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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendments filed 07/26/2025 have been entered.
Claims 1-13, 15-16 and 18 have thereby been entered.
Claim 19 has been added.
Claims 1-19 are being examined in this office action.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10, 12-16, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monestere (US 3851647) in view of Asai (US 8585651).
Regarding claim 1, Monestere discloses a connector hub for a needle assembly for placing a catheter into the vein of a patient (col. 4, lines 3-4) in need thereof, the connector hub comprising: a first portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) located at a first end section of the connector hub (28), said first portion comprising a first opening configured to engage a needle (opening where 11 connects to 28, engaging needle 23, see annotated Fig. 2 below), a first passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) fluidly connected to said first opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, opening and passage comprise a single cavity), and a first longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below); a second portion (24, see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) located at a second end section of the connector hub opposite said first end section (second end at 29), the second portion comprising a second opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below), a second passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) fluidly connected to said second opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, opening and passage comprise a single cavity), and a second longitudinal axis (see annotated Fig. 2 below); a medial portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, encompassing areas 12, 22, 26) located at a middle section of the connector hub, said medial portion coupling said first and second portions and fluidly connecting said first opening and said second opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, medial portion connects first and second portions), said medial portion comprising a medial longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) and medial passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) fluidly connected with said first passage and said second passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, medial passage connected to first passage, and medial passage fluidically coupled to the second passage via needle 23), wherein the medial longitudinal axis is coaxial with the second longitudinal axis of said second portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, sharing the same axis) and arranged at an angle relative to the first longitudinal axis of said first portion; and at least one insertion port connected to said medial portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below), wherein said insertion port comprises an insertion port opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below), an insertion port passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below) fluidly connected to said medial passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, insertion port passage and medial passage form singular cavity together), and an insertion port longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 below, axis along the insertion port passage), and wherein the insertion port longitudinal axis is arranged at an angle relative to the medial longitudinal axis, the first longitudinal axis, and the second longitudinal axis. Though Monestere does not explicitly disclose that the device is for placing a centerline catheter into the subclavian vein, the recitations of the “centerline catheter” and the “subclavian vein” are intended use limitations and as such are given no patentable weight, as the disclosed structures of Monestere would be capable of accommodating a centerline catheter and being inserted into the subclavian vein, specifically.
Monestere, however, fails to disclose a hermetic seal at the opening of the insertion port, and also fails to explicitly disclose the second opening being configured to engage a syringe.
Asai teaches and analogous connector hub with an insertion port (Fig. 2: 14) wherein said insertion port opening is hermetically sealed (Fig. 2: 44; col. 4, lines 42-43), and second opening configured to engage a syringe (Fig. 2: syringe 16 engaged at second opening at 40). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere connector hub by incorporating the seal at the insertion port opening taught by Asai, in order to keep the insertion port liquid tight when a guidewire or other instrument is not inserted to prevent blood leakage (col. 4, lines 51-55; col. 8, 51-53). It also would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere connector hub by incorporating the Asai teaching of the second end engaging the syringe to be able to inject fluids and draw blood in a straight path.
PNG
media_image1.png
628
1277
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Monestere Annotated Fig. 2
Regarding claim 2, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above, wherein the needle (Monestere: 23), when engaged by said first opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above), includes a needle longitudinal axis (dashed line through axis of needle 23, same as first longitudinal axis, see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) arranged at an angle relative to the second longitudinal axis, the second longitudinal axis being coaxial with the syringe that can be engaged by said second opening (Asai: Fig. 2: syringe 16 engaged at second opening at 40, being coaxial to Monestere’s second longitudinal axis upon combination), the first longitudinal axis of said first portion being arranged relative to the needle longitudinal axis at an angle of 0 degrees (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above: first longitudinal axis extends along length of needle 23).
Regarding claim 3, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above, wherein the syringe (Asai: 16), when engaged by said second opening, includes a syringe longitudinal axis (see annotated Asai Fig. 2 below) arranged at an angle relative to the first longitudinal axis, the second longitudinal axis of said second portion being arranged relative to the syringe longitudinal axis at an angle of 0 degrees (see annotated Asai Fig. 2, below: second longitudinal axis extends along length of syringe 16).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere connector by incorporating the syringe connected to the second portion/second opening as taught by Asai, in order to perform blood flashback and collect the blood (col. 8, lines 41-58).
PNG
media_image2.png
467
1368
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Asai Annotated Fig. 2
Regarding claim 6, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Monestere does not explicitly disclose the angle which the insertion port is relative to the medial portion.
Asai does, however, explicitly disclose that the insertion port (Fig. 4: 42) longitudinal axis is arranged relative to the medial (Fig. 4: 40) longitudinal axis at an angle (Fig. 4: angle theta) between 20-40 degrees (col. 4, lines 29-32). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to also incorporate the exact angle of the insertion port taught by Asai into the Monestere-Asai combination in order for the insertion port to have the appropriate acute angle for optimal fluid communication and guidewire advancement from the insertion port into the medial portion (col. 4, lines 29-37).
Regarding claim 7, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Monestere does not explicitly disclose the angle which the insertion port is relative to the medial portion.
Asai does, however, explicitly disclose that the insertion port (Fig. 4: 42) longitudinal axis is arranged relative to the medial (Fig. 4: 40) longitudinal axis at an angle (Fig. 4: angle theta) of 30 degrees (col. 4, lines 29-32). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to also incorporate the angle of the insertion port taught by Asai into the Monestere-Asai combination in order for the insertion port to have the appropriate acute angle for optimal fluid communication and guidewire advancement from the insertion port into the medial portion (col. 4, lines 29-37).
Regarding claim 8, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Monestere does not explicitly disclose the angle between the axis of the insertion port and the axis of the first portion.
Asai does, however, explicitly disclose that the axis of the insertion port is arrange at a 30-degree angle to the axis of the medial portion (col. 4, lines 29-32). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to also incorporate the angle of the insertion port taught by Asai into the Monestere-Asai combination in order for the insertion port to have the appropriate acute angle for optimal fluid communication and guidewire advancement from the insertion port into the medial portion (col. 4, lines 29-37).
As Monestere teaches an angle of 0 degrees between the axis of the first portion and axis of the medial portion (see Monestere annotated Fig. 2 above), upon combination of the 30-degree angle between the axis of the medial portion and axis of the insertion port taught by Asai, the Monestere-Asai combination would teach that the insertion port longitudinal axis is arranged relative to the first longitudinal axis at an angle of 20-40 degrees.
Regarding claim 10, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Monestere fails to explicitly disclose a conical shaped insertion port passage.
Asai does, however, explicitly teach that the insertion port passage (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 below) has a conical shape (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 below) comprising a first cone diameter and a second cone diameter (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 below), wherein the second cone diameter is larger than the first cone diameter (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 below), and wherein the first cone diameter is arranged proximal to said medial passage (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 below). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the conical shape of the insertion port passage taught by Asai into the Monestere-Asai combination in order to optimally guide the guidewire distally into the medial portion (col. 4, lines 34-37) without becoming stuck and buckling against an outer wall.
PNG
media_image3.png
781
984
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Asai Annotated Fig. 4
Regarding claim 12, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above, wherein the first insertion port opening is hermetically sealed with a membrane (Asai: 44), wherein a catheter guide wire is configured to puncture said membrane upon inserting the catheter guide wire through the first insertion port opening and into said insertion port passage (Asai: col. 4, lines 51-55).
Regarding claim 13, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above, wherein the connector hub is manufactured from a transparent material (col. 4, lines 16-18) that allows for direct visualization of a fluid entering and traveling through the connector hub (col. 4, lines 16-18).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere connector by incorporating the transparent material taught by Asai, in order to be able to visualize and confirm the blood inside of the connector (col. 4, lines 16-18).
Regarding claim 14, Monestere in view of Asai teaches a kit for placing a catheter into the vein of a patient in need thereof, the kit comprising an introducer needle (Monestere: 23; Asai: 30), a syringe (Asai: 16), and the connector hub according to claim 1, as described above. Though Monestere does not explicitly disclose that the device is for placing a centerline catheter into the subclavian vein, the recitations of the “centerline catheter” and the “subclavian vein” are intended use limitations and as such are given no patentable weight, as the disclosed structures of Monestere would be capable of accommodating a centerline catheter and being inserted into the subclavian vein, specifically.
Regarding claim 15, Monestere in view of Asai teaches a method for placing a centerline catheter into the vein of a patient in need thereof, the method comprising: providing the connector hub according to claim 1, as described above, said connector hub being engaged with an introducer needle at said first portion (Monestere: col. 2, lines 57-58; Fig. 2) and with a syringe at said second portion (Asai: col. 5, lines 7-8; Fig. 2), the introducer needle comprising a hollow internal lumen (Monestere: needle allows for flash-back making it hollow; col. 2, lines 54-59); and installing a catheter guide wire into the vein by threading the catheter guide wire through each of said insertion port passage, said medial passage, said first passage, and said internal lumen of the introducer needle (Asai: col. 5, lines 52-55). Though Monestere does not explicitly disclose that the device is for placing a catheter into the subclavian vein, the recitation of the “subclavian vein” is an intended use limitation and as such are given no patentable weight, as the disclosed structures of Monestere would be capable of accommodating a catheter and being inserted into the subclavian vein, specifically.
Regarding claim 16, Monestere in view of Asai teaches a method for placing a centerline catheter into the vein of a patient in need thereof, the method comprising: providing the connector hub according to claim 1, as described above, the connector hub being engaged with an introducer needle at said first portion (Monestere: col. 2, lines 57-58; Fig. 2) and with a syringe at said second portion (Asai: col. 5, lines 7-8; Fig. 2), the introducer needle comprising a hollow internal lumen (Monestere: needle allows for flash-back making it hollow; col. 2, lines 54-59); installing a catheter guide wire into the vein by threading the catheter guide wire through each of said second passage, said medial passage, said first passage, and said internal lumen of the introducer needle (Asai describes the insertion of the guidewire from the insertion port into the vein through the needle: col. 5, lines 52-55. In view of the Monestere-Asai combination described above, the guidewire may be inserted from the second passage of Monestere instead of the insertion port as taught by Asai, as Monestere discloses the second passage, medial passage, and first passage all being fluidly connected by the needle through which the guidewire passes). Though Monestere does not explicitly disclose that the device is for placing a catheter into the subclavian vein, the recitation of the “subclavian vein” is an intended use limitation and as such are given no patentable weight, as the disclosed structures of Monestere would be capable of accommodating a catheter and being inserted into the subclavian vein, specifically.
Regarding claim 18, Monestere discloses a connector hub comprising: a first portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) located at a first end section of the connector hub (28), said first portion comprising a first opening (opening where 11 connects to 28, see annotated Fig. 2 above), a first passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) fluidly connected to said first opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, opening and passage comprise a single cavity), and a first longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above); a second portion (24, see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) located at a second end section of the connector hub opposite said first end section (second end at 29), said second portion comprising a second opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above), a second passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) fluidly connected to said second opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, opening and passage comprise a single cavity), and a second longitudinal axis (see annotated Fig. 2 above); a medial portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) located at a middle section of the connector hub (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above), said medial portion coupling said first and second portions and fluidly connecting said first and second openings (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, fluidic coupling at the needle passing through), said medial portion comprising a medial passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) fluidly connected with said first passage and said second passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, medial passage connected to first passage, and medial passage fluidically coupled to the second passage via needle 23), and a medial longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, axis along the medial passage), wherein the medial longitudinal axis is coaxial with the second longitudinal axis of said second portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, medial and second portions sharing an axis) and arranged at an angle relative to the first longitudinal axis of said first portion; and at least one insertion port connected to said medial portion (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above), wherein said insertion port comprises an insertion port opening (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above), an insertion port passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above) fluidly connected to said medial passage (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, insertion port passage and medial passage form singular cavity together), and an insertion port longitudinal axis (see annotated Monestere Fig. 2 above, axis along the insertion port passage), and wherein the insertion port longitudinal axis is arranged at an angle relative to the medial longitudinal axis. Though Monestere does not explicitly disclose that the device is for placing a centerline catheter into the subclavian vein, the recitations of the “centerline catheter” and the “subclavian vein” are intended use limitations and as such are given no patentable weight, as the disclosed structures of Monestere would be capable of accommodating a centerline catheter and being inserted into the subclavian vein, specifically.
Monestere, however, fails to disclose a hermetic seal at the opening of the insertion port, or the conical shape of the insertion port passage.
Asai teaches and analogous connector hub with an insertion port (Fig. 2: 14) wherein said insertion port opening is hermetically sealed (Fig. 2: 44; col. 4, lines 42-43). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere connector hub by incorporating the seal at the insertion port opening taught by Asai, in order to keep the insertion port liquid tight when a guidewire or other instrument is not inserted to prevent blood leakage (col. 4, lines 51-55; col. 8, 51-53). Asai also teaches said insertion port passage includes a conical shape having a decreasing diameter from said insertion port opening towards said medial portion (see Asai annotated Fig. 4 above). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have also incorporated the conical shape of the insertion port passage taught by Asai into the Monestere-Asai combination in order to optimally guide the guidewire distally into the medial portion (col. 4, lines 34-37) without becoming stuck and buckling against an outer wall.
Regarding claim 19, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 18, wherein said first opening of said first portion is configured to receive a needle that includes a needle longitudinal axis (Monestere: col. 2, lines 57-58; Fig. 2), wherein said second opening of said second portion is configured to receive a syringe that includes a syringe longitudinal axis (Asai: col. 5, lines 7-8; Fig. 2), and wherein the needle longitudinal axis and the syringe longitudinal axis are arrange at an angle relative one another when the needle and syringe are received by respective first and second openings (see Monestere and Asai annotated Figures 2 above).
Claims 4-5 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monestere (US 3851647) in view of Asai (US 8585651) and in further view of Fuchs (4161177).
Regarding claim 4, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Although Monestere discloses a flexible portion between the first portion and medial portion of the connector allowing for the angle between the medial portion and the first portion to be adjusted (col. 2, lines 30-36), Monestere in view of Asai fails to explicitly disclose an angle of 20-40 degrees between the longitudinal axes of the medial and first portions.
Fuchs teaches an analogous needle-catheter connector hub, wherein the medial longitudinal axis (axis through portion 2: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) is arranged relative to the first longitudinal axis of said first portion (axis through portion 1: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) at an angle between 20-40 degrees (col. 3, lines 44-48: as the longitudinal axes of portions 1 and 2 can be arranged up to the preferred 45 degrees, they may and will be positioned between 20 and 40 degrees). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere-Asai connector hub with the device taught by Fuchs, such that portion 2 of Fuchs replaces the end of the medial portion on Monestere-Asai (Monestere Fig. 2 above). This combination would have been obvious in order to allow for easier access and manipulation to the back portion of the connector and its attachments, and to allow for adjustment of the back portion without disturbing the front needle portion while it is inserted in the patient (col. 2, lines 46-51; [57] Abstract, last sentence).
Regarding claim 5, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. Although Monestere discloses a flexible portion between the first portion and medial portion of the connector allowing for the angle between the medial portion and the first portion to be adjusted (col. 2, lines 30-36), Monestere in view of Asai fails to explicitly disclose an angle of 20-40 degrees between the longitudinal axes of the medial and first portions.
Fuchs teaches an analogous needle-catheter connector hub, wherein the medial longitudinal axis (axis through portion 2: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) is arranged relative to the first longitudinal axis of said first portion (axis through portion 1: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) at an angle of 30 degrees (Fuchs: col. 3, lines 44-48: as the longitudinal axes of portions 1 and 2 can be arranged up to the preferred 45 degrees, they may and will be positioned at 30 degrees). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere-Asai connector hub with the device taught by Fuchs, such that portion 2 of Fuchs replaces the end of the medial portion on Monestere-Asai (Monestere Fig. 2 above). This combination would have been obvious in order to allow for easier access and manipulation to the back portion of the connector and its attachments, and to allow for adjustment of the back portion without disturbing the front needle portion while it is inserted in the patient (col. 2, lines 46-51; [57] Abstract, last sentence).
Regarding claim 9, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above, but fails to explicitly disclose the angle between the insertion port and the first portion.
As described regarding claims 6-7 above, Asai teaches the angle between the axes of the insertion port and the medial portion being 30 degrees (col. 4, lines 29-32) in the Monestere-Asai combination. However, the Monestere-Asai combination fails to explicitly disclose the angle between the longitudinal axes of the medial and first portions.
Fuchs teaches an analogous needle-catheter connector hub, wherein the medial longitudinal axis (axis through portion 2: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) can be arranged relative to the first longitudinal axis of said first portion (axis through portion 1: see Fuchs annotated Fig. 2 below) at an angle of up to a preferred 45 degrees (Fuchs: col. 3, lines 44-48). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere-Asai connector hub with the device taught by Fuchs, such that portion 2 of Fuchs replaces the end of the medial portion on Monestere-Asai (Monestere Fig. 2 above). This combination would have been obvious in order to allow for easier access and manipulation to the back portion of the connector and its attachments, and to allow for adjustment of the back portion without disturbing the front needle portion while it is inserted in the patient (col. 2, lines 46-51; [57] Abstract, last sentence).
Therefore, upon this combination of teachings, the Monestere-Asai-Fuchs combination would teach a connector hub wherein the insertion port longitudinal axis is arranged relative to the first longitudinal axis at an angle of 40 degrees, as the incorporated teaching of Fuchs allows for the first portion axis to be angled 10 degrees from the medial portion axis, creating a combined 40 degrees between the axis of the insertion port and axis of the first axis.
PNG
media_image4.png
649
1405
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Fuchs Annotated Fig. 2
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monestere (US 3851647) in view of Asai (US 8585651) and in further view of Czorny (US 3220411).
Regarding claim 11, Monestere in view of Asai teaches the connector hub of claim 1, as described above. However, Monestere-Asai fails to teach the opening of the insertion port (see Monestere annotated Fig. 2 above) as being flush with the external surface of the medial portion.
Czorny teaches an analogous needle-catheter hub device with an angled side port for the insertion of a guidewire (10) wherein said insertion port opening (Fig. 2: 11) is arranged flush with an external surface of said medial portion (Fig. 2: opening 11 is flush with the medial portion housing of 6 and 13). Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the length of the insertion port of the Monestere-Asai connector with the non-protruding access aperture (11) taught by Czorny in order to create a more compact and streamline connector hub while maintaining the angled side insertion of a guidewire (Fig. 2) through a sealing membrane (1; col. 2, lines 47-49).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Monestere (US 3851647) in view of Asai (US 8585651) and in further view of Mahurkar (US 5879338).
Regarding claim 17, Monestere in view of Asai teaches a method of manufacturing the connector hub according to claim 1, as described above, but fails to explicitly teach the method of manufacturing of the hub being injection molding, 3D printing, extrusion blow molding, injection blow molding, or vacuum casting.
Mahurkar teaches an analogous needle-syringe assembly wherein the connector hub is manufactured by a method of injection molding (col. 9, lines 9-12). It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Monestere-Asai connector hub with the manufacturing method of injection molding taught by Mahurkar in order to manufacture the hub in a cost-effective manner (col. 9, lines 7-11).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/26/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that Monestere in view of Asai fails to teach all limitations of the independent claims as currently amended. However, the rejection to amended independent claims 1 and 18 have been updated such that all limitations are read upon. The amendments filed 07/26/2025 changed the scope of the claims, and as such, the art has been reinterpreted regarding the medial portion and the medial longitudinal axis. As seen in the updated Monestere Fig. 2 above, the medial portion is interpreted as the entire middle portion, making the medial longitudinal axis coaxial with the first and second longitudinal axes, and as such, the medial portion fluidly couples the first and second portions.
Therefore, all depending claim rejections are maintained in light of the updated independent claim rejections.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KATERINA ANNA WITTLIFF whose telephone number is (703)756-4772. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 9-7ET.
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, MICHAEL TSAI can be reached at 571-270-5246. 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.
/K.A.W./Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/MICHAEL J TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights