DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 and claim 21 are objected to because the term “a dental vacuum HVE line” and “the associated HVE line” are interchangeably used, please use the term consistently to avoid confusion.
Claim 21 is also objected to because the terms “said patient” “said dental patient” are interchangeably used, please use the term consistently to avoid confusion.
The term “aerosols” is recited in claims 1, 21–22, and only one place use “said aerosols”. Please use the term consistently to avoid unnecessary confusion.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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, 13, 21–22 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 is indefinite because it is unclear if the second recited limitation of “a distance” is the same as the first recited term. Same issue with “external environment”.
Claim 13 is indefinite because it depends on claim 1.
Claim 21 is indefinite because is unclear if the second recited limitation of “an external environment” is the same as the first recited term. Claim 22 is indefinite because the term “said dental procedure location” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 22 is also indefinite because there is two recited “a dental vacuum HVE line” and it is unclear if they refer to the same structure.
Claim 22 is indefinite because it depends on claim 21.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 1, 13 and 21–22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Argenta et al., US 2001/0029956 A1 (“Argenta”) in view of Cohen, US 2010/0297577 A1 (“Cohen”) and Bjork et al., US 2018/0043055 A1 (“Bjork”).
Regarding claim 1:
Argenta discloses that a filter assembly (Argenta’s reduced pressure appliance 29c) for removing aerosols from an external environment in proximity to a dental procedure location (Argenta’s reduced pressure applicant 29c comprising a rigid screen 100, which functions as a filter and enabling Argenta’s filter assembly to remove aerosols from an external environment—Argenta’s wound 114, note that the limitation of “dental procedure location” has no patentable weight because it is not part of the claimed filter assembly) when said filter assembly (29c of Argenta) is spaced a distance (Argenta’s rigid screen 100 directly contacts wounds 114, which means the distance = 0, and read on the claimed limitation) from said dental procedure location,
said filter assembly comprising:
a filter housing (Argenta’s wound covering 116, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) comprising an inlet portion (Argenta’s inlet is covered the rigid screen 100, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and an outlet portion (Argenta’s suction port 104, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein said outlet portion (104 of Argenta) is adapted to be connected to an associated evacuation component (Argenta discloses a suction pump, Argenta [0049]), wherein said inlet portion comprises an inlet portion major dimension that is larger than an outlet portion major dimension of said outlet portion (as clearly shown in Argenta’s Fig. 4), wherein said inlet portion and said outlet portion are connected by a tapered connecting portion (as shown in Argenta Fig. 4, Argenta’s housing 116 is tapered), and wherein a flow passage (interior of Argenta’s housing 116 is the claimed “flow passage”) in said filter housing connects said inlet portion and said outlet portion;
and a filter medium (Argenta’s rigid screen 100, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) carried by the inlet portion of the filter housing and directly exposed to an external environment (114 of Argenta) to be filtered by the filter assembly, wherein the filter medium (100 of Argenta) comprises a complimentary shape to and is disposed within an opening in the inlet portion of the filter housing (as shown in Fig. 4 of Argenta), wherein the filter medium (100 of Argenta) forms an outermost surface of the filter assembly when in use at a distance from said dental procedure location (Argenta’s rigid screen 100 is directly touches the wound 114 and if one maps the dental procedure location to the floor of dental office, Argetna’s rigid screen would be distance away from the floor of the dental procedure office), wherein the filter medium (100 of Argenta) is configured to remove aerosols from the external environment (114 of Argenta) when aerosols in the external environment are drawn into the filter medium by suction (intended use, Argenta’s rigid screen 100 is capable to allowing aerosols smaller than the ridge screen opening to pass through);
said inlet portion (opening covered by Argenta’s rigid screen 100, Argenta Fig. 4) of the filter housing (116 of Argenta) comprises a back surface (base of Argenta’s shield 118, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and a lip (Argenta’s pad 109) that forms the opening of the inlet portion as a cavity in which said filter medium is located (Argenta discloses its pad 109 may overlie an outer peripheral portion of rigid screen 100 in order to hold the screen, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein the filter medium (100 of Argenta) is secured to at least one or both of the lip (Argenta’s pad 109 holds the rigid screen, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and the back surface of the filter housing such that said filter assembly including said filter medium connected thereto comprises a disposable component (Argenta’s rigid screen 100 is replaceable via disassembly of Argenta’s reduced pressure assembly 29c).
Argenta does not disclose its associated evacuation component comprising a dental vacuum HVE line.
However, Argenta discloses its device is configured to treat wound. In the analogous art of filter devices related with medical treatment, Cohen discloses a high-volume evacuator used in the suction lines of a vacuum system in the dental operatory unit, Cohen [0002]. Cohen discloses that HVE could be used to prevent patient from swallowing or aspirating it, Id. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Argenta’s associated evacuation component with a dental vacuum HVE line when the treated wound is located in a patient’s mouth.
Modified Argenta does not disclose that the filter medium captures at least 85% of all aerosol particles 0.3 micron or bigger.
In the analogous art of wound treatment articles, Bjork discloses a wound dressing comprising an adsorbent layer, which could be made of an open cell foam with a cell size of at least 50 microns, Bjork [0091]. Bjork discloses that such open cell foam wound dressing allow transport of fluid and cellular debris into and within the foam, Id. Argenta also discloses that its rigid screen 100 could be in the form of open-cell foam screen, Argenta [0011]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to replace Argenta’s rigid screen 100 with Bjork’s wound dressing with an open cell size of 50 microns to allow transport of fluid and cellular debris into and within the foam. With such modification, modified Argenta’s filter medium would be Bjoik’s open cell foam with a pore size of 50 microns, which is capable of capturing at least 85% of all aerosol particles 0.3 microns or bigger because it has a pore size much bigger than 0.3 microns.
Regarding claim 13:
Modified Argenta discloses that the filter assembly of claim 1, wherein the filter medium comprises an antimicrobial agent, an antiviral agent, or a combination thereof (Bjoik discloses antimicrobial agents could be included to inhibit the growth of or kill microbes to prevent or control infection, Bjoik [0047]).
Regarding claim 21:
Argenta discloses that a method for removing aerosols from an external environment in proximity to a mouth of a dental patient (as modified in claim 1, modified Argenta discloses a method of using its modified reduced pressure appliance 29c to treat wound 114 inside a dental patient’s mouth), said method comprising:
providing a filter assembly (modified Argenta’s filter assembly 29c, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) that comprises: (i) a filter housing (modified Argenta’s fluid impermeable wound covering 116, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) comprising an inlet portion (covered by modified Argenta’s rigid screen 100, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and an outlet portion (modified Argenta’s suction port 104, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein said outlet portion (104 of Argenta) is adapted to be connected to an associated evacuation component comprising a dental vacuum HVE line (as modified in claim 1, Cohen’s high-volume evacuator), wherein said inlet portion (covered by Argenta’s rigid screen 100, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) comprises an inlet portion major dimension that is larger than an outlet portion major dimension of said outlet portion (as clearly shown in Argenta’s Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein said inlet portion and said outlet portion are connected by a tapered connecting portion (Argenta’s housing 116 is tapered, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), and wherein a flow passage (interior chamber of Argenta’s housing 116 is the claimed “flow passage”, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) in said filter housing connects said inlet portion and said outlet portion (as shown Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]); and
(ii) a filter medium (Bjork’s open cell foam wound dressing, Bjork [0091] in place of Argenta’s rigid screen 100 as modified in claim 1) carried by the inlet portion of the filter housing and directly exposed to an external environment (114 of Argenta) to be filtered by the filter assembly, wherein the filter medium comprises a complimentary shape to and is disposed within an opening in the inlet portion of the filter housing (as shown in Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein the filter medium (Bjork’s open cell foam wound dressing) forms an outermost surface of the filter assembly when in use at a distance from said dental procedure location (Bjork’s open cell foam wound dressing in modified Argenta’s appliance 29c would be at a distance from the dental procedure location—dental office floor), wherein the filter medium is configured to remove aerosols from the external environment when aerosols in the external environment are drawn into the filter medium by suction from the associated HVE line (modified Argenta’s open cell foam would dressing is capable of removing any debris from wound 114 that is smaller than open cell size);
wherein said inlet portion of the filter housing comprises a back surface (Argenta’s base of the shield 118, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and a lip (Argenta’s pad 109, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) that forms the opening of the inlet portion as a cavity in which said filter medium is located (as shown in Fig. 4, Argenta discloses its pad 109 may overlie an outer peripheral portion of a rigid screen 100 in order to hold the screen in position, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]), wherein the filter medium is secured to at least one or both of the lip (Argenta discloses its pad 109 may overlie an outer peripheral portion of a rigid screen 100 in order to hold the screen in position, Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]) and the back surface of the filter housing such that said filter assembly including said filter medium connected thereto comprises a disposable component (modified Argenta comprising Bjork’s open cell foam wound dressing, which is the disposable component)
operatively connecting the outlet portion of the filter assembly to a dental vacuum HVE line (as discussed in claim 1, modified Argenta’s applicant 29c is connected to a dental vacuum HVE line as disclosed by Cohen);
locating said filter assembly, a distance from said mouth of said patient within said external environment outside of said dental patient's mouth (modified Argenta’s device is used for dental surgeries, and some dental surgeries, such as jaw surgery1, sometimes require minor incisions outside the mouth, if such wound is treated using modified Argenta’s device, the filter assembly would be a distance from said mouth within said external environment outside a dental patient’s mouth);
using suction from said HVE line operatively connected to said outlet portion of the filter assembly to draw airflow from the external environment outside of the dental patient's mouth into the inlet portion of the filter assembly through said filter medium into said flow passage and to said outlet portion such that said filter medium captures aerosols from said external environment outside of the dental patient's mouth (using modified Argenta’s device to treat wounds located outside of a patient’s mouth in a jaw surgery, flow as indicate by arrow in Argenta Fig. 4, [0044]).
Regarding claim 22:
Modified Argenta discloses that the method of removing aerosols as set forth in claim 21, further comprising contacting said aerosols with at least one of an antimicrobial agent and an antiviral agent in said filter medium (Bjoik discloses antimicrobial agents could be included to inhibit the growth of or kill microbes to prevent or control infection, Bjoik [0047]).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §§ 102(a)(1) and 103
The applicant amends the claims to recite further limitation and argues that Argenta does not teach such limitation.
In view of the amendment, the examiner introduces new prior art references. Details are provided above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
1 is jaw surgery done outside of patient's mouth - Search