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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is responsive to the amendment filed on 12/15/2025. As directed by the amendment: claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, and 21 has/have been amended; no claim(s) has/have been cancelled and no new claim(s) has/have been added. Thus, claims 1-23 are presently pending in this application.
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) 1-5, 12-13, 21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113).
Regarding claim 1, Kurth discloses a heating apparatus configured to heat a thermoformable prosthetic socket of a prosthetic device, comprising:
a heating chamber (Shown in the figure below) comprising a top, a bottom and sidewalls;
one or more heating elements (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) is arranged within the heating chamber, wherein the heating chamber comprises an opening (Shown in the figure below) in one of the top, bottom or sidewalls,
and wherein the opening (Shown in the figure below) is configured to allow a rigid base portion of the prosthetic device having an attachment mechanism to extend outside the heating chamber (Shown in the figure below) when the thermoformable prosthetic socket is arranged within the heating chamber, so the rigid base portion extending outside the heating chamber is not heated to a thermoformable temperature when the one or more heating elements is activated (Examiner notes that the phrase “wherein the opening is configured to…” is a statement of intended use and the structure of the device as taught by Kurth can perform the intended function. It has been held that “[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original); MPEP 2114. A claim containing a “recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus” if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987); MPEP 2114(II). A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art.).
PNG
media_image1.png
784
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches further comprising a support structure (Fig. 7 #26 conical disk) arranged within the heating chamber, and wherein the thermoformable prosthetic socket is configured to be supported by at least a portion of the support structure ([0040] lines 3-8 ---"The telescopic rod 7 is connected to a substantially shallow conical disk 26, which presses a sealing element 27 against the here funnel-shaped inner face of the prosthesis socket blank 2, such that a circumferential radial seal of the interior 28 of the blank is provided in this area.”).
Regarding claim 3, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 2), and Kurth teaches wherein a portion of the thermoformable prosthetic socket is configured to rest upon the support structure, and wherein the support structure is configured to rotate about a central axis of the support structure ([0040] lines 11-17 ---" Moreover, the telescopic rod 7 engages with a form fit in an output shaft 30 (shown only schematically here) of the motor 11, this providing the coupling of the drive mechanism. For this purpose, the rod preferably has a square shape in the lower area. That is to say, the whole prosthesis socket blank 2 can be rotated in this way during operation of the motor 11.”).
Regarding claim 4, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 2), and Kurth teaches wherein the one or more heating elements (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) comprises two or more heating elements, wherein the thermoformable prosthetic socket is configured to rest upon the support structure (Fig. 7 #26 conical disk) in a fixed orientation, and wherein the support structure (Fig. 7 #26 conical disk) and the two or more heating elements (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) are configured to turn on and off in a rotational manner ([0024] lines 20-30 ---"When, during heating, a temperature of the blank is detected that corresponds to the upper temperature threshold value, the blank is processible, in other words can be deformed. A signal is then optionally output, and the radiant heater is switched off either immediately or with a delay. However, it can, for example, continue to rotate. If the blank is not removed immediately and further processed, the surface temperature of the blank falls again. When the lower temperature threshold value is reached, the radiant heater is switched back on in order to maintain the blank within the temperature window.”).
Regarding claim 5, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches wherein the one or more heating elements comprises infrared heating elements ([0010] lines 1-2 ---" An infrared radiator is preferably used as radiant heater.”).
Regarding claim 12, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches wherein the one or more heating elements comprises four heating elements (Fig. 7 shows at least 4 heating elements).
Regarding claim 13, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches wherein the one or more heating elements (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) comprises one heating element configured to be arranged within an interior portion of the thermoformable prosthetic socket (Fig. 7 #2 prosthesis socket blank).
Regarding claim 21, Kurth discloses a heating apparatus configured to heat a thermoformable prosthetic device, comprising:
a heating chamber (Shown in the figure below) comprising a top, an open bottom, and a sidewall extending from the bottom to the top dimensioned to enclose the thermoformable prosthetic device;
and one or more heating sources (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) configured to heat the heating chamber (Shown in the figure below), and wherein the heating chamber is configured to allow a rigid base portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device having attachment mechanisms to extend outside the heating chamber, so the rigid base portion is not heated to a thermoformable temperature while thermoformable prosthetic device is heated inside the heating chamber(Examiner notes that the phrase “wherein the heating chamber is configured to…” is a statement of intended use and the structure of the device as taught by Kurth can perform the intended function. A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art.).
PNG
media_image1.png
784
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 23, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 21), and Kurth teaches further comprising a controller (Fig. 1 #31 control device) configured to control heating of the heating apparatus.
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.
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) as applied to claim 5, in view of Majordy et al (US 6,870,136)
Regarding claim 6, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach further comprises one or more fans configured for convection heating.
Nonetheless, Majordy teaches further comprises one or more fans configured for convection heating (Col. 7 lines 41-43 ---" The heater and fan assembly 80 depicted in FIG. 7 are important in providing a source of heat and motive power for the forced, heated convection of the proofing box.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth by incorporating the fan as taught by Majordy for the purpose of providing a source motive power for the forced, heated convection of the heating chamber.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) as applied to claim 1, in view of Weisbeck et al (US 2019/0154336)
Regarding claim 7, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches wherein a surface of the heating chamber is configured as a removable lid (Fig. 7 #4 plate) and when the removable lid (Fig. 7 #4 plate) is removed it is configured to access an interior of the heating chamber.
However, Kurth does not teach wherein the removable lid includes an opening configured to allow a portion of the prosthetic device to extend outside the heating chamber when a portion of the prosthetic device is arranged in the heating chamber such that the thermoformable prosthetic socket is arranged in the heating chamber.
Nonetheless, Weisbeck teaches wherein the removable lid includes an opening (Fig. 3 #148 opening) configured to allow a portion of the prosthetic device to extend outside the heating chamber when a portion of the prosthetic device is arranged in the heating chamber such that the thermoformable prosthetic socket is arranged in the heating chamber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth by incorporating the opening as taught by Weisbeck for the purpose of aligning the prosthetic with the heating chamber.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) as applied to claim 1, in view of Herrera Garcia et al (US 2021/0331354)
Regarding claim 8, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach wherein heating chamber comprises a non-rigid material.
Nonetheless, Herrera Garcia teaches wherein heating chamber comprises a non-rigid material ([0052] lines 1-3 ---" The auxiliary curing chamber generally can be rigid or non-rigid and can be comprised of any of a number of art-recognized heat conductive materials.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth by incorporating the non-rigid chamber as taught by Herrera Garcia for the purpose of reducing the production cost of the heating apparatus.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) in view of Herrera Garcia et al (US 2021/0331354) as applied to claim 8, further in view of Robinson et al (US 3,752,643).
Regarding claim 9, Kurth in view of Herrera Garcia teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach further comprising a handle configured to open and close a portion of the heating chamber in order to provide access to an interior region of the heating chamber.
Nonetheless, Robinson teaches further comprising a handle (Fig. 1 #56 handle) configured to open and close a portion of the heating chamber in order to provide access to an interior region of the heating chamber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth in view of Herrera Garcia by incorporating the handle as taught by Robinson for the purpose providing a means for removing the lid.
Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) in view of Herrera Garcia et al (US 2021/0331354) as applied to claim 8, further in view of Seibert et al (US 2004/0169030).
Regarding claim 10, Kurth in view of Herrera Garcia teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), but does not teach further comprising a zipper configured to open and close a portion of the heating chamber in order to provide access to an interior region of the heating chamber.
Nonetheless, Seibert teaches further comprising a zipper configured to open and close a portion of the heating chamber in order to provide access to an interior region of the heating chamber ([0028] lines 5-9 ---“The unit is closed with snaps, a hook and loop fastener such as Velcro.RTM. (Velcro is a registered trademark of Velcro Industries for snap-hook fasteners), zippers, magnets, rivets, gluing, sewing, taping or other mechanical fastening methods.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth in view of Herrera Garcia by incorporating the zippers as taught by Robinson for the purpose providing a means for opening and closing the heating chamber.
Regarding claim 11, Kurth in view of Herrera Garcia teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 1), and Kurth teaches wherein said opening of the heating chamber further comprises a non-rigid material (Fig. 7 #22 sealing ring) configured to provide a seal between the prosthetic device and the non-rigid material.
Claim(s) 14-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113), in view of Weisbeck et al (US 2019/0154336).
Regarding claim 14, Kurth discloses a heating apparatus configured to heat a thermoformable prosthetic device, comprising:
a heating chamber (Shown in the figure below) having an enclosed bottom and a sidewall extending from the enclosed bottom and defining an open top region;
a central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod) disposed within the heating chamber, the central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod) being configured to receive at least a portion of a thermoformable prosthetic socket of the thermoformable prosthetic device ([0040] lines 3-8 ---"The telescopic rod 7 is connected to a substantially shallow conical disk 26, which presses a sealing element 27 against the here funnel-shaped inner face of the prosthesis socket blank 2, such that a circumferential radial seal of the interior 28 of the blank is provided in this area.”);
a lid (Fig. 7 #4 plate) configured to cover the open top region;
and one or more heating elements (Fig. 7 #3 radiant heaters) arranged within the heating chamber.
PNG
media_image1.png
784
582
media_image1.png
Greyscale
However, Kurth does not disclose the lid defining an opening that is configured to allow a rigid base portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device having attachment mechanisms to extend through the opening to a region outside the heating chamber and an upper portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device configured to be arranged in the heating chamber, such that the rigid base portion is not heated to a thermoformable temperature while the thermoformable prosthetic socket is heated inside the heating chamber.
Nonetheless, Weisbeck teaches the lid defining an opening (Fig. 3 #148 opening) that is configured to allow a rigid base portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device having attachment mechanisms to extend through the opening to a region outside the heating chamber and an upper portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device configured to be arranged in the heating chamber, such that the rigid base portion is not heated to a thermoformable temperature while the thermoformable prosthetic socket is heated inside the heating chamber.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth by incorporating the opening as taught by Weisbeck for the purpose of aligning the prosthetic with the heating chamber.
Regarding claim 15, Kurth in view of Weisbeck teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 14), and Kurth teaches wherein a position of the central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod) is adjustable within the heating chamber ([0051] lines 6-9 ---"In the embodiment shown, this is achieved by the fact that, after unlocking of a clamping device 37 through which the rod 7 is guided sealingly, the rod 7 can be pulled out of the plate 4 assisted by a spring.”).
Regarding claim 16, Kurth in view of Weisbeck teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 14), and Kurth teaches wherein central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod) further comprises a second lower support platform (Fig. 7 #26 conical disk) configured to physically support a proximal end of the upper portion of the thermoformable prosthetic device when the at least the portion of the thermoformable prosthetic socket is engaged with the central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod).
Regarding claim 17, Kurth in view of Weisbeck teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 16), and Kurth teaches wherein a position of the second lower support platform (Fig. 7 #26 conical disk) within the heating chamber is adjustable with respect to a proximal end of the central support structure (Fig. 7 #7 rod).
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113), in view of Weisbeck et al (US 2019/0154336) as applied to claim 14, further in view of Zhan et al (CN 2518058 Y).
Regarding claim 18, Kurth in view of Weisbeck teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 16), but does not teach wherein the one or more heating elements comprises a first heating element arranged adjacent to the sidewall, a second heating element arranged adjacent to the sidewall, and a third heating element arranged adjacent to the sidewall, wherein the first heating element, second heating element and the third heating element spaced apart radially around the sidewall.
Nonetheless, Zhan teaches wherein the one or more heating elements comprises a first heating element (Fig. 2 #20 left heating pipe group) arranged adjacent to the sidewall, a second heating element (Fig. 2 #26 rear heating tube group) arranged adjacent to the sidewall, and a third heating element (Fig. 2 right heating pipes) arranged adjacent to the sidewall, wherein the first heating element, second heating element and the third heating element spaced apart radially around the sidewall (Fig. 2 shows the first, second, and third heating element groups spaced apart radially around the heating chamber.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth in view of Weisbeck by incorporating the first, second, and third heating elements as by Zhan for the purpose of adjusting heating speed and evening of temperature.
Regarding claim 19, Kurth in view of Weisbeck and Zhan teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 18), and Zhan teaches further comprising a controller (Fig. 4 electric control schematic diagram) configured to selectively activate each one of the first, second, and third heating elements (Description para 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth in view of Weisbeck and Zhan by incorporating controller as by Zhan for the purpose of adjusting heating speed and evening of temperature.
Regarding claim 20, Kurth in view of Weisbeck and Zhan teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 18), and Kurth teaches further comprising a fourth heating element (Fig. 7 shows at least four heating elements) disposed within the central support structure.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kurth et al (US 2011/0229113) as applied to claim 21, in view of Joseph et al (US 2021/0386565)
Regarding claim 22, Kurth teaches the apparatus as appears above (see the rejection of claim 21, but does not teach wherein one or more heating sources comprises a silicone heating pad.
Nonetheless, Joseph teaches wherein one or more heating sources comprises a silicone heating pad ([0045] lines 7-9 ---" The pre-socket can be heated with a heat source, e.g., an infrared heater, convection oven, silicone pad heater, halogen tube heater or other common heating devices.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus of Kurth by incorporating silicone pad heater as by Joseph for the purpose of reducing production cost of the heating apparatus.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/15/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Kurth does not disclose or teach an opening configured to allow "a rigid base portion of the prosthetic device to extend outside the heating chamber", a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claims 21 and 23, Applicant argues that Kurth does not teach "a heating chamber comprising a top, an open bottom, and a sidewall extending from the bottom to the top dimensioned to enclose the thermoformable prosthetic device." Examiner respectfully disagrees.
If Fig. 7 is rotated by 180º, "a heating chamber comprising a top, an open bottom, and a sidewall extending from the bottom to the top dimensioned to enclose the thermoformable prosthetic device" can be shown.
In response to applicant's argument that neither Kurth nor Weisbeck, alone or in combination, discloses or teaches "a rigid base portion of the prosthetic device having attachment mechanisms to extend outside the heating chamber", a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Furthermore, Examiner notes that the thermoformable prosthetic socket of a prosthetic device in any configuration, dimension, shape, or size is not a part of the claimed heating apparatus.
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 JOE E MILLS JR. whose telephone number is (571)272-8449. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Ibrahime Abraham can be reached at (571) 270-5569. 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.
/JOE E MILLS JR./Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/IBRAHIME A ABRAHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761