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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 4-6 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability.
Claim 4 is newly amended.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 4-6 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Halili (US PGPUB 20100298768 A1) in view of Stillman (US 20160082201 A1) in view of Chang (US 20140025040 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Halili teaches a fluid transfer device (figs. 1, 3B, 4B, 5B, 6B, 7B, 15A, items 10) comprising:
a housing (100) having an exterior wall, a plurality of pairs of slots (see holes in figs.1, 15A; also 108, 110, 112 & 114) formed in said exterior wall, each one of said pairs of slots being diametrically opposed to each other;
a needle hub (150, 151, 152; see also figs. 17-18) having an exterior wall (inherent) (annotated figure 17) and an interior wall (inherent) extending interiorly across said exterior wall, to thereby form upper and lower compartments a first needle (154, 156) extending upwardly from said interior wall, into said upper compartment a second needle (156, 154) extending downwardly from said interior wall into said lower compartment, said interior wall having an opening therein to form a fluid passageway (fig. 17);
a first cartridge (30, having a plunger (132) and a pierceable cap ( tight seal, paragraph [0119]) );
a second cartridge (20,) having a plunger and a pierceable cap (inherent);
a base member (10) , said member having a base bottom wall (see figs. 2C),
and said arrangement being such that said first cartridge (30) is inserted into said base member ( 10) at the upper end such that said plunger seats on said plunger rod (50), and said second cartridge (20)is in said housing (100 ) with said pierceable cap (paragraph [0119]) of said second cartridge (20) facing said first needle ( see annotated figure 18).
PNG
media_image1.png
328
470
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
784
328
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Halili fails to teach a plunger rod fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall. Stillman teaches a fluid transfer with a needle (12) wherein a plunger rod (106) fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall (102)(paragraph [0024]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plunger of Halili so the plunger rod is fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall, similar to Stillman in order to prevent separation of the plunger from the rest of the assembly (motivated by Stillman, paragraph [0024]).
Halili and Stillman fail to teach said base member having an upper end configured to receive the first cartridge, a lower end having a base bottom wall, said upper end and said lower end being opposite ends of said base member, and a plunger rod fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall such that said plunger rod is fixedly secured to said base bottom wall and that said plunger rod extends towards the upper end. Chang teaches a fluid transfer system (figure 6 and 7) wherein said base member (195) having an upper end configured to receive the first cartridge (paragraph [0034]), a lower end having a base bottom wall, said upper end and said lower end being opposite ends of said base member, and a plunger rod (500) fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall (paragraph [0035]) such that said plunger rod is fixedly secured to said base bottom wall and that said plunger rod extends towards the upper end (paragraph [0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Halili to have said base member having an upper end configured to receive the first cartridge, a lower end having a base bottom wall, said upper end and said lower end being opposite ends of said base member, and a plunger rod fixedly secured to and extending upwardly from said base bottom wall such that said plunger rod is fixedly secured to said base bottom wall and that said plunger rod extends towards the upper end, similar to change, so the plunger is fixed to the intended path.
Regarding Claim 5, Halili in view of Stillman and Chang teaches the fluid transfer device of Claim 4. Halili further teaches wherein said needle hub (150) includes first and second upper tabs, each of said upper tabs having a protrusion (165, 166) extending outwardly therefrom, said protrusions being arranged to engage with one of said pairs of slots formed in said housing (annotated figure 17).
Regarding Claim 6, Halili in view of Stillman and Chang teaches the fluid transfer device of Claim 4. Halili further teaches wherein said first needle has a spike adjacent thereto, said spike and said first needle having a common wall therebetween (see annotated figure 18 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
457
662
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 KATE ELIZABETH STRACHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7291. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:00-5:00.
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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached on (571)-270-5879. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)-270-5879.
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.
/KATE ELIZABETH STRACHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/REBECCA E EISENBERG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781