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 .
This Office Action is responsive to the Amendment filed 29 June 2026. Claims 1-8, 10-15, and 17-20 are currently under consideration. The Office acknowledges the amendments to claims 1, 4, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17, and 19, as well as the cancellation of claims 9 and 16.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, lines 3-4: “the pump including the pump includes” should apparently read --the pump including-- or --wherein the pump includes--.
In claim 1, line 5: “outlet port, a passive valve” should apparently read --outlet port, and a passive valve--.
In claim 11, line 7: “the pump includes” should apparently read --wherein the pump includes--.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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, 11, 12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2017/0273792 A1; hereinafter known as “Evans”), in view of Herz et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2013/0055889 A1; hereinafter known as “Herz”).
Regarding claim 1, Evans discloses an electronic pump assembly (Abstract; [0039]), the electronic pump assembly comprising: a pump 106 configured to move fluid between from or to a fluid reservoir 102 of a device, the pump including a passive valve 110/112; a controller 108 configured to actuate the pump; and a flow modifier 108/110/112 configured to restrict a flow of fluid entering or within the pump ([0022]; [0031]-[0039]; [0053]; reversing valve may be taken to be the controller, or if it is electrically controlled, then that electrical control may be taken to be the controller; reversing valve, check valves, or filters may each be taken to be such a flow modifier). Evans fails to disclose that the pump includes a piezo element, a diaphragm actuator, and a base plate defining an inlet port and an outlet port, wherein the passive valve is disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate. Herz discloses a similar pump assembly (Abstract; Figs. 2, 4; [0002]) comprising a piezo element 210, a diaphragm actuator 110, a base plate 160 defining an inlet port 126 and an outlet port 128, along with a passive valve 130 disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate ([0082]-[0084]) in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced ([0011]; [0040]; [0173]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Evans with such a pump as taught by Herz in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the flow modifier includes a filter disposed within a fluid passageway connected to the pump ([0036]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the filter is a first filter connected to an input of the pump, the electronic pump assembly including a second filter connected to an output of the pump ([0036]; on inlet and outlet check valves).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the flow modifier is defined by at least a portion of the passive valve ([0033]-[0034]).
Regarding claim 11, Evans discloses an implantable device (Abstract) comprising: a fluid reservoir 102 configured to hold fluid; an inflatable member 104; and an electronic pump assembly configured to transfer the fluid between the fluid reservoir and the inflatable member, the electronic pump assembly including: a pump 106 configured to move the fluid between from or to the fluid reservoir of the device, the pump including a first passive valve 110 and a second passive valve 112; a controller configured to actuate the pump; and a flow modifier 108/110/112 configured to restrict a flow of the fluid entering or within the pump ([0022]; [0031]-[0039]; [0053]; reversing valve may be taken to be the controller, or if it is electrically controlled, then that electrical control may be taken to be the controller; reversing valve, check valves, or filters may each be taken to be such a flow modifier). Evans fails to disclose that the pump includes a piezo element, a diaphragm actuator, and a base plate defining an inlet port and an outlet port, wherein the first and second passive valves are disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate. Herz discloses a similar pump assembly (Abstract; Figs. 2, 4; [0002]) comprising a piezo element 210, a diaphragm actuator 110, a base plate 160 defining an inlet port 126 and an outlet port 128, along with first and second passive valves 130/140 disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate ([0082]-[0084]) in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced ([0011]; [0040]; [0173]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Evans with such a pump as taught by Herz in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the flow modifier includes a filter disposed within a fluid passageway connected to the pump ([0036]).
Regarding claim 15, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the flow modifier is defined by at least a portion of the passive valve ([0033]-[0034]).
Claims 4, 5, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans and Herz as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Jiang et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2016/0039121 A1; hereinafter known as “Jiang”).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, but fails to disclose that the filter includes a tubular member defining a cavity, the filter includes a filter component disposed within the cavity of the tubular member, the filter component defining a plurality of holes. Jiang discloses a similar apparatus (Abstract; [0003]) comprising a tubular member defining a cavity with a filter component disposed within the cavity, the filter component defining a plurality of holes 570, in order to provide a desired filter or flow-control function (Fig. 5B; [0050]-[0054]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Evans and Herz with such a filter as taught by Jiang in order to provide a desired filter or flow-control function.
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Jiang further discloses that the plurality of holes include linear holes (Fig. 5B; [0052]).
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Evans and Herz discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, but fails to disclose that the filter includes a tubular member defining a cavity, the filter includes a cylindrical member disposed within the cavity of the tubular member, the cylindrical member defining a plurality of holes. Jiang discloses a similar apparatus (Abstract; [0003]) comprising a tubular member defining a cavity with a cylindrical member disposed within the cavity, the cylindrical member defining a plurality of holes 570, in order to provide a desired filter or flow-control function (Fig. 5B; [0050]-[0054]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Evans and Herz with such a filter as taught by Jiang in order to provide a desired filter or flow-control function.
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Jiang further discloses that the plurality of holes include holes include circular holes, Y-shaped holes, hexagonal holes, honeycomb holes, or holes arranged in a gyroid lattice (Fig. 5B; [0052]).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans, Herz, and Jiang as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Keaney et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2018/0043084 A1; hereinafter known as “Keaney”). The combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, but fails to disclose that the plurality of holes include conical holes. Keaney discloses a filter component that defines a plurality of conical holes in order to compensate for and/or maintain a constant pressure across the filter component (Fig. 3A; [0049]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang with conical holes, as taught by Keaney, in order to compensate for and/or maintain a constant pressure across the filter component.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Evans, Herz, and Jiang as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Jahangir (U.S. Pub. No. 2020/0023110 A1). The combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, but fails to disclose that the filter component includes a cylindrical portion having a first end portion including a flat surface and a second end portion including a conical portion. Jahangir discloses a filter component that includes a cylindrical portion having a first end portion including a flat surface and a second end portion including a conical portion in order to fit snuggly within a tubular member ([0022]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Evans, Herz, and Jiang with such a filter component shape as taught by Jahangir in order to fit snuggly within the tubular member.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weber et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0350712 A1; hereinafter known as “Weber”), in view of Evans and Herz.
Regarding claim 19, Weber discloses a method of controlling an implantable device (Abstract), the method comprising; detecting a signal to actuate a pump 108/110 of an electronic pump assembly 106, the pump including a piezoelectric pump 220, and transferring, by the pump, fluid from a fluid reservoir 102 ([0033]; [0035]). Weber fails to disclose that the pump has a passive valve disposed between a diaphragm actuator of the pump and a base plate of the pump, as well as restricting, by a flow modifier, a flow of fluid entering the pump. Evans discloses a similar method (Abstract) that uses a pump assembly comprising a pump 106 and a passive valve 110/112, as well as restricting, by a flow modifier, a flow of fluid entering the pump, in order to restrict/block fluid from entering the pump until pressure exceeds a threshold level and provide filtering ([0034]-[0036]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Weber with a passive valve and by restricting, by a flow modifier, a flow of fluid entering the pump, as taught by Evans, in order to restrict/block fluid from entering the pump until pressure exceeds a threshold level and provide filtering.
The combination of Weber and Evans fails to disclose that the passive valve is disposed between a diaphragm actuator of the pump and a base plate of the pump. Herz discloses a similar pump assembly (Abstract; Figs. 2, 4; [0002]) comprising a diaphragm actuator 110, a base plate 160, and a passive valve 130 disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate ([0082]-[0084]) in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced ([0011]; [0040]; [0173]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Weber and Evans with such a pump as taught by Herz in order to provide improved sealing while being easily produced.
Regarding claim 20, the combination of Weber, Herz, and Evans discloses the invention as claimed, see rejection supra, and Evans further discloses that the flow modifier is disposed in a fluid passageway between the fluid reservoir and the pump ([0036]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10, 17, and 18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: as detailed in the previous Office action, none of the prior art of record teaches or reasonably suggests such a pump that includes a piezo element, a diaphragm actuator, and a base plate with inlet and outlet ports, wherein the pump further includes a first layer of material defining a first passive valve and a second layer of material defining a second passive valve, wherein the first and second layers of material are disposed between the diaphragm actuator and the base plate.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the objections to the claims and the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments. The objections and rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive in light of the amendments. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made, as detailed supra.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wang et al., "The effect of surface wettability on the performance of a piezoelectric membrane pump," AIP Advances 8, 045010 (09 April 2018), teaches a similar piezoelectric pump to that of the claimed invention, comprising a pump body with inlet and outlet ports, as well as a valve plate with passive (check) valves.
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 THADDEUS B COX whose telephone number is (571)270-5132. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Jason M. Sims can be reached at (571)272-7540. 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.
/THADDEUS B COX/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights