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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 24-49 are allowable.
Claims 24, 26-28, 35-41, 44, and 46-49 are currently amended.
Claims 1-23 are cancelled.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed 07/17/2026 have been fully considered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 07/17/2026, with respect to claims 24-49 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, since Applicant amended the independent claim, a new ground for rejection is made, thereby making this action Final.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 24-49 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 32-57 and 63-64 of copending Application No. 18/035,048 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented. The claims of the reference application contain each and every limitation of claims 24-29 of the instant application as well as additional features. The claims of the reference application are narrower than the claims of the instant application, and effectively anticipate the instant claims. Thus, the invention of the reference application claims 32-57 and 63-64 are in effect a “species” of the “generic” invention of the instant claims 24-49. It has been held that the generic invention is “anticipated” by the “species”. See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-49 are allowable.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior arts of record are Bene (U.S. Patent No. 5,725,775 A) in view of Szamosfalvi (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2008/0015487 A1). Additionally, Pouchoulin (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2023/0017204 A1) was previously indicated as prior art of record in the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/18/2026, however, it does not qualify as prior art at least because Pouchoulin and the present application were owned by or subject to an obligation of assignment to the assignee of the present application, Gambro Lundia AB.
As described on pages 3-9 of the Non-Final Rejection mailed 02/18/2026, Bene in view of Szamosfalvi teaches a Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy (CRRT) apparatus comprising some of the claimed features of independent claim 24. However, Bene in view of Szamosfalvi fails to teach or reasonably suggest, alone or in combination, that receiving a patient prescription comprising clinical prescription parameters including allowing entry of a target value for a parameter indicative of a steady state acid-base balance in the blood of a patient, wherein the parameter indicative of a steady-state acid-base balance is a net buffer load, and wherein the one or more mathematical relations include a net buffer load mathematical relation in which the net buffer load is a sum of at least: bicarbonate generated from metabolism of citrate infused to the patient, and wherein the bicarbonate generation from metabolism of citrate is based on a citrate load to the patient, the citrate load being determined from a citrate infusion rate through the anticoagulant infusion line and a citrate removal rate to effluent, and a bicarbonate balance in the extracorporeal blood treatment, and allowing entry of a set value for a prescribed anticoagulant dose to be delivered, as required by the claim (see pages 14-16 of Remarks filed 07/17/2026).
One of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to modify the device of Bene in view of Szamosfalvi to have the claimed features without relying on impermissible hindsight (see MPEP 2141).
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
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 JIHAD DAKKAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0567. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9AM - 5PM ET.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/JIHAD DAKKAK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/SARAH AL HASHIMI/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights