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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 18, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed February 18, 2026 has been entered. All previously set forth Specification, Claim, and Drawing objections have been overcome.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-3, 8, and 16 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
35 USC § 103 Rejection
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 8, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cook (US 3,367,545) in view of Danek et al (US 5,452,824).
Regarding claim 1, Cook discloses a syringe housing for enclosing a syringe containing a fluid to be dispensed, the syringe housing comprising:
a space in the syringe housing (gun 10 and barrel 40) sized for accommodating the syringe (cartridge 12);
an opening at a first end of the syringe housing through which the syringe is insertable into the syringe housing (rear end of barrel 40; 3:46-55);
a nozzle (nozzle 18) located at a second end of the syringe housing opposite to the first end (please refer to the location of the nozzle 18 in Fig. 1), whereat the nozzle is configured to engage a dispensing tip of the syringe (tubular shank 24 and neck 25) for receiving fluid contained in the syringe and dispensing the fluid through the nozzle (3:66-69; Figs. 1, 5, & 7); and
a syringe adaptor (base member 44) that is removably coupled to the syringe housing for retaining the syringe after it has been inserted into the syringe housing (shown through engagement of base member 44 to rear end of barrel 40 in 3:31-45), the syringe adaptor including a pneumatic connector (inlet valve 46) that is connectable to a gas supply (via externally threaded shank 50) for introducing a gas into an air chamber enclosed within the syringe housing and the syringe (3:40-45), the gas being operative in use to apply a force inside the syringe to drive dispensation of the fluid through the nozzle (2:9-15).
Cook does not expressly disclose that the nozzle is configured to engage a dispensing tip of the syringe for receiving fluid contained in the syringe and dispensing the fluid through the nozzle. However, Danek discloses a dispensing nozzle (dispensing nozzle 22 and Luer lock connector 16) configured to receive fluid from a syringe through engagement with a syringe dispensing structure, wherein the dispensing nozzle receives fluid from the syringe and dispenses the fluid through the nozzle (3:30-34; Fig. 2). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Cook’s dispensing arrangement to incorporate Danek’s syringe and nozzle engagement structure in order to provide improved dispensing control, facilitate fluid transfer from the syringe to a dispensing nozzle, and permit use of known interchangeable dispensing nozzle arrangements in pressure driven dispensing systems.
Regarding claim 2, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, Cook further discloses an adaptor lock adapted to be screwed onto the syringe adaptor at the first end of the syringe housing to retain the syringe adaptor when it is coupled to the syringe housing (engagement of external screw threads formed on the rear end of the barrel 40 to the internal screw threads of the base member 44, 3:34-45).
Regarding claim 3, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, Cook further discloses the gas comprises compressed air, and the air chamber (pressure chamber 54) is located between the syringe adaptor and a piston inside the syringe (pistonlike member 34), the air chamber being configured to acquire an pressure from the compressed air to apply the force against the piston to drive dispensation of the fluid (3:56-65).
Regarding claim 8, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, Cook further discloses the syringe is configured to be removable from the syringe housing for replacing the syringe (2:9-15 for assembly of part enclosing he cartridge and 1:51-60 defining the disposable nature of the cartridge allowing its replacement).
Regarding claim 16, in addition to the limitations of claim 1, Cook further discloses the syringe adaptor is coupled to the syringe housing via interference fit between a syringe O-ring (elastomeric ring 52) located on an external surface of the syringe adaptor and internal walls of the syringe (3:46-55).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID P ANGWIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3735. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00 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. 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.
/DAVID P ANGWIN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights