DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claim(s) 162-165 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Smith (2009/0194106).
Regarding claim 162, Smith discloses an assisted breathing unit (10) for providing a flow of respiratory gases to a user, the assisted breathing unit adapted to receive a humidifier chamber (50) having a humidifier gases inlet (proximal opening of connector 54 connected at the flow generator) and a humidifier gases outlet (distal opening of connector 54 located at the humidifier tub), the assisted breathing unit comprising: an outer casing (outer walls) comprising a wall; and a connection ring (i.e. 60) rotatable relative to the wall of the outer casing ([0052] lines 1-8), an inlet aperture (distal opening of connector 56) of an outlet gases passage (54; [0041] lines 1-15) fluidly connectable to the humidifier gases outlet (distal opening of connector 54 located at the humidifier tub) so that humidified gases exiting the humidifier chamber (50) pass through the outlet gases passage (56) for delivery to a patient ([0041] lines 1-15).
Regarding claim 163, Smith discloses the outlet gases passage (56) is non-rotatable relative to the wall of the outer casing (as shown, the connector 56 does not include rotatable parts).
Regarding claim 164, Smith discloses the outlet gases passage (56) is removable from the assisted breathing unit (10) (i.e. via removable tub 50).
Regarding claim 165, Smith discloses the outlet gases passage (56) is fitted to the assisted breathing unit (10) by being pressed through the connection ring (60) in the wall of the outer casing (fig. 7; [0047] lines 1-10 disclose pushing through the ring for connecting and [0057] lines 1-10 disclose that the connection ring can be reversed such that the humidifier inlet is pushed through the connector thereby fitting the gas passage 56 to the unit 10).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 166-175 is/are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Smith in view of Edirisuriya et al. (6,953,354).
Regarding claim 166, Smith discloses a compartment (i.e. cradle) that receives the humidifier chamber (50) but does not specifically disclose an inner portion of the outlet gases passage includes a flange, the flange comprises ridges that engage with complementary sockets or slots in the compartment to hold the outlet gases passage in position. However, Edirisuriya discloses an inner portion of the outlet gases passage includes a flange (i.e. base 202, 424), the flange comprises ridges outer perimeter 424 ridge) that engage with complementary sockets or slots in the compartment to hold the outlet gases passage in position (col. 6 lines 5-21, col. 9 lines 5-10 disclose clipped connection). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified the outlet to be removably connected as taught by Edirisuriya to provide the advantage of enhanced ease of maintenance and cleaning.
Regarding claim 167, Smith discloses at least part of the inner portion of the outlet gases passage is curved (i.e. annular) so as to fit flush against a curved wall of the compartment (as shown in fig. 27, the outlet sits substantially flush).
Regarding claim 168, Smith discloses wherein the connection ring (60) is located in a rear wall of the assisted breathing unit (as shown in fig. 3, the ring is in a rear portion).
Regarding claim 169, Smith discloses the connection ring (60) is non-removable from the outer casing ([0057] lines 1-10 disclose permanently attached).
Regarding claim 170, Smith discloses the connection ring (60) comprises a flange (64) and an engaging mechanism is interposed between the outer casing and the flange of the connection ring such that the connection ring is non-removable from the outer casing ([0047] lines 1-10, [0057]).
Regarding claim 171, Smith discloses the engaging mechanism is a circlip ([0047] lines 1-15).
Regarding claim 172, Smith discloses the connection ring is rigid ([0047] lines 1-5 disclose at least a portion is rigid).
Regarding claims 173-174, Smith discloses the inlet aperture of the outlet gases passage is formed from a soft sealing material is a silicone rubber ([0048]).
Regarding claim 175, the modified Smith teaches (see figs. 8-10 of Edirisuriya) an inner portion of the outlet gases passage forms a mouth portion (base) and an outer portion of the outlet gases passage forms a stem portion (stem port), the mouth portion being wider than the stem portion.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 176-193 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art fails to disclose an assisted breathing unit for providing a flow of respiratory gases to a user, the assisted breathing unit adapted to receive a humidifier chamber having a humidifier gases inlet and a humidifier gases outlet, wherein: the outer casing of the assisted breathing unit encloses the assisted breathing unit and the outer casing forms part of the assisted breathing unit, electronic circuitry enclosed within the outer casing, the assisted breathing unit further adapted to connect to an external power supply to receive power for at least the fan unit and the electronic circuitry and the assisted breathing unit adapted to operate in a standard mode when connected to an AC mains power source; and the electronic circuitry comprising a power-saving mode where work is done at a maximum power rate below a rate at which the assisted breathing unit draws power when operating in the standard mode, the electronic circuitry being adapted to detect when the assisted breathing unit is connected to a synthesized mains AC power supply. This limitation in combination with the rest of the limitations of claim 186 are not reasonably taught by the prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LATOYA M LOUIS whose telephone number is (571)270-5337. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 1 pm - 6:30 pm ET.
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 at 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.
/LaToya M Louis/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785