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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/22/26 has been entered.
Acknowledgments
This office action is in response to the reply filed on 4/22/26. In the reply, the applicant amended claims 1-3,5,12-13,18-19; canceled claims 4,14. Claims 1-3, 5-13, 18-19 are pending.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-8, 10-13, 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azure et al. (US 9,526,911) (“Azure”) in view of Penner et al. (US 2002/0188323) (“Penner”).
(claims 1, 8, 12, 18) Azure discloses: a. exposing a target site of the subject to an alternating electric field for a period of time C8L36-57, wherein the target site comprises a cancer cell (see title and C6L34-C7L4). Azure does not directly disclose b. contacting the target site of the subject with a vasodilator, wherein the vasodilator increases circulation at the target site of the subject. However, Azure does disclose the synergistic effect of an agent/adjuvant and electric field, Fig. 1, claim 14. Penner, in the analogous art, teaches a similar method for electrochemical treatment (ECT) of tumors [0005]. In Penner nitroglycerin in used with the electrical potential to vasodilate a tissue or organ [0115] claims 83,86,88 in an ECT of lung cancers [0010]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the immunostimulatory agent or adjuvant in Azure to be a vasodilator, as taught by Penner as part of the design consideration wherein a multitude of enhancers or adjuvants are contemplated (Azure C6L34-55). (claim 12) The vasodilator increasing circulation to maintain or decrease temperature is a resultant that is obvious over Azure/Penner in the same way as applicant claims based on results of a method.
Azure further discloses: the alternating electric field has a frequency between 100 and 500 kHz; between 180 and 220 kHz. C8L36-57
the cancer cell is a glioblastoma cell or lung metastatic carcinoma cell. C17L60-C18L6
the target site is exposed to the alternating electric field and vasodilator simultaneously or consecutively. C6L24-33
contacting the target site of the subject to a vasodilator comprises transdermal administration of the vasodilator to the subject at the target site. (see claim 14, “local administration” and “delivering or administering” C6L24-26, “administering” is interpreted as transdermal administration in the context of Azure
The target site is the subject's head, chest, or extremity. (design choice) C17L60-C18L6 Azure
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Azure in view of Penner.
Azure as modified by Penner teaches the vasodilator causes the increase in blood circulation is 1% greater than blood circulation prior to exposure to the vasodilator is a design choice that is a measurable result of the method as well known in the art to take this measurement.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims 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. Penner has replaced Nitto as the secondary reference, see above.
ConclusionAny inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEANNA K HALL whose telephone number is (571)272-2819. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am- 4:30pm 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, 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.
/DEANNA K HALL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights