1, henceforth written as Inoue.
Regarding claim 61, 901’ is silent regarding “wherein the condensate management system comprises a film or foamed breathable polymer, wherein the film or foamed breathable polymer comprises a conduit”
However, Inoue further teaches means of condensate management system comprises a film or foamed breathable polymer, wherein the film or foamed breathable polymer comprises a conduit. See paragraph 34+59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1, inclusive of its cylindrically shaped membrane 8, minimizes the condensate formed when travelling within line 3 and piping 17; fig 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the condensate management system taught Inoue along with the condensate management system disclosed by 901’, arriving at the claimed invention, as such a modification combining equivalents for the same purpose of managing condensate only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.06(I).
Regarding claim 64, 901’ is silent regarding “wherein the condensate management system comprises a tube containing absorbent material.”
However, Inoue further teaches means of condensate management system comprises a film or foamed breathable polymer, wherein the film or foamed breathable polymer comprises a conduit. See paragraph 34+59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1, inclusive of its cylindrically shaped membrane 8, minimizes the condensate formed when travelling within line 3 and piping 17; fig 1. In paragraph 34, membrane 8 as being permeable to, therein absorbent of, water vapor
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the condensate management system taught Inoue along with the condensate management system disclosed by 901’, arriving at the claimed invention, as such a modification combining equivalents for the same purpose of managing condensate only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.06(I).
Claims 62-63 and 65 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 5, 8-9, 10-11 of ‘901 and further in view of US 20120165610 A1, henceforth written as Poll.
Regarding claim 62, 901’ is silent regarding “wherein the condensate management system comprises a canister containing a substance with an affinity to water.”
However, Poll teaches: a canister containing a substance with an affinity to water [ for minimizing condensate]. (paragraph 130; dehumidifying unit 106 comprises a rotor, therein canister, containing desiccants with a high affinity for adsorbing water)
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the condensate management system disclosed by Poll with the condensate management system disclosed by ‘901, therein arriving at the claimed invention as such a modification combining equivalents for the same purpose of managing condensate only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.06(I).
Regarding claim 63, 901’ in view of Poll teaches wherein the substance comprises a foam material or a chemical that absorbs water, see the desiccant of Poll incorporated in the modification of claim 62 above.
Regarding claim 65, 901’ is silent regarding “wherein the condensate management system comprises a desiccant located near the filtration unit”.
However, Poll teaches a desiccant located near the filtration unit[, for minimizing condensate, downstream of the filtration unit]. (paragraph 130; dehumidifying unit 106 contains desiccants with a high affinity for adsorbing water, near set 204 a filtration unit; fig 39)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the condensate management system taught Poll along with the condensate management system disclosed by 901’, arriving at the claimed invention, as such a modification combining equivalents for the same purpose of managing condensate only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.06(I).
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.
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.
Claims 49, 51, 54-56, 58-65, and 67-71 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20120165610 A1, henceforth written as Poll, and in view of US 20030028139 A1, henceforth written as Inoue.
Regarding Claim 49,
Poll discloses:
A system for laparoscopic surgery, the system comprising:
(invention of fig 39)
a insufflator configured to generate a flow of gases for delivery to a body cavity;--
(paragraph 136+161; bulb 110 pumps to burst air toward assembly 10; fig 39)
--a gases pathway configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to -- a body cavity;
(branch 48 allows for flow from bulb 110 to a body cavity (not illustrated) via sheath 14 ; fig 39)
a recirculation circuit connecting the body cavity to the gases pathway, wherein the recirculation circuit is configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity and to direct the gases into the gases pathway between the insufflator [and a downstream element] such that the gases are reintroduced into the body cavity, --
(claimed recirculation circuit comprises tubing 230, tubing 232, branch 48 for conveying gas from a body cavity through the circuit and returning to the cavity via assembly 10; fig 39)
and wherein the [downstream element] is positioned within the recirculation circuit such that the [downstream element] receives gases from both the insufflator and from the body cavity;
(see fig 39 detailing the connection of the claimed gases pathway and claimed recirculation circuit such that gas traveling along the tubing of branch 48 is received from the claimed insufflator and had originated from the body cavity via coupling 20)
a filtration unit positioned along the recirculation circuit,
(set 204; fig 39)
the filtration unit comprising a filter and a pump,
(paragraph 148+151; filter 216 and driven gas moving component 214; fig 39)
wherein the filter is configured to remove smoke and other debris from the gases flowing through the recirculation circuit,
(paragraph 148, "elements 216 that trap smoke, particulates, aerosolized pathogens, odors, chemical toxins, and other undesired agents from a physiologic airflow")
and wherein the pump comprises an inlet and an outlet, wherein the pump is configured to create a pressure differential between the inlet and the outlet; and
(paragraph 126+141-142+148-150; demonstrates the gas moving component 214, therein producing a pressure differential actuating flow from inlet to outlet; fig 39 )
a condensate management system configured to minimize condensate in the recirculation circuit, --
(paragraph 158; moisture trap 236 separates condensate from the gas drawn from the body cavity ; fig 39)
--the condensate management system positioned along the recirculation circuit upstream of the filtration unit such that gases leaving the body cavity and flowing through the recirculation circuit pass through the condensate management system before passing through the filtration unit;
(fig 39 and paragraph 158 demonstrates trap 236 is upstream of filter 216)
Poll discloses the elements of the present claim, as described above. Yet, its present embodiment is silent on:
a humidifier in fluid communication with the insufflator and configured to at least humidify the flow of gases received from the insufflator; a gases pathway configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the humidifier and the gases to flow from the humidifier to a body cavity;-- wherein the recirculation circuit is configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity and to direct the gases into the gases pathway between the insufflator and the humidifier such that the gases are reintroduced into the body cavity, and wherein the humidifier is positioned within the recirculation circuit such that the humidifier receives gases from both the insufflator and from the body cavity
However, Inoue teaches a pneumoperitoneum gas heating and humidifying apparatus wherein:
a humidifier in fluid communication with the primary flow generator and configured to at least humidify the gases received from the primary flow generator [within the recirculation circuit];
(paragraph 32+59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1 receives flowing gas from gas flow regulator 15, and provides means for maintaining temperature of a gas for dispensing into a body cavity for preventing cooling and excess condensation while being conveyed in the tube; fig 1+3)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the humidifier apparatus teachings of Inoue to the tubing downstream of the claimed insufflator disclosed by Poll, therein arriving at the claimed invention, in order to advantageously arrive at an invention which inhibits excessive cooling and consequential condensate formation while conveying gas to a body cavity, see paragraph 59-60 of Inoue.
Examiner notes in light of the above modification of Poll in view of Inoue, that the apparatus 1 of Inoue is disposed downstream of Poll’s bulb 110, such that the claim limitations of “a gases pathway configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the humidifier and the gases to flow from the humidifier to a body cavity; --wherein the recirculation circuit is configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity and to direct the gases into the gases pathway between the insufflator and the humidifier such that the gases are reintroduced into the body cavity, and wherein the humidifier is positioned within the recirculation circuit such that the humidifier receives gases from both the insufflator and from the body cavity” is met as gas which is originally evacuated from the body cavity via Poll’s coupling 20 passes through Poll’s bulb 110 toward Inoue apparatus 1, such that gas from the body cavity is reintroduced to the body cavity after being received by Inoue’s apparatus 1 which receives gas after it has passed through Poll’s bulb 110 and exited Poll’s cavity.
Poll in view of Inoue discloses the elements of the present claim, as described above. Yet, its present embodiment is silent on:
the condensate management system comprising a heated conduit,
However, Inoue further teaches means of condensate management:
the condensate management system comprising a heated conduit,
(paragraph 59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1, inclusive of its heater 5a, minimizes the condensate formed when travel within line 3 and piping 17; fig 1)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the condensate management system taught Inoue along with the condensate trap disclosed by Poll, arriving at the claimed invention by disposing the heating and humidifying apparatus taught by Inoue adjacent Poll’s water trap 236 and encompassing Poll’s tubing 230, in order to advantageously arrive at an invention which further minimizes the condensate formed upon siphoned gas from a body cavity being exposed outside of the body, therein improving the run-time of the invention before the drain channels 238 of Poll are inundated with condensate, see paragraph 59 of Inoue and MPEP 2144.06(i).
Regarding claim 51, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue discloses:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the gases flowing from the humidifier to the body cavity are humidified.
Examiner notes that in light of the modification made in claim 49 above, the humidifier of Poll is disposed in the claimed gases pathway such that humidified gas is distributed to a body cavity.
Regarding claim 54, Poll discloses:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the filtration unit comprises a flow generator portion.
(chamber (not enumerated) of canister 212 containing air moving component 214, therein a portion where flow is generated; fig 39)
Regarding Claim 55,
Poll in view of Inoue discloses all of the elements of the current invention which the present claim is dependent upon, as described above, including the following limitations of the present claim:
The system of Claim 54, wherein the filtration unit comprises an inlet, an outlet, and a filtration portion, --wherein the gases from the body cavity are drawn in to the filtration unit through the inlet and toward the gases pathway through the outlet.
Poll: (portion (not enumerated) of set 204’s flow pathway containing filter 216 constitutes the claimed filtration portion, demonstrated by fig 39 as having an inlet (not enumerated) and outlet (not enumerated), transmitting gas in the claimed direction)
However, Poll in view of Inoue is silent regarding:
wherein the filtration portion is positioned between the inlet and the flow generator portion,
Notably, Poll teaches that modifications may be made to the device, see paragraph 163.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to rearrange Poll’s filtration portion to be upstream of Poll’s claimed flow generator as Poll, therein arriving at the claimed invention as such a modification involving rearrangement of parts only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 56, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the humidifier comprises an inlet, an outlet,
Inoue: (apparatus 1 includes inlet (not enumerated) and outlet (not enumerated) of line 3; fig 1)
a chamber configured to hold a volume of liquid, and
Inoue: (water conduit 4; fig 1)
a heating element associated with the chamber.
Inoue: (heater 5a; fig 1)
Regarding claim 58, Poll discloses:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system is positioned along a portion of the recirculation circuit extending between the body cavity and the filtration unit.
(fig 39 demonstrates trap 236 is between set 204 and the body cavity, located at trocar 202)
Regarding claim 59, Poll discloses:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system is positioned adjacent to an inlet of the filtration unit.
(fig 39 demonstrates adjacency of trap 236 and an inlet (not enumerated) of set 204)
Regarding claim 60, Poll discloses:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system comprises a reusable water trap.
(paragraph 158; continuously operating, therein reusable for continuing flow, moisture, therein water, trap)
Regarding claim 61, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system comprises a film or foamed breathable polymer, wherein the film or foamed breathable polymer comprises a conduit.
Inoue: (paragraph 34; cylindrically shaped, therein a conduit for flow, membrane 8; fig 1)
Regarding Claim 62,
Poll in view of Inoue discloses all of the elements of the current invention which the present claim is dependent upon, as described above. However, Poll in view of Inoue is silent regarding:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system comprises a canister containing a substance with an affinity to water.
However, Poll teaches:
a canister containing a substance with an affinity to water[, for minimizing condensate, downstream of the filtration unit].
(paragraph 130; dehumidifying unit 106 comprises a rotor, therein canister, containing desiccants with a high affinity for adsorbing water)
Examiner also notes in paragraph 163 of Poll, that it is disclosed that parts of the invention may be rearranged.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to rearrange the invention disclosed by Poll by disposing its dehumidifying unit 106 immediately upstream of its claimed filtration unit, therein arriving at the claimed invention as such a modification involving rearrangement of parts only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding claim 63, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 62, wherein the substance comprises a foam material or a chemical that absorbs water.
Poll: (paragraph 130; unit 106 contains desiccants, therein a chemical, with a high affinity for adsorbing water)
Regarding claim 64, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the condensate management system comprises a tube containing absorbent material.
Inoue: (paragraph 34; membrane 8 is cylindrical and therein forms a tube, membrane 8 is further noted as being permeable to, therein absorbent of, water vapor; fig 1)
Regarding Claim 65,
Poll in view of Inoue discloses all of the elements of the current invention which the present claim is dependent upon, as described above. However, Poll in view of Inoue is silent regarding:
The system of Claim 49,wherein the condensate management system comprises a desiccant located near [and upstream of ] the filtration unit.
However, Poll teaches:
a desiccant located near the filtration unit[, for minimizing condensate, downstream of the filtration unit].
(paragraph 130; dehumidifying unit 106 contains desiccants with a high affinity for adsorbing water)
Examiner also notes in paragraph 163 of Poll, that it is disclosed that parts of the invention may be rearranged.
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to rearrange the invention disclosed by Poll by disposing its dehumidifying unit 106 immediately upstream of its claimed filtration unit, therein arriving at the claimed invention as such a modification involving rearrangement of parts only involves routine skill in the art, see MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C).
Regarding Claim 67,
Poll in view of Inoue discloses all of the elements of the current invention which the present claim is dependent upon, as described above. However, Poll in view of Inoue is silent regarding:
The system of Claim 49,wherein the heated conduit is insulated.
However, Inoue teaches:
wherein the heated conduit is insulated.
(paragraph 59-60; insulating material (not enumerated) is provided on the piping 17, fig 1+3, to minimize condensate formation)
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further incorporate the insulation-condensate relationship teachings of Inoue to the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue in order to advantageously arrive at an invention with improved means for minimizing condensate formation in its tubing, see paragraph 59-60 of Inoue and MPEP 2144.06(I).
Regarding claim 68, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 49, wherein the heated conduit comprises a heating element.
Inoue: (heater 5a; fig 1)
Regarding claim 69, the modified device of Poll in view of Inoue teaches:
The system of Claim 68, wherein the heated conduit comprises a tube with a wall defining a lumen, wherein the heating element is positioned at least one of: outside of the wall, inside of the wall, outside of the lumen, or inside of the lumen.
Inoue: ( fig 1 illustrates the position of heater 5a outside of the lumen defined by membrane 8, and within the wall of body 2)
Regarding Claim 70,
Poll discloses:
A system for laparoscopic surgery, the system comprising:
(invention of fig 39)
an insufflator configured to generate a flow of gases for delivery to a body cavity;
(paragraph 136+161; bulb 110 pumps to burst air toward assembly 10; fig 39)
a supply conduit -- to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the [body cavity],
(branch 48 conveys gas from bulb 110 to assembly 10; fig 39)
the supply conduit defining a portion of a gases pathway,
(the claimed gases pathway is defined by the inner lumen (not enumerated/illustrated) of the components spanning of the claimed recirculation circuit which permit gas to be conveyed therethrough)
the gases pathway directing the flow of gases -- to a delivery component for delivering the flow of gases into the body cavity;
(gas flow is conveyed to view optimizing assembly 10; fig 6+39)
a recirculation circuit connecting the body cavity to the gases pathway, the recirculation circuit comprising:
(claimed recirculation circuit comprises tubing 230, tubing 232, branch 48; fig 39)
a first conduit section configured to receive gases passing through the body cavity, --
(tubing 230; fig 39)
--a second conduit section downstream of the first conduit section, the second conduit section connected to the supply conduit between the insufflator and the humidifier such that the gases from the body cavity are directed through the supply conduit and into the humidifier before being reintroduced into the body cavity via the delivery component; and
(the claimed second conduit spans the tubing 232 from the outlet (not enumerated) of set 204 and the outlet (not enumerated) of bulb 110; fig 39)
a filtration unit positioned along the recirculation circuit between the first conduit section and the second conduit section,
(set 204; fig 39)
the filtration unit comprising a filter and a pump,
(paragraph 148+151; filter 216 and driven gas moving component 214; fig 39)
wherein the filter is configured to remove smoke and other debris from the gases flowing through the recirculation circuit.
(paragraph 148, "elements 216 that trap smoke, particulates, aerosolized pathogens, odors, chemical toxins, and other undesired agents from a physiologic airflow")
Poll discloses the elements of the present claim, as described above. Yet, its present embodiment is silent on:
a humidifier in fluid communication with the insufflator and configured to humidify the flow of gases received from the insufflator;
a supply conduit connecting the insufflator to the humidifier and configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the humidifier,
the gases pathway directing the flow of gases from the humidifier to a delivery component for delivering the flow of gases into the body cavity;
However, Inoue teaches a pneumoperitoneum gas heating and humidifying apparatus wherein:
a humidifier in fluid communication with the primary flow generator and configured to at least humidify the gases received from the primary flow generator [within the recirculation circuit];
(paragraph 32+59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1 receives flowing gas from gas flow regulator 15, and provides means for maintaining temperature of a gas for dispensing into a body cavity for preventing cooling and excess condensation while being conveyed in the tube; fig 1+3)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the humidifier apparatus teachings of Inoue to the tubing downstream of the claimed insufflator disclosed by Poll, therein arriving at the claimed invention, in order to advantageously arrive at an invention which inhibits excessive cooling and consequential condensate formation while conveying gas to a body cavity, see paragraph 59-60 of Inoue.
Examiner notes in light of the above modification of Poll in view of Inoue, that the apparatus 1 of Inoue is disposed downstream of Poll’s bulb 110, such that the claim limitations of “a supply conduit connecting the insufflator to the humidifier and configured to allow the flow of gases to flow from the insufflator to the humidifier, the gases pathway directing the flow of gases from the humidifier to a delivery component for delivering the flow of gases into the body cavity” are met as gas which is originally evacuated from the body cavity via Poll’s coupling 20 passes through Poll’s bulb 110 toward Inoue apparatus 1, such that gas from the body cavity is reintroduced to the body cavity after being received by Inoue’s apparatus 1 which receives gas after it has passed through Poll’s bulb 110 and exited Poll’s cavity.
Poll in view of Inoue discloses the elements of the present claim, as described above. Yet, its present embodiment is silent on:
at least a portion of the first conduit section configured to be heated,
However, Inoue further teaches means of condensate management:
the first conduit comprising a heated conduit,
(paragraph 59-60; gas heating and humidifying apparatus 1, inclusive of its heater 5a, minimizes the condensate formed when travel within line 3 and piping 17; fig 1)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the condensate management system taught Inoue along with the condensate trap disclosed by Poll, arriving at the claimed invention by disposing the heating and humidifying apparatus taught by Inoue adjacent Poll’s water trap 236 and encompassing Poll’s tubing 230, in order to advantageously arrive at an invention which further minimizes the condensate formed upon siphoned gas from a body cavity being exposed outside of the body, therein improving the run-time of the invention before the drain channels 238 of Poll are inundated with condensate, see paragraph 59 of Inoue and MPEP 2144.06(i).
Regarding claim 71, Poll discloses:
The system of Claim 70, wherein the pump comprises an inlet and an outlet, and wherein the pump is configured to create a pressure differential between the inlet and the outlet.
(paragraph 126+141-142+148-150; demonstrates the gas moving component 214, therein producing a pressure differential actuating flow from inlet to outlet; fig 39 )
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 FORREST DIPERT whose telephone number is (703)756-1704. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am-5pm eastern.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached on (571) 270-5246. 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.
/FORREST BLAKE DIPERT/ Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/MICHAEL J TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights