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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 16 March 2026 has been entered.
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) 1-6 and 9-11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pre-Grant Publication 2012/0143150 to Page in view of 2017/0340430 to Moore (Moore).
Regarding claim 1, Page teaches an intravenous fluid delivery system comprising a multiple line portion (see e.g. 310, Fig. 3E), including a plurality of fluid lines (312, 314) connected to each other, and a mixing element (320, 333) at a downstream end with a single outlet (connected to 331) and having slots (316) in fluid communication with each line (312, 314). Page does not teach a mixing element having elongated slots. Moore teaches another medical fluid apparatus generally, and particularly teaches that respective flows of multiple inlets (24, 26) may be combined into a single outlet (30) via elongated slots (32) in order to produce a combined flow. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to provide a mixing element as taught by Moore to the system of Page in order to combine the plurality of fluid lines (312, 314) into the single outlet (331).
Regarding claim 2, Page teaches a central line (312) and peripheral lines (314).
Regarding claim 3, Page teaches that the peripheral lines are connected to an external wall of the central line (as in Fig. 3B).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Page teaches detachable connections and separability of the peripheral lines (paragraph 87).
Regarding claim 6, Page teaches the limitations of claim 3 as discussed above, but does not teach the particular connection dimensions. However, Page does teach that the dimensions of the tubing are subject to normal design parameters and vary according to the application (paragraph 85). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to optimize the connection thickness of the tubing of Page for a given application resulting the in the claimed dimension as a mere design choice relating to the chosen application.
Regarding claim 9, Page teaches connectors (331) configured for respective connection to fluid lines.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Page teaches that the respective fluid source may be a pump or a bag (paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 13, Moore teaches a central slot (24).
Regarding claim 14, Moore teaches that the peripheral slots (26) provide fluid to the central slot (24, see e.g. paragraph 89) Regarding claim 9, Page teaches connectors (331) configured for respective connection to fluid lines.
Regarding claims 10 and 11, Page teaches that the respective fluid source may be a pump or a bag (paragraph 4).
Regarding claim 13, Page teaches a central slot (24).
Regarding claim 14, Page teaches that the peripheral slots (16) provide fluid to the central slot.
Regarding claim 15, Page teaches that the single outlet is formed by a distal end of the central slot.
Claim(s) 7-8 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Page in view of Moore as applied above, and further in view of US Pre-Grant Publication 2004/0158211 to Rogers et al. (Rogers).
Regarding claim 7, Page teaches the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above, but is silent as to the materials used for the tubing. Rogers teaches that at least thermoplastic polyurethanes (paragraph 43) are known for the production of medical tubing as being flexible and biocompatible. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to use thermoplastic polyurethanes as taught by Rogers in the tubing of Page in order to achieve a flexible, biocompatible tubing.
Regarding claim 8, Page does not teach methods of forming the tubes. Rogers teaches co-extrusion of tubing (43) as a viable method of forming multiple lumen tubing. One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to use co-extrusion as taught by Rogers to form the multiple lumen tubing as the mere selection of a manufacturing method known in the field for producing the type of article at hand.
Regarding claim 16, Page does not teach an outlet tubing with a valve. Rogers teaches another intravenous fluid delivery system generally, and particularly teaches that a fluid source (90) may be coupled to a needle or catheter via an outlet tube (40, 80) with a valve (30) to prevent bloodborne pathogen exposure (paragraph 21). One of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filing date of the application to provide a valved outlet tube as taught by Rogers in order to prevent bloodborne pathogen exposure. The examiner notes that the combination requires only the serial connection of the port (333) of Page to the valve (30) or outlet tube (80) of Rogers, and further notes that both references are cognizant of Luer type connections for such interfaces.
Regarding claims 17 and 18, Rogers teaches coupling to needles (via 50) or catheters (20).
Regarding claim 19, Rogers teaches a one-way valve (30) downstream of the outlet tube (80) configured to prevent fluid from flowing upstream, including to the mixing element in the combination.
Regarding claim 20, Rogers teaches a one-way valve (30) between the outlet tubing (at 40) and the mixing element of Page.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 5, filed 16 March 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Moore as set forth above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILIP E STIMPERT whose telephone number is (571)270-1890. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8a-4p.
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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at 571-270-1744. 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.
/PHILIP E STIMPERT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783 28 May 2026
Prosecution Insights