DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beck et al. (US 2004/0064292 A1).
With regard to claim 18, Beck discloses A closed-loop control circuit (Fig. 4 and 9) for driving an infusion pump motor (Fig. 9, [0100]), the closed-loop control circuit comprising: a proportional gain module (105); an integral gain module (106); a derivative gain module (104); a monitor (130) for controlling a switchable input based on output of the proportional gain module, the integral gain module, and the derivative gain module ([0054]); and a summer (110) configured to receive the switchable input and an infusion pump motor speed and output a pump motor drive command wherein an input to the circuit is motor speed (Ume in Fig. 4 [[0060] is fed into the pump model 260 as an input), and wherein the output of the circuit (Ufc in Fig. 4) of the circuit is fed back into the circuit as an input to each of the modules (Fig. 4, shows Ufc is fed into 79 which feeds into 130 which feeds into 260 which feeds into 80 which feeds back into 100 which contains the modules).
With regard to claim 19, Beck discloses further comprising a feedforward path configured to route the switchable input to the pump motor drive command output ([0100], feedforward command).
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.
Claim(s) 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beck et al. (US 2004/0064292 A1) in view of Keenan et al. (US CA 8,884,999) and in further view of Kamen et al. (US 2014/0188076 A1).
With regard to claim 20, Beck discloses the claimed invention except for the pump being used for a syringe.
Keenan teaches a closed-loop control circuit for driving an infusion pump that also uses a proportional gain module, an integral gain module and a derivative gain module ([00133], [00136], [00137]) and is being used for a syringe infusion pump ([0004]) that can receive inputs ([00154]).
Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Beck with the use in a syringe pump device as taught by Keenan for the purpose of controlling infusion device ([0006]).
However,
Kamen also teaches a syringe pump device that receives inputs similarly to Keenan. The inputs from a lookup table as motor speed ([0196]) and syringe type (target flow rate of the syringe loaded is considered a syringe type as it describes a characteristic of the syringe) and configured to output a force command (movement start of the plunger at a first speed with the force being measured to be under specific threshold is considered a force command because the movement speed of the plunger relates to the force needed to push the fluid out of he syringe, [0196]), wherein the force command is input into a combiner (processor [0192]).
Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Beck/Keenan with the inputs as taught by Kamen for the purpose of controlling infusion of the fluid ([0196]).
With regard to claim 21, Beck/Keenan teaches the claimed invention except for the force command.
Kamen teaches wherein the combiner (processor, [0192]) is configured to receive the force command as input and output a force error, and wherein the proportional gain and integral gain modules are configured to receive as input the force error ([0196], [0198], force is measured and will create an alarm/error if the force exceeds a pre-programmed threshold).
Therefore, it would be prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Beck/Keenan with the force error as taught by Kamen for the purpose of preventing excess force during delivery for safety measures ([0198]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 18-21 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.
Applicant states that motor speed is not an input and the output is not fed back into the circuit as an input. However, while the modules are located in element 100 shown in Fig. 4, this is part of a larger circuit shown in its entirety in Fig. 4. Thus it can be seen that motor speed is an input to part of the circuit and that the output from the modules is fed back into the circuit and loops back to the modules after several steps. The circuit would need to be further defined as to where or how the input of motor speed is being fed into the circuit in order to overcome the current rejection.
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 LAUREN P FARRAR whose telephone number is (571)270-1496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 5pm.
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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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.
/Lauren P Farrar/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783