DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 3/2/2026. As directed by the amendment, claims 1, 5-6, 8-9, 15, 21, and 23 has been amended, claims 3 and 25-67 have been cancelled, and no claims have been newly added. Thus, claims 1-2 and 4-24 are presenting pending in this application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The listing of references in the PCT international search report is not considered to be an information disclosure statement (IDS) complying with 37 CFR 1.98. 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2) requires a legible copy of: (1) each foreign patent; (2) each publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; (3) for each cited pending U.S. application, the application specification including claims, and any drawing of the application, or that portion of the application which caused it to be listed including any claims directed to that portion, unless the cited pending U.S. application is stored in the Image File Wrapper (IFW) system; and (4) all other information, or that portion which caused it to be listed. In addition, each IDS must include a list of all patents, publications, applications, or other information submitted for consideration by the Office (see 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1) and (b)), and MPEP § 609.04(a), subsection I. states, “the list ... must be submitted on a separate paper.” Therefore, the references cited in the international search report have not been considered. Applicant is advised that the date of submission of any item of information in the international search report will be the date of submission of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements for the IDS with 37 CFR 1.97, including all timing statement requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Claim Objections
Claims 25-67 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 25-67 have been cancelled in the amendment dated 11/3/2023, but have not been presented in the amendment dated 3/2/2026. It is suggested that any subsequent amendment presents claims 25-67 as being cancelled, so that if any new claims are presented in the subsequent amendment, the new claims will be renumbered consecutively from claim 68.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
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, 4-9, 14-16, and 20-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti 2009/0216183) in view of Kamishita et al (2017/0128364)
Regarding claim 1, Minotti in figs 1-3 discloses a spray device, comprising: a liquid container (110) including a first chamber (130) operable to retain a first liquid and a second chamber (132) operable to retain a second liquid (rigid closed chambers including liquid medicaments); a first pump (150) in fluid communication with the first chamber (130) operable to aspirate and retain the first liquid; a second pump (152) in fluid communication with the second chamber operable (132) to aspirate and retain the second liquid (para [0025]); and in figs 1-2 discloses a first pump (50) and second pump (52) that is identical to pumps (150, 152) (para [0025]) and therefore in fig 1-2 discloses a plurality of mixing spaces fluidly coupled to the first pump (50) and the second pump (52) and operable to allow mixing of the first liquid and the second liquid (each pump (50, 52) is connected to a first mixing space in receptacle (40) (para [00023]) and second mixing space between nozzle tip (22) and stylet (24) (para [0024]); and a nozzle (tip of spray tip (22) is shown in fig 2 to have an opening comprising a nozzle) fluidly coupled to the plurality of mixing spaces (fluid exiting first and second pumps (50, 52) enter receptacle (40) comprising first mixing space, enters lower portion of spray nozzle (22) comprising second mixing space, and exiting opening in spray tip comprising a nozzle) (para [0023]); wherein the plurality of mixing spaces comprises: a first mixing space (40) (receptacle (40) includes a first mixing space in passageway (48) wherein input from first and second containers (110, 130) combine) (para [0023]); and a second mixing space (spray tip (22) includes a mixing space between inside of spray tip (22) and stylet (24)) fluidly coupled between the first mixing space (40) and the nozzle (space inside of spray tip (22) comprising the second mixing space is between the first mixing space (40) and opening of spray tip (22)) (para [0024]).
Minotti does not disclose the plurality of mixing spaces further includes a nozzle mixing space between the second mixing space and a nozzle opening.
However, Kamishita in figs 1-4 teaches a device to apply a spray to a nose of a user including a nozzle body (20) and a post (30) (packing rod) disposed within the nozzle body (20) (para [0031]), wherein the post includes a first plurality of nozzle grooves (39) connected to a second mixing space (40) (gap) (para [0035]), and wherein the second mixing space (40) is connected to a nozzle mixing space (44) (vortex generation member) by a second set of nozzle grooves (38), wherein the nozzle mixing space (44) is between the second mixing space (40) and a nozzle opening (21) (nozzle orifice) (para [0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing the spray tip and stylus with a first plurality of nozzle grooves, a gap forming a second mixing space, a second plurality of nozzle grooves, and a nozzle mixing space comprising a vortex-flow generating member, wherein first the plurality of nozzle grooves fluidly couples a space below the spray tip to the gap forming the second mixing space within the spray tip, and the second plurality of nozzle grooves fluidly couples the gap forming the second mixing space to the nozzle mixing space as taught by Kamishita in order to provide an optimized shape and configuration of the nozzle for spraying a viscous formulation to a nose of a user (Kamishita, para [0006]).
Regarding claim 4, Minotti discloses in fig 2 a connecting plate (40) (receptacle) including a first inlet (as shown in fig 2, lower left portion of receptacle (40) includes a first inlet to connect to an outlet of the first pump (50)), a second inlet (as shown in fig 2, lower right portion of receptacle (40) includes a second inlet to connect to an outlet of the second pump (52)), a central abutment (as shown in fig 2, central portion of receptacle (40) includes a central abutment to connect to spray nozzle (22)), an inner perimeter wall defining at least a part of a first mixing space (as shown in fig 2, inner wall of receptacle (40) forms first mixing space) and an outer perimeter wall (as shown in fig 2, receptacle (40) has an outer perimeter wall) (para [0023]).
Regarding claim 5, Minotti discloses the first mixing space (40) is fluidly coupled to a first outlet from the first pump (50) and a second outlet from the second pump (50) (liquid medicament stored in the pump housing (70) can flow is out the top of the respective piston pumps (50, 52) and multiple medicaments are mixed in the receptacle (40)) (para [0023]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Minotti’s reference discloses the nozzle mixing space comprises a vortex tip (44 of Kamishita) (vortex-flow generating member (44 of Kamishita) is configured to generate a vortex flow of a formulation that is delivered from each of the grooves (38 of Kamishita) of the rod small-diameter portion (35 of Kamishita) before being injected from the nozzle orifice (21 of Kamishita) of the nozzle body (20) of Kamishita) (Kamishita, para [0036]).
Regarding claim 7, Minotti discloses a connecting plate (40) (receptable) having a recess at least partially defining the first mixing space (as shown in fig 2, inner portion of receptacle (40) forms first mixing space) and openings fluidly coupling the first pump (50) and the second pump (52) to the first mixing space (as shown in fig 2, lower portion of receptacle (40) includes lower left and right portions to respectively connect to first (50) and second pumps (52)) (para [0023]).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Minotti’s reference in figs 1-4 of Kamishita discloses a post (30 of Kamishita) (packing rod) disposed within the nozzle body (20 of Kamishita) (Kamishita, para [0031]), wherein the post includes a plurality of nozzle grooves (39 of Kamishita) (Kamishita, para [0036]) and a plurality of channel-forming protrusions (as shown in figs 2a-b of Kamishita, post (30 of Kamishita) includes channel-forming protrusions spaced between adjacent nozzle grooves (39 of Kamishita) (Kamishita, para [0035]) wherein the grooves (39 of Kamishita) fluidly couple the first mixing space to the second mixing space (40 of Kamishita) (grooves (39 of Kamishita) couple the bottom of the nozzle body (20 of Kamishita) to the second mixing space (40 of Kamishita), and because the first mixing space is below the nozzle body (20 of Kamishita), would couple the first mixing space to the second mixing space) (Kamishita, para [0035]).
Regarding claim 9, Minotti discloses a top housing (22) (spray nozzle tip) including a nozzle opening (as shown in fig 2, top portion of spray nozzle tip (22) includes a nozzle opening) and defining a portion of a second mixing space (as shown in fig 2, second mixing space is disposed within spray nozzle tip (22)) (para [0024]), and the modified Minotti’s reference discloses the top housing (10 of Kamishita) comprises a portion of the nozzle mixing space (44 of Kamishita) (as shown in figs 3a-b of Kamishita, top housing (10 of Kamishita forms a top portion of the nozzle mixing space formed by the vortex-flow generation member (44 of Kamishita)) (Kamishita, figs 3a-b, para [0036]).
Regarding claim 15, the modified Minotti’s reference discloses a tip portion (22 of Kamishita) of a top housing (20 of Kamishita) (para [0030]), wherein the tip portion (22) of the top housing (20) is configured to spray from a mixing space formed by a vortex-generating member (44 of Kamishita) shown in fig 3B (Kamishita, para [0036]), wherein the tip portion (22 of Kamishita) of the top housing (20 of Kamishita) is configured to spray at an angle ranging from about 0 to about 90 degrees relative to a flow path out of the mixing space (an acceptable spray angle of 40 to 60 degrees) (Kamishita, para [0040]), wherein the nozzle (22 of Kamishita) is configured to spray a predetermined pattern of liquid including one or more of a hollow cone or a full cone (Kamishita, para [0039]).
Regarding claim 14, Minotti discloses the first pump (50) comprises: a first inlet tube (as shown in fig 2, each pump (50 ,52) includes a first inlet tube extending from hose (84), pump plunger (74) and plunger neck (54)) (para [0023]) in fluid communication with the first chamber (as shown in fig 3, pump (150) is in fluid communication with first chamber (130)) (para [0025]), wherein the first inlet tube includes a first inlet (84) (inlet of intake hose), a first piston (74) (plunger), a first spring (76),and a first ball valve (60) (check valve can be a ball valve) (para [0023]); and a first outlet tube including a first outlet fluidly coupled to the first mixing space (as shown in fig 2, upper portion of valve seat (62) includes an outlet tube portion with an outlet connected to receptacle (40) containing first mixing space) (para [0023]); and the second pump (52) comprises: a second inlet tube (as shown in fig 2, each pump (52) includes a second inlet tube extending from hose (84), pump plunger (74) and plunger neck (54))) (para [0023]) in fluid communication with the second chamber (as shown in fig 3, second pump (152) is in fluid communication with second chamber (132)) (para [0025]), wherein the second inlet tube includes a second inlet (86) (inlet of intake hose), a second piston (74) (plunger), a second spring (70), and a second ball valve (60) (check valve can be a check valve) (para [0023]); and a second outlet tube including a second outlet fluidly coupled to the first mixing space (as shown in fig 2, upper portion of valve seat (62) includes an outlet tube portion with an outlet connected to receptacle (40) containing first mixing space) (para [0023]).
Regarding claim 16, modified Minotti discloses a first liquid and a first liquid.
Modified Minotti does not disclose a viscosity of the first liquid or the second liquid, or a combination thereof is from about 0.1 centipoise (cP) to about 10,000 cP.
However, Kamishita in figs 1-4 teaches a device to spray a formulation to a nose of a user, wherein the formulation can be a gel material with a viscosity of 1000 or 2500 mPas (1000 or 2500 cP) (para [0011], pages 8-9, Table 10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing a first liquid or second liquid with a viscosity from about 0.1 centipoise (cP) to about 10,000 cP (1000 or 2500 cP) as taught by Kimishita in order to provide a gel material to apply a viscous pharmaceutical formulation to a rhinal mucosal membrane (Kamishita, para [0001]).
Regarding claim 20, Minotti discloses the spray device is operable to spray a liquid amount of from about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml upon each actuation of the first and second pumps (50, 52) (the metered volume delivered by each pump is about 50-100 ul (para [0024]), and therefore the total liquid amount that the spray device is operable to spray is about 100-200 ul (0.1 ml to 0.2 ml), which is within the claimed range of about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml
Regarding claim 21, modified Minotti discloses a first mixing space within the receptacle (40 of Minotti) and a second mixing space within the nozzle tip (22 of Minotti) (Minotti, para [0023]).
Modified Minotti does not disclose a ratio of a volume of the first mixing space to a volume of the second mixing space is from about 1:10 to about 10:1; or a ratio of a volume of the first mixing space to a volume of the third mixing space is from about 1000:1 to about 10:1; or a ratio of a volume of the second mixing space to a volume of the third mixing space is from about 1000:1 to about 10:1.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti so that a ratio of a volume of the first mixing space to a volume of the second mixing space to be from about 1:10 to about 10:1, as it has been held that changes in size and optimization of ranges are within the level of skill of one of ordinary skill in the art. Therefore, modifying the volume of the first and second mixing spaces by routine experimentation would have been an obvious modification in order to provide a minimal low volume capacity of the first mixing space to reduce storage of mixed medicaments in between nasal spray actuations (Minotti, para [0024]) and to provide a suitable volume of the second mixing space to minimize volume dead space, increase spray pressure and reduce storage of mixed medicament (Minotti, para [0024]).
Regarding claim 22, Minotti discloses that the first pump (50) is operable to aspirate and retain a liquid amount of from about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml (the metered volume delivered by each pump is about 50-100 ul (0.05 ml to 0.1 ml) (para [0024]) which is within the claimed range of about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml); or the second pump (52) is operable to aspirate and retain a liquid amount of from about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml (the metered volume delivered by each pump is about 50-100 ul (0.05 ml to 0.1 ml) (para [0024]) which is within the claimed range of about 0.01 ml to about 5 ml).
Regarding claim 23, Minotti discloses a ratio of a volume of: a capacity of the first pump or the second pump (50, 52), and a volume of a first mixing space (40) is from about 100:1 to about 1:1 (capacity of the first or second pump is about 50-100 ul, and a volume of a first mixing space within the receptacle is much smaller than that of the individual pumps, which in a preferred embodiment can be 5-10 ul (Minotti, para [0024]), and therefore a capacity of the first or second pump to a volume of the first mixing space is (500-100)/(5-10), corresponding to a ratio of about 10:1 to 100:1, which is within the claimed range.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Petit (2011/0133000)
Regarding claim 2, modified Minotti discloses a plurality of mixing spaces
Modified Minotti does not disclose a plurality of mixing spaces is substantially empty between each actuation of the pumps.
However, Petit teaches a device for dispensing a fluid product including a pump (52), wherein the pump includes a closure member (40) that is opened during the very end of actuation and opened mechanically by a second piston (57) of the pump to ensure that the pump is pre-compressed completely during actuation thereof, so that when it opens, the entire dose is guaranteed to be dispensed (para [0038]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing the first and second pump with a second piston that is adapted to co-operate with a closure member to move it towards its non-closing position once the pump has been actuated as taught by Petit in order to guarantee that the entire dose is dispensed (Petit, para [0038]). The now-modified Minotti’s device is considered that the plurality of mixing spaces is substantially empty between each actuation of the pumps because each actuation of the pumps guarantee that the entire dose is dispensed and therefore no dose would remain in the plurality of mixing spaces.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lasserre et al (7,845,518).
Regarding claim 10, modified Minotti discloses a top housing (22).
Modified Minotti does not disclose a cap operable to be coupled to a top housing.
However, Lasserre teaches a fluid dispensing device including a top housing (21) (shell) including a dispensing orifice (23) (col 5, ln 5-22), and a cap (60) configured to be coupled to the top housing (21) (col 6, ln 40-43).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing a cap operable to be coupled to the top housing as taught by Lasserre in order to protect the device (Lasserre, col 6, ln 40-41)
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Cagle (6,983,864).
Regarding claim 11, modified Minotti discloses a pump housing coupled between: the liquid container, and an outlet tube of the first pump and an outlet tube of the second pump (as shown in figs 1-2, device includes a pump housing shown as a block into which the pumps (50, 52) are seated and shown to be disposed between the liquid container (10) and the outlet (54) of the first and second pumps (50, 52), a first pump fitting configured to retain the first pump; a second pump fitting configured to retain the second pump (as shown in fig 2, pump housing includes a recess to receive the first and second pumps (50, 52)).
Modified Minotti does not disclose a base operable to connect to a connecting tongue of the liquid container; and a collar.
However, Cagle in figs 1-8 teaches a fluid dispenser including a liquid container (12) and a pump housing (14) (retainer) coupled between the liquid container (14) and an outlet (43) (outlet tube) of a pump (39) (col 4, ln 65-col 5, ln 6), wherein the pump housing (14) includes a base (25) (flex arms) operable to connect to a connecting tongue (53) (retention tabs) of the liquid container (12) (col 6, ln 62-67); and a collar (as shown in fig 8, lower portion of pump housing (14) includes platform (18) with a collar (56) on an outer perimeter with washer tabs (23) to connect to a pump assembly (15)) (col 4, ln 40-49).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing the pump housing with a base operable to connect to a connecting tongue of the liquid container and a collar as taught by Cagle, as the use of a base comprising flex arms to connect to a tongue of the liquid container and a collar with washer arms to connect to a pump assembly is known is known in the art, and it appears that the modified Minotti’s device would perform equally well to connect the pump housing to liquid container and pumps using a base operable to connect to a connecting tongue of the liquid container and a collar.
Regarding claim 12, modified Minotti discloses a liquid container (10) and a pump housing (as shown in figs 1-2, device includes a pump housing shown as a block into which the pumps (50, 52) are seated)
Modified Minotti does not disclose a gasket coupled between the liquid container and the pump housing.
However, Cagle in figs 1-8 teaches a fluid dispenser including a liquid container (11) and a pump housing (14) (retainer) (col 4, ln 5-12) and including a gasket (44) (resilient sealing means including washers (44a, b)) coupled between the liquid container (11) and the pump housing (14) (col 5, ln 18-32)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing a gasket coupled between the liquid container and the pump housing as taught by Cagle in order to provide a fluid-tight seal and prevent spillage or leaking of the fluid (Cagle, col 7, ln 3-7).
Regarding claim 13, modified Minotti in fig 3 discloses the liquid container further comprises: a divider (112) (liquid tight wall) separating the first chamber (130) and the second chamber (132); an outer housing (as shown in fig 3, liquid container includes an outer housing); a bottom forming a bottom of the first chamber (130) and the bottom of the second chamber (132) (as shown in fig 3, the bottom of the liquid container forms the bottom of the first chamber (130) and second chamber 132)).
Modified Minotti does not disclose a connecting tongue operable to connect to a base of a pump housing.
However, Cagle in figs 1-8 teaches a fluid dispenser including a liquid container (12) and a pump housing (14) (retainer) coupled between the liquid container (14) and an outlet (43) (outlet tube) of a pump (39) (col 4, ln 65-col 5, ln 6), wherein the pump housing (14) includes a base (25) (flex arms) operable to connect to a connecting tongue (53) (retention tabs) of the liquid container (12) (col 6, ln 62-67);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing the pump housing with a base operable to connect to a connecting tongue of the liquid container as taught by Cagle, as the use of a base comprising flex arms to connect to a tongue of the liquid container is known is known in the art, and it appears that the modified modified Minotti’s device would perform equally well to connect the pump housing to liquid container using a base operable to connect to a connecting tongue of the liquid container.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Silhavy (12,383,917).
Regarding claim 17, modified Minotti discloses a first chamber and a second chamber.
Modified Minotti does not disclose a volume of the first chamber is from about 1 ml to about 100 ml; or a volume of the second chamber is from about 1 ml to about 100 ml.
However, Silhavy teaches a dual reservoir spray dispenser including a first chamber (11) and a second chamber (12) (col 15, ln 16-27), wherein a volume of the first and second chamber can be 1 to 250 mL, preferably from 2 to 100 mL, more preferably from 5 to 25 mL (col 4, ln 52-54)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Minotti so that a volume of the first chamber is from about 1 ml to about 100 ml; or a volume of the second chamber is from about 1 ml to about 100 ml as taught by Silhavy, as the feature of providing a first and/or second chamber with a volume from about 1 ml to about 100 ml is known in the art, and it appears that the device of modified Minotti would perform equally well to disperse a liquid if a volume of the first and/or second chamber is from about 1 ml to about 100 ml.
Claim(s) 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al, or in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Silhavy.
Regarding claim 18, modified Minotti discloses a first chamber (130) and a second chamber (132), and in fig 3 of Minotti appears to disclose that the volume of the first and second chambers (130, 132) are equal, and therefore a ratio of a volume of the first chamber and a volume of the second chamber would be about 1:1.
In the alternative, although Minotti does not explicitly disclose the volumes of the first and second chamber, Silhavy teaches a dual reservoir spray dispenser including a first chamber (11) and a second chamber (12) (col 15, ln 16-27), wherein the first and second chambers can have the same volume and the pump dispensers for the first and second chambers can be the same (col 11, ln 9-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti so that a volume of the first chamber and second chamber are the same, and the pump dispensers for the first chamber and the second chamber are the same (so that a ratio of a volume of the first chamber and a volume of the second chamber would be about 1:1) as taught by Silhavy so that a same quantity of a first component in the first chamber and a second component in the second chamber should be co-dispensed upon actuation, and the first reservoir and the second reservoir should be substantially emptied after the same number of actuations (Silhavy, col 11, ln 17-23).
Regarding claim 19, modified Minotti discloses a first chamber (130) and a second chamber (132), and fig 3 of Minotti appears to disclose that the volume of the first and second chambers (130, 132) are equal.
In the alternative, although modified Minotti does not explicitly disclose the volumes of the first and second chamber, Silhavy teaches a dual reservoir spray dispenser including a first chamber (11) and a second chamber (12) (col 15, ln 16-27), wherein the first and second chambers can have the same volume and the pump dispensers for the first and second chambers can be the same (col 11, ln 9-23).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti so that a volume of the first chamber and second chamber are equal, and the pump dispensers for the first chamber and the second chamber are the same as taught by Silhavy so that a same quantity of a first component in the first chamber and a second component in the second chamber should be co-dispensed upon actuation, and the first reservoir and the second reservoir should be substantially emptied after the same number of actuations (Silhavy, col 11, ln 17-23).
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Minotti and Kamishita et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shahaf et al (2018/0344951).
Regarding claim 24, modified Minotti discloses a nozzle.
Modified Minotti does not disclose an exit velocity from the nozzle is from about 6.5 m/s to about 19.5 m/s.
However, Shahaf teaches a device for aerosolized delivery to an orifice of the body including a nozzle (6200) for delivering an aerosol to a nose of a patient (para [0619]), and wherein an exit velocity from the nozzle is from about 6.5 m/s to about 19.5 m/s (5 m/s to 50 m/s) (para [0072]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of modified Minotti by configuring the nozzle so that an exit velocity from the nozzle is from about 6.5 m/s to about 19.5 m/s (5 m/s to 50 m/s) as taught by Shahaf, as the use of providing an aerosol plume in that range is known in the art, in the case where the claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art a prima facie case of obviousness exists. See MPEP 2144.05(I).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on page 3, first full paragraph-page 5, first full paragraph, that Minotti does not disclose a first mixing space, a second mixing space, and a nozzle mixing space as recited in claim 1, as Minotti shows that the two fluids separately enter spaces (42) and (44) and then mix together in passage (48), and therefore, the lower portion of the spray nozzle (22) of Minotti would not read on the limitation “a second mixing space” because the stream of fluid from passage (48) is not split into multiple separate streams and remixed again in the spray nozzle. However, although Minotti does not disclose that a fluid stream is split before entering the spray nozzle, Minotti’s spray nozzle is considered to read on the broadest reasonable interpretation of “a second mixing space” as the space is considered to be structurally distinct from the passage (48) because it is located in different structural components (for example, as shown in figs 1-2, the passageway (48) comprising the first mixing space is disposed in the receptacle (40) (para [0022]), and the passageway in the spray nozzle (22) between an interior surface of the spray nozzle (22) and an outer surface of the stylet (24) is disposed in the nozzle (22) (para [0024]), and have different structural features (for example, the passageway (48) comprising the first mixing space is shown to have a tubular shape, while the passageway in the spray nozzle (22) between an interior surface of the spray nozzle (22) and an outer surface of the stylet (24) is shown to have an annular shape). Furthermore, applicant’s argument is moot in view of new grounds of rejection further in view of Kamishita,, which in figs 1-4 teaches a device to apply a spray to a nose of a user including a nozzle body (20) and a post (30) (packing rod) disposed within the nozzle body (20) (para [0031]), wherein the post includes a first plurality of nozzle grooves (39) connected to a second mixing space (40) (gap) (para [0035]), and wherein the second mixing space (40) is connected to a nozzle mixing space (44) (vortex generation member) by a second set of nozzle grooves (38), wherein the nozzle mixing space (44) is between the second mixing space (40) and a nozzle opening (21) (nozzle orifice) (para [0036]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to the skilled artisan, upon seeing Kamishita’s disclosure, to modify the device of modified Minotti by providing the spray tip and stylus with a first plurality of nozzle grooves, a gap forming a second mixing space, a second plurality of nozzle grooves, and a nozzle mixing space comprising a vortex-flow generating member, wherein first the plurality of nozzle grooves fluidly couples a space below the spray tip to the gap forming the second mixing space within the spray tip, and the second plurality of nozzle grooves fluidly couples the gap forming the second mixing space to the nozzle mixing space as taught by Kamishita in order to provide an optimized shape and configuration of the nozzle for spraying a viscous formulation to a nose of a user (Kamishita, para [0006]). Therefore, modified Minotti discloses an inhaler with a first mixing space (48 of Minotti), and, as modified by Kamishita, the spray nozzle (55 of Minotti) includes a second mixing space (40 of Kamishita) and a nozzle mixing space (44 of Kamishita), and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant argues on page 5, second full paragraph-page 8, first paragraph of applicant’s remarks, that the additional prior references does not disclose the feature of a first mixing space, a second mixing space, and a nozzle missing space as recited in claim 1. However, as discussed above, because Minotti discloses the feature of a first mixing space and a second mixing space, and Kamishita teaches the feature of an inhaler with a second mixing space and nozzle mixing space, the modified Minotti’s device discloses the limitations of claim 1, and therefore the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 DOUGLAS Y SUL whose telephone number is (571)270-5260. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 am-5:30 pm 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, TIMOTHY STANIS can be reached at 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.
/DOUGLAS Y SUL/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights