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. This office action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed 12/5/22. As directed by the amendment: claims 13, 16, and 18 have been amended, claims 19-34, 36-58, and 60-99 have been cancelled, and no claims have been added. As such, claims 1-18, 35, and 59 are pending in the instant application. Information Disclosure Statement The listing of references in the specification is not a proper information disclosure statement. 37 CFR 1.98(b) requires a list of all patents, publications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office, and MPEP § 609.04(a) states, "the list may not be incorporated into the specification but must be submitted in a separate paper." Therefore, unless the references have been cited by the examiner on form PTO-892, they have not been considered. Claim Objections Claims 1-8, 13-15, 17, and 59 are objected to because of the following informalities: Regarding claim 1, the language “10 cm H20” (line 22) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 2, the language “10 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 3, the language “10 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 4, the language “10 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 5, the language “20 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –20 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 6, the language “25 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –25 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 7, the language “10 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 8, the language “10 cm H20” (line 3) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 13, the language “60 cm H20” (line 10) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –60 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 14, the language “45 cm H20” (line 2) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –45 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 15, the language “30 cm H20” (line 22) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –30 cm H 2 O--. Regarding claim 17, the language “port at location outside” (line 3-4) is objected to for a grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –port at a location outside--. Regarding claim 59, the language “10 cm H2O” (line 20) is objected to for a typographical/grammatical error; Examiner suggests amending to read –10 cm H 2 O--. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a): (a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112: The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention. Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Regarding claim 13, the claim sets forth that when the inflatable balloon is inserted into the patient at the location within the throat, with the inflation valve closed and without opening the valve, that the pressure inside the balloon increases from ambient pressure to an inserted-location pressure which is less than 60 cm H 2 O (see lines 5-10). This lacks adequate written description in the disclosure as filed as the disclosure does not provide any further guidance as to how the pressure increases, with fluid communication to the inflatable chamber of the balloon cut off due to the closed state of the inflation valve, due to merely inserted the device/balloon into position within the patient’s throat. It does not appear to be well-known or conventional in the art of laryngeal mask airway devices that simply inserting such a device with an inflatable balloon/cuff whose inflation valve is closed causes an increase in the pressure within the balloon/cuff. Claims 14-15 are rejected based on dependency on a rejected claim. 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)(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. (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. Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by Takeda et al. (2014/0076309) . Regarding claim 35, Takeda discloses a laryngeal mask airway system (see Fig. 1-9 and abstract for example) which includes a laryngeal mask airway device (see Fig. 2, the laryngeal mask airway device 2, i.e. the device in the upper part of this figure not including the posterior protector 3 is the laryngeal mask airway device) including an inflatable balloon which is shaped so as to define at least an inflatable annular cuff which is insertable through an anterior opening of an oral cavity of a patient and shaped so as to define a cuff anterior side that is configured to stabilize the cuff with respect to the laryngeal inlet of the patient when the balloon is disposed at an insertion location within a throat of the patient (see Fig. 2, balloon 7 defining an annular cuff 7b, the upper side of the balloon in this figure defining a cuff anterior side which stabilizes the device within the throat of the patient; see para. 0032; see also Fig. 9 which shows the device inserted into a patient); a shaft having a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location and a distal end portion fixed to the inflatable balloon (see Fig. 2, shaft 4, proximal end being the end at connector 5 and distal end connected to inflatable balloon at 7c; see para. 0032); an airway tube which passes through at least a longitudinal portion of the shaft and having a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location and a distal end open through the inflatable annular cuff (see Fig. 2 and 4, airway tube 4a, i.e. the inner lumen of 4 as shown in Fig. 4, proximal end at 5 and distal end at 7c ); and an inflation tube having a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location and a distal end coupled in fluid communication with an inflatable chamber defined by the balloon for supplying air to the chamber (see Fig. 4 and para. 0032, “extension tube not shown” being the inflation tube with supply/evacuation port being proximal end outside the patient when in use and distal end connected in fluid communication with the inflatable chamber of the balloon 7 as can be seen in Fig. 4 at 7e); an insertion posterior protector which includes an elongate sheet of material (see Fig. 2, insertion posterior protector 2 which has a length and is thus elongate, and is made of a material and thus shows a sheet of material in Fig. 2) shaped to define a proximal coupling portion shaped to define one or more couplers configured to removably couple the proximal coupling portion to the shaft proximally to the inflatable balloon (see Fig. 2, walls 11b- e being couplers providing for removable coupling to the device and thus the shaft, with portions 15 extending such that it is located/coupled to the shaft proximal to the balloon 7; see para. 0037; note that the claims as currently worded do not specify that the one or more couplers themselves removably couple directly to the shaft/at a location proximal of the balloon, and thus the proximal coupling portion including 15 and 11b-e reads on this limitation ); and a distal protection portion shaped so as to partially cover a posterior external surface of the inflatable balloon when the proximal coupling portion is removably coupled to the shaft so as to protect the inflatable balloon from puncture during insertion thereof into the patient’s oral cavity ( see Fig. 2, distal protection portion 11a which at least partially covers posterior surface of balloon 7 and provides protection thereto from puncture during insertion as can be seen from Figs. 1-2 ). 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. Claim(s) 1-15 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullard (5,791,341) in view of Zachar (10,173,022) . Regarding claim 1, Bullard discloses a laryngeal mask airway device (see Fig. 1-4, abstract; laryngeal mask airway device 10) including an inflatable balloon which is shaped so as to define at least an inflatable annular cuff and a proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion and insertable through an anterior opening of an oral cavity of a patient (see Fig. 1-2, inflatable balloon defined by elements 14 and 12 with 14 being the inflatable annular cuff and 12 being the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion, see col. 1 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7, see also Fig. 3-4 ; note the claims as currently worded do not require that the inflatable balloon is a singular contiguous element ) , the inflatable annular cuff shaped to define a cuff anterior side configured to stabilize the cuff with respect to a laryngeal inlet of the patient when the balloon is disposed at an insertion location within a throat of the patient (see Fig. 1-2, the left side of 14 defining cuff anterior side, Fig. 3-4 showing device in insertion location stabilized with respect to a laryngeal inlet of the patient, see col. 1 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7); a shaft having a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location and a distal end portion fixed to the inflatable balloon (see Fig. 3-4 showing the device in in the insertion location and with proximal end 13 of shaft 11 outside the oral cavity and distal end portion 15 fixed to the balloon as shown, see also Fig. 1-2 and col. 3 ln. 21-50); an airway tube which passes through a longitudinal portion of the shaft (see Fig. 1-4 , airway tube 16, col. 3 ln. 21-33 ), and has a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed in the insertion location (see Fig. 3-4, proximal end show outside oral cavity), and a distal end open through the inflatable cuff (see Fig. 1-4, distal end open through to provide for ventilating gas for the patient ) , wherein the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion forms an air-tight seal with an external surface of the shaft (see Fig. 1-2 showing 12 sealing around shaft 11 of the proximal pharyngeal portion 12 ); and an inflation tube having a proximal end configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location and a distal end coupled in fluid communication with an inflatable chamber defined by the balloon for supplying air to the chamber (see Fig. 1-4, inflation tube defined by elements 19 and 24, see col. 3 ln. 33-50; proximal ends located outside the oral cavity with valved pilot balloons 17 and 22, distal ends for providing inflation of balloon 12 and 14 which define inflatable chamber; note the claims as currently worded do not require a singular inflation tube or singular inflatable chamber). Bullard’s inflatable balloon is capable of being filled with air at a pressure of 10 cm H 2 O; however, Zachar teaches a similar laryngeal mask airway device whose inflatable balloon is inflated to such a pressure (see abstract, col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Bullard device’s inflatable balloon to be configured to inflate at a pressure of 10 cm H 2 O, as taught by Zachar , as this is a well-known pressure level for inflating such a balloon, and would provide low pressure inflation and sealing (see Zachar col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). The now modified Bullard device is such that a volume of air in a proximal one-third of the inflatable chamber equals at least 200% of a volume of air in the distal one-third of the chamber, the proximal third extending distally from proximal end of the chamber along one third of a length of the chamber (defined by elements 12 and 14 of Bullard) measured along a straight line segment connecting a distal centroid of the distal end and a proximal centroid of the proximal end (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Regarding claim 2, the modified Bullard device is such that the inflatable balloon is configured such that when filled with the 10 cm H 2 O and unconstrained, the volume in the proximal one-third is 300% of the volume in the distal one-third (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Regarding claim 3, the modified Bullard device is such that the inflatable balloon is configured such that when filled with the 10 cm H 2 O and unconstrained, the volume in the proximal one-third is 350% of the volume in the distal one-third (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Regarding claim 4, the modified Bullard device is such that the inflatable balloon is configured such that when filled with the 10 cm H 2 O and unconstrained, the volume in the proximal one-third is 400% of the volume in the distal one-third (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Regarding claim 5, the modified Bullard device appears to show the volume in the proximal one-third is 2 00% of the volume in the distal one-third (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Modified Bullard is silent as to this proportion when the inflatable chamber is filled with air at a pressure of 20 cm H2O; however, Zachar teaches a similar laryngeal mask airway device whose inflatable balloon is inflated to such a pressure (see abstract, col. 2 ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12, and claim 1 last two lines). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Bullard device’s inflatable balloon to be configured to inflate at a pressure of 20 cm H 2 O, as taught by Zachar , as this is a well-known pressure level for inflating such a balloon, and would provide medium pressure inflation and sealing (see Zachar col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). Regarding claim 6, the modified Bullard device appears to show the volume in the proximal one-third is 200% of the volume in the distal one-third (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Modified Bullard is silent as to this proportion when the inflatable chamber is filled with air at a pressure of 25 cm H2O; however, Zachar teaches a similar laryngeal mask airway device whose inflatable balloon is inflated to such a pressure (see abstract, col. 3 ln. 9-12, and claim 1 last two lines). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Bullard device’s inflatable balloon to be configured to inflate at a pressure of 25 cm H 2 O, as taught by Zachar , as this is a well-known pressure level for inflating such a balloon, and would provide medium pressure inflation and sealing (see Zachar col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). Regarding claim 7, the modified Bullard device’s inflatable balloon is silent as to when the air pressure is filled to a pressure of 10 cm H 2 O, the volume of the proximal one-third of the chamber being at least 5cc; however, this would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and obvious to choose such a value to provide a desired size/sealing volume and one would expect the modified Bullard device to perform equally as well. Regarding claim 8, the modified Bullard device’s inflatable balloon is silent as to when the air pressure is filled to a pressure of 10 cm H 2 O, the volume of the proximal one-third of the chamber being at least 10 cc; however, this would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and obvious to choose such a value to provide a desired size/sealing volume and one would expect the modified Bullard device to perform equally as well. Regarding claim 9, the modified Bullard device is such that the inflatable balloon and shaft are configured such that the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion forms the air-tight seal entirely around a longitudinal portion of the shaft (see Bullard Fig. 1-2, col. 3 ln. 33-50). Regarding claim 10, the modified Bullard device’s proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion extends laterally away in both directions from the straight line segment (see Bullard Fig. 1-4, col. 3 ln. 33-50, see also Fig. 5). Regarding claim 11, the modified Bullard device is such that it appears the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion is reflectionally symmetric about a plane of symmetry that extends in an anterior/posterior direction with the straight line segment falls in the plane (see Bullard Fig. 1-4 for example). However, in the event that modified Bullard is view as to not teach such symmetry, it would have been an obvious matter of shape design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and one would expect the modified Bullard device to perform equally as well. See MPEP 2144.04 IV B. Regarding claim 12, the modified Bullard device’s cuff anterior side is configured to form a seal around the laryngeal inlet of the patient when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location (see Bullard Fig. 3-4, col. 3 ln. 51 through col. 4 ln. 13). Regarding claim 13, the modified Bullard device’s inflation tube includes an inflation valve configured to be disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location (see Bullard Fig. 1-4, inflation valve 17 and 22, see col. 3 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7 ). The modified Bullard device includes the same structural and function limitations as claimed such that it would also be configured such that when the inflatable balloon, while the inflation valve is closed and the pressure within the inflatable balloon equals ambient pressure, is inserted from outside the oral cavity of the patient to the insertion location within the throat without opening the inflation valve, the pressure within the inflatable balloon increases from the ambient pressure to an inserted-location pressure, the inserted-location pressure less than 60 cm H 2 O (see Bullard Fig. 1-4 and col. 3 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7; portions of Zachar noted above). Regarding claim 14, the modified Bullard device’s insertion-location pressure is less than 45 cm H 2 O (see Zachar col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). Regarding claim 15, the modified Bullard device’s insertion-location pressure is less than 30 cm H 2 O (see Zachar col. 2 ln. 15, ln. 29-32, col. 3 ln. 9-12). Regarding claim 59, the use of the modified Bullard device, as modified above in the rejection of claim 1, discloses a method including inserting an inflatable balloon of a laryngeal mask airway device through an anterior opening of an oral cavity of a patient and shaped so as to define at least an inflatable annular cuff and a proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion and disposing the balloon at an insertion location within a throat of the patient (see Bullard Fig. 3-4 and 1-2, inflatable balloon defined by elements 14 and 12 with 14 being the inflatable annular cuff and 12 being the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion, see col. 1 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7, see also Fig. 3-4; note the claims as currently worded do not require that the inflatable balloon is a singular contiguous element), such that a proximal end of an inflation tube is disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity and a distal end of the inflation tube coupled in fluid communication with an inflatable chamber defined by the balloon to supply air to the balloon (see Fig. 1-4, inflation tube defined by elements 19 and 24, see col. 3 ln. 33-50; proximal ends located outside the oral cavity with valved pilot balloons 17 and 22, distal ends for providing inflation of balloon 12 and 14 which define inflatable chamber; note the claims as currently worded do not require a singular inflation tube or singular inflatable chamber), a proximal end of a shaft disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity and a distal end portion of the shaft fixed to the inflatable balloon (see Fig. 3-4 showing the device in in the insertion location and with proximal end 13 of shaft 11 outside the oral cavity and distal end portion 15 fixed to the balloon as shown, see also Fig. 1-2 and col. 3 ln. 21-50), a proximal end of an airway tube disposed outside the patient’s oral cavity and passing through at least a longitudinal portion of the shaft and having a distal end open through the cuff (see Fig. 1-4, airway tube 16, col. 3 ln. 21-33), the proximal inflatable pharyngeal portion forms an air-tight seal with an external surface of the shaft ( see Fig. 1-2 showing 12 sealing around shaft 11 by the proximal pharyngeal portion 12 ), , and a cuff anterior side of the inflatable annular cuff stabilizes the cuff with respect to a laryngeal inlet of the patient (see Fig. 1-2, the left side of 14 defining cuff anterior side, Fig. 3-4 showing device in insertion location stabilized with respect to a laryngeal inlet of the patient, see col. 1 ln. 33 through col. 4 ln. 7); and ventilating the lungs using the device (see col. 3 ln. 60-64), wherein the balloon is configured such that when the inflatable chamber is filled with air at a pressure of 10 cm H2O and unconstrained a volume of the air in a proximal one-third of the chamber equals at least 200% of volume in a distal one-third of the inflatable chamber with the proximal third extending distally from proximal end of the chamber along one third of a length of the chamber (defined by elements 12 and 14 of Bullard) measured along a straight line segment connecting a distal centroid of the distal end and a proximal centroid of the proximal end (see Fig 1-2 of Bullard which shows such proportions); however, in the event that modified Bullard is viewed as to not show such proportions, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to have such proportions as this would have been obvious design choice and one would have found it obvious to choose such proportions to provide a desired seating and sealing of the device within the patient. See MPEP 2144.04 IV A. Claim(s) 16-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullard and Zachar as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fortuna (7,040,322) . Regarding claim 16, the modified Bullard device is silent as to the annular cuff shaped to define a distal tip portion as part of the distal end of the cuff and which forms a seal against an upper esophageal sphincter when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location (Bullard Fig. 3-4 appears to show a distal part of annular cuff 14 sealing against upper esophageal sphincter); however, Fortuna teaches a similar device which includes this feature (see Fortuna Fig. 1, 2 and 4, distal portion 46 of cuff, also distal tip element 18 and 16 providing seal per Fig. 11). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to include a sealing distal tip portion, as taught by Fortuna, in order to provide esophageal drainage function (see Fortuna col. 6 ln. 44-60). The modified Bullard device is silent as to the distal wall of the distal tip portion having a thickness of at least 2 mm; however, this would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and one would have chosen such a thickness in order to provide a desired level of structural integrity to the device. See also MPEP 2144.04 A. Regarding claim 17, the modified Bullard device includes a drainage tube that extends from a gastric channel and having a distal gastric opening through the distal tip portion and a proximal drainage port at a location outside the patient’s oral cavity when the inflatable balloon is disposed at the insertion location (see Fortuna Fig. 2, drainage tube 18, distal gastric opening 56, proximal drainage port at 22, see Fig. 1 and 11, see col. 6 ln. 44-60, col. 8 ln. 38-42). Regarding claim 18, the modified Bullard device is silent as to including a distal tip portion located distal to the cuff and which forms a seal against an upper esophageal sphincter when the balloon is disposed at the insertion location (Bullard Fig. 3-4 appears to show a distal part of annular cuff 14 sealing against upper esophageal sphincter); however, Fortuna teaches a similar device which includes this feature (see Fortuna Fig. 1, 2 and 4, distal portion 46 of cuff, also distal tip element 18 and 16 providing seal per Fig. 11). Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Bullard device to include a sealing distal tip portion, as taught by Fortuna, in order to provide esophageal drainage function (see Fortuna col. 6 ln. 44-60). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Pagan (6,261,401), Sato et al. (5,743,258), and Brain (5,282,464) disclose laryngeal mask airway devices similar to the claimed/disclosed invention. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT COLIN W STUART whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)270-7490 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F: 9-5 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Timothy Stanis can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-5139 . 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. /COLIN W STUART/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785