DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed 20 January 2026. Claims 1-3, 6-14, 17-21 are now pending. The Examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 3, 6, 7, 12, 17, 18, 19, 20.
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 Objections
Claims 1, 6, 7, 8, 12, 13, 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 1 recites “the side panel” in lines 9-10. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 1 recites “the sloped movement surfaces” in line 18. Examiner recommends amending to –the pair of sloped movement surfaces—
-Claim 6 recites “the plurality of side panels” in line 2. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 7 recites “the plurality of side panels” in line 2. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 6 recites “rotation axis that extends” in line 3. Examiner recommends amending to --rotation axis which extends—
-Claim 8 recites “the plurality of side panels” in line 2. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 12 recites “the side panel” in lines 9-10. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 12 recites “the sloped movement surfaces” in line 20. Examiner recommends amending to –the pair of sloped movement surfaces—
-Claim 12 recites “the plurality of side panels” in lines 13-14. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 12 recites “rotation axis extending” in line 16. Examiner recommends amending to –rotation axis which extends—
-Claim 12 recites “the sloped movement surface” in line 27. Examiner recommends amending to –the pair of sloped movement surfaces—
-Claim 13 recites “the plurality of side panels” in line 2. Examiner recommends amending to –the at least one of the plurality of side panels—
-Claim 17 recites “the side panel” in line 7. Examiner recommends amending to –the one of the plurality of side panels—
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-11, 12-14, 17-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
-Claim 1 recites “extending between a first end and a second end” in line 13. It is unclear what structure the first end and the second end corresponds to. Further clarification should be provided to identify whether this is related to the contact surface, rotary latch or a separate embodiment.
-Claim 12 recites “extending between a first end and a second end” in line 18. It is unclear what structure the first end and the second end corresponds to. Further clarification should be provided to identify whether this is related to the contact surface, rotary latch or a separate embodiment.
-Claim 17 recites “extending between a first end and a second end” in line 9. It is unclear what structure the first end and the second end corresponds to. Further clarification should be provided to identify whether this is related to the contact surface, rotary latch or a separate embodiment.
-Claim 17 recites “the sloped movement surfaces” in line 11. It is unclear what plural surfaces this limitation is referring to since a singular sloped movement surface was recited in the claim in line 9 and is then recited again in line 18. The recitation in line 9 should possibly read –a pair of sloped movement surfaces—
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (WO 2021194263) in view of Jones (U.S. 20150119634).
Regarding Claim 1, Jeong teaches a neonatal incubator system for use by a user with an infant patient [Pg. 1, paragraph 1] comprising:
an enclosure configured to create a chamber around the infant patient [Pg. 4, paragraph 4], the enclosure including: a plurality of side panels [Fig. 8, elements 100 (body part) 10 (outer wall) and 11 (inner wall)]; a porthole formed in at least one of the plurality of side panels [Fig. 8, element 20]; a porthole door associated with the porthole [Fig. 1, elements 12a, 12b, 21, 22], the porthole door being movable between a closed position and an open position [Pg. 4, paragraph 10]; and
the rotary latch being rotatable between a latched position in which the rotary latch secures the porthole door in the closed position and one or more unlatched positions in which the porthole door is movable to the open position [Pg. 5, paragraph 6—describes the closing mechanism of the door and latch], the rotary latch including a contact surface extending between a first end and a second end and a locking tab [Fig. 5A, elements 31b (contact surface) and 40 (elastic holder/locking tab)], See annotated Fig. 5A/5B, wherein an engagement portion of the porthole door is held between the contact surface and the locking tab when the rotary latch is in the latched position and the porthole door is in the closed position [Fig. 5A, element 24 (engagement portion of the porthole door)] and [Pg. 6, paragraph 4],
wherein the rotary latch includes a pair of sloped movement surfaces each extending away from the contact surface on each of the first and second ends of the contact surface [Fig. 5A, element 31a (sloped movement surface)]-in this interpretation each end of the contact surface is interpreted to be both the left and right ends extending vertically from 31b-31a-also see Fig. 5A which provides depiction of 31a diagonally oriented, wherein the sloped movement surfaces contact the engagement portion of the porthole door to move the porthole door away from the closed position as the rotary latch rotates about the rotation axis from the latched position to the one or more unlatched positions [Pg. 7, paragraph 1]—details the pressing of 31a, the sloped movement surface, which contacts the door by means of locking tab, 24, and applies a force to open 40, and disengages the door, and
wherein when the user exerts a force on the rotary latch to rotate the rotary latch from the latched position to the one or more unlatched positions [Pg. 7, paragraph 8]—includes description of user pressing the latch to rotate the lever clockwise and release the engagement mechanism of the door, one of the pair of the sloped movement surfaces contact the porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the porthole door away from the closed position [Pg. 7, paragraph 1, includes user pressing the sloped movement surface, 31a, to rotate the lever around the hinge and the door engagement is released]—where the movement surface 31a is interpreted to be the one of the pair of the sloped movement surface.
Jeong is silent on a rotary latch rotatable about a rotation axis that is perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole. Jones teaches a rotary latch rotatable about a rotation axis that is perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole [0031]—describing the handle rotating the inner link clockwise to unlock the retention system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a perpendicular rotation axis as taught by Jones to prevent inadvertent opening of the locking door and maintain an environment in an incubator as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses the appropriate environment in the hood being maintained in any state in which the door is closed or open [Pg. 1, paragraph 4] with Jones because Jones teaches preventing inadvertent opening of the door when forces are applied [0031].
PNG
media_image1.png
1144
716
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, Jeong teaches wherein the rotary latch includes a bias spring that biases the rotary latch toward the latched position [Fig. 5A, element 35 (torsion spring)] and [Pg. 6, paragraph 1]—describes the torsion spring effecting a clockwise/counter-clockwise direction to counter the pressing operation which is interpreted the mean biasing into the original latched position.
Regarding Claim 3, Jeong is silent on teaches wherein the rotary latch is rotatable about the rotation axis in both a clockwise direction and a counterclockwise direction from the latched position to the one or more unlatched positions. Jones teaches wherein the rotary latch is rotatable about the rotation axis in both a clockwise direction and a counterclockwise direction from the latched position to the one or more unlatched positions [0027] and [0031].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a clockwise and counterclockwise rotation of the latch mechanism as taught by Jones to allow for door transitioning between various states as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses the importance of reliable opening of the door [Pg. 2, paragraph 1] with Jones because Jones teaches taking into account normal forces applied by users to transition the doors from various states [0027].
Regarding Claim 6, Jeong is silent on wherein the rotary latch includes a base having a base contact surface that contacts the one of the plurality of side panels and a control knob that is received on the base, wherein the control knob is rotatable about the rotation axis that extends through the base. Jones teaches wherein the rotary latch includes a base having a base contact surface that contacts the one of the plurality of side panels [Fig. 4, element 34 (base/retention system), 40 (base contact surface/outer link), 32 (incubator door)] and [Fig. 1, element 20 (plurality of side panels), 34 (retention means)]—34 and 40 are subsequently shown to contact the side walls of the incubator in Fig. 1, and a control knob that is received on the base, wherein the control knob is rotatable about the rotation axis that extends through the base [0019; “The retention system 34 includes a handle or knob 36.”] and [0031] and [0032].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a knob, rotatable reference rotation axis as taught by Jones to incorporate into a latch/handle structure as suggested by Jeong which teaches a similar mechanism of a rotatable lever that rotates about a base (33), with base contact portions (50), to contact the peripheral portion of the door (25) [Fig. 5A] with Jones because Jones teaches that the use of the handle or knob creates an automatic closure to eliminate potential for unintentional incomplete door closure [0019].
Regarding Claim 7, Jeong is silent on wherein the control knob is movable along the rotation axis away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels. Jones teaches wherein the control knob is movable along the rotation axis away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels [0031]-[0032]—describes the force, F2, applied by a user to rotate the knob/handle and the effect that this mechanism has on pivoting the base with particular reference to the perpendicular rotation along the rotation axis.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to indicate a reference rotation axis as taught by Jones for movement of the control knob in reference to the incubator structure as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses suppressing friction and noise generated by latch operation [Pg. 7, paragraph 10] with Jones because Jones teaches prevention in inadvertent opening [0031].
Regarding Claim 11, Jeong is silent on further comprising a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob, wherein the bias spring biases the control knob toward the latched position.
Jones teaches further comprising a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob, wherein the bias spring biases the control knob toward the latched position [Fig. 4, element 44 (spring)] and [0028; “the spring 44 will assist the user and help draw the incubator door 32 toward fully-closed.”] –with the base considered [Fig. 4, element 34 and the control knob, element 36].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a bias spring positioned between the base and control knob as taught by Jones to cause a bias movement as suggested by Jeong as Jeong discusses suppressing friction and noise generated by latch operation [Pg. 7, paragraph 10] with Jones because Jones teaches prevention in inadvertent opening [0031].
Regarding Claim 12, A neonatal incubator system for use by a user with an infant patient [Pg. 1, paragraph 1] comprising:
an enclosure configured to create a chamber around the infant patient [Pg. 4, paragraph 4], the enclosure including:
a plurality of side panels [Fig. 8, elements 100 (body part) 10 (outer wall) and 11 (inner wall)];
a porthole formed in at least one of the plurality of side panels [Fig. 8, element 20];
a porthole door associated with the porthole [Fig. 1, elements 12a, 12b, 21, 22], the porthole door being movable between a closed position and an open position [Pg. 4, paragraph 10]; and
the rotary latch being rotatable between a latched position in which the rotary latch secures the porthole door in the closed position and an unlatched position in which the porthole door is movable to the open position [Pg. 5, paragraph 6—describes the closing mechanism of the door and latch] [Pg. 6, paragraph 1—describes the opening mechanism of the door and latch], the rotary latch including:
a base having a base contact surface that contacts the one of the plurality of side panels [Fig. 5A, element 33 (base), 32 (contact surface-mounted to side walls)];
Jeong is silent on a rotary latch rotatable about a rotation axis that is perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole, a control knob that is received on the base, wherein the control knob is rotatable about the rotation axis extending through the base, the control knob being rotatable about the rotation axis between the latched position and the unlatched position, wherein the control knob includes a contact surface extending between a first end and a second end and a pair of sloped movement surfaces each extending away from the contact surface on each of the first and second ends of the contact surface, wherein the sloped movement surfaces contact an engagement portion of the porthole door to move the porthole door away from the closed position as the rotary latch rotates about the rotation axis from the latched position to the unlatched position; and a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob to bias the control knob toward the latched position, wherein when the user exerts a force on the rotary latch to rotate the rotary latch from the latched position to the unlatched position, the sloped movement surface of the control knob contacts the porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the porthole door away from the closed position.
Jones teaches a rotary latch rotatable about a rotation axis that is perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole [0031]—describing the handle rotating the inner link clockwise to unlock the retention system, a control knob that is received on the base, wherein the control knob is rotatable about the rotation axis extending through the base [See Figs. 5 and 6, element 36 (knob)]—shown in latched and unlatched configurations based on rotation mechanism of the retention system, the control knob being rotatable about the rotation axis between the latched position and the unlatched position [See Figs. 5 and 6, element 36 (knob)]—shown in latched and unlatched configurations based on rotation mechanism of the retention system and [0031], wherein the control knob includes a contact surface extending between a first end and a second end and a pair of sloped movement surfaces each extending away from the contact surface on each of the first and second ends of the contact surface [Figs. 3-6, 38 (contact surface/door stop), and 40/42 (sloped movement surface) that hinges in a diagonal configuration from latched to unlatched positions, wherein the sloped movement surfaces contact an engagement portion of the porthole door to move the porthole door away from the closed position as the rotary latch rotates about the rotation axis from the latched position to the unlatched position [0025; “tending to hold the incubator door 32 fully open such that it's pulled into engagement with the incubator door stop 38.”]; and
a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob to bias the control knob toward the latched position [Fig. 4, element 44 (spring)] and [0028; “the spring 44 will assist the user and help draw the incubator door 32 toward fully-closed.”] –with the base considered [Fig. 4, element 34 and the control knob, element 36],
wherein when the user exerts a force on the rotary latch to rotate the rotary latch from the latched position to the unlatched position [0033; “After the Force F2 rotates the outer link 40 clockwise passed the three o'clock position (best shown in FIG. 2 ), the spring 44 will assist the user and help draw the incubator door 32 toward fully-open.”], the sloped movement surface of the control knob contacts the porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the porthole door away from the closed position [0033; “Advantageously, a user need only partially open the incubator door 32 such that it's in close proximity to its fully-open position, and thereafter the spring 44 automatically assists and draws the incubator door 32 fully-open.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a perpendicular rotation axis as taught by Jones to prevent inadvertent opening of the locking door and maintain an environment in an incubator as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses the appropriate environment in the hood being maintained in any state in which the door is closed or open [Pg. 1, paragraph 4] with Jones because Jones teaches preventing inadvertent opening of the door when forces are applied [0031].
Regarding Claim 17, Jeong teaches a rotary latch for use with a neonatal incubator system for use by a user with an infant patient [Pg. 1, paragraph 1] including an enclosure configured to create a chamber around the infant patient [Pg. 4, paragraph 4] having a plurality of side panels having at least one porthole and an associated porthole door [Fig. 8, elements 100 (body part) 10 (outer wall) and 11 (inner wall)] and [Fig. 1, elements 12a, 12b, 21, 22] movable between a closed position and an open position [Pg. 4, paragraph 10], the rotary latch comprising: a base that is configured to contact one of the plurality of side panels [Fig. 5A, element 33 (base), 32 (contact surface-mounted to side walls)];
Jeong is silent on a control knob that is received on the base, wherein the control knob is rotatable about a rotation axis perpendicular to the side panel and extending through the base, the control knob being rotatable between a latched position and an unlatched position, wherein the control knob includes a contact surface extending between a first end and a second end and a sloped movement surface extending away from the contact surface on each of the first and second ends of the contact surface, wherein the sloped movement surfaces contact an engagement portion of the associated porthole door to move the associated porthole door away from the closed position as the rotary latch rotates about the rotation axis from the latched position to the unlatched position; and a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob to bias the control knob toward the latched position, wherein when the user exerts a force on the rotary latch to rotate the rotary latch from the latched position to the unlatched position, the sloped movement surface of the control knob is configured to contact the associated porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the associated porthole door away from the closed position.
Jones teaches a control knob that is received on the base [See Figs. 5 and 6, element 36 (knob)], wherein the control knob is rotatable about a rotation axis perpendicular to the side panel and extending through the base [See Figs. 5 and 6, element 36 (knob)], the control knob being rotatable between a latched position and an unlatched position [See Figs. 5 and 6, element 36 (knob)]—shown in latched and unlatched configurations based on rotation mechanism of the retention system and [0031], wherein the control knob includes a contact surface extending between a first end and a second end and a sloped movement surface extending away from the contact surface on each of the first and second ends of the contact surface [Figs. 3-6, 38 (contact surface/door stop), and 40/42 (sloped movement surface) that hinges in a diagonal configuration from latched to unlatched positions, wherein the sloped movement surfaces contact an engagement portion of the associated porthole door to move the associated porthole door away from the closed position as the rotary latch rotates about the rotation axis from the latched position to the unlatched position [0025; “tending to hold the incubator door 32 fully open such that it's pulled into engagement with the incubator door stop 38.”]; and
a bias spring positioned between the base and the control knob to bias the control knob toward the latched position [Fig. 4, element 44 (spring)] and [0028; “the spring 44 will assist the user and help draw the incubator door 32 toward fully-closed.”] –with the base considered [Fig. 4, element 34 and the control knob, element 36],
wherein when the user exerts a force on the rotary latch to rotate the rotary latch from the latched position to the unlatched position [0033; “After the Force F2 rotates the outer link 40 clockwise passed the three o'clock position (best shown in FIG. 2 ), the spring 44 will assist the user and help draw the incubator door 32 toward fully-open.”], the sloped movement surface of the control knob is configured to contact the associated porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the associated porthole door away from the closed position [0033; “Advantageously, a user need only partially open the incubator door 32 such that it's in close proximity to its fully-open position, and thereafter the spring 44 automatically assists and draws the incubator door 32 fully-open.”]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a perpendicular rotation axis as taught by Jones to prevent inadvertent opening of the locking door and maintain an environment in an incubator as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses the appropriate environment in the hood being maintained in any state in which the door is closed or open [Pg. 1, paragraph 4] with Jones because Jones teaches preventing inadvertent opening of the door when forces are applied [0031].
Regarding Claim 18, Jeong is silent on wherein the control knob includes a locking tab, wherein the engagement portion of the associated porthole door is configured to be held between the contact surface and the locking tab when the control knob is in the latched position and the associated porthole door is in the closed position. Jones teaches wherein the control knob includes a locking tab [Fig. 3, element 64 (anchor point)], wherein the engagement portion of the associated porthole door is configured to be held between the contact surface and the locking tab when the control knob is in the latched position and the associated porthole door is in the closed position [Fig. 3, element 38/70 (engagement portion), 64 (locking tab), and 32 (contact surface)]—where element 62 is generally considered to be between elements 38/70 and 32 in the closed position shown in Fig. 3.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a locking tab as taught by Jones to prevent inadvertent opening of the locking door and maintain an environment in an incubator as suggested by Jeong, as Jeong discusses the use of the locking part to minimize noise generated during opening and closing [Pg. 3, paragraph 2] with Jones because Jones teaches the use of the tab to retain the door closed and resist any forces that would cause the door to open [0031].
Regarding Claim 19, Jeong further teaches wherein the sloped movement surface is configured to contact the engagement portion of the associated porthole door to move the associated porthole door away from the closed position as the force exerted by the user physically rotates the rotary latch from the latched position to the unlatched position [Pg. 7, paragraph 8]—includes description of user pressing the latch to rotate the lever clockwise and release the engagement mechanism of the door and [Pg. 7, paragraph 1, includes user pressing the sloped movement surface, 31a, to rotate the lever around the hinge and the door engagement is released].
Claim(s) 8, 13, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (WO 2021194263) in view of Jones (U.S. 20150119634) in further view of Khodak (U.S. 20110172487).
Regarding Claim 8, Jeong and Jones are silent on wherein the control knob is movable away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position.
Khodak teaches wherein the control knob is movable away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position [Fig. 8, element 92 (control knob), 12 (base), 90 (panel)] and [0048; “Removing the heater assembly 84 for service allows the remainder of the humidifier module 26 to be cleaned using an autoclave.”]—interpretation includes unlatching of the components and disassembly as the cleaning position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a selectable cleaning feature as taught by Khodak to maintain a clean environment in the chamber as suggested by Jeong and Jones, as Jeong discusses the importance of cleanliness and cleaning in the chamber environment [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and Jones which recognizes the issues associated with conventional incubators and maintaining controlled environments within [0003] with Khodak because Khodak teaches the beneficial aspects of viewing conditions during performance and operation and the additional aspect of being able to view the interior of the incubator during cleaning [0063].
Regarding Claim 13, Jeong and Jones are silent on wherein the control knob is movable away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position. Khodak teaches wherein the control knob is movable away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position [Fig. 8, element 92 (control knob), 12 (base), 90 (panel)] and [0048; “Removing the heater assembly 84 for service allows the remainder of the humidifier module 26 to be cleaned using an autoclave.”]—interpretation includes unlatching of the components and disassembly as the cleaning position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a selectable cleaning feature as taught by Khodak to maintain a clean environment in the chamber as suggested by Jeong and Jones, as Jeong discusses the importance of cleanliness and cleaning in the chamber environment [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and Jones which recognizes the issues associated with conventional incubators and maintaining controlled environments within [0003] with Khodak because Khodak teaches the beneficial aspects of viewing conditions during performance and operation and the additional aspect of being able to view the interior of the incubator during cleaning [0063].
Regarding Claim 20, Jeong and Jones are silent on wherein the control knob is movable along the rotation axis away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position. Khodak teaches wherein the control knob is movable along the rotation axis away from the base and the one of the plurality of side panels when the control knob is rotated to a cleaning position [Fig. 8, element 92 (control knob), 12 (base), 90 (panel)] and [0048; “Removing the heater assembly 84 for service allows the remainder of the humidifier module 26 to be cleaned using an autoclave.”]—interpretation includes unlatching of the components and disassembly as the cleaning position.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize a selectable cleaning feature as taught by Khodak to maintain a clean environment in the chamber as suggested by Jeong and Jones, as Jeong discusses the importance of cleanliness and cleaning in the chamber environment [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and Jones which recognizes the issues associated with conventional incubators and maintaining controlled environments within [0003] with Khodak because Khodak teaches the beneficial aspects of viewing conditions during performance and operation and the additional aspect of being able to view the interior of the incubator during cleaning [0063].
Claim(s) 9, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (WO 2021194263) in view of Jones (U.S. 20150119634) in further view of Khodak (U.S. 20110172487) and in even further view of Mackin (U.S. 6234954).
Regarding Claim 9, Jeong, Jones, and Khodak are silent on wherein the control knob is rotated past the one or more unlatched positions to reach the cleaning position.
Mackin teaches wherein the control knob is rotated past the one or more unlatched positions to reach the cleaning position [Col 3 lines 34-50] and [Col 3, lines 60-63]—describes a mechanism for adjusting the adjustment means (knob, level, flange, etc.) to move past the unlatched position to be removed for cleaning.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an adjustable mechanism to select a cleaning setting as taught by Mackin, as Jeong and Jones discuss the importance of cleanliness [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and maintaining a controlled internal environment within the incubator [0003] and Khodak discusses the beneficial aspects of viewing conditions during performance and operation and the additional aspect of being able to view the interior of the incubator during cleaning [0063] with Mackin because Mackin teaches the frequent need to clean the system [Col 1, lines 30-37].
Regarding Claim 14, Jeong, Jones and Khodak are silent on wherein the control knob is rotated past the unlatched position to reach the cleaning position. Mackin teaches wherein the control knob is rotated past the unlatched position to reach the cleaning position [Col 3 lines 34-50] and [Col 3, lines 60-63]—describes a mechanism for adjusting the adjustment means (knob, level, flange, etc.) to move past the unlatched position to be removed for cleaning.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an adjustable mechanism to select a cleaning setting as taught by Mackin, as Jeong and Jones discuss the importance of cleanliness [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and maintaining a controlled internal environment within the incubator [0003] with Khodak which teaches the beneficial aspects of viewing conditions during performance and operation and the additional aspect of being able to view the interior of the incubator during cleaning [0063].
Claim(s) 10, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (WO 2021194263) in view of Jones (U.S. 20150119634) and in further view of Stoner (U.S. 3076451).
Regarding Claim 10, Jeong and Jones are silent on wherein the base includes a fluid gutter extending between the contact surface and an engagement edge that contacts the control knob.
Stoner teaches wherein the base includes a fluid gutter extending between the contact surface and an engagement edge that contacts the control knob [Col 11, lines 43-45].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a fluid gutter or other fluid control mechanism as taught by Stoner to include a fluid control safety feature to maintain controlled environments as suggested by Jeong and Jones, as Jeong discusses the importance of cleanliness in the chamber environment [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and Jones which teaches the issues associated with conventional incubators and maintaining controlled environments within [0003] with Stoner because Stoner teaches safety considerations for maintaining controlled environments [Col 11, lines 45-49].
Regarding Claim 21, Jeong and Jones are silent on wherein the base includes a fluid gutter extending between a base contact surface and an engagement edge that contacts the control knob. Stoner teaches wherein the base includes a fluid gutter extending between a base contact surface and an engagement edge that contacts the control knob [Col 11, lines 43-45].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included a fluid gutter or other fluid control mechanism as taught by Stoner to include a fluid control safety feature to maintain controlled environments as suggested by Jeong and Jones, as Jeong discusses the importance of cleanliness in the chamber environment [Pg. 1, paragraph 2] and Jones which teaches the issues associated with conventional incubators and maintaining controlled environments within [0003] with Stoner because Stoner teaches safety considerations for maintaining controlled environments [Col 11, lines 45-49].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 20 January 2026 with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive however, new objections are
presented in light of the amendments.
Applicant's arguments filed 20 January 2026 with respect to 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive however, new rejections are
presented in light of the amendments.
Applicant’s arguments filed 20 January 2026 with respect to the rejection of
Claims 1, 2, and 3 under 35 U.S.C.102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive, however, new rejections are presented above in light of the amendments for claims 1-3 citing Jeong in view of Jones. Regarding Claim 1, applicant contends that Jeong does not teach sloped movement surfaces. The examiner presents reference to Jeong [Fig. 5A, element 31a (sloped movement surface)] with further explanation that in this interpretation each end of the contact surface is interpreted to be both the left and right ends extending vertically from 31b-31a-also see Fig. 5A which provides depiction of 31a diagonally oriented. Due to the broad nature of the recitation of “sloped movement surface” which does not clarify what the recitation of sloped movement embodies, the examiner’s interpretation encompasses a sloping structure that allows for a user to contact/interface with the surface of the structure that is capable of movement (i.e. a lever, button, rotation, etc.). Structures 31b and 31a fulfill this limitation and allow for diagonal orientation as shown in Fig. 5A and B and for contact by the user to maneuver the contact surface to cause a movement of the structure to open the porthole door. In view of the foregoing, the previously presented rejections citing Jeong are maintained.
Further regarding claim 1, the applicant contends that Jeong does not teach “the user exerts a force to rotate the rotary latch about the rotation axis from the latched position to the unlatched position…closed position.” The examiner presents reference to [Pg. 7, paragraph 8] with further explanation: includes description of user pressing the latch to rotate the lever clockwise and release the engagement mechanism of the door, one of the pair of the sloped movement surfaces contact the porthole door and the force exerted by the user physically moves the porthole door away from the closed position [Pg. 7, paragraph 1, includes user pressing the sloped movement surface, 31a, to rotate the lever around the hinge and the door engagement is released]—where the movement surface 31a is interpreted to be the one of the pair of the sloped movement surface. The rotation axis perpendicular to the side panel is broadly interpreted as the side panel which is oriented in a horizontal plane and the latch/lever mechanism shown in Fig. 5A/5B that lies in a 90-degree differential plane that includes a lever motion in a perpendicular axis to that of the side panel. This is broadly interpreted with the specification held in consideration because the disclosure provides reference to Fig. 16 which includes the rotary latch (element 46) and the porthole door (element 26) which is interpreted to be in the same plane as the plurality of side panels. This depiction shows a rotation in a plane parallel to the side panel and porthole door rather than perpendicular to the plane of these structures. Given the limited reference to the perpendicular movement and/or orientation of the rotary latch and its rotation axis perpendicular to the side panels, this limitation is broadly interpreted to include a lever motion perpendicular to the plane of the side panels. In view of the foregoing, the previously presented rejections citing Jeong are maintained.
Applicant’s arguments filed 20 January 2026 with respect to the rejection of
Claims 12, 13, 14 and 17 under 35 U.S.C.103 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Regarding claims 12 and 17, the applicant contends that the references Jeong and Jones do not disclose a rotary latch that rotates about a rotation axis perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole. While the examiner agrees that Jeong does not teach a rotary latch that rotates about a rotation axis perpendicular to the side panel including the porthole, the reference Jones does include a teaching of this limitation in sections [0031] and representation in the rotating retention system discussed. Figs. 3-6 show the rotation of this retention system rotating on an axis perpendicular to that of the horizontal structural element, also described in the reference paragraph as clockwise, where the horizontal element is interpreted to be one of the side panels of the plurality of side panels. In view of the foregoing, the previously presented rejections citing Jeong in view of Jones are maintained.
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 BROOKE NICOLE KOHUTKA whose telephone number is (571)272-5583. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30am-5:00pm EST.
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, Charles Marmor II can be reached at 571-272-4730. 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.
/B.N.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/CHRISTINE H MATTHEWS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights