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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 July 6, 2026, has been entered.
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on July 6, 2026. As directed by the amendment: claims 1, 12, and 18 have been amended, no new claims have been canceled, and no new claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-5 and 7-20 are presently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues on page 8-10 of the remarks that the 103-rejection on made does not read on the new limitations of claim 1, 12, and 18. However, Applicant amended the claim to add new limitation "chain drive assembly comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor, an idler sprocket, and arm sprockets coupled to the arms," that was not previously considered.
Applicant argues specifically on page 9-10 of the remarks that Fried does not teach a chain drive assembly with sprockets; however, Fried discloses “it will be understood by those skilled in the art that other transmission systems can be implemented, including any set of interworking gears, cogwheels, racks, bearings, screws, chains, shafts, pulleys and conveyor belts, configured to transform rotational motion of actuator”. Thus, since the prior art identifies alterative mechanisms does not establish that the reference fails to disclose the claimed arrangement. Teaching alternatives confirms that the reference encompasses the claimed motor system and its associated components.
Applicant's arguments have been considered, but, because they rely on the new limitations, and the arguments have not been found persuasive. A new rejection below has been applied to this claim amendment. Applicant arguments with respect to claim(s) dependent from the independent claim have been considered but are not persuasive as addressed above.
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 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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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) 1-2 and 8-11 are rejected under rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman (US 20200086075 A1) in view of Minato et al. (US 20170197047 A1), hereafter as Minato, and Fried et al. (WO 2019224810 A1), hereafter as Fried, and Grant (US 4262667 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose a ventilator system (Fig. 1, 8) comprising:
a controller device disposed in the protective case (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014-0015, 0017-0018, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052) and configured to execute computer-executable instructions to:
determine one or more adjustable parameters associated with supplying air to a patient (Fig 7, para. 0014, 0020, 0051: the one or more adjustable parameters including parameters from sensors such as flow, pressure, humidity, temperature as well as parameters input by user; Fig. 5);
generate, based on the one or more adjustable parameters (para. 0013, 0035, 0051; Fig. 14) a control signal (Fig. 5; para. 0007, 0013-0014, 0034, 0035) for an assist control mode or a volume control mode (para. 0013, 0050-0051, 0053);
and generate one or more outputs associated with the adjustable parameters (figure 5; claim 1; para. 0021, 0023);
arms disposed in the case (rod 107 and 125 Fig. 10; para. 0028), and operatively controlled by a motor and each comprising:
a paddle, wherein the paddles are positioned to compress a bag valve mask (BVM; 4; Fig 10, 16 ; para. 0021) from opposite sides of the BVM based at least in part on the control signal generated by the controller device (abstract; para. 0015, 0021; Claim 11; Fig. 8 & 10-12);
an overpressure valve disposed in the case and (outlet of the BVM 96, exhalation solenoid valve 117; Fig. 11; para. 0032) coupled to the BVM to provide mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) settings (para. 0018, 0032);
the motor (motor 102; Fig 10; Para. 0021, 0027) wherein the motor is disposed in the case configured to articulate the paddles via motion of the arms based on the control signal (claims 1, 2, Para. 0021; limitation is functional);
wherein the ventilator system is capable of operating in a plurality of modes including at least an OFF mode, an assist control mode, and a volume control mode, as defined by the controller device (para 0050-0051, 0053);
Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose an enclosure comprising a protective case configured to house at least a portion of the ventilator system; wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open and wherein second portions of the arms, comprising the paddles, are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open.
However, Minato discloses a ventilator system in a case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Although, Minato does not specifically teach that case is protective. Applicant in the specification describe a protective case is used to provide flexibility in various environment (para. 0018 or instant application). Minato teaches the housing is durable (para. 0067) and facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the case be a protective case, because the claimed invention would perform equally well with the case taught by Minato to hold the ventilator system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include the protective case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043) as taught by Minato for the purpose of facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067).
Further, modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman teaches wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Examiner notes: the “first portion” of the arms (part of the arm closest to the motor) are “covered” partially by the BVM when the case is open, same for the motor being covered; Examiner is suggesting adding limitations about it being inaccessible when it is open), and second portions of the arms (part of the arm closest to the paddle), comprising the paddles (105/106; “the second portion” are not covered when the case of Minato is open), are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Fig. 1-2; Minato, and Fig. 8; Mujeeb).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open, and wherein second portions of the arms, comprising the paddles, are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open as taught by Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman as it is known in the art that how double-sided compression mechanism are designed.
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not specifically teach a chain drive comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms, wherein the chain drive assembly is disposed within the protective case.
However, Fried teaches a transmission system (Figs. 4-6; 164) that includes chain drive (Pg. 9 lines 7-9; Examiner notes that the transmission system could have chain or there like) comprising a drive sprocket (Fig. 4; gear 166), an idler sprocket (“cogwheel” Examiner notes; Fried teaches that these transmission systems could be any set of interworking gears, cogwheels, racks, bearings, screws, chains, shafts, pulleys and conveyor belts, configured to transform rotational motion of actuator) coupled to the motor (Fig.5; 162) and arm sprockets ( gears 168, 172) are coupled to the arms (shafts 174, 176; Pg. 12 lines 17-31),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device and transmission system within the device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the chain drive comprising a drive sprocket, an idler sprocket, coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms as taught by Fried for the purpose of providing precision control of the magnitude by which bag ventilators are squeezed, in order to avoid imprecision in inhalation rate and volume achieved by manual and conventional automation assisted systems (Pg. 2; lines 8-12) and switching the different transmission systems is known in the art to transform rotational motions in desired directions (Pg. 15; lines 21-26).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not disclose specifically an idler sprocket and the chain assembly.
However, Grant teaches a chain drive assembly (Fig. 4-5) comprising a drive sprocket (40) coupled to the motor (35, 36), an idler sprocket (41, 44), and arm sprockets coupled to the arms (Fig. 4-5; 33; Col. 2 lines 35-41, Col. 3 line 66-Col. 4 line 39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify this transmission system of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the a chain drive assembly comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor, an idler sprocket as taught by Grant for the purpose of driven arm being able to be driven up and down in forward and reverse directions and limits are imposed on the up and down (expansion and compression) of the compression piece (Col. 4 lines 21-28; Claim 1).
Regarding Claim 2, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of claim 1, wherein the one or more adjustable parameters include at least one of a pressure parameter (Fig. 5, para. 0020; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman), a mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) parameter (Fig. 5, para. 0020; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman), a tidal volume (Fig. 5, para. 0020; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman), a threshold (para. 0019), a respiratory rate (Fig. 5, para. 0020; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman), a control mode, an inspiratory and expiratory ratio (Fig. 5, 7; para. 0013, 0020; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 8, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of 1, wherein articulating the one or more paddles causes the one or more paddles (mechanical jaws 105 and 106; Fig. 10; para. 0028; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) to squeeze the BVM (Bag Valve Mask (BVM) 4; Fig 10, 16; para. 0021; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 9, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of 1, wherein the BVM (Bag Valve Mask (BVM) 4; Fig 10, 16; para. 002; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman 1) is attached to a mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) valve (internal circuity 97; Fig 8; para. 0021: examiners notes: there is a solenoid that operates an on-off valve and a pressure relief valve; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 10, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of 1, wherein the controller device (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) raises an alarm based on detecting a state of the ventilator system (para. 0017, 0048; claim 11; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 11, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of 10, wherein the alarm is at least one of a pressure alarms (Claim 11; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Claim(s) 12, 16, 18, and 20 are rejected under rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman in view of Minato and Campbell et al. (US 5342313 A), hereafter as Campbell, Fried, and Grant.
Regarding Claim 12, Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose a device, comprising:
a processor (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052) configured to execute computer-executable instructions to: determine one or more adjustable parameters associated with controlling a ventilator device to supply air to a patient (Fig 7; para. 0014, 0020, 0051),
wherein the one or more adjustable parameters are determined based at least in part on breathing thresholds associated with the patient ( 0019, 0034);
generate, based on the one or more adjustable parameters (para. 0013, 0035, 0051; Fig. 14) a control signal (Fig. 5; para. 0007, 0013-0014, 0034, 0035) for an assist control mode or a volume control mode (para. 0013, 0050-0051, 0053);
cause a pair of controllable paddles (mechanical jaws 105 and 106; Fig. 10; para. 0028) to articulate to articulate via motion of arms (107,125, Fig 10) disposed in a protective case and each comprising one of the pair of controllable paddles,
wherein the pair of controllable paddles are positioned to compress a bag valve mask (BVM) (Bag Valve Mask (BVM) 4; Fig 10, 16 ; para. 0021) from opposite sides of the BVM based at least in part on the control signal generated by the processor (abstract; para. 0015, 0021; Claim 11; Fig. 8 & 10-12: Examiner notes: the microcontroller);
provide mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (para. 0018, 0032) settings using an overpressure valve (outlet of the BVM 96, exhalation solenoid valve 117; Fig. 11; para. 0032) coupled to the BVM;
articulate the pair of controllable paddles via actuation of a motor causing motion of the arms (claims 1, 2, Para. 0021);
generate one or more outputs associated with a condition of the ventilator device (claims 1, 2);
wherein the ventilator system is capable of operating in a plurality of modes including at least an OFF mode, an assist control mode, and a volume control mode, as defined by the controller device (para 0050-0051, 0053),
and display, on a display device (Fig 7; Para. 0020), at least one of the one or more outputs.
Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose an ventilator device is housed in the protective case; wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open and wherein second portions of the arms, comprising the paddles, are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open.
However, Minato discloses a ventilator system in a case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Although, Minato does not specifically teach that case is protective. Applicant in the specification describe a protective case is used to provide flexibility in various environment (para. 0018 or instant application). Minato teaches the housing is durable (para. 0067) and facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the case be a protective case, because the claimed invention would perform equally well with the case taught by Minato to hold the ventilator system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include the protective case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043) as taught by Minato for the purpose of facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067).
Further, modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman teaches wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Examiner notes: the “first portion” of the arms (part of arm closest to motor) are “covered” partially by the BVM when the case is open, same for the motor being covered; Examiner is suggesting adding limitations about it being inaccessible when it is open), and second portions of the arms (part of arm closest to paddle), comprising the paddles (105/106; “the second portion” are not covered when the case of Minato is open), are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Fig. 1-2; Minato, and Fig. 8; Mujeeb).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open, and wherein second portions of the arms, comprising the paddles, are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open as taught by Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman as it is known in the art that how double-sided compression mechanism are designed.
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose a motor that is a stepper motor.
However, Campbell teaches disclose a motor that is a stepper motor (motor 48; Fig. 2; Col. 3 lines 33-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include a motor that is a stepper motor (motor 48; Fig. 2; Col. 3 lines 33-46) as taught by Campbell for the purpose which periodically turns the stepper motor on and off to accomplish the desired fluid flow.
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not specifically teach a chain drive comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms, wherein the chain drive assembly is disposed within the protective case.
However, Fried teaches a transmission system (Figs. 4-6; 164) that includes chain drive (Pg. 9 lines 7-9; Examiner notes that the transmission system could have chain or there like) comprising a drive sprocket (Fig. 4; gear 166), an idler sprocket (“cogwheel” Examiner notes; Fried teaches that these transmission systems could be any set of interworking gears, cogwheels, racks, bearings, screws, chains, shafts, pulleys and conveyor belts, configured to transform rotational motion of actuator) coupled to the motor (Fig.5; 162) and arm sprockets ( gears 168, 172) are coupled to the arms (shafts 174, 176; Pg. 12 lines 17-31),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device and transmission system within the device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the chain drive comprising a drive sprocket, an idler sprocket, coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms as taught by Fried for the purpose of providing precision control of the magnitude by which bag ventilators are squeezed, in order to avoid imprecision in inhalation rate and volume achieved by manual and conventional automation assisted systems (Pg. 2; lines 8-12) and switching the different transmission systems is known in the art to transform rotational motions in desired directions (Pg. 15; lines 21-26).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not disclose specifically an idler sprocket and the chain assembly.
However, Grant teaches a chain drive assembly (Fig. 4-5) comprising a drive sprocket (40) coupled to the motor (35, 36), an idler sprocket (41, 44), and arm sprockets coupled to the arms (Fig. 4-5; 33; Col. 2 lines 35-41, Col. 3 line 66-Col. 4 line 39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify this transmission system of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the a chain drive assembly comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor, an idler sprocket as taught by Grant for the purpose of driven arm being able to be driven up and down in forward and reverse directions and limits are imposed on the up and down (expansion and compression) of the compression piece (Col. 4 lines 21-28; Claim 1).
Regarding Claim 16, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the device of claim 12, wherein the ventilator device is enclosed in the protective case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Regarding Claim 18, Mujeeb-U-Rahman discloses a method comprising:
determining, by a processor (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014-0015, 0017-0018, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052) of a ventilator controller device, one or more adjustable parameters associated with controlling a ventilator device to supply air to a user (Fig 7,para. 0014, 0020, 0051), wherein the one or more adjustable parameters are determined based at least in part on breathing thresholds associated with the user (para. 0051);
generate, based on the one or more adjustable parameters (para. 0013, 0035, 0051; Fig. 14) a control signal (Fig. 5; para. 0007, 0013-0014, 0034, 0035) for an assist control mode or a volume control mode (para. 0013, 0050-0051, 0053);
causing a pair of controllable paddles (mechanical jaws 105 and 106; Fig. 10; para. 0028 to articulate via motion of arms (17, 125, Fig. 10) disposed in a protective case and each comprising one of the pair of controllable paddles,
wherein the pair of controllable paddles are positioned to compress a bag valve mask (BVM) (Bag Valve Mask (BVM) 4; Fig 10, 16 ; para. 0021) from opposite sides of the BVM based at least in part on the control signal generated by the controller device (abstract; para. 0015, 0021; Claim 11; Fig. 8 & 10-12);
providing mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) (para. 0018, 0032) settings using an overpressure valve (outlet of the BVM 96, exhalation solenoid valve 117; Fig. 11; para. 0032) coupled to the BVM;
articulating the pair of controllable paddles via actuation of a motor causing motion of the arms based on the control signal (claims 1, 2, Para. 0021);
generating one or more outputs associated with a condition of the ventilator device (para. 0051);
wherein the ventilator system is capable of operating in a plurality of modes including at least an OFF mode, an assist control mode, and a volume control mode, as defined by the controller device (para 0050-0051, 0053);
and displaying, on a display device, at least one of the one or more outputs (Fig. 7; Para. 0020).
Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose an ventilator device is housed in the protective case.
However, Minato discloses a ventilator system in a case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Although, Minato does not specifically teach that case is protective. Applicant in the specification describe a protective case is used to provide flexibility in various environment (para. 0018 or instant application). Minato teaches the housing is durable (para. 0067) and facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067). It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have the case be a protective case, because the claimed invention would perform equally well with the case taught by Minato to hold the ventilator system.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include the protective case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043) as taught by Minato for the purpose of facilitates transportation of the portable electromechanical resuscitator bag compression device to areas where natural disasters or epidemic have occurred (para. 0067).
Further, modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman teaches wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Examiner notes: the “first portion” of the arms (part closest to motor) are “covered” partially by the BVM when the case is open, same for the motor being covered; Examiner is suggesting adding limitations about it being inaccessible when it is open), and second portions of the arms (part closest to paddle), comprising the paddles (105/106; “the second portion” are not covered when the case of Minato is open), are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open (Fig. 1-2; Minato, and Fig. 8; Mujeeb).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case in Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include wherein the motor and first portions of the arms are covered within the protective case when the protective case is open, and wherein second portions of the arms, comprising the paddles, are uncovered within the protective case when the protective case is open as taught by Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman as it is known in the art that how double-sided compression mechanism are designed.
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose a motor that is a stepper motor.
However, Campbell teaches disclose a motor that is a stepper motor (motor 48; Fig. 2; Col. 3 lines 33-46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include a motor that is a stepper motor (motor 48; Fig. 2; Col. 3 lines 33-46) as taught by Campbell for the purpose which periodically turns the stepper motor on and off to accomplish the desired fluid flow.
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not specifically teach a chain drive comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms, wherein the chain drive assembly is disposed within the protective case.
However, Fried teaches a transmission system (Figs. 4-6; 164) that includes chain drive (Pg. 9 lines 7-9; Examiner notes that the transmission system could have chain or there like) comprising a drive sprocket (Fig. 4; gear 166), an idler sprocket (“cogwheel” Examiner notes; Fried teaches that these transmission systems could be any set of interworking gears, cogwheels, racks, bearings, screws, chains, shafts, pulleys and conveyor belts, configured to transform rotational motion of actuator) coupled to the motor (Fig.5; 162) and arm sprockets ( gears 168, 172) are coupled to the arms (shafts 174, 176; Pg. 12 lines 17-31),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device and transmission system within the device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the chain drive comprising a drive sprocket, an idler sprocket, coupled to the motor and arm sprockets are coupled to the arms as taught by Fried for the purpose of providing precision control of the magnitude by which bag ventilators are squeezed, in order to avoid imprecision in inhalation rate and volume achieved by manual and conventional automation assisted systems (Pg. 2; lines 8-12) and switching the different transmission systems is known in the art to transform rotational motions in desired directions (Pg. 15; lines 21-26).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman does not disclose specifically an idler sprocket and the chain assembly.
However, Grant teaches a chain drive assembly (Fig. 4-5) comprising a drive sprocket (40) coupled to the motor (35, 36), an idler sprocket (41, 44), and arm sprockets coupled to the arms (Fig. 4-5; 33; Col. 2 lines 35-41, Col. 3 line 66-Col. 4 line 39).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify this transmission system of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman to include the a chain drive assembly comprising a drive sprocket coupled to the motor, an idler sprocket as taught by Grant for the purpose of driven arm being able to be driven up and down in forward and reverse directions and limits are imposed on the up and down (expansion and compression) of the compression piece (Col. 4 lines 21-28; Claim 1).
Regarding Claim 20, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahman disclose the method of claim 18, Mujeeb-U-Rahman further comprising using a threshold pressure value (table 1; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) for determining when a next ventilation cycle in an assist mode will be triggered (Fig 6; para. 0019; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Claim(s) 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman, Minato, Fried, and Grant, as applied to claim 1, in view of Sprinkle et al. (US 20080257145 A1), hereafter Sprinkle.
Regarding Claim 3, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of claim 1, wherein the controller device (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014-0015, 0017-0018, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose threshold delay percent that is set by an operator to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold is ignored.
However, Sprinkle discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the control device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097) as taught by Sprinkle for the purpose of ensuring the next trigger is not falsely or prematurely initiated until the start of the patient’s next inhalation (0097) as well as suitable system efficiency (para. 0097).
Regarding Claim 4, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of claim 3, wherein the controller device (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014-0015, 0017-0018, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) is further configured to use a threshold pressure value (table 1; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) for determining when a next ventilation cycle in an assist mode will be triggered (Fig 6; para. 0019; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 5, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of claim 3, wherein a pressure difference between a mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) pressure value and a measured pressure is greater than a threshold pressure value, the controller device (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014-0015, 0017-0018, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) causes a compression (para. 0021; claims 11, 16; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose the controller causes compression based on threshold delay percent.
However, Sprinkle discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the control device doing a compression of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) as taught by Sprinkle for the purpose of ensuring the next trigger is not falsely or prematurely initiated until the start of the patient’s next inhalation (0097) as well as suitable system efficiency (para. 0097) and compression should be done that best benefits the patient.
Claim(s) 13-15, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman, Minato, Campbell, Fried, and Grant, as applied to claims 12 and 18, in view of Sprinkle et al. (US 20080257145 A1), hereafter Sprinkle.
Regarding Claim 13, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the device of claim 12, wherein the processor (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman)
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose threshold delay percent that is set by an operator to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold is ignored.
However, Sprinkle discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the control device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097) as taught by Sprinkle for the purpose of ensuring the next trigger is not falsely or prematurely initiated until the start of the patient’s next inhalation (0097) as well as suitable system efficiency (para. 0097).
Regarding Claim 14, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the device of claim 13, wherein the processor (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) is further configured to use a threshold pressure value (table 1; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) for determining when a next ventilation cycle in an assist mode will be triggered (Fig 6; para. 0019; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Regarding Claim 15, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the device of claim 13, wherein a pressure difference between a mechanical positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) pressure value and a measured pressure is greater than a threshold pressure value, the controller device (control unit 2; Fig. 8; para. 0014, 0021, 0034, 0043, 0052; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman) causes a compression (para. 0021; claims 11, 16; Mujeeb-U-Rahaman).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose the controller causes compression based on threshold delay percent.
However, Sprinkle discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the control device doing a compression of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) as taught by Sprinkle for the purpose of ensuring the next trigger is not falsely or prematurely initiated until the start of the patient’s next inhalation (0097) as well as suitable system efficiency (para. 0097) and compression should be done that best benefits the patient.
Regarding Claim 19, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the method of claim 18,
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not specifically disclose threshold delay percent that is set by an operator to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold is ignored.
However, Sprinkle discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the control device of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include discloses threshold delay percent (threshold 904; fig. 9; para. 0097) that is set by an operator (controller 506; fig. 5a; para. 0097) to determine a percentage of time at which a pressure drop below a threshold (examiner notes; percentage of a breathing characteristic (e.g., breath rate, breath cycle, exhalation, or other breathing characteristics including flow, flow rate and pressure) is used to ignore triggers threshold for a certain amount a time to avoid triggering another bolus (905)) is ignored (para. 0097) as taught by for the purpose of ensuring the next trigger is not falsely or prematurely initiated until the start of the patient’s next inhalation (0097) as well as suitable system efficiency (para. 0097).
Claim(s) 7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman , Minato, Fried, and Grant, as applied to claims 1, in further view of Dominiak et al. (US 5478211 A), hereafter as Dominiak.
Regarding Claim 7, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman discloses the ventilator system of claim 1, wherein the protective case (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not disclose an intravenous attachment.
However, Dominiak teaches an intravenous attachment (flexible tubing 62; fig. 3; Col 5. Lines 21-36)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include the intravenous attachment (flexible tubing 62; Fig. 3; Col 5. Lines 21-36) as taught by Dominiak for the purpose of suppling IV fluid to a patient (Col 5. Lines 21-36) that might need it when either transporting to the hospital or in the hospital.
Claim(s) 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mujeeb-U-Rahaman, Minato, Campbell, Fried, and Grant, as applied to claim 16, in further view of Dominiak et al. (US 5478211 A), hereafter as Dominiak.
Regarding Claim 17, Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman disclose the device of claim 16, wherein the case comprises (Fig. 1-4; 100-102; para. 0035-0043; Minato).
Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman does not disclose an intravenous attachment.
However, Dominiak teaches an intravenous attachment (flexible tubing 62; Fig. 3; Col 5. Lines 21-36)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the case of Modified Mujeeb-U-Rahaman to include the intravenous attachment (flexible tubing 62; Fig. 3; Col 5. Lines 21-36) as taught by Dominiak for the purpose of suppling IV fluid to a patient (Col 5. Lines 21-36) that might need it when either transporting to the hospital or in the hospital.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO-892 for additional attached references. Other prior art of particular note include:
-Joshi et al. (US-20170105897-A1) teaches transmission system that has belts provide a convenient linkage between the toothed wheels, and may be replaced with comparable components such as chains, with corresponding sprockets on the drive shafts (21, 24) and first and second lateral drive spools 12R and 12L (para. 0026; Figs. 4-9)
-Clements (US 2398520 A) teaches a chain assembly with a pump more so a driving mechanism for pumping means (Fig. 2)
-Fumagalli (US-3818806-A) teaches flywheel (idler) driven by the motor means (Fig. 1, 3)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAAP A ELLABIB whose telephone number is (571)272-5879. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, KENDRA CARTER can be reached on (571) 272-9034. 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.
/MAAP AHMED ELLABIB/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights