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 § 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0041021 to Moss et al. (Moss).
Regarding claim 1, Moss teaches a fluid management cassette (1302), comprising: a cassette body (1314) configured for insertion into a cassette bay of a control console (e.g. 100), the cassette body including a multi-part face plate having at least one fluid input port (leading to 1304) and at least first (from 1306) and second (from 1308) fluid output ports defined therethrough; a pump (103) disposed within an interior (including the extent of lines 206) of the cassette body; a valve manifold (1300) disposed within the interior of the cassette body; and first (1304 to 1306) and second (1304 to 1308) fluid flow paths extending through the cassette body, the first and second fluid flow paths sharing connection from the first fluid input port to a pump (103) and from the pump to the valve manifold, the first and second fluid flow paths defining separate connections from the valve manifold to the respective first and second fluid output ports, wherein the valve manifold is selectively actuatable to at least four different configurations (corresponding to the blank wall of the valve body facing toward each of the ports or to the blank space opposite the inlet passage 1304) including enabling flow from the inlet port to any, all, or none of the outlet ports.
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, 3-4, 7 and 21-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pre-Grant Publication 2020/0041021 to Moss et al. (Moss).
Regarding claim 1, Moss teaches a fluid management cassette (1302), comprising: a cassette body (1314) configured for insertion into a cassette bay of a control console (e.g. 100), the cassette body including a multi-part face plate having at least one fluid input port (leading to 1304) and at least first (from 1306) and second (from 1308) fluid output ports defined therethrough; a pump (103) disposed within an interior (including the extent of lines 206) of the cassette body; a valve manifold (1300) disposed within the interior of the cassette body; and first (1304 to 1306) and second (1304 to 1308) fluid flow paths extending through the cassette body, the first and second fluid flow paths sharing connection from the first fluid input port to a pump (103) and from the pump to the valve manifold, the first and second fluid flow paths defining separate connections from the valve manifold to the respective first and second fluid output ports, wherein the valve manifold is selectively actuatable to at least four different configurations (corresponding to the blank wall of the valve body facing toward each of the ports or to the blank space opposite the inlet passage 1304) including enabling flow from the inlet port to any, all, or none of the outlet ports.
Moss teaches another embodiment (Figs. 27-28) in which an inlet line (1204) is selectively coupled to two outlet lines (1206, 1208) via a rotary, translating valve (1200, 1222), which is axially slidable within the base (1202) to achieve the first, second, third and fourth configurations. The examiner notes that the claim recites only that the slider is “translationally slidable” to achieve the configurations. The claim does not recite translationally separated positions of each configuration, i.e. distinct positions along a reciprocatory axis, and therefore concludes that the translational slidability of Moss is sufficient to anticipate this limitation. Furthermore, Moss teaches a plurality of lumens defined transversely through the slider in a predetermined pattern capable of achieving the described states. Moss does not explicitly teach that these lines are connected to the pumps (at 206). Moss teaches that the pumps are used to provide fluid flow, and the valves are used to actively control that flow (see e.g. paragraph 92). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to use the valve of Figs. 27-28 in combination with the pumps to control the flow of the pumps to the necessary parts of the dialysis machine.
Regarding claim 3, Moss teaches a spring (1226) biasing toward a position corresponding to any of the flow enabled configurations.
Regarding claim 4, Moss teaches that motors may actuate the valves (paragraph 83, motor 129). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to use a motor as taught by Moss to actuate the valve of Figs. 27-28 in order to enable automatic control thereof by the controller of the dialysis machine.
Regarding claim 7, Moss teaches pump motors (paragraph 81) for rotating peristaltic pumps.
Regarding claim 21, Moss teaches actuators (e.g. a wrench or a solenoid, per paragraphs 132-133), with the actuator (solenoid) capable of translating the slider.
Regarding claim 22, Moss teaches that the slider is biased (by 1226) to the first configuration (Fig. 28).
Regarding claims 23 and 24, Moss teaches that a drive shaft (1806) may be used to rotate a valve via operable engagement therewith, and therefore it would have been obvious as the mere substitution of one known actuator for another to use such a shaft (and the associated motor) to turn the valve of Figs. 27-28.
Regarding claim 25, Moss teaches solenoids (e.g. 1130) for providing translative force.
Regarding claim 26, Moss teaches the spring bias and therefore any movement into the configuration of Fig. 28 would be against that bias (of 1226).
Regarding claims 27-28, Moss teaches that the spring (1226) biases the slider into the first configuration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
As a preliminary matter, the examiner agrees that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been overcome and withdraws the rejection herein.
With respect to the argument that Moss does not teach a plurality of transverse lumens, the examiner is not persuaded. Multiple lumens may be transverse and fall within the same plane, as do the passages (1204, 1206, 1208) of Moss with which communication is established in the embodiment of Fig. 27. The examiner notes Fig. 29, in which such passages within the valve are illustrated.
With respect to the translation limitation, the examiner notes that the claim recites only that the slider is “translationally slidable” to achieve the configurations. That is to say that the limitation is functional. Since the valve of Moss is capable of being translated during every positional change, Moss is capable of performing the claimed function. Since the claim does not recite translationally separated positions of each configuration, i.e. distinct positions along a reciprocatory axis, and the examiner concludes that the translational slidability of Moss is sufficient to anticipate and/or render obvious this limitation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Pre-Grant Publication 2009/0012460 teaches (Fig. 2) a dialysis cassette with all fluid connections on one side surface and relevant valve structure, U.S. Patent 5,421,814 teaches a spool valve structure (see e.g. Fig. 5) with distinct configurations achieved by distinct axial positions of the spool.
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 PHILIP E STIMPERT whose telephone number is (571)270-1890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a-4p.
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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at 571-270-1744. 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.
/PHILIP E STIMPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783 28 May 2026
Prosecution Insights