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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 9/19/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant's amendments overcome the previous claim objections. Claims 1-17 remain pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, and claims 2-6 by dependency, are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the dome-shaped ring” in line 6, line 19, and line 25. This should read “the ferromagnetic dome-shaped ring” to maintain consistent terminology with line 3.
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 and 7, and claims 2-6 and 8-12 by dependency, 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 the limitation “which extends radially outward therefrom”, line 12-13. This limitation is indefinite because it is unclear to which element “therefrom” is intended to refer. For the purposes of this Office Action, “therefrom” is interpreted as referring to the “base peripheral edge”, such that the limitation reads “which extends radially outward from the base peripheral edge”.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “and a radial dimension greater than its thickness” line 8-9. This limitation is indefinite because it is unclear which part is intended to have a radial dimension greater than its thickness. For the purposes of this Office Action, this limitation will be interpreted as referring to the flat disc introduced in line 6.
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) 7-8, 10, and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heatherington (US 20160022947 A1) in view of Melton et al. (US 3225982 A), hereafter Melton.
Regarding claim 7, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, Heatherington discloses a nasal respiratory assembly (Abstract, ln 1-4; Fig. 2, nasal assembly 12) comprising: a pair of sheets (Fig. 2 and 4, nasal assembly includes a pair of sheets 30; par. 0039, ln 1-8) each sheet defining an opening sized and shaped to fit over a nostril of a patient (sheet includes an opening and provides sealable engagement with nostrils, par. 0039 ln 4-13), with a first ring (Fig. 4, extending portion 34, ring 26, and structure connecting 34 and 26) positioned at an underside of the sheet (Fig. 4, ring 34, 26, and connecting structure are positioned under the sheet 30) and circumferentially aligned with the opening (Fig. 4, ring 34, 26, and connecting structure are all aligned with the opening in sheet 30), with an upper side of the sheet configured for sealable engagement with the nostril (Fig. 4, adhesive 32 on the upper side of the sheet 30 provides sealable engagement with the nostrils; par. 0039 ln 4-8), wherein the first ring includes a flat disc having a first side contacting the underside of the sheet (Fig. 4, flat disc 26 contacts underside of sheet 30) and an opposed flat second side, a peripheral edge between the first side and the second side (Fig. 4, disc 26 has a flat side opposed to the side contacting the sheet and a peripheral edge), and a radial dimension greater than its thickness (radial dimension of the disc 26 has a radial dimension greater than its thickness; Fig. 4); a pair of posts (Fig. 2 and 4, element 28, 35, and 52), each post including a second ring positioned at a first end (Fig. 4, receiving portion 35) and a receptacle positioned at a second end (Fig. 4, element 52, 28; this definition of receptacle is consistent with Applicant’s specification where the receptacle is the element received in the connector opening) with a passageway extending from the first to the second ends (the respiratory assembly engages with the nostrils to provide a sealable engagement with a treatment fluid, par. 0002; examiner notes: a passageway for fluid must exist between the first and second ends of the post in order to deliver treatment fluid to the nostrils), the second ring removably attachable to the first ring (ring 35 selectively engages with ring 34, par. 0041 ln 1-4; selectively engageable is defined such that the engagement is only when desired by the patient and thus removable, par. 0036 ln 6-11); a connector (Fig. 2, splitter 60) with a pair of channel openings at a post end (Fig. 2, two tube engaging ends 62; par. 0038 ln 7-8), each channel opening sized and shaped to cooperate with one of the receptacles of the posts (Fig. 2, tube engaging end 62 engages the post receptacle 52 and 28) to form a substantially airtight connection therewith (tube 28 and connector 60 have a sealable engagement preventing leakage of gas, par. 0038 ln 3-7), and an inlet at a vent end (Fig. 2, source-engaging end 64) that is in fluid communication with a flexible tubing (Fig. 2, connector 60 allows gaseous flow between posts 28 and hose 40; par. 0037 ln 7-11; a definition of hose is a flexible tube for conveying fluids) connected to a fluid source (Fig. 2, fluid source 41), wherein the fluid source is selected from a high flow generator, a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine, a fluid tank, or a humidifier (fluid source 41 may be a CPAP machine, par. 0036 ln 4-6).
Heatherington does not disclose the first ring is ferromagnetic, the second ring is magnetic and removably attachable to the ferromagnetic first ring.
Melton teaches a magnetic attachment (Fig. 3, magnetic connection between 17 and 19; col. 2 ln 54-62) comprising a magnetic ball (Fig. 3, 4, ball 17) and a magnetic ring (Fig. 3, 4, socket 19) for the purpose of allowing easy removal when desired (col. 3 ln 41-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the first ring and the second ring of Heatherington to be magnetically engaged as taught by Melton for the purpose of easy removal when desired (See Melton: col. 3 ln 41-45).
Regarding claim 8, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 7 (shown above), wherein each receptacle is configured to be inserted into a channel opening (extending structure 66 is engaged into corresponding recess structure 62; Heatherington par. 0038 ln 11-14).
Regarding claim 10, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 7 (shown above), further comprising a vent (Heatherington Fig. 2, source splitter receiver 68; a definition of vent is an opening through which gases can pass) connecting the inlet at the vent end of the connector to the flexible tubing connected to the fluid source (Heatherington Fig. 2, source splitter receiver 68 connects inlet 64 to tubing 40).
Regarding claim 12, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 7 (shown above), wherein an upper surface of the post is angled (Heatherington Fig. 2, upper end of post 35 shown angled).
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heatherington in view of Melton as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Heatherington ‘291.
Regarding claim 9, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 7 (shown above).
The modified Heatherington does not disclose wherein each receptacle includes one or more releases that can be pivoted to maintain or release the post within a channel opening.
Heatherington ‘291 teaches a respiratory assembly (abstract ln 1) wherein each receptacle (Fig. 13A-D, socket assembly 94) includes one or more releases (Fig. 13A-D, pincher 117 and collar 119) that can be pivoted to maintain or release the post within a channel opening (pinchers 117 pivot the collar to engage and disengage the post 14; par. 0075 ln 1-9) for the purpose of allowing easy release of the post (par. 0075 ln 5-9).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Heatherington to include a pivoting release as taught by Heatherington ‘291 for the purpose of allowing easy release of the post (See Heatherington ‘291: par. 0075 ln 5-9).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heatherington in view of Melton as applied to claim 7 above, and further in view of Redd.
Regarding claim 11, as best understood based on the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) issue identified above, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 7 (shown above).
The modified Heatherington does not specifically disclose the flexible tubing has an inner diameter of about 2-4 mm.
Redd teaches a gas delivery device (abstract ln 1-5) wherein the flexible tubing has an inner diameter of 2-4 mm (col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1). Redd teaches that tubing with an internal diameter of 2-4 mm is generally used to transmit breathing gas from a gas source to an airway interface (col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tubing of Heatherington to have an inner diameter of 2-4 mm since Redd teaches a diameter of 2-4 mm is generally used to transmit breathing gas to an airway interface (Redd col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1).
Claim(s) 13-15 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heatherington in view of Ewers et al. (US 10206571 B2), hereafter Ewers, in view of Eifler (DE 102012004359 A1, machine translation accessed December 11, 2025 relied upon herein).
Regarding claim 13, Heatherington discloses a nasal respiratory assembly (Abstract, ln 1-4; Fig. 2, nasal assembly 12) comprising: a pair of sheets (Fig. 2 and 4, sheets 30; par. 0039, ln 1-8) each sheet defining an opening sized and shaped to fit over a nostril of a patient (sheet includes an opening and provides sealable engagement with nostrils, par. 0039 ln 4-13), with a first ring (Fig. 4, extending portion 34) positioned at an underside of the sheet (Fig. 4, ring 34 is positioned under the sheet 30) and circumferentially aligned with the opening (Fig. 4, ring 34 is aligned with the opening in sheet 30), with an upper side of the sheet configured for sealable engagement with the nostril (Fig. 4, adhesive 32 on the upper side of the sheet 30 provides sealable engagement with the nostrils; par. 0039 ln 4-8); a pair of posts (Fig. 2, tubes 28), each post including a second ring at a first end (Fig. 4, receiving portion 35) and a ball shaped receptacle positioned at a second end (Fig. 2, tube splitter receiver 66 may be a ball joint; par. 0038 ln 14-18) with a passageway extending from the first to the second ends (Fig. 2, 4, receiving portion 35 and receiver 66 are connected by tube 28), the second ring having a first surface removably attachable to the first ring (ring 35 selectively engages with ring 34, par. 0041 ln 1-4; selectively engageable is defined such that the engagement is only when desired by the patient and thus removable, par. 0036 ln 6-11); a connector (Fig. 2, splitter 60) with a pair of socket openings at a post end (Fig. 2, two tube engaging ends 62 may be sockets; par. 0038 ln 7-18), each socket opening sized and shaped to receive the ball shaped receptacle in a ball and socket arrangement (Fig. 2, socket 62 engages the ball shaped receptacle 66 allowing pivotal movement; par. 0038 ln 14-18) to form a substantially airtight connection therewith (posts 28 and connector 60 have a sealable engagement preventing leakage of gas, par. 0038 ln 3-7), and an inlet at a vent end (Fig. 2, source-engaging end 64) that is in fluid communication with a flexible tubing (Fig. 2, connector 60 allows gaseous flow between posts 28 and hose 40; par. 0037 ln 7-11; a definition of hose is a flexible tube for conveying fluids) connected to a fluid source (Fig. 2, fluid source 41), wherein the fluid source is selected from a high flow generator, a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) machine, a fluid tank, or a humidifier (fluid source 41 may be a CPAP machine, par. 0036 ln 4-6).
Heatherington does not disclose the first ring is ferromagnetic and the second ring is magnetic and disposed within a socket housing and pivotable relative to the socket housing.
Ewers teaches a connection for a CPAP device (abstract ln 6-8) comprising a magnetic hose connector (hose assembly connector 136 comprised of steel forms a magnetic connection; Fig. 10B, col. 17 ln 28-30) which magnetically connects to a magnetic ring (magnet 135 is doughnut-shaped with an interior hole; Fig. 10A, col. 17 ln 37-38) disposed in a socket of the blower (blower assembly connector 137 and retainer 140 houses the magnet 135; Fig. 10A/B, col. 17 ln 20-25) wherein the magnet (135) can pivot relative to the socket (magnet can freely rotate within the housing; col. 17 ln 25-36) for the purpose of easy quick connection and disconnection (col. 12 ln 60-63) and preventing the buildup of torque tension by allowing rotation at the connection (col. 17 ln 9-15) .
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Heatherington to have a magnetic connection comprising a magnetic ring disposed in a socket as taught by Ewers for the purpose of easy quick connection and disconnection (Ewers col. 12 ln 60-63) and preventing the buildup of torque tension (Ewers col. 17 ln 9-15).
The modified Heatherington does not disclose the magnetic ring is pivotable angularly relative to the socket housing to permit tilting of the first surface.
Eifler teaches a breathing gas connection (par. 0003) wherein a ring portion (segment 13; Fig. 1-2a-c) pivots angularly relative to a socket housing to permit tilting (segment 13 pivots angularly within receiving element 3 as seen in Fig. 2a-c) for the purpose of providing a swiveling connection with high rotational mobility (par. 0011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to further modify the magnetic ring of Heatherington to pivot angularly as taught by Eifler for the purpose of providing a swiveling connection with high rotational mobility (Eifler par. 0011).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 13 (shown above), wherein each ball shaped receptacle is configured to be inserted into a socket opening (ball shaped receptacle 66 is engaged into socket 62; Heatherington par. 0038 ln 14-18).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 13 (shown above), further comprising a vent (Heatherington Fig. 2, source splitter receiver 68; a definition of vent is an opening through which gases can pass) connecting the inlet at the vent end of the connector to the flexible tubing connected to the fluid source (Heatherington Fig. 2, source splitter receiver 68 connects inlet 64 to tubing 40).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 13 (shown above), wherein an upper surface of the post is angled (Heatherington Fig. 2, upper end of post 35 shown angled).
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heatherington in view of Ewers in view of Eifler as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Redd.
Regarding claim 16, the modified Heatherington discloses the assembly of claim 13, (shown above).
The modified Heatherington does not specifically disclose the flexible tubing has an inner diameter of about 2-4 mm.
Redd teaches a gas delivery device (abstract ln 1-5) wherein the flexible tubing has an inner diameter of 2-4 mm (col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1). Redd teaches that tubing with an internal diameter of 2-4 mm is generally used to transmit breathing gas from a gas source to an airway interface (col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the tubing of Heatherington to have an inner diameter of 2-4 mm since Redd teaches a diameter of 2-4 mm is generally used to transmit breathing gas to an airway interface (Redd col. 1 ln 65 - col. 2 ln 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments filed 9/19/2025, with respect to claims 7 and 13, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding claim 7, Applicant argues that the term “ferromagnetic ring” would not be interpreted as including a cylindrical portion. However, “ring” can be defined as a solid object in the shape of a circle. For instance, a napkin ring can often be found in the shape of a cylinder and would be understood by a normal person as being a ring. Therefore, “ferromagnetic ring” can be reasonably interpreted as including a cylindrical portion like that of Heatherington.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 13 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1, and dependent claims 2-6, would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 recites the limitations “a dome portion having a base peripheral edge affixed to the second side of the flat disc portion which extends radially outward therefrom, an apex at an opposed end of the dome portion from the sheet and the flat disc portion, and an arcuate curving surface with a curved profile in a plane containing portions of the apex and the base peripheral edge, the arcuate curving surface extending from the second side of the flat disc portion to the apex of the dome portion” and “the magnetic ring removably attachable to the arcuate curving surface of the dome-shaped ring”. The subject matter that was not found was the dome portion having an arcuate curving surface with a curved profile in a plane containing portions of the apex and the base peripheral edge, the arcuate curving surface extending from the second side of the flat disc portion to the apex of the dome portion and a magnetic ring removably attachable to the arcuate curving surface of the dome-shaped ring.
Heatherington discloses a dome portion having an arcuate curving surface with a curved profile in a plane containing portions of the apex and the base peripheral edge (portion 34, Fig. 4) and a ring (portion 35) removably attachable to an arcuate curving surface of the dome-shaped ring (portions 34 and 35 are configured for selective engagement; Fig. 4, par. 0041). However, the dome portion of Heatherington does not have a base peripheral edge affixed to the flat disc portion. No teaching or motivation was found in the prior art to make this modification. As such, no prior art rejection was made for claim 1, and dependent claims 2-6.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KELSEY RHEE whose telephone number is (703)756-5954. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM 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, BRANDY LEE can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/K.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785