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 . 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(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.
Claims 1-3, 7 10, 11, 13-16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Orrington, II (US 2021/0353469 A1) (Orrington).
Referring to claim 1: Orrington teaches an aerosol containment device (see figures 2-3) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0009]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a manifold (see figures 2-3, #202/303); and a shield (see figures 2-3; paragraphs [0027]-[0032]) connected to the manifold.
Referring to claim 2: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises a body that has: a front inlet; a rear discharge; and plenum extending between the front inlet and the rear discharge (see figures 2-3).
Referring to claim 3: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises one or more entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet, wherein each of the one or more entry vanes has a cross-section that is substantially constant (see figure 3, reproduced below; paragraph [0047]).
PNG
media_image1.png
890
776
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Referring to claim 7: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises one or more interior vanes inside the plenum, wherein each of the one or more interior vanes has a cross- section that is substantially constant (see figure 3, reproduced above; paragraph [0047]).
Referring to claim 10: Orrington further teaches the shield is manufactured from a clear plastic (see paragraph [0030]).
Referring to claim 11: Orrington further teaches a vacuum source; and a vacuum hose connected between the vacuum source and the rear discharge of the manifold (see paragraph [0047]; wherein it is clear a vacuum source is connected to the vacuum hose to create suction).
Referring to claim 13: Orrington further teaches the vacuum hose is a structured hose (see paragraph [0047]).
Referring to claim 14: Orrington teaches an aerosol containment device (see figures 2-3) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0009]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a vacuum source (see paragraph [0047]; wherein it is clear a vacuum source is connected to the vacuum hose to create suction); a vacuum hose connected to the vacuum source (see paragraph [0047]); a manifold (see figures 2-3, #202/303) connected to the vacuum hose; and a shield (see figures 2-3; paragraphs [0027]-[0032]) connected to the manifold, wherein the shield is manufactured from a transparent plastic (see paragraph [0030]).
Referring to claim 15: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises a body that has: a front inlet; a rear discharge; and plenum extending between the front inlet and the rear discharge (see figures 2-3).
Referring to claim 16: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises a plurality of entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet (see figure 3, reproduced above; paragraph [0047]).
Referring to claim 18: Orrington further teaches the manifold comprises a plurality of interior vanes inside the plenum, and wherein each of the plurality of interior vanes is attached to a corresponding one of the plurality of entry vanes (see figure 3, reproduced above; paragraph [0047]).
Referring to claim 20: Orrington teaches an aerosol containment device (see figures 2-3) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0009]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a vacuum source (see paragraph [0047]; wherein it is clear a vacuum source is connected to the vacuum hose to create suction); a vacuum hose connected to the vacuum source (see paragraph [0047]), wherein the vacuum hose is a structured hose (see paragraph [0047]); a manifold (see figures 2-3, #202/303) connected to the vacuum hose, wherein the manifold comprises a body that has: a front inlet; a rear discharge connected to the vacuum hose; a plenum extending between the front inlet and the rear discharge (see figures 2-3); and a plurality of flow features (see figure 3) within the plenum; and a shield (see figures 2-3; paragraphs [0027]-[0032]) connected to the manifold, wherein the shield is manufactured from a transparent plastic (see paragraph [0030]).
Claims 1, 2, 9-11, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (US 2021/0353395 A1) (Kim).
Referring to claim 1: Kim teaches an aerosol containment device (see figure 4A) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0006]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a manifold (see figures 1/4A, #104); and a shield (see figures 1/4A, #102; paragraph [0045]) connected to the manifold.
Referring to claim 2: Kim further teaches the manifold comprises a body that has: a front inlet; a rear discharge; and plenum extending between the front inlet and the rear discharge (see figures 1-2A; paragraph [0050]).
Referring to claim 9: Kim further teaches the manifold further comprises a plurality of attachment tabs and wherein the shield comprises a plurality of attachment apertures that are configured to capture a corresponding one of the plurality of attachment tabs to secure the shield to the manifold (see figures 2C-D; paragraph [0059]).
Referring to claim 10: Kim further teaches the shield is manufactured from a clear plastic (see paragraph [0062]).
Referring to claim 11: Kim further teaches a vacuum source (see figure 1, #112); and a vacuum hose (see figure 1, #110) connected between the vacuum source and the rear discharge of the manifold (see figures 1/4A).
Referring to claim 14: Kim teaches an aerosol containment device (see figure 4A) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0006]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a vacuum source (see figure 1, #112); a vacuum hose (see figure 1, #110) connected to the vacuum source; a manifold (see figures 1/4A, #104) connected to the vacuum hose; and a shield (see figures 1/4A, #102; paragraph [0045]) connected to the manifold, wherein the shield is manufactured from a transparent plastic (see paragraph [0062]).
Referring to claim 15: Kim further teaches the manifold comprises a body that has: a front inlet; a rear discharge; and plenum extending between the front inlet and the rear discharge (see figures 1-2A; paragraph [0050]).
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.
Claims 4 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Orrington, with regards to claim 3 and 7 above.
Referring to claims 4 and 8: Orrington is silent to the manifold specifically comprises between two and eight entry vanes and between two and eight interior vanes. There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing the number of the one or more vanes of Orrington would result in a difference in function of the Orrington device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the vanes of Orrington would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being giving the claimed number of vanes. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range soles any stated problem, indicating that the vanes “may vary from 1 to 20, for example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, or 20, or more” and in some embodiments do “include any entry vanes 128, interior foils 130, or interior vanes 132” (see paragraphs [039]-[040] of specification as originally filed). Therefore, there appears to be no criticality placed on the range as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result. 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 number of vanes taught by Orrington to between two and eight entry vanes and two and eight interior vanes as a matter of design choice withing the skill of the art.
Claims 3-4, 7-8, 16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Orrington.
Referring to claims 3 and 7: With regards to claim 2 above, Kim is silent to the manifold comprises one or more entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet and one or more interior vanes inside the plenum, wherein each of the one or more entry vanes and one or more interior vanes have a cross-section that is substantially constant. Orrington teaches an aerosol containment device (see figures 2-3) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0009]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a manifold (see figures 2-3, #202/303); and a shield (see figures 2-3; paragraphs [0027]-[0032]) connected to the manifold, wherein the manifold comprises one or more entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet and one or more interior vanes inside the plenum, wherein each of the one or more vanes has a cross-section that is substantially constant (see figure 3, reproduced above; paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the manifold of Kim with one or more entry and interior vanes like taught by Orrington in order to help prevent objects, such as towels, in the immediate vicinity of the front inlet being sucked into the vacuum hose (see Orrington paragraph [0047]).
Referring to claims 4 and 8: Kim, as modified by Orrington, is silent to the manifold specifically comprises between two and eight entry vanes and between two and eight interior vanes. There is no evidence of record that establishes that changing the number of the one or more vanes of Kim, as modified by Orrington, would result in a difference in function of the Kim, as modified by Orrington, device. Further, a person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying the vanes of Kim, as modified by Orrington, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears the device would function as intended being giving the claimed number of vanes. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range soles any stated problem, indicating that the vanes “may vary from 1 to 20, for example 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, or 20, or more” and in some embodiments do “include any entry vanes 128,interior foils 130, or interior vanes 132” (see paragraphs [039]-[040] of specification as originally filed). Therefore, there appears to be no criticality placed on the range as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result. 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 number of vanes taught by Kim, as modified by Orrington, to between two and eight entry vanes and two and eight interior vanes as a matter of design choice withing the skill of the art.
Referring to claims 16 and 18: With regards to claim 15 above, Kim is silent to the manifold comprises a plurality of entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet. Orrington teaches an aerosol containment device (see figures 2-3) for use in containing aerosols discharged during a dental procedure (see paragraph [0009]), the aerosol containment device comprising: a manifold (see figures 2-3, #202/303); and a shield (see figures 2-3; paragraphs [0027]-[0032]) connected to the manifold, wherein the manifold comprises one or more entry vanes adjacent to the front inlet and one or more interior vanes inside the plenum, wherein each of the one or more vanes has a cross-section that is substantially constant, wherein each of the plurality of interior vanes is attached to a corresponding one of the plurality of entry vanes (see figure 3, reproduced above; paragraph [0047]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the manifold of Kim with one or more entry vanes and interior vanes like taught by Orrington in order to help prevent objects, such as towels, in the immediate vicinity of the front inlet being sucked into the vacuum hose (see Orrington paragraph [0047]).
Claims 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as applied to claims 11 and 14 above, in view of Chen (US Patent No. 5,865,182).
Referring to claims 12 and 19: Kim further teaches the manifold further comprises a coupling (see figure 3B, #106) that is configured to selectively hold the manifold in fixed positional relationship with the vacuum hose (see paragraphs [0048]-[0050] and [0063]). Kim is silent to the coupling being specifically a set screw. Chen teaches a positionable viewing shield comprising a connector (see figures 1-2, #22) coupling a flexible segment (see figure 1, #48) with a set screw (see figures 1-2, #26; column 3, lines 50-55). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make a simple substitution of the coupling of Kim with a connector including set screw like taught by Chen in order to yield predictable results in coupling the manifold in a fixed position relative to the vacuum hose.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-6 and 17 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 prior art of record does not reasonably teach or reasonably suggest, in combination with the additional limitations of the base claims and any intervening claims, an aerosol containment device comprising a manifold comprising a plurality of interior foils inside a plenum of the manifold.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Crohin et al. (US 2021/0338396 A1) teaches a plurality of grooves on the surface of a manifold. Orrington, II et al. (US 2022/0142269 A1); Ryan (US 2021/0378778 A1); Jeanmenne (US 2021/0378802 A1); Mirbahaeddin (US Patent No. 11,179,287); Danner (US 2021/0330419 A1); each of which teaches an aerosol containment device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLEE R WILSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7517. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday 8 AM-5:00 PM 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, Boyer Ashley can be reached at (571)272-4502. 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.
/KAYLEE R WILSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3700