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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 10-19, and 24-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byerly et al. (WO 2019/040313 A1) in view of Radmer et al. (US 2016/0263327 A1).
With regard to claims 1 and 2, Byerly et al. teach a medication delivery device comprising: a housing (Fig. 16 member 12); a mechanical switch mounted to a printed circuit board, wherein the mechanical switch comprises an arm (Fig. 16 arm 492, PCB 525); a rotatable element that is rotatable relative to the printed circuit board, the rotatable element having a series of protrusions that are spaced from one another, the rotatable element being positioned to permit the protrusions to slide against the arm of the switch (Fig. 17 member 438 with protrusions 502); a conversion control module in electrical communication with the switch configured to generate an undulating unit signal based on signals from the switch as the arm slides against the protrusions ([0103] the sensor 486 (Fig. 16) sends signals based on the state of the switch, the state being a set or reset state depending on if the switch is opened or closed); and a controller configured to receive the undulating unit signal from the conversion control module ([0103], signals are sent to a controller). Byerly et al. does not explicitly disclose the switch is a SPDT switch. However, Radmer et al. teach equivalently using a SPDT or an SPST switch, the benefit of the SPDT switch being that it can prevent drainage on the battery ([0083]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a SPDT switch in Byerly et al. as this would provide equivalent signaling to yield the same predictable result and as taught by Radmer et al. is beneficial for prevent drainage on the battery.
With regard to claim 3, the dose is determined based on the sensing ([0102], [0103]).
With regard to claims 4 and 5, see [0055] the controller includes a processor, which would necessarily comprise the logic, [0056] a battery is used.
With regard to claims 10, 12, and 14, see exemplary Fig. 2 outlet 24, Fig. 16 dose button 456 fixed to circuit 525 ([0044]-[0046], [0103]).
With regard to claims 11 and 13, see [0103].
With regard to claim 15, see housing of 490 (Fig. 16).
With regard to claim 16, see exemplary Fig. 2 member 20 ([0034]).
With regard to claims 17 and 18, Byerly et al. teach a dose detection system for a medication delivery device, comprising: a mechanical switch mounted to a printed circuit board, wherein the mechanical switch comprises an arm (Fig. 16 arm 492, PCB 525); a rotatable element that is rotatable relative to the printed circuit board, the rotatable element having a series of protrusions that are spaced from one another, the rotatable element being positioned to permit the protrusions to slide against the arm of the switch (Fig. 17 member 438 with protrusions 502); a conversion control module in electrical communication with the switch configured to generate an undulating unit signal based on signals from the switch as the arm slides against the protrusions ([0103] the sensor 486 (Fig. 16) sends signals based on the state of the switch, the state being a set or reset state depending on if the switch is opened or closed which necessarily includes logic); and a controller configured to receive the undulating unit signal from the conversion control module ([0103], signals are sent to a controller). Byerly et al. does not explicitly disclose the switch is a SPDT switch. However, Radmer et al. teach equivalently using a SPDT or an SPST switch, the benefit of the SPDT switch being that it can prevent drainage on the battery ([0083]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a SPDT switch in Byerly et al. as this would provide equivalent signaling to yield the same predictable result and as taught by Radmer et al. is beneficial for prevent drainage on the battery.
With regard to claim 19, the dose is determined based on the sensing ([0102], [0103]).
With regard to claims 24 and 25, Byerly et al. teach a method comprising: rotating a rotatable element relative to a printed circuit board, the rotatable element having a series of protrusions that are spaced from one another (Fig. 17 member 438 with protrusions 502, PCB 525, [0103]), the rotatable element being positioned to permit the protrusions to slide against an arm of a mechanical switch mounted to the printed circuit board (Fig. 16 arm 492); and generating an undulating signal via a conversion control module that is in electrical communication with the switch based on signals from the switch as the arm slides against the protrusions ([0103] the sensor 486 (Fig. 16) sends signals based on the state of the switch, the state being a set or reset state depending on if the switch is opened or closed which necessarily includes logic). Byerly et al. does not explicitly disclose the switch is a SPDT switch. However, Radmer et al. teach equivalently using a SPDT or an SPST switch, the benefit of the SPDT switch being that it can prevent drainage on the battery ([0083]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a SPDT switch in Byerly et al. as this would provide equivalent signaling to yield the same predictable result and as taught by Radmer et al. is beneficial for prevent drainage on the battery.
With regard to claim 26, the dose is determined based on the sensing ([0102], [0103]).
Claim(s) 6-9, 20-23, 27, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byerly et al. (WO 2019/040313 A1) and Radmer et al. (US 2016/0263327 A1) as applied to claims 4, 19, and 26 above, and further in view of Sur (US 2021/0127455 A1).
With regard to claims 6-9, 20-23, 27, and 28, Byerly et al. disclose the controller includes a processor, which would necessarily comprise the logic ([0055]), a battery ([0056]), and using a wake-up feature to allow power transmission from the power source with a wake-up switch to minimize power loss ([0099], [0118]) but do not specifically disclose using a MOSFET. However, Sur teaches using a SPDT switch in conjunction with a second switch connected to a MOSFET to control current and regulate the load ([0143]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a MOSFET in conjunction with the wake-up switch of Byerly as in Sur to aid in regulating the load and controlling current. Further, MOSFETs are well known to be integral with microprocessors.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-3648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:00 AM to 4:30 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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.
/EMILY L SCHMIDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights