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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of “New Species A” (corresponding to Figs. 1-7 and claims 1-4, 6, 13-14, 16-17, 19-21, 23, 28-29, 31-32, and 43) in the reply filed on 7/28/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 5 and 41 are withdrawn by the Examiner from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because line 10 recites a single sentence “Figure 1.” which appears to be a typographical error and should be deleted. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the specification is missing a “Cross-Reference to Related Applications” section on page 1 which lists the serial numbers and filing dates of the applications to which the instant application claims priority.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 16, 19, 21, 28, and 31 are objected to because of the following informalities:
-Claim 1, line 5: please correct “the user’s breast” to “a breast of a user”
-Claim 1, line 5: please correct “the pouch” to “the compressible milk pouch”
-Claim 1, line 6: please correct “a user” to “the user”
-Claim 1, line 7: please correct “the nipple” to “a nipple of the breast”
-Claim 6, line 4: please correct “the nipple opening” to “the nipple hole or opening”
-Claim 16, line 2: please correct “compressible milk pouch” to “the compressible milk pouch”
-Claim 19, line 2: please correct “the milk pouch” to “the compressible milk pouch”
-Claim 19, line 3: please correct “air” to “the air”
-Claim 19, line 4: please correct “the nipple opening” to “the nipple hole or opening”
-Claim 21, line 4: please correct “the pouch” to “the compressible milk pouch”
-Claim 21, line 4: please correct “the vacuum level” to “a level of the suction”
-Claim 28, line 4: please correct “a vacuum” to “the suction”
-Claim 28, line 4: please correct “milk” to “the milk”
-Claim 31, lines 2-3: please correct “the milk pouch” to “the compressible milk pouch”
-Claim 31, line 4: please correct “a vacuum” to “the suction”
-Claim 31, line 4: please correct “milk” to “the milk”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Scholz (US 2019/0351114 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Scholz discloses a wearable passive suction-based milk collection device (apparatus 100, see Figs. 1-9, par. [0074], [0076]), the device comprising:
a compressible milk pouch (body 102, see par. [0076], [0079]) with a nipple hole or opening (opening 114, see par. [0076]-[0078], [0086]) in a rear face (rear side 106) of the compressible milk pouch (body 102) (see Figs. 1-9, par. [0076]), the rear face (rear side 106) of the compressible milk pouch (body 102) configured to seal against at least part of the user’s breast when the pouch (body 102) is compressed by a user to create a negative air pressure inside the compressible milk pouch (body 102), providing suction onto the nipple thereby drawing milk from the nipple for collection in the compressible milk pouch (body 102) (see Figs. 1-9, par. [0077], [0079], [0082], [0085]),
wherein the device (apparatus 100) is shaped to at least partially fit inside a bra (see par. [0066], the apparatus 100 is sized/shaped to fit in a user’s hand such that apparatus 100 would also be sized/shaped to at least partially fit within a pumping bra).
Regarding claim 4, Scholz discloses the device of claim 1, wherein the compressible milk pouch (body 102, see par. [0076], [0079]) comprises a dome shaped front face or front face portion (front side 104, see Fig. 3, front side 104 is dome shaped).
Regarding claim 6, Scholz discloses the device of claim 1, wherein a front surface (front side 104) of the compressible milk pouch (body 102, see par. [0076], [0079]) comprises a flat portion (flattened portion 117) configured to allow the device to rest stably on a flat surface at an angle that prevents milk from spilling from the nipple opening (opening 114, see par. [0076]-[0078], [0086]) (see Figs. 7-9, par. [0080]-[0081]).
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.
Claims 2, 13-14, 28, and 43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US 2019/0351114 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Quarles (US 2020/0246519 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Scholz discloses the device of claim 1. However, Scholz fails to expressly state a rigid or semi-rigid frame configured to retain the compressible milk pouch.
Quarles teaches a device (see Figs. 1-2) comprising a rigid or semi-rigid frame (housing 12) configured to retain the compressible milk pouch (milk collection container 14) (see Figs. 1-2, par. [0015]-[0018]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Scholz to include a rigid or semi-rigid frame configured to retain the compressible milk pouch, as taught by Quarles, in order to enclose the compressible milk pouch and latch to the breast to create a tighter seal between the device and the breast resulting in increased suction pressure (see Quarles par. [0015]-[0017]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 2 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) is configured to latch on to the frame (Quarles, housing 12) (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 2 above, see Quarles Figs. 1-2, Quarles par. [0015]-[0018], housing 12 retains the milk pouch and latches to the breast such that the milk pouch would be considered latched to the frame when the frame is latched to the breast).
Regarding claim 14, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 2 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) is configured to releasably attach to the frame (Quarles, housing 12) (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 2 above, see Quarles Figs. 1-2, Quarles par. [0015]-[0018]).
Regarding claim 28, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 2 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the frame (Quarles, housing 12) is configured to expose an exposed surface (Scholz, front side 104 is exposed when the apparatus 100 is placed against the breast; see also Quarles Fig. 2, the entire outer/stippled surface of the milk collection container 14 can similarly be considered the exposed surface) of the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 2 above, see Quarles Figs. 1-2), and wherein the exposed surface (Scholz, front side 104 is exposed when the apparatus 100 is placed against the breast; see also Quarles Fig. 2, the entire outer/stippled surface of the milk collection container 14 can similarly be considered the exposed surface) is squeezed or pressed to create a vacuum to draw milk from the breast and secure the device (Scholz, apparatus 100) in position on the breast (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 2 above, see Scholz Figs. 1-9, Scholz par. [0077], [0079], [0082], [0085], see Quarles Figs. 1-2, Quarles par. [0015]-[0018]).
Regarding claim 43, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 2 substantially as claimed. However, modified Scholz fails to expressly state wherein the frame comprises a flat base configured to allow the device to rest upright on a surface.
Scholz further teaches wherein the compressible milk pouch (body 102) comprises a flat base (flattened portion 117) configured to allow the device (apparatus 100) to rest upright on a surface (see Figs. 7-9, par. [0080]-[0081], flattened portion 117 may be positioned on the bottom side 110). Although Quarles’ frame (housing 12) does not expressly teach a similar flat base, Quarles’ frame (housing 12) surrounds the bottom of the compressible milk pouch (milk collection container 14) of Quarles. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the flat base (flattened portion 117) of Scholz onto the frame (housing 12) of Quarles rather than the milk pouch (body 102) of Scholz in order to maintain the ability of the device to be rested upright on a surface without spilling the milk from the pouch (see Scholz par. [0081]).
Claims 3, 16-17, 19-21 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US 2019/0351114 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, in view of Zhang (EP 3679959 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Scholz discloses the device of claim 1. However, Scholz fails to expressly state wherein the compressible milk pouch is configured to connect to an air valve.
Zhang teaches a device (see Figs. 1-8) comprising a compressible milk pouch (deformable body 4) configured to connect to an air valve (valve 7) (see Figs. 1-8, par. [0042]-[0044], [0051], [0053]-[0054], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Scholz to include an air valve on the compressible milk pouch, as taught by Zhang, in order to allow air to be vented out of the compressible milk pouch to create the suction in the compressible milk pouch (see Zhang par. [0043]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 3 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) is formed as part of the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above, see Zhang Figs. 1-8, Zhang par. [0042]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 17, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 3 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) is configured to allow air to flow into the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) to decrease the suction on the nipple (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above, see Zhang Figs. 1-8, Zhang par. [0042]-[0044], [0053]-[0054], [0058], valve 7 is a deformable duckbill valve which is intended to be opened when the milk pouch is compressed, however Figs. 1-3 and 8 show that a user has access to the valve 7 to manually deform the valve 7 to open it which would allow air to flow into the milk pouch and decrease the suction).
Regarding claim 19, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 3 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) is configured to allow air to flow out from the milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) when the device (Scholz, apparatus 100) is being primed or squeezed to reduce air from being substantially evacuated through the nipple opening (Scholz, opening 114) when the device (Scholz, apparatus 100) is being primed or squeezed (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above, see Zhang Figs. 1-8, Zhang par. [0042]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 3 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) is operated via a push or touch (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above, see Zhang Figs. 1-8, Zhang par. [0042]-[0044], [0053]-[0054], [0058], valve 7 is a deformable duckbill valve which is intended to be opened when the milk pouch is compressed by pushing/touching the milk pouch, and Figs. 1-3 and 8 additionally show that a user has access to the valve 7 to manually push/touch/deform the valve 7 to open it).
Regarding claim 21, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 3 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the compressible milk pouch (Scholz, body 102) comprises a cut (Zhang, cut/slit of valve 7, see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above), and wherein a push or squeeze of the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) opens the cut (Zhang, cut/slit of valve 7), the cut (Zhang, cut/slit of valve 7) configured to allow air into the pouch (Scholz, body 102) to lower the vacuum level (see previous modifications in rejection of claim 3 above, see Zhang Figs. 1-8, Zhang par. [0042]-[0044], [0053]-[0054], [0058], valve 7 is a deformable duckbill valve which is intended to be opened when the milk pouch is compressed, however Figs. 1-3 and 8 show that a user has access to the valve 7 to manually deform the valve 7 to open it which would allow air to flow into the milk pouch and decrease the suction).
Regarding claim 23, Scholz discloses the device of claim 1. However, Scholz fails to expressly state a non-return or one-way air valve in fluid communication with the compressible milk pouch.
Zhang teaches a device (see Figs. 1-8) comprising a non-return or one-way air valve (valve 7) in fluid communication with the compressible milk pouch (deformable body 4) (see Figs. 1-8, par. [0042]-[0044], [0051], [0053]-[0054], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Scholz to include an air valve on the compressible milk pouch, as taught by Zhang, in order to allow air to be vented out of the compressible milk pouch to create the suction in the compressible milk pouch (see Zhang par. [0043]-[0044]).
Claims 29 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US 2019/0351114 A1) in view of Quarles (US 2020/0246519 A1), as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Harris (US 2017/0232165 A1).
Regarding claim 29, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 2 substantially as claimed. However, modified Scholz fails to expressly state wherein the frame comprises a crossbar configured to extend across the frame, the crossbar configured to divide the frame into a lower section and an upper section.
Harris teaches a device (see Fig. 8) wherein the frame (shield 41 and support apparatus 100 together can be considered a frame to retain the milk pouch/pump 40) comprises a cross bar (extension(s) 10 and/or 1 of support apparatus 100 can be considered a crossbar) configured to extend across the frame (shield 41 and apparatus 100) (see Fig. 8), the crossbar (extension(s) 10 and/or 1) configured to divide the frame (shield 41 and apparatus 100) into a lower section and an upper section (see Fig. 8, the portions of the shield 41/apparatus 100 above the extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can be considered the upper section and the portions of the shield 41/apparatus 100 below the extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can be considered the lower section) (see Fig. 8, par. [0025]-[0034], [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of modified Scholz to attach a crossbar to the frame, as taught by Harris, because the crossbar aids in fastening the device to a bra to enable the device to be securely and comfortably worn while allowing the user to move and accommodating fluctuations in breast size, pressure changes, and weight of the milk pouch (see Harris par. [0033]-[0034], [0037]).
Regarding claim 31, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 29 substantially as claimed. Modified Scholz further teaches wherein the lower section (Harris, see Fig. 8, the portions of the shield 41/apparatus 100 below the extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can be considered the lower section) is configured to expose an exposed surface (Scholz, front side 104 is exposed when the apparatus 100 is placed against the breast; see also Harris Fig. 8, outer portions not covered by the breast or extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can similarly be considered the exposed surface) of the milk pouch (Scholz, body 102), wherein the exposed surface (Scholz, front side 104 is exposed when the apparatus 100 is placed against the breast; see also Harris Fig. 8, outer portions not covered by the breast or extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can similarly be considered the exposed surface) is configured to be squeezed or pressed to create a vacuum to drawn milk from the breast and to secure the device (Scholz, apparatus 100) in position on the breast (see previous modifications in rejection of claims 2 and 29 above, see Scholz Figs. 1-9, Scholz par. [0077], [0079], [0082], [0085]).
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scholz (US 2019/0351114 A1) in view of Quarles (US 2020/0246519 A1) and further in view of Harris (US 2017/0232165 A1), as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of Zhang (EP 3679959 A1).
Regarding claim 32, modified Scholz teaches the device of claim 29 substantially as claimed. However, modified Scholz fails to expressly state an air valve in fluid communication with the compressible milk pouch, wherein the upper section is configured to expose the air valve.
Zhang teaches a device (see Figs. 1-8) comprising an air valve (valve 7) in fluid communication with the compressible milk pouch (deformable body 4) (see Figs. 1-8, par. [0042]-[0044], [0051], [0053]-[0054], [0058]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of modified Scholz to include an air valve on the compressible milk pouch, as taught by Zhang, in order to allow air to be vented out of the compressible milk pouch to create the suction in the compressible milk pouch (see Zhang par. [0043]-[0044]). Because Zhang teaches that the air valve (valve 7) must be provided on an upper section of the compressible milk pouch (deformable body 4) to reduce the change of milk being accidentally ejected from the air valve (valve 7) (see Figs. 1-8, par. [0042]-[0044]), this modification further teaches wherein the upper section (Harris, see Fig. 8, the portions of the shield 41/apparatus 100 above the extension(s) 10 and/or 1 can be considered the upper section) is configured to expose the air valve (Zhang, valve 7) (see previous modifications in rejection of claims 2 and 29 above).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AVERY SMALE whose telephone number is (571)270-7172. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 8-4 ET.
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 at (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.
/AVERY SMALE/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/KAMI A BOSWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783