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
Claims 29 and 30 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims require a comma after the preamble. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 25 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 25 recites “the intravenous infusion pump” there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 28 and 34 are objected to because of the following informalities: the claims recite “the infusion pump” this should be “the intravenous infusion pump” for consistency. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 29 is 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. Claim 29 recites “an intravenous infusion pump” a pump is previously claimed in claim 25, it is not clear if this is the same or a different pump. For purposes of the rejection, it is considered as the same pump.
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) 25, 26, and 28-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ater (US 2016/0270658 A1).
With regard to claims 25, 26, and 28-32, Ater teaches a method for the safe administration of contraction inducing drugs comprising: measuring one or more of frequency, strength, and duration of uterine contractions through a measurement device connected to a monitor ([0111]-[0112] sensor 10 monitor 9, [0174] uterine pressure Fig. 4A 214); determining whether one or more of the measured frequency, strength, or duration of uterine contractions exceeds one or more predetermined thresholds ([0129] stops deliveries when alarm is activated); and stopping the intravenous infusion pump from administering a drug when the frequency, strength, or duration of uterine contractions exceed the one or more predetermined thresholds ([0129] stops deliveries when alarm is activated, Fig. 1 pump 46 delivers oxytocin/Pitocin [0006], [0051]).
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) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ater (US 2016/0270658 A1) as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Chossat (US 2011/0320049 A1).
With regard to claim 27, Ater discloses a method substantially as claimed. Ater does not disclose restarting administration by entering a passcode. However, Chossat teaches that after an alert related to dosage has been given authorization like a password may be needed to override the alert ([0045]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to require a passcode to restart delivery in Ater because Chossat teaches such may be required to override a system which ensures a patient is only receiving medication deemed necessary which enhances safety.
Claim(s) 33 and 35-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ater (US 2016/0270658 A1) and Chossat (US 2011/0320049 A1) as applied to claim 27 above, and further in view of Boone, III et al. (US 2010/0045427 A1) and Khair et al. (US 2010/0280486 A1).
With regard to claims 33 and 35-37, Ater and Chossat teach a method substantially as claimed. Ater and Chossat do not disclose the number of passcode entries are based on categories of medical staff. However, Boone, III et al. teach a limited number of times a usage code may be used ([00009]-[0010]). Further, Khair et al. teach limiting which caregivers may have access to overriding dosage information to physicians or nursing supervisors ([0068]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to limit the number of times someone may enter a passcode and to limit the staff allowed to enter a passcode for overriding a system to deliver a drug in Ater and Chossat as Boone, III et al. and Khair teach such measures which would help to ensure proper usage and patient safety by preventing and over delivery of medication and ensuring proper staff is making decisions regarding treatment. As combined other staff would have zero number of times available to them if they attempted to input a code to restart the pump.
Claim(s) 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ater (US 2016/0270658 A1) and Chossat (US 2011/0320049 A1) as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Boone, III et al. (US 2010/0045427 A1).
With regard to claim 34, Ater teaches the pump is stopped and shows the pump in connection to the monitor and that the system controller which stop delivery is in the monitor (Fig. 1, [0116], [0117], [0121], [0129]) but does not specifically disclose the pump is shut down by shutting down power from the monitor. However, Boone, III et al. teach disabling operation to a system by disconnecting the power ([0099]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to shut off the pump of Ater by shutting off the monitor power as Boone, III et al. teach this is an art effective means for disabling operation. Further, as the pump and monitor work in conjunction with each other and the pump is controlled by the monitor there are a limited number of power supplies which may be shut down to shut down pump operation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be able to determine appropriate measures for disconnecting power such that the pump system shuts down.
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