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 Objections
Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 21, delete “to be connected” in line 6 of the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Delete “and end” in line 7 of the claim
Delete “being” before –extending—in line 10 of the claim
Regarding claim 35, Delete “and end” in line 7 of the claim
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 21 and 35, the limitation “a patient interface connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to a patient interface; and an outlet connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to the respiratory therapy device” renders the claim indefinite as it appears there are two different connectors at the second tube end. Per, the specification (paragraph 267 and Figs. 4g-4h) it appears that the patient interface connector is at the opposite end from the outlet connector. The claim will be interpreted that the outlet connector is located at a first end of the tube.
Regarding claim 21, "wherein the deformable seal is farther from the second tube end than the electrical connector end” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether applicant intends to say that the deformable seal is a greater distance from the second tube end than from the electrical connector end or that the deformable seal is farther from the second tube end than the electrical connector is from the second tube end. For examination purposes it is assumed that the deformable seal is a greater distance from the second tube end than the electrical connector is from the second tube end.
Claims 22-34 and 36-48 are rejected based on their dependency to claims 21 and 35 respectively.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 21-28, 33-42, and 47-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edirisuriya et al (US 2003/0236015), hereinafter Edirisuriya in view of Row et al (US 2010/0116272), hereinafter Row.
Regarding claim 21, Edirisuriya teaches an air circuit for use with a respiratory therapy device to treat sleep disordered breathing in a patient (paragraph 4, provide a connector between a gases supply means and a heated breathing conduit, paragraph 47, may be used to connect to CPAP devices, Fig. 3 air circuit 25), the air circuit comprising:
a tube having a helical coil (Fig. 7: wire 45, paragraph 56, spiral wire 45) and a heating element within the helical coil (paragraph 5, conduit includes electrical wire extending within the circuit, paragraph 51, heating element 30, Fig. 3, paragraph 57 spiral wound heater wire) the tube having a first tube end (Fig. 3: first tube end connected to connector 31) and a second tube end opposite the first tube end (Fig. 3: second tube end connected to connector to patient interface, Paragraph 50: end 26) ;
a patient interface connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to be connected to a patient interface (Per the 112 rejection this has been interpreted as located at the first tube end, paragraph 50, the end 26 of the conduit may have a cannula connected to the patient or a facemask connected to the user’s face); and
an outlet connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to the respiratory therapy device (Per the 112 rejection this has been interpreted as located at the first tube end, Fig. 3: 31, paragraph 52, the end of conduit 25 has a connector 31 suitable for coupling the conduit to the humidifier), the outlet connector comprising:
an electrical connector in electrical communication with the heating element (Figs. 11-13, 212, paragraph 64, the electrical port has pins or contact surface located within that are connected to the heater wire), the electrical connector being extending along a first axis from the outlet connector to an electrical connector end (See Fig. 11 and Fig. 12: the first axis extends through the electrical connector and parallel to the top surface of the connector, see annotated figure below, electrical connector end is open end at end of connector), and the electrical connector being configured to engage an electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. (paragraph 59, a male portion connected to the humidifier and a female portion connected to heated breathing circuit so that when the male and female portion are coupled together an electrical coupling is achieved, paragraph 65 when connected an electrical and pneumatic connection is made)
PNG
media_image1.png
609
766
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Edirisuriya does not teach a deformable seal configured to contact and seal against an airflow tube of the respiratory therapy device
However, Row teaches a cuff for an air delivery conduit (Abstract) which teaches a deformable end seal (Fig. 27: 331, paragraph 87, radial lip seal 331, lip seal may resiliently deform) configured to contact and seal against an airflow tube of the respiratory therapy device (Paragraph 87, the sealing lip is structured to resiliently deform upon engagement with connector 100 so as to provide a gas tight seal against the exterior surface of connector 100, sealing lip 331 provides a flexible protrusion to resiliently deflect from a first position to a second position, Paragraph 63, connector 100 may be outlet of respiratory therapy device), the deformable seal having an annular shape formed around a second axis (second axis through centerline of conduit diameter see fig. 27, lip goes around the entire conduit diameter and so has an annular shape),
wherein the first axis of the electrical connector is parallel to the second axis of the deformable seal, (See Figs. 27-28, the axis of the rim in along the center of the connector which would be parallel to the electrical connector axis of Edirisuriya) and
wherein the deformable seal is farther from the second tube end than the electrical connector end. (The sealing lip is at the end of the connector, Fig. 28 which is farther from then second tube end than a connector end)
Therefore, the combination of Edirisuriya and Row teaches the deformable seal is farther from the second tube end that the electrical connector end. (Edirisuriya teaches the electrical connector is located before the end of the connector)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to include the deformable seal as taught by Row in order to provide a gas tight seal between the connector and respiratory device outlet. (paragraph 67)
Regarding claim 22, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and further teaches wherein the deformable seal is configured to contact and seals against the airflow tube of the respiratory therapy device before the electrical connector engages the electrical connector receiver when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device. (Since Edirisuriya teaches the electrical connector is located at a midpoint of the connector and Row teaches the sealing lip is at the end of the connector, the deformable seal 331 would contact and seal against the airflow tube before the electrical connector engages)
Regarding claim 23, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, but Edirisuriya does not teach wherein the electrical connector is cantilevered from the outlet connector.
However, Row teaches that the connector may be cantilevered from the outlet connector. (fig. 23 shows outlet connector cantilevered from connector)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Edirisuriya with the cantilever structure as taught by Row in order to provide room for a seal surrounding the connector to prevent water ingression into the electrical contacts. (Fig. 27, paragraph 92)
Regarding claim 24, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the electrical connector comprises a free end that is configured to be received by the electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. ( Figs. 11-13, open end of connector is free to accept a connection, paragraph 59, a male portion connected to the humidifier and a female portion connected to heated breathing circuit so that when the male and female portion are coupled together an electrical coupling is achieved, paragraph 65 when connected an electrical and pneumatic connection is made)
Regarding claim 25, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, but does not teach wherein the electrical connector is a male electrical connector configured to be received by a female electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. (Edirisuriya teaches the connector is a female connector)
However, the courts have held that the particular placement of a component is an obvious matter of design choice and that a reversal of parts is an obvious modification. MPEP 2144.04 V1
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have made the electrical connector of Edirisuriya a male electrical connector configured to be received by a female electrical connector on the therapy device since this is a mere reversal of parts and has been held to be obvious.
Regarding claim 26, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya teaches wherein the outlet connector further comprises an outlet connector substructure, the electrical connector being attached to the outlet connector substructure. (Fig. 11: substructure 211)
Regarding claim 27, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 26, and Edirisuriya teaches wherein the outlet connector further comprises an outlet connector housing molded over the outlet connector substructure. (Paragraph 68, connectors can be formed and then over-molded)
Regarding claim 28, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 26, but does not teach wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises ribs configured to support and position the outlet connector on the airflow tube when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device.
However, Row teaches wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises ribs configured to support and position the outlet connector on the airflow tube when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device. (Paragraph 90, the interior surface of the cuff may include a series of ribs 340 to engage the external diameter of the tubular connector, Figs. 42-45)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to include the ribs as taught by Row in order to provide an insertion/retention force. (paragraph 90)
Regarding claim 33, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the electrical connector includes a support structure supporting at least one electrical lead. (Paragraph 65, has pins and contact surfaces within sleeve 211)
Regarding claim 34, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches a respiratory therapy system for treatment of sleep disordered breathing in a patient (Fig. 2), comprising:
a respiratory therapy device (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: 1)comprising:
a respiratory therapy device housing (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: external walls of 1):
a controllable pressure device positioned within the respiratory therapy device housing and configured to pressurize a flow of air at positive pressure relative to atmosphere (Edirisuriya paragraph 48, a gas supply means such as a ventilator or blower, paragraph 47, a positive pressure ventilation device); and
an outlet assembly positioned on the respiratory therapy device housing (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: outlet 2, paragraph 48); and
the air circuit of claim 21, (Edirisuriya in view of Row as rejected in claim 21) the outlet connector being configured to be connected to the outlet assembly to direct the flow of air at positive pressure to a patient. (Edirisuriya Fig. 3: outlet 31 connected to outlet assembly via tube 25)
Regarding claim 35, Edirisuriya teaches an air circuit for use with a respiratory therapy device to treat sleep disordered breathing in a patient (paragraph 4, provide a connector between a gases supply means and a heated breathing conduit, paragraph 47, may be used to connect to CPAP devices, Fig. 3: 25), the air circuit comprising:
a tube having a helical coil (Fig. 7: wire 45, paragraph 56, spiral wire 45) and a heating element within the helical coil (paragraph 5, conduit includes electrical wire extending withing the circuit, paragraph 51, heating element 30, Fig. 3, paragraph 57 spiral wound heater wire) the tube having a first tube end (Fig. 3: first tube end connected to connector 31) and a second tube end opposite the first tube end (Fig. 3: second tube end connected to connector to patient interface, Paragraph 50: end 26) ;
a patient interface connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to be connected to a patient interface (paragraph 50, the end 26 of the conduit may have a cannula connected to the patient or a facemask connected to the user’s face);
an outlet connector connected to the tube at the second tube end and configured to be connected to the respiratory therapy device (Per the 112 rejection this has been interpreted as located at the first tube end, Fig. 3: 31, paragraph 52, the end of conduit 25 has a connector 31 suitable for coupling the conduit to the humidifier), the outlet connector comprising:
an electrical connector in electrical communication with the heating element (Figs. 11-13, 212, paragraph 64, the electrical port has pins or contact surface located within that are connected to the heater wire), the electrical connector being extending along a first axis from the outlet connector to an electrical connector end (See Fig. 11 and Fig. 12: the first axis extends through the electrical connector and parallel to the top surface of the connector, see annotated figure for claim 21 above, electrical connector end is open the end at end of connector), and the electrical connector being configured to engage an electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. (paragraph 59, a male portion connected to the humidifier and a female portion connected to heated breathing circuit so that when the male and female portion are coupled together an electrical coupling is achieved, paragraph 65 when connected an electrical and pneumatic connection is made)
Edirisuriya does not teach a deformable seal configured to contact and seal against an airflow tube of the respiratory therapy device, the deformable seal having an inner peripheral edge that forms a hole that receives the airflow tube, and the inner peripheral edge lying in a plane,
wherein the longitudinal axis of the electrical connector is perpendicular to the plane of the inner peripheral edge of the deformable seal, and
wherein the electrical connector is spaced from the deformable seal in a direction of the longitudinal axis of the electrical connector such that the electrical connector does not reach the plane of the inner peripheral edge of the deformable seal.
However, Row teaches a cuff for an air delivery conduit (Abstract) which teaches a deformable end seal (Fig. 27: 331, paragraph 87, radial lip seal 331, lip seal may resiliently deform), the deformable seal having an inner peripheral edge that forms a hole that receives the air flow tube, (See Figs. 27-28, the lip 331 forms a hole/opening that holds the airflow tube) and the inner peripheral edge lying in a plane, (Fig. 27-28, plane through 331)
wherein the longitudinal axis of the electrical connector is perpendicular to the plane of the inner peripheral edge of the deformable seal, (the longitudinal axis of the connector of Edirisuriya runs perpendicular to a plane through the end of the connector) and
wherein the electrical connector is spaced apart from the deformable seal in a direction of the longitudinal axis of the electrical connector such that the electrical connector does not reach the plane of the inner peripheral edge of the deformable seal. (The sealing lip is at the end of the connector, Fig. 28, therefore the end of the electrical connector of Edirisuriya would not reach the plane of the deformable seal)
Therefore, the combination of Edirisuriya and Row teaches the deformable seal is farther from the second tube end that the electrical connector end. (Edirisuriya teaches the electrical connector is located before the end of the connector)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to include the deformable seal as taught by Row in order to provide a gas tight seal between the connector and respiratory device outlet. (paragraph 67)
Regarding claim 36, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and further teaches wherein the deformable seal is configured to contact and seals against the airflow tube of the respiratory therapy device before the electrical connector engages the electrical connector receiver when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device. (Since Edirisuriya teaches the electrical connector is located at a midpoint of the connector and Row teaches the sealing lip is at the end of the connector, the deformable seal 331 would contact and seal against the airflow tube before the electrical connector engages)
Regarding claim 37 Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, but Edirisuriya does not teach wherein the electrical connector is cantilevered from the outlet connector.
However, Row teaches that the connector may be cantilevered from the outlet connector. (fig. 23 shows outlet connector cantilevered from connector)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have provided Edirisuriya with the cantilever structure as taught by Row in order to provide room for a seal surrounding the connector to prevent water ingression into the electrical contacts. (Fig. 27, paragraph 92)
Regarding claim 38, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the electrical connector comprises a free end that is configured to be received by the electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. ( Figs. 11-13, open end of connector is free to accept a connection, paragraph 59, a male portion connected to the humidifier and a female portion connected to heated breathing circuit so that when the male and female portion are coupled together an electrical coupling is achieved, paragraph 65 when connected an electrical and pneumatic connection is made)
Regarding claim 39, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, but does not teach wherein the electrical connector is a male electrical connector configured to be received by a female electrical connector receiver of the respiratory therapy device. (Edirisuriya teaches the connector is a female connector)
However, the courts have held that the particular placement of a component is an obvious matter of design choice and that a reversal of parts is an obvious modification. MPEP 2144.04 V1
Therefore, it would have been obvious to have made the electrical connector of Edirisuriya a male electrical connector configured to be received by a female electrical connector on the therapy device since this is a mere reversal of parts and has been held to be obvious.
Regarding claim 40 Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya teaches wherein the outlet connector further comprises an outlet connector substructure, the electrical connector being attached to the outlet connector substructure. (Fig. 11: substructure 211)
Regarding claim 41, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 26, and Edirisuriya teaches wherein the outlet connector further comprises an outlet connector housing molded over the outlet connector substructure. (Paragraph 68, connectors can be formed and then over-molded)
Regarding claim 42, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 26, but does not teach wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises ribs configured to support and position the outlet connector on the airflow tube when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device.
However, Row teaches wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises ribs configured to support and position the outlet connector on the airflow tube when the outlet connector is connected to the respiratory therapy device. (Paragraph 90, the interior surface of the cuff may include a series of ribs 340 to engage the external diameter of the tubular connector, Figs. 42-45)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to include the ribs as taught by Row in order to provide an insertion/retention force. (paragraph 90)
Regarding claim 47, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 21, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the electrical connector includes a support structure supporting at least one electrical lead. (Paragraph 65, has pins and contact surfaces within sleeve 211)
Regarding claim 48, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches a respiratory therapy system for treatment of sleep disordered breathing in a patient (Fig. 2), comprising:
a respiratory therapy device (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: 1)comprising:
a respiratory therapy device housing (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: external walls of 1):
a controllable pressure device positioned within the respiratory therapy device housing and configured to pressurize a flow of air at positive pressure relative to atmosphere (Edirisuriya paragraph 48, a gas supply means such as a ventilator or blower, paragraph 47, a positive pressure ventilation device); and
an outlet assembly positioned on the respiratory therapy device housing (Edirisuriya Fig. 2: outlet 2, paragraph 48); and
the air circuit of claim 35, (Edirisuriya in view of Row as rejected in claim 35) the outlet connector being configured to be connected to the outlet assembly to direct the flow of air at positive pressure to a patient. (Edirisuriya Fig. 3: outlet 31 connected to outlet assembly via tube 25)
Claims 30-32 and 44-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Edirisuriya et al (US 2003/0236015), hereinafter Edirisuriya in view of Row et al (US 2010/0116272), hereinafter Row, and further in view of Worley (US 2008/0041391), hereinafter Worley.
Regarding claim 30, Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 26, but does not teach wherein the outlet connector further comprises a tab having a retention feature and an actuator, the retention feature being configured to engage corresponding structure of an outlet assembly to connect the air circuit to the outlet assembly, and the actuator is configured to be manipulated to disengage the retention feature from corresponding structure of the outlet assembly.
However, in anther embodiment Edirisuriya teaches the outlet connector further comprises a tab having a retention feature and an actuator (Paragraph 73, pivoting member 408 has protrusions at top of arms 411, 412, fig. 23), the retention feature being configured to engage corresponding structure of an outlet assembly to connect the air circuit to the outlet assembly, (Paragraph 75, grooves formed on mating connector for protrusions on arms 4010 and the actuator is configured to be manipulated to disengage the retention feature from corresponding structure of the outlet assembly. (Pivoting member 408 acts that when the protuberances are pushed inwards upper arms 411, 412 are moved inwards causing lower arms 413, 414 and protrusions to pivot outwards)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to have the retention features as taught by the alternate embodiment of Edirisuriya to secure the two connectors together and allow easy removal. (paragraph 78)
Edirisuriya does not teach the outlet connector substructure comprises a tab having a retention feature.
However, Walker teaches a coupling for a mask system having a retention feature on the connector substructure. Fig. 1: tabs 42, Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the air circuit of Edirisuriya in view of Row so that the retention tabs are located on the connector substructure as taught by Walker as this merely an alternative arrangement of parts and the courts have held that a mere rearrangement of part is an obvious matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 31, Edirisuriya in view of Row and Walker teaches the air circuit of claim 30, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises an outlet connection region (End of connector), the tab extending from the outlet connector substructure at the outlet connection region. (Fig. 19, See 408 extends from the outlet connector substructure at the connection)
Regarding claim 32, Edirisuriya in view of Row and Walker teaches the air circuit of claim 31, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the retention feature is positioned on the tab between the actuator and the outlet connection region (Fig. 23 retention tabs 415 and 416 are between the end of the connector and , and location on arms 411 and 412 that are pressed inwards to pivot retention tabs outwards. paragraph 73)
wherein the tab is cantilevered from the outlet connector substructure at the outlet connection region. (Walker, Figs. 1-2)
Regarding claim 44 Edirisuriya in view of Row teaches the air circuit of claim 40, but does not teach wherein the outlet connector further comprises a tab having a retention feature and an actuator, the retention feature being configured to engage corresponding structure of an outlet assembly to connect the air circuit to the outlet assembly, and the actuator is configured to be manipulated to disengage the retention feature from corresponding structure of the outlet assembly.
However, in anther embodiment Edirisuriya teaches the outlet connector further comprises a tab having a retention feature and an actuator (Paragraph 73, pivoting member 408 has protrusions at top of arms 411, 412, fig. 23), the retention feature being configured to engage corresponding structure of an outlet assembly to connect the air circuit to the outlet assembly, (Paragraph 75, grooves formed on mating connector for protrusions on arms 4010 and the actuator is configured to be manipulated to disengage the retention feature from corresponding structure of the outlet assembly. (Pivoting member 408 acts that when the protuberances are pushed inwards upper arms 411, 412 are moved inwards causing lower arms 413, 414 and protrusions to pivot outwards)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the filing date of the invention to have modified Edirisuriya to have the retention features as taught by the alternate embodiment of Edirisuriya to secure the two connectors together and allow easy removal. (paragraph 78)
Edirisuriya does not teach the outlet connector substructure comprises a tab having a retention feature.
However, Walker teaches a coupling for a mask system having a retention feature on the connector substructure. Fig. 1: tabs 42, Fig. 2)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the air circuit of Edirisuriya in view of Row so that the retention tabs are located on the connector substructure as taught by Walker as this merely an alternative arrangement of parts and the courts have held that a mere rearrangement of part is an obvious matter of design choice.
Regarding claim 45, Edirisuriya in view of Row and Walker teaches the air circuit of claim 44, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the outlet connector substructure further comprises an outlet connection region (End of connector), the tab extending from the outlet connector substructure at the outlet connection region. (Fig. 19, See 408 extends from the outlet connector substructure at the connection)
Regarding claim 46, Edirisuriya in view of Row and Walker teaches the air circuit of claim 45, and Edirisuriya further teaches wherein the retention feature is positioned on the tab between the actuator and the outlet connection region (Fig. 23 retention tabs 415 and 416 are between the end of the connector and , and location on arms 411 and 412 that are pressed inwards to pivot retention tabs outwards. paragraph 73)
wherein the tab is cantilevered from the outlet connector substructure at the outlet connection region. (Walker, Figs. 1-2)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29 and 43 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 29 and 43, the prior art does not teach the details of an outlet connector substructure includes a receiver, the receiver including receiver threads at a tube connection region, the tube and the helical coil being threaded onto the receiver threads such that a connection portion of the tube extends into the receiver at the tube connection region, and the outlet connector substructure having an orifice positioned opposite the receiver,
wherein an end cap is attached to the outlet connector substructure and covers the orifice,
wherein the outlet connector further comprises a clip configured to secure the connection portion of the tube within the tube connection region of the receiver, and
wherein the outlet connector housing is molded over the clip.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARGARET M LUARCA whose telephone number is (303)297-4312. The examiner can normally be reached 6:30 am - 3:30 pm MT.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at 571-270-7410. 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.
/MARGARET M LUARCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights