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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/16/26 has been entered.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3-5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hille et al (US 6,187,322 B1) in view WO 2008069012A2.
As to claim 1, Hille et al teaches (see Fig 1) a dosing device (2) for manufacturing a therapeutic transdermal system (see column 1, lines 15-17 and claim 1) for dosing therapeutic liquids onto a support element of the therapeutic transdermal system (see Fig 1) comprising: a liquid dispensing device comprising a metering pump (see Abstract and a piston type dosing pump) fluidically connected to the feeding pipe (1); a dosing head (distribution plate 3) fluidically connected to the liquid dispensing device for dispensing the therapeutic liquid conveyed by the liquid dispensing device to the support element (web-shaped material 7) of the therapeutic transdermal system (see claim 1); and the liquid has transferred by relative motion between the applicator device and the web material (see column 3, lines 51-54). Hille et al lacks teaching a movement device for moving the dosing head and a container in which a therapeutic liquid stored, although the feeding tube is a way through which the liquid is transferred from unshown source. In any event, WO’012 teaches a container in which a therapeutic liquid stored (see Fig 1 for reservoir 1 and page 27, on line 4 and page 30, lines 1-6). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a container (reservoir) in which the liquid stored in Hille et al to continuously feed or supply the liquid material to the application device. Furthermore, WO’012 teaches a movement device (a carriage controlled by controller 6) connected to the dosing head (ejection head 3) for moving the dosing head at least during the delivery of the therapeutic liquid to the support element (5, see column 30, lines 6-13 and Fig 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a movement device in Hille et al to apply the liquid on a predetermined position on the surface of the substrate as taught by WO’012 (see page 30, lines 1-6).
Regarding claims 3-5, Hille et al (see Fig 1) the dosing head has at least two dosing units (distribution plate 3); and wherein the dosing units (3) have at least two dosing nozzles (passages 4), and at least two dosing units (3) are arranged opposite to each other with respect to a pivot axis (capable of having an imaginary line around which the head rotates).
As to claim 7, Hille et al teaches the liquid dispensing device has several rotary piston pumps and/or wobble piston pumps (see column 2, lines 51-56).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hille et al (US 6,187,322 B1) in view WO 2008069012A2 as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP-2020049760 A.
Hille et al as modified lacks teaching a lifting device. However, JP’760 teaches (see Abstract) a carriage provided with a lifting mechanism 60 for a head unit 21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to lift the dosing head in vertical directing with a lifting mechanism so that the head unit is at a height position corresponding to the thickness of the work as taught by JP’760 (see English Translation in the first paragraph under Description).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record Hille et al lacks teaching rotating and or/pivoting movement of the dosing head or wherein the movement device has a pneumatic pivot drive. Prior art of record does not disclose or suggest a dosing device for manufacturing a therapeutic transdermal system (TTS) for dosing therapeutic liquids onto a support element of the therapeutic transdermal system (TTS) comprising, among others, a container, a liquid dispensing device, a dosing head, a movement device as claimed (see claim 1), wherein the movement device effects a pivoting movement and/or a rotating movement of the dosing head by 160° to 180°, and wherein the
movement device has a pneumatic pivot drive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-7 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YEWEBDAR T TADESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-1238. The examiner can normally be reached 7.00-3:30 PM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
YEWEBDAR T. TADESSE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1717
/YEWEBDAR T TADESSE/
Prosecution Insights