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 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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 5232024 A) in view of Russo (US 7779842 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Williams disclose a fluid manifold (manifold, Fig 6) comprising: a manifold body (manifold body 60, Fig 6) defining: an inlet port (inlet port 67, Fig 6); an outlet port (outlet port 69, Fig 6); a flow channel (longitudinal bore 66, Fig 6) in fluid communication with the inlet port (67) and the outlet port (69) (Shown in Fig 6); an injection port (female luer fittings 74, Fig 6); and a divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7) in fluid communication with the injection port (74) and the flow channel (66) (Shown in Fig 6); and a valve (slide valve actuator 62, Fig 6) comprising: a button (touch pad 62a, Fig 7); a divider body (valve actuator main body 78, Fig 7) coupled to a first side (inner side 1000, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a) and movable between a first position (“Off/Up” position) and a second position (“on/down” position) within the divider volume (Col. 6, lines 61-66), the divider body (78) defining a divider port (transverse bore 79, Fig 7), wherein the divider body (78) restricts flow from the injection port (74) to the flow channel (66) in the first position (“Off/Up” position) and the divider port (79) permits flow from the injection port (74) to the flow channel (66) in the second position (“on/down” position) (Col. 6, lines 12-16: “When the slide valve is in an off position, as shown in FIG. 7, the valve bore 79 is not aligned with transverse bore 71 of the manifold body which is then sealed off by the trunk 78 of the slide member 62 interacting with the "O"-rings 80 and 81”; (Col. 6, lines 32-41); a second side (Outer side 1002, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a), wherein the second side (1002, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a) is opposite the first side (1000, Annotated Fig 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
824
794
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Williams is silent regarding biasing member coupled to a second side of the button and configured to urge the divider body toward the first position.
Russo teaches a valve (control valve 10, Fig 1-3) comprising: a button (actuator button 17, Fig 4); a divider body (plunger 16, Fig 2) coupled to a first side (Inner side 4001, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17) a second side (Exterior side 4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17), wherein the second side (4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17) is opposite the first side (4001, Annotated Fig 4); a biasing member (biasing member 4000, Fig 5) coupled to the second side (4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (20) and configured to urge the divider body (16) toward a first position (Col 5, lines 8-14).
PNG
media_image2.png
693
804
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claim invention to modify the valve of Williams to with similar biasing member coupled to the button as taught by Russo to have the button return to the initial position when not being depressed or pushed (Col 2, lines 57-65).
Regarding claim 2, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 1. Williams discloses wherein the manifold body (60) further defines a first injection channel (transverse bore 71, Fig 6) in fluid communication with the injection port (74) and the divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7)(See communication as dashed lines in Annotated Fig 2).
PNG
media_image3.png
601
389
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 2. Williams discloses wherein the manifold body (60) further defines a second injection channel (1001, Annotated Fig 3) in fluid communication with the divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7) and the flow channel (66) (Shown in Fig 6-7, See communication as dashed lines in Annotated Fig 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
566
607
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 3. Williams discloses wherein the divider port (79) permits flow from the first injection channel (71) to the second injection channel (1001) in the second position (“On/Up” position; Col. 5, lines 52-56: “bore 79 is adapted and positioned to interact with transverse bore 71 of the manifold body when in an open position to permit flow inward or outward to an external luer fitting (see FIG. 6)”).
Regarding claim 5, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 3. Williams discloses wherein the first injection channel (71) and the second injection channel (1001) are aligned (Annotated Fig 3).
Regarding claim 6, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 5. Williams discloses wherein the divider port (79) is aligned with the first injection channel (71) and the second injection channel (1001) in the second position. (“On/Up” position; Col. 5, lines 52-56: “bore 79 is adapted and positioned to interact with transverse bore 71 of the manifold body when in an open position to permit flow inward or outward to an external luer fitting (see FIG. 6)”).
Regarding claim 7, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 3. Williams discloses wherein the divider body (78) prevents flow from the first injection channel (71) to the second injection channel (1001) in the first position (“Off/down” position; Col. 6, lines 12-16: “When the slide valve is in an off position, as shown in FIG. 7, the valve bore 79 is not aligned with transverse bore 71 of the manifold body which is then sealed off by the trunk 78 of the slide member 62 interacting with the "O"-rings 80 and 81”)
Regarding claim 8, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 1. Williams discloses wherein the valve (62) comprises the button (62a) is configured to move the divider body (78) between the first position (“Off/Up” position) and a second position (“on/down” position is set by pushing touch pad 62a) (Col. 6, lines 33-41).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 5232024 A) in view of Russo (US 5377672 A) in further view of Chau et al. (US 20100324466 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Williams/Russo discloses the fluid manifold of Claim 1. However, Williams/Russo is silent regarding further comprising a sealing member disposed within the injection port, wherein the sealing member defines a split septum configured to receive a syringe.
Chau teaches a fluid manifold (multi-port fluid access device 10, Fig 1) comprising a sealing member (Septum 28, [0027]) disposed within the injection port (first fluid port 20, Fig 1), wherein the sealing member (28) defines a split septum configured to receive a syringe. ([0027]: “The first fluid port 20 is intended to be accessed with a syringe needle (metal or plastic), which can penetrate the septum 28 (…) Septum 28 may be a split septum to make needle penetration easier.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claim invention to modify the injection port of Williams/Russo to incorporate a sealing member similar to the one taught by Chau to seal the port and make the syringe penetration easier ([0027]).
Claims 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being over Williams (US 5232024 A) in view of Russo (US 7779842 B1) in further view of Spohn et al. (US 20140107480 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Williams discloses a first fluid manifold (manifold, Fig 6) comprising: a manifold body (manifold body 60, Fig 6) defining: an inlet port (inlet port 67, Fig 6); an outlet port (outlet port 69, Fig 6); a flow channel (longitudinal bore 66, Fig 6) in fluid communication with the inlet port (67) and the outlet port (69); an injection port (female luer fittings 74, Fig 6); and a divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7) in fluid communication with the injection port (74) and the flow channel (66); and a valve (slide valve actuator 62, Fig 6) comprising: a button (touch pad 62a, Fig 7); a divider body (valve actuator main body 78, Fig 7) coupled to a first side (medial inner side 1000, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a) and movable between a first position (“Off/Up” position) and a second position (“on/down” position) within the divider volume (Col. 6, lines 61-66), the divider body (78) defining a divider port (transverse bore 79, Fig 7), wherein the divider body (78) restricts flow from the injection port (74) to the flow channel (66) in the first position (“Off/Up” position) and the divider port (79) permits flow from the injection port (74) to the flow channel (66) in the second position (“on/down” position) (Col. 6, lines 12-16: “When the slide valve is in an off position, as shown in FIG. 7, the valve bore 79 is not aligned with transverse bore 71 of the manifold body which is then sealed off by the trunk 78 of the slide member 62 interacting with the "O"-rings 80 and 81”; (Col. 6, lines 32-41); a second side (Lateral inner side 1002, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a), wherein the second side (1002, Annotated Fig 1) of the button (62a) is opposite the first side (1000, Annotated Fig 1)(Medial 1000 and lateral 1002 inner sides are opposite relative to each other).
However, Williams is silent regarding a biasing member configured to urge the divider body toward the first position; and a fluid manifold array comprising a second fluid manifold comprising a second inlet port and a second outlet port in fluid communication with the second inlet port, wherein the second inlet port is coupled to the outlet port of the first fluid manifold, and the inlet port of the first fluid manifold is in fluid communication with the second outlet port.
Russo teaches a valve (control valve 10, Fig 1-3) comprising: a button (actuator button 17, Fig 4); a divider body (plunger 16, Fig 2) coupled to a first side (Inner side 4001, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17) a second side (Exterior side 4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17), wherein the second side (4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (17) is opposite the first side (4001, Annotated Fig 4); a biasing member (biasing member 4000, Fig 5) coupled to the second side (4002, Annotated Fig 4) of the button (20) and configured to urge the divider body (16) toward a first position (Col 5, lines 8-14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claim invention to modify the valve of Williams to with similar biasing member coupled to the button as taught by Russo to have the button return to the initial position when not being depressed or pushed (Col 2, lines 57-65).
Williams/Russo are silent regarding a fluid manifold array comprising a second fluid manifold comprising a second inlet port and a second outlet port in fluid communication with the second inlet port, wherein the second inlet port is coupled to the outlet port of the first fluid manifold, and the inlet port of the first fluid manifold is in fluid communication with the second outlet port.
Spohn teaches a fluid manifold array (manifold 100, Fig 5) comprising a first fluid manifold (fluid control valve 142, Fig 5), a second fluid manifold (second fluid control valve 144, Fig 5) comprising a second inlet port (first port 152 of second valve 144, Fig 5; (152’ will be used to reference this element)) and a second outlet port (third port 156 of second valve 144, Fig 5; (156’ will be used to reference this element)) in fluid communication with the second inlet port (152’), wherein the second inlet port (152’) is coupled to the outlet port (156) of the first fluid manifold (142), and the inlet port (152) of the first fluid manifold (142) is in fluid communication with the second outlet port (156’) (Seen in Fig 5; [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claim invention to modify the fluid manifold of Williams/Russo to incorporate at least a second manifold in series as taught by Spohn to have additional injection ports [0038].
Regarding claim 12, Williams/Russo/Spohn discloses the fluid manifold array of Claim 11. Williams discloses wherein the manifold body (60) further defines a first injection channel (1001, Annotated Fig 3) in fluid communication with the injection port (74) and the divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7) (See communication as dashed lines in annotated Fig 2).
Regarding claim 13, Williams/Russo/Spohn discloses the fluid manifold array of Claim 12. Williams discloses wherein the manifold body (60) further defines a second injection channel (1001, Annotated Fig 3) in fluid communication with the divider volume (volume where slide valve actuator main body 78 slides, Figs 6-7) and the flow channel (66) (Shown in Fig 6-7, See communication as dashed lines in annotated Fig 2).
Regarding claim 14, Williams/Russo/Spohn discloses the fluid manifold array of Claim 11. Williams discloses wherein the button (62a) is configured to move the divider body (78) between the first position (“Off/Up” position) and a second position (“on/down” position is set by pushing touch pad 62a) (Col. 6, lines 33-41).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Williams (US 5232024 A) in view of Russo (US 7779842 B1) in further view of Spohn et al. (US 20140107480 A1) in view of Chau et al. (US 20100324466 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Williams/Russo/Spohn discloses the fluid manifold array of Claim 11. Williams/Russo/Spohn are silent regarding further comprising a sealing member disposed within the injection port, wherein the sealing member defines a split septum configured to receive a syringe.
Chau teaches a fluid manifold (multi-port fluid access device 10, Fig 1) comprising a sealing member (Septum 28, [0027]) disposed within the injection port (first fluid port 20, Fig 1), wherein the sealing member (28) defines a split septum configured to receive a syringe. ([0027]: “The first fluid port 20 is intended to be accessed with a syringe needle (metal or plastic), which can penetrate the septum 28 (…) Septum 28 may be a split septum to make needle penetration easier.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective
filing date of the claim invention to modify the injection port of Williams/Russo/Spohn to incorporate a sealing member similar to the one taught by Chau to seal the port and make the syringe penetration easier ([0027]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-8, 10-14, and 16 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 GUILLERMO G PAZ ESTEVEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-5951. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00-5:00.
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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached on (571) 272-4965. 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.
/GUILLERMO G PAZ ESTEVEZ/ Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/Lauren P Farrar/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights