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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/21/2026 has been entered.
Acknowledgment
Claim 1 is amended and filed on 1/21/2026.
Claims 9-18, 20 are canceled and claims 21-22 are newly added.
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) 1-2, 6, 19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chen (US. 6261267B1).
Re claim 1, Chen discloses a drip chamber (Figs. 1-5, abstract) comprising: a container (110) configured to hold an intravenous (IV) fluid (liquid within reservoir 200, abstract, Col. 2, lines 30-35); a drop former suspended over the container (lower portion of structure that has a lumen 129, Col. 2, lines 45-60) and coupled to a liquid inlet port (top opening of 128, Fig.1-5) to receive the IV fluid from a reservoir (200, Fig. 1); and a cap (120, Fig. 2) disposed on upper side of the container (Fig.1-5, 110) , wherein the drop former is suspended from the cap ( Fig. 2-5), wherein a gas inlet port (124, Col. 2, lines 45-50) of the cap (120) is coupled to the drop former via a fluidic pathway though the cap into the container via gas orifice (through 124a to the opening of 124c, Fig. 5), the gas orifice disposed above the drop former to permit an injected gas to reach the drop former to stimulate a release of a drop of the IV fluid from the drop former (Col. 1, lines 50-65, and Col. 3, lines 20-30).
Re claim 2, Chen discloses wherein an outlet port (130, Fig. 2) is disposed at a lower end of the container (Fig. 2), the outlet port being configured to couple to an IV line (300, Fig. 1) to deliver the IV fluid to a patient. (abstract, Col. 2, lines 35-40).
Re claim 6, Chen discloses wherein the drop former comprises a tubular structure (tubular structure around 129129, Fig. 5) having an inner lumen (129,Fig. 5) through which the IV fluid from the liquid inlet port passes through to a distal tip of the tubular structure (lower end of 129, Col. 1, lines 50-65, and Col. 3, lines 20-30).
Re claim 19, Chen discloses an IV administration set (Fig. 1-2), comprising: a spike (122) configured to couple to an IV bag (200) containing a reservoir of IV fluid (bag has a chamber to hold the fluid); an IV line segment disposed distal to the spike (300), the IV line segment having a distal end terminating in a luer fitting (500); and the drip chamber of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1).
Re claim 21, Chen discloses wherein the gas orifice is disposed on an outer surface of the liquid inlet port (Fig. 5).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3-5, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Ambrosina et al. (US. 20140216560A1) (“Ambrosina”).
Re claim 3, Chen fails to disclose a tubing segment coupled to the gas inlet port and configured to convey the injected gas from a source to the gas inlet port.
However, Ambrosina discloses an IV fluid system (Fig.1-2, abstract, 130 and 131) and a tubing segment ( tube from 150 to 130 and 131, Fig. 2, ¶0095) coupled to the gas inlet port (port left of 135-2, 135-5) and capable to convey the injected gas from a source to the gas inlet port ( ¶0052).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Chen to include a tubing segment so that the container further comprises a tubing segment coupled to the gas inlet port and configured to convey the injected gas from a source to the gas inlet port as taught by Ambrosina for the purpose of inducing the required differential pressures needed to move the fluid into the patient under a wide range of pressures (Ambrosina, ¶0052).
Re claim 4, Chen fails to disclose a compressed gas cartridge coupled to the gas inlet port and configured to inject the injected gas through the gas inlet port.
However, Ambrosina discloses an IV fluid system (Fig.1-2, abstract, 130 and 131) and a tubing segment a compressed gas cartridge (¶0052, 150 chamber and/ or 170-1 has an air which compressed by the air pump 180 and connected to the tube from 150 to 130 and 131, Fig. 2, ¶0095, ¶0112) coupled to the gas inlet port (port left of 135-2, 135-5 and capable to convey the injected gas from a source to the gas inlet port (¶0052).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Chen to include a compressed gas cartridge so that the container further comprises a compressed gas cartridge coupled to the gas inlet port and configured to inject the injected gas through the gas inlet port as taught by Ambrosina for the purpose of inducing the required differential pressures needed to move the fluid into the patient under a wide range of pressures (Ambrosina, ¶0052).
Re claim 5, Chen fails to disclose the compressed gas cartridge is configured to meter out the injected gas through the gas inlet port in a series of bursts synchronized with a predetermined drip rate.
However, Ambrosina discloses an IV fluid system (Fig.1-2, abstract, 130 and 131) and a tubing segment a compressed gas cartridge (¶0052, 150 chamber and/ or 170-1 has an air which compressed by the air pump 180 and connected to the tube from 150 to 130 and 131, Fig. 2, ¶0095, ¶0112) is configured to meter out the injected gas through the gas inlet port in a series of bursts synchronized with a predetermined drip rate ( ¶0052).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Chen to include a compressed gas cartridge so that the compressed gas cartridge is configured to meter out the injected gas through the gas inlet port in a series of bursts synchronized with a predetermined drip rate as taught by Ambrosina for the purpose of inducing the required differential pressures needed to move the fluid into the patient under a wide range of pressures (Ambrosina, ¶0052).
Re claim 22, Chen fails to disclose the drip chamber is not vented to the atmosphere.
However, Ambrosina discloses an IV fluid system (Fig.1-2, abstract, 130 and 131) and drip chamber (150) is not vented to the atmosphere ( the air is provided by the changing pressure of 130, ¶0095).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the device of Chen to include a compressed gas so that the drip chamber is not vented to the atmosphere as taught by Ambrosina for the purpose of inducing the required differential pressures needed to move the fluid into the patient under a wide range of pressures (Ambrosina, ¶0052).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen in view of Taezian (US 5098408).
Re claim 7, Chen fail to disclose the drop former comprises one of a pin with a solid distal tip and a wire with a solid distal tip.
However, Taezian discloses wherein the drop former comprises one of a pin (Fig. 3) with a solid distal tip and a wire with a solid distal tip (a pin with a solid distal tip which is the lower tip of 95, Fig, 7).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify the drop former of Chen so that the drop former comprises one of a pin with a solid distal tip and a wire with a solid distal tip as taught by Taezian for the purpose of accurately and repeatedly formed the shaped drop (Taezian, Col. 4, lines 1-6).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taezian in view of Pekkarinen et al. (US 4,583,975) (“ Pekkarinen”).
Re claim 8, Chen fails to disclose a piezo electric sensor coupled to the container and configured to detect drops falling within the container.
However, Pekkarinen discloses a container (22) configured to hold an IV fluid (Col. 2 lines 47-49); a drop former (24) suspended over the container (22) and a piezoelectric sensor (sensor 12, includes at least one piezoelectric element 30, Col. 2 line 66-67) coupled to the container (Fig. 1, Col. 3 lines 6-7) to detect a drop falling into the container from the drop former (Col. 3 lines 12-15).
Thus, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modify container of Chen to include a piezo electric sensor so that a piezo electric sensor coupled to the container and configured to detect drops falling within the container as taught by Pekkarinen for the purpose of monitoring the fluid drops and giving an alarm as an error of flow rate occur (Pekkarinen, Col. 3, lines 5-16).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAMZA A. DARB whose telephone number is (571)270-1202. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:00 M-F (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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571) 270-1744. 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.
/HAMZA A DARB/Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /CHELSEA E STINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783