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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“connecting part” in claims 1, 22, and 23. The examiner notes that this limitation will be interpreted to mean a ring-shaped protrusion, as set forth in paragraph 46, and functional equivalents thereof.
“sealing structure” in claim 16. The examiner notes that this limitation will be interpreted to mean a rib and “other forms of sealing structures”, as set forth in paragraph 46, and functional equivalents thereof.
“positioning structure” in claims 19 and 23. The examiner notes that this limitation will be interpreted to mean a limiting lug and a limiting groove, as set forth in paragraph 51, and functional equivalents thereof.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 5 and 23 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 claim 5, the claim recites that the membrane, connecting part, and at least a part of the milk bowl jointly define an air-side negative pressure cavity. This claim is dependent on claim 1 which recites at the end that these same components jointly define a recess or a cavity. It is unclear if the cavity of claim 5 is the same cavity of claim 1 or if the cavity is different. For examination purposes, the cavity of claim 5 is considered the same as the cavity of claim 1.
Claim 23 recites the limitation "the connecting part" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3-8, 12-18, 21, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hwang (US 20220265907).
Regarding claim 1, Hwang discloses a breast pump (assembly 10 in fig. 1), comprising:
a milk bowl (storage housing 120 and stopper 200 in fig. 3 form the “milk bowl”),
a breast shield detachably connected to the milk bowl (contact housing 110 in fig. 3; paragraph 40 discloses the housings 110 and 120 being detachably coupled), wherein a milk storage cavity for storing milk is defined by the breast shield and the milk bowl (milk storage space C in fig. 3), and the breast shield has a flange shaped to fit a breast (see below) and a milk pumping channel for receiving a nipple (milk inflow cavity 113a);
a main body detachably connected to the milk bowl (first case 410 in fig. 5 is connected to milk bowl 120 via pipe 300 in fig. 1; paragraph 42 discloses the connection is detachable), wherein an air pump for generating negative pressure is provided inside the main body (milking pump 420 in fig. 14), the milk bowl is air communicated with the negative pressure generated by the air pump (negative pressure is transmitted to milk bowl 120 via connectors 411 and 210 and pipe 300 in fig. 2), and the negative pressure generated by the air pump acts on the milk pumping channel to promote lactation (paragraph 50); and
a membrane configured to prevent the milk from reaching the air pump (flow separation membrane 150 in fig. 3), wherein an inner surface of the milk bowl is provided with a connecting part connected to the membrane (this limitation is interpreted to mean a ring-shaped protrusion; see below, the designated connecting part is embodied as a ring shape protrusion which protrudes inwardly), and the membrane, the connecting part, and at least a part of the milk bowl jointly define a recess or a cavity (coupling cavity 123 in fig. 3).
PNG
media_image1.png
437
488
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 3, Hwang discloses a membrane support for installing the membrane (see below).
PNG
media_image2.png
228
493
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, Hwang discloses the membrane support and the connecting part jointly define an air-side groove or cavity (see annotated figures above; the membrane support and connecting part designated above form a groove which receives the membrane therebetween).
Regarding claim 5, Hwang discloses the membrane, the connecting part, and at least a part of the inner surface of the milk bowl jointly define an air-side negative pressure cavity (see 112b rejection/interpretation above; coupling cavity 123 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Hwang discloses the milk bowl is provided with a connecting post for conducting the negative pressure to the membrane (connector 210 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 7, Hwang discloses the milk bowl is provided with a connecting post for being engaged to an inside of the main body (the examiner notes that “for being engaged” is the intended use of the connecting post and the claim does not presently require that the post actually be engaged to the inside of the body; connector 210 is functionally capable of being engaged to an inside of main body 410).
Regarding claim 8, Hwang discloses the milk bowl is provided with a connecting post for being connected to the air pump (connector 210 in fig. 3 fluidically connects to the pump 420).
Regarding claim 12, Hwang discloses at least a part of an outer surface of the milk bowl is arranged parallel to an outer surface of the main body (fig. 3 and 5 shows that the outer surfaces of both the milk bowl 120 and the main body 410 having planar surfaces indicating that the milk bowl 120 is capable of being moved and oriented in a way so that one of these planar surfaces are parallel with a planar surface of the main body 410).
Regarding claim 13, Hwang discloses an outer surface of the main body is provided with a connection post for being connected to the air pump and for providing the negative pressure to the membrane (connector 411 in fig. 14 is shown to be fluidically connected to pump 420 and provides negative pressure to membrane 150 via pipe 300).
Regarding claim 14, Hwang discloses the connecting part protrudes from the milk bowl (see below; the connecting part below protrudes inwardly).
PNG
media_image3.png
213
488
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 15, Hwang discloses the connecting part is ring- shaped (see above; the connecting part is ring-shaped in fig. 2 to engage the ring-shaped membrane 150 and stopper 200).
Regarding claim 16 and 17, using an alternative/additional interpretation of claim 1, Hwang discloses a breast pump (assembly 10 in fig. 1), comprising:
a milk bowl (storage housing 120 and stopper 200 in fig. 3 form the “milk bowl”),
a breast shield detachably connected to the milk bowl (contact housing 110 in fig. 3; paragraph 40 discloses the housings 110 and 120 being detachably coupled), wherein a milk storage cavity for storing milk is defined by the breast shield and the milk bowl (milk storage space C in fig. 3), and the breast shield has a flange shaped to fit a breast (see below) and a milk pumping channel for receiving a nipple (milk inflow cavity 113a);
a main body detachably connected to the milk bowl (first case 410 in fig. 5 is connected to milk bowl 120 via pipe 300 in fig. 1; paragraph 42 discloses the connection is detachable), wherein an air pump for generating negative pressure is provided inside the main body (milking pump 420 in fig. 14), the milk bowl is air communicated with the negative pressure generated by the air pump (negative pressure is transmitted to milk bowl 120 via connectors 411 and 210 and pipe 300 in fig. 2), and the negative pressure generated by the air pump acts on the milk pumping channel to promote lactation (paragraph 50); and
PNG
media_image4.png
367
488
media_image4.png
Greyscale
a membrane configured to prevent the milk from reaching the air pump (flow separation membrane 150 in fig. 3), wherein an inner surface of the milk bowl is provided with a connecting part connected to the membrane (this limitation is interpreted to mean a ring-shaped protrusion; see above, the designated connecting part is embodied as a ring shape protrusion which protrudes inwardly and is indirectly connected to the membrane), and the membrane, the connecting part, and at least a part of the milk bowl jointly define a recess or a cavity (coupling cavity 123 in fig. 3).
Further regarding claims 16 and 17, using the additional/alternative interpretation of claim 1 above, Hwang discloses a sealing structure/rib is provided between the connecting part and the membrane so as to prevent the milk from reaching the air pump (the “sealing structure” is interpreted to mean a rib and functional equivalents thereof; o-ring below is equated to the rib).
PNG
media_image5.png
228
414
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18, Hwang discloses an airway connector is disposed in the milk bowl (cap connector 130 in fig. 3), and one side of the airway connector is connected to the milk pumping channel (outflow tube 131 in fig. 3 is fluidically connected to channel 111a) and another side of the airway connector is connected to a milk pumping side of the membrane (funnel connector 140 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 21, Hwang discloses a one-way valve connected to the airway connector is further disposed in the milk storage cavity, so that the milk flows in one direction to the milk storage cavity from the airway connector (valve 133 in fig. 3).
Regarding claim 22, Hwang discloses a breast pump (assembly 10 in fig. 1), comprising:
a milk bowl (storage housing 120 and stopper 200 in fig. 3 form the “milk bowl”),
a breast shield detachably connected to the milk bowl (contact housing 110 in fig. 3; paragraph 40 discloses the housings 110 and 120 being detachably coupled), wherein a milk storage cavity for storing milk is defined by the breast shield and the milk bowl (milk storage space C in fig. 3), and the breast shield has a flange shaped to fit a breast (see below) and a milk pumping channel for receiving a nipple (milk inflow cavity 113a);
a main body detachably connected to the milk bowl (first case 410 in fig. 5 is connected to milk bowl 120 via pipe 300 in fig. 1; paragraph 42 discloses the connection is detachable), wherein an air pump for generating negative pressure is provided inside the main body (milking pump 420 in fig. 14), the milk bowl is air communicated with the negative pressure generated by the air pump (negative pressure is transmitted to milk bowl 120 via connectors 411 and 210 and pipe 300 in fig. 2), and the negative pressure generated by the air pump acts on the milk pumping channel to promote lactation (paragraph 50); and
a membrane configured to prevent the milk from reaching the air pump (flow separation membrane 150 in fig. 3), wherein the milk bowl is provided with a connecting part connected to the membrane (this limitation is interpreted to mean a ring-shaped protrusion; see below, the designated connecting part is embodied as a ring shape protrusion which protrudes inwardly and is indirectly connected to the membrane), and a rib is provided between the connecting part and the membrane so as to prevent a detachment between the connecting part and the membrane (see below; the o-ring designated below is equated to the claimed “rib” and assists in clamping the membrane 150 to prevent detachment between the connecting part below and the membrane 150).
PNG
media_image6.png
367
488
media_image6.png
Greyscale
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.
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.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hong (US 20140094748).
Regarding claim 2, Hwang discloses all of the claimed limitations set forth in claim 1, but does not teach or disclose the membrane is formed with a groove, and the connecting part is embedded in the groove.
Hong teaches a breast pump (fig. 3) comprising a membrane (film 50 in fig. 3) having a groove (see below) with a connecting part embedded in the groove (see below). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the membrane and connecting part so that the membrane comprises a groove and the connecting part is embedded in the groove, as taught by Hong. This modification would provide for an equivalent clamping mechanism which effectively couples the connecting part to the membrane, as taught by Hong, which would not alter operation of the device of Hwang.
PNG
media_image7.png
331
388
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pan (US 11554198).
Regarding claims 9 and 10, Hwang discloses all of the claimed limitations set forth in claim 1, as discussed above but does not teach or disclose the breast shield is flexible [claim 9] and is made from silicone [claim 10].
Pan is directed towards a breast pump (fig. 1) comprising a breast shield (adaptor 20 in fig. 3) which is flexible and made from silicone (7:26-30). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the breast shield of Hwang to be flexible and made from silicone, as taught by Pan, since Pan teaches that this is known material for breast shields and enables the shield to be easily installed while not causing skin allergies (7:26-30).
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Phillips (US 20160296682).
Regarding claim 11, Hwang discloses all of the claimed limitations set forth in claim 1, as discussed above, but does not teach or disclose the flange is a double-layer structure.
Phillips is directed towards a breast shield (fig. 2) in which the shield is made from a flexible material and contains a material that produces or retains heat (paragraphs 51 and 52) so that the shield is a double-layer structure comprising the base material of the shield as well as the material that produces or retains heat. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the shield of Hwang, including the flange, to contain a material that produces or retain heat, as taught by Phillips so that the flange is a double-layer structure. This modification would render the shield more comfortable for use, as taught by Phillips (paragraph 52)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 20 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.
Claim 23 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 19 and 23, the closest prior art is Hwang, as discussed above, which does not teach or disclose a positioning structure for positioning the airway connector on the milk bowl is provided between the milk bowl and the airway connector, so as to prevent a detachment between the connecting part and the membrane. The examiner notes that “positioning structure” is interpreted to mean a limiting lug and limiting groove, as discussed above. Hwang does not teach or disclose a positioning structure as set forth in this interpretation.
The examiner notes that this interpretation appears proper interpretation under 112(f) since the claim uses a term as a substitute of means (the examiner asserts that “structure” is a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning), the term is modified by functional language (“positioning”), and the term is not modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function (as noted above, the term “structure” does not impart sufficient structure to perform the function of positioning).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY FREDRICKSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7481. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9 AM - 5 PM 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, BHISMA MEHTA can be reached at 571-272-3383. 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.
/COURTNEY B FREDRICKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783