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(s) 5, 7 and 20 is/are objected to due to the following informalities : In claim 5, line 1 , “the infusion pump’s operation” should be corrected to “the operation of the infusion pump” for claim language consistency. In claim 7, line 1, “the infusion pump’s operation” should be corrected to “the operation of the infusion pump” for claim language consistency. In c laim 20, line 2 , “the further operations ” should be corrected to “a further operations” since this is the first time this term is introduced. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 10 3 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. Claim(s) 1 , 10 , 11, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kruse ( US 20170142658 A1 , herein Kruse) and further in view of Mandro ( US 8066672 B2 , herein Mandro ). Regarding claim 1, Kruse discloses a n infusion pump ( the medical device can be an infusion pump [0021 ]) comprising: a pump (pump 12 [0022]; see also Fig. 2) configured to deliver an infusion (the medical device can be an infusion pump configured to deliver one or more additional or other medicaments to a patient [0021]) ; a clock configured to track time (clock/timer 38 [0022]) ; a memory (memory device 30 [0022]) ; a controller (processor 42 [0022]) in operative communication with the pump, the clock, and the memory that controls operation of the infusion pump (processor 42 that functions to control the overall functions of the device [0022]) , and stores pump settings in the memory , wherein the pump settings include a duration of the infusion; (The memory device 30 may be coupled to the processor 42 to receive and store input data and to communicate that data to the processor 42 [0022] ; Data may comprise one or more parameters related to the infusion pump [0006] ) , but fails to explicitly disclose that the controller retrieves time from the clock . Kruse also fails to disclose: a primary power source configured to provide power to the pump, the clock, the memory, and the controller during the infusion; and a backup power source configured to provide power to the clock and the memory during an interruption in power from the primary power source to maintain the pump settings. However , Kruse teaches that the input data received and stored by the memory device may include user input data and non-user/sensor input data [0022] . One of ordinary skill in the art may interpret that the non-user input data may encompass time data from the clock. Furthermore, Mandro teaches infusion pump assembly 10 may include primary power supply 36 (e.g. a first battery) for providing electrical power to at least a portion of processing logic 16 and one or more of the subsystems (e.g., memory system 20, input system 22, display system 24, vibration system 26, audio system 28, motor assembly 30, force sensor 32, and displacement detection device 34) [Col 3, lines 54-60]. Mandro further teaches backup power supply 108 may be configured to provide backup electrical energy 110 to the at least a portion of processing logic 16 in the event that primary power supply 36 fails to provide primary electrical energy 112 to at least a portion of processing logic 16 [Col 6, lines 17-21] . Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to modify the infusion pump of Kruse to include a primary power source configured to provide power to the pump, the clock, the memory, and the controller during the infusion; and a backup power source configured to provide power to the clock and the memory during an interruption in power from the primary power source to maintain the pump settings as taught by Mandro since such a modification may enable backup power supply to provide backup electrical energy in the event that the primary power supply fails to provide the primary electrical energy to the device [Col 1, lines 39-43] . Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 214 3.I. D ). Regarding claim 10 , Kruse as modified by Mandro disclosed all limitations of claim 1, However, Kruse failed to explicitly disclose wherein the backup power source is a rechargeable battery. However Mandro teaches upon primary power supply 36 once again functioning properly, diode assembly 100 and current limiting assembly 102 may allow a portion of primary electrical energy 112 produced by primary power supply 36 to rech arge backup power supply 108 [ Col 9, lines 7-11 ] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that backup power supplies configured to be recharged by a primary power source are commonly implemented using rechargeable batteries or equivalent energy storage devices. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art , prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kruse to include wherein the backup power source is a rechargeable battery as taught by Mandro since such a modification would enable the infusion pump of Kruse to allow the backup power source to be reused without replacement and to improve system reliability and reduce maintenance. The substitution of a rechargeable battery for the rechargeable backup power source represents the use of a known element according to its established function to yield predictable results (See MPEP 2143.I.B) . Regarding claim 11, Kruse discloses a method of operating an infusion pump (a method for reducing energy consumption of a battery of an infusion pump [0009]), the method comprising: providing an infusion using the infusion pump (the medical device is configured as a pump 12, such as an infusion pump, that can include an internal pumping or delivery mechanism and reservoir for delivering medicament [0020]) ; tracking time with a clock ( clock/timer 38 [0022]; such data transfers may be event-based, time -based , proximity-based [0007]) ; storing pump settings for the infusion in a memory (The memory device 30 may be coupled to the processor 42 to receive and store input data and to communicate that data to the processor 42 [0022]) , the pump settings including a duration of the infusion (Data may comprise one or more parameters related to the infusion pump [0006]) ; but failed to explicitly disclose detecting interruption in power from a primary power source for the infusion pump ; suspending the infusion upon detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source; and powering the clock and the memory with a backup power source while the infusion is suspended to maintain the pump settings for the infusion. However, Kruse teaches infusion pump device may include a “power off” or “ suspend ” function for suspending one or more functions of the device, such as, suspending a delivery protocol , and/or for powering off the device or the delivery mechanism thereof [0024]. Furthermore , Mandro teaches backup power supply is configured to provide backup electrical energy to the at least a portion of the processing logic in the event that the primary power supply fail s to provide the primary electrical energy to the at least a portion of the processing logic [Col 1, 38-43] . Mandro further teaches the failure of the power supply included within the infusion pump assembly may result in the infusion pump assembly ceasing to operate [ Col 1, 23-27 ]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the supply of power to the processing logic would enable the maintaining of pump settings and other data when the pump is not in operation. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kruse to include detecting interruption in power from a primary power source for the infusion pump; suspending the infusion upon detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source; and powering the clock and the memory with a backup power source while the infusion is suspended to maintain the pump settings for the infusion as taught by Mandro since such a modification would enable the infusion pump of Kruse to improve operational safety during a power interruption, prevent unintended infusion delivery and maintain programmed settings so that the infusion can be safely resumed without requiring re-entry of settings. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 19, Kruse teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium (device memory 220 [0028] ) storing instructions for controlling operation of an infusion pump (The control processor operates according to program instructions that may be stored in device memory 220. Program instructions may be stored in processor memory incorporated in the control processor 218 [0028]) , wherein the instructions, when executed by a controller, cause the infusion pump to perform operations comprising: providing an infusion using the infusion pump (the medical device is configured as a pump 12, such as an infusion pump, that can include an internal pumping or delivery mechanism and reservoir for delivering medicament [0020]) ; tracking time with a clock ( clock/timer 38 [0022]; such data transfers may be event-based, time -based , proximity-based [0007]) ; storing pump settings for the infusion in a memory (The memory device 30 may be coupled to the processor 42 to receive and store input data and to communicate that data to the processor 42 [0022]) , the pump settings including a duration of the infusion (Data may comprise one or more parameters related to the infusion pump [0006]) ; but failed to explicitly disclose detecting interruption in power from a primary power source for the infusion pump; suspending the infusion upon detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source; and powering the clock and the memory with a backup power source while the infusion is suspended to maintain the pump settings for the infusion. However, Kruse teaches infusion pump device may include a “power off” or “ suspend ” function for suspending one or more functions of the device, such as, suspending a delivery protocol , and/or for powering off the device or the delivery mechanism thereof [0024]. Furthermore, Mandro teaches backup power supply is configured to provide backup electrical energy to the at least a portion of the processing logic in the event that the primary power supply fail s to provide the primary electrical energy to the at least a portion of the processing logic [Col 1, 38-43] . Mandro further teaches the failure of the power supply included within the infusion pump assembly may result in the infusion pump assembly ceasing to operate [ Col 1, 23-27 ]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the supply of power to the processing logic would enable the maintaining of pump settings and other data when the pump is not in operation. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Kruse to include detecting interruption in power from a primary power source for the infusion pump; suspending the infusion upon detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source; and powering the clock and the memory with a backup power source while the infusion is suspended to maintain the pump settings for the infusion as taught by Mandro since such a modification would enable the infusion pump of Kruse to improve operational safety during a power interruption, prevent unintended infusion delivery and maintain programmed settings so that the infusion can be safely resumed without requiring re-entry of settings. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Claim(s) 2 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kruse ( US 20170142658 A1 , herein Kruse) and further in view of Mandro ( US 8066672 B2 , herein Mandro ) and Wu et al. ( US 11249658 B2 , herein Wu). Regarding claim 2, Kruse as modified by Mandro disclosed all limitations of claim 1. Kruse as modified by Mandro however failed to explicitly disclose wherein upon restoration of power from the primary power source, the controller is configured to retrieve a current time from the clock and the pump settings from the memory. However , Wu teaches after system power is restored, a “RESTORE” event trigger is sent to the controller module 102. The RESTORE operation restores volatile memory content using the saved image stored at the non-volatile memory through the volatile and non-volatile interfaces of the controller module 102. For example, the SAVE and RESTORE operation performed by the iSC system 100 does not need participation from the host system (e.g., host memory controller 101). From system perspective, the content of the volatile memory is intact and the non-volatile memory appears to be non-volatile. In addition, system parameters and/or settings may be loaded from the non-volatile memory during the RESTORE operation [Col 5 page 58-67, Col 6 page 1-3]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a controller configured to load system parameters and/or settings from a non-volatile memory during restoration of system power as taught by Wu can be programmed to retrieve pump settings from the memory of Kruse upon restoration of power from the primary power source. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro to include retrieving, upon restoration of the power from the primary power source, the pump settings from the memory as taught by Wu since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 12, Kruse as modified by Mandro disclosed all limitations of claim 11. However, Kruse as modified by Mandro failed to explicitly disclose further comprising: retrieving, upon restoration of the power from the primary power source, the pump settings from the memory. However , Wu teaches after system power is restored, a “RESTORE” event trigger is sent to the controller module 102 . The RESTORE operation restores volatile memory content using the saved image stored at the non-volatile memory through the volatile and non-volatile interfaces of the controller module 102 . For example, the SAVE and RESTORE operation performed by the iSC system 100 does not need participation from the host system (e.g., host memory controller 101 ). From system perspective, the content of the volatile memory is intact and the non-volatile memory appears to be non-volatile. In addition, system parameters and/or settings may be loaded from the non-volatile memory during the RESTORE operation [Col 5 page 58-67, Col 6 page 1-3]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a controller configured to load system parameters and/or settings from a non-volatile memory during restoration of system power as taught by Wu can be programmed to retrieve pump settings from the memory of Kruse upon restoration of power from the primary power source. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro to include retrieving, upon restoration of the power from the primary power source, the pump settings from the memory as taught by Wu since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Claim(s) 3 , 4 , 13 , 14 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kruse ( US 20170142658 A1 , herein Kruse) and further in view of Mandro ( US 8066672 B2 , herein Mandro ) , Wu et al. ( US 11249658 B2 , herein Wu) and Surine et al. ( WO 2019055516 A2 , herein Surine ). Regarding claim 3, Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu disclosed all limitations of claim 2 . However, Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu failed to explicitly disclose wherein, upon authorization by a user, the controller restarts the pump and continues the infusion using the retrieved pump settings. However, Surine teaches controller 108 can store individual characteristics to be reused for a " Same Patient " infusion [ Page 35, lines 26-28] . Using " Same Patient " delivery, infusions running through power-downs can be preserved. For example, selecting " Same Patient " delivery can restart an infusion without having to re-enter all of the programming parameters for that infusion [Page 36, lines 11-13] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a controller capable of maintaining infusion and restarting an infusion can also be programmed to restart pump and continue infusion by retrieving pump settings upon user authorization . Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu to include wherein, upon authorization by a user, the controller restarts the pump and continues the infusion using the retrieved pump settings as taught by Surine since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 4, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine disclosed all limitations of claim 3. However , Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu failed to explicitly disclose wherein the pump settings do not need to be reentered to restart the pump. However , Surine teaches u sing " Same Patient " delivery, infusions running through power-downs can be preserved. For example, selecting " Same Patient " delivery can restart an infusion without having to re-enter all of the programming parameters for that infusion [Page 36, lines 11-13]. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu to include wherein the pump settings do not need to be reentered to restart the pump as taught by Surine since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 13, Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu disclosed all limitations of claim 12 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu failed to explicitly disclose further comprising: resuming the infusion, upon user authorization, using the retrieved pump settings such that the infusion continues from an operating state of the pump at the time of detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source. However, Surine teaches controller 108 can store individual characteristics to be reused for a " Same Patient " infusion [Page 35, lines 26-28]. Using " Same Patient " delivery, infusions running through power-downs can be preserved. For example, selecting " Same Patient " delivery can restart an infusion without having to re-enter all of the programming parameters for that infusion [Page 36, lines 11-13] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a controller capable of maintaining infusion and restarting an infusion can also be programmed to restart pump and continue infusion by retrieving pump settings upon user authorization . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu to include wherein, upon authorization by a user , the controller restarts the pump and continues the infusion using the retrieved pump settings as taught by Surine since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 14, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine disclosed all limitations of 13 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu failed to explicitly disclose wherein the pump settings do not need to be reentered. However, Surine teaches u sing " Same Patient " delivery, infusions running through power-downs can be preserved. For example, selecting " Same Patient " delivery can restart an infusion without having to re-enter all of the programming parameters for that infusion [Page 36, lines 11-13]. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu to include wherein the pump settings do not need to be reentered to restart the pump as taught by Surine since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 20, Kruse as modified by Mandro and Wu disclosed all limitations of claim 19 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro failed to explicitly disclose wherein the instructions cause the infusion pump to perform the further operations of: retrieving, upon restoration of the power from the primary power source, the pump settings from the memory; and resuming the infusion, upon user authorization, using the retrieved pump settings such that the infusion continues from an operating state of the pump at the time of detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source. However , Wu teaches after system power is restored, a “RESTORE” event trigger is sent to the controller module 102 . The RESTORE operation restores volatile memory content using the saved image stored at the non-volatile memory through the volatile and non-volatile interfaces of the controller module 102 . For example, the SAVE and RESTORE operation performed by the iSC system 100 does not need participation from the host system (e.g., host memory controller 101 ). From system perspective, the content of the volatile memory is intact and the non-volatile memory appears to be non-volatile. In addition, system parameters and/or settings may be loaded from the non-volatile memory during the RESTORE operation [Col 5 page 58-67, Col 6 page 1-3]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a controller configured to load system parameters and/or settings from a non-volatile memory during restoration of system power as taught by Wu can be programmed to retrieve pump settings from the memory of Kruse upon restoration of power from the primary power source. Furthermore, Surine teaches controller 108 can store individual characteristics to be reused for a " Same Patient " infusion [Page 35, lines 26-28]. Using " Same Patient " delivery, infusions running through power-downs can be preserved. For example, selecting " Same Patient " delivery can restart an infusion without having to re-enter all of the programming parameters for that infusion [Page 36, lines 11-13] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a controller capable of maintaining infusion and restarting an infusion can also be programmed to restart pump and continue infusion by retrieving pump settings upon user authorization . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro to include wherein the instructions cause the infusion pump to perform the further operations of: retrieving, upon restoration of the power from the primary power source, the pump settings from the memory; and resuming the infusion, upon user authorization, using the retrieved pump settings such that the infusion continues from an operating state of the pump at the time of detecting the interruption in power from the primary power source.as taught by Wu and Surine since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to resume without requiring reconfiguration. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Claim(s) 5, 6 , 7 , 15 , 16 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kruse ( US 20170142658 A1 , herein Kruse) and further in view of Mandro ( US 8066672 B2 , herein Mandro ), Wu et al. ( US 11249658 B2 , herein Wu), Surine et al. ( WO 2019055516 A2 , herein Surine ) and Hickle et al. ( WO 03072184 A2 , herein Hickle ). Regarding claim 5, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine disclosed all limitations of claim 3 . However, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine failed to explicitly disclose wherein the infusion pump's operation comprises at least an initiation state and a current operating state and wherein the initiation state of the infusion is bypassed when the pump is restarted. However, Hickle teaches commencing from a fail-safe module system (FSM) inactive mode 100, the sedation and analgesia system 22 only moves into initiation state mode 102 upon receipt of power [0027] . Upon reception of a valid strobe from controller 14 by fail-safe module 23 (query 104), sedation and analgesia system 22 will be transferred to operation state mode 105 [0027] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize to bypass the initiation state upon restart when system conditions are already valid, as this represents a predictable variation to reduce startup time and avoid redundant initialization, especially in view of Hickle’s teaching that transition to operation depends on system readiness (e.g., receipt of a valid strobe signal) Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kruse as modified by Mandro and Surine to include wherein the infusion pump's operation comprises at least an initiation state and a current operating state and wherein the initiation state of the infusion is bypassed when the pump is restarted as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable a state-based control system for the infusion pump of Kruse to provide controlled startup and operation. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 6, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu, Surine and Hickle disclosed all limitations of claim 5 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine failed to explicitly disclose wherein the initiation state is bypassed automatically. However, Hickle teaches u pon reception of a valid strobe from controller 14 by fail-safe module 23 (query 104), sedation and analgesia system 22 will be transferred to operation state mode 105 [0027]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize to bypass the initiation state automatically upon restart when system conditions are already valid, as this represents a predictable variation to reduce startup time and avoid redundant initialization, especially in view of Hickle’s teaching that transition to operation depends on system readiness (e.g., receipt of a valid strobe signal) Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine to include wherein the initiation state is bypassed automatically as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to reduce time for startup. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 7, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine disclosed all limitations of claim 3 . However , Kruse failed to explicitly disclose wherein the infusion pump's operation comprises at least an initiation state and a current operating state, the initiation state comprises initial parameters, and the initial parameters include patient information, drug information, infusion information, or a combination thereof. However, Hickle teaches commencing from a fail-safe module system (FSM) inactive mode 100, the sedation and analgesia system 22 only moves into initiation state mode 102 upon receipt of power [0027] . Upon reception of a valid strobe from controller 14 by fail-safe module 23 (query 104), sedation and analgesia system 22 will be transferred to operation state mode 105 [0027] . Hickle further teaches setting initial inputs to FSM step 202 comprises inputting information related to oxygen delivery, drug delivery 19, patient interface 17, or other critical parameters relating to a desired safe state mode 107 [0035] . Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine to include wherein the infusion pump's operation comprises at least an initiation state and a current operating state, the initiation state comprises initial parameters, and the initial parameters include patient information, drug information, infusion information, or a combination thereof as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable the device of Kruse to store these critical parameters and obviate the need for user to input such information during startup. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 15, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine disclosed all limitations of claim 13 . However Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine failed to explicitly disclose wherein an initiation state of the infusion is bypassed. However, Hickle teaches commencing from a fail-safe module system (FSM) inactive mode 100, the sedation and analgesia system 22 only moves into initiation state mode 102 upon receipt of power [0027] . Upon reception of a valid strobe from controller 14 by fail-safe module 23 (query 104), sedation and analgesia system 22 will be transferred to operation state mode 105 [0027] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize to bypass the initiation state upon restart when system conditions are already valid, as this represents a predictable variation to reduce startup time and avoid redundant initialization, especially in view of Hickle’s teaching that transition to operation depends on system readiness (e.g., receipt of a valid strobe signal) Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine to include wherein an initiation state of the infusion is bypassed as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable a state-based control system for the infusion pump of Kruse to provide controlled startup and operation. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 16, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu, Surine and Hickle disclosed all limitations of claim 15, However, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine failed to explicitly disclose wherein the initiation state is bypassed automatically. However, Hickle teaches upon reception of a valid strobe from controller 14 by fail-safe module 23 (query 104), sedation and analgesia system 22 will be transferred to operation state mode 105 [0027]. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize to bypass the initiation state automatically upon restart when system conditions are already valid, as this represents a predictable variation to reduce startup time and avoid redundant initialization, especially in view of Hickle’s teaching that transition to operation depends on system readiness (e.g., receipt of a valid strobe signal) Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine to include wherein the initiation state is bypassed automatically as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable the infusion pump of Kruse to reduce time for startup. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 17, Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu, Surine and Hickle disclosed all limitations of claim 15 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine failed to explicitly disclose wherein the initiation state comprises initial parameters, wherein the initial parameters include patient information, drug information, infusion information, or a combination thereof. Hickle however teaches setting initial inputs to FSM step 202 comprises inputting information related to oxygen delivery, drug delivery 19, patient interface 17, or other critical parameters relating to a desired safe state mode 107 [0035] . Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro , Wu and Surine to include wherein the initiation state comprises initial parameters, wherein the initial parameters include patient information, drug information, infusion information, or a combination thereof as taught by Hickle since such a modification may enable the device of Kruse to store these critical parameters and obviate the need for user to input such information during startup. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Claim(s) 8 , 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kruse ( US 20170142658 A1 , herein Kruse) and further in view of Mandro ( US 8066672 B2 , herein Mandro ) and Kamen et al. ( AU 2013364131 A2 , herein Kamen). Regarding claim 8, Kruse as modified by Mandro disclosed all limitations of claim 1 . However, Kruse as modified by Mandro failed to explicitly disclose further comprising: a voltage regulator coupled to the primary power source, the backup power source, and the controller. However, Kamen teaches an infusion pump includes an attachable 30 electronic component. The attachable electronics component includes at least one processor, a power regulator, and a control system [Page 23, 0057]. Kamen further teaches the hub 3910 converts the AC power to a regulat ed DC power to be used to charge an internal backup battery , provide power to various circuitry therein , or to power the patient care devices 3906, 3902 via their respective USB cables [page 137, 00553] . Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modigied by Mandro to include further comprising: a voltage regulator coupled to the primary power source, the backup power source, and the controller as taught by Kamen since such a modification may enable the device of Kruse to stabilize voltage drop that may occur during the switching of primary to backup power. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 9, Kruse as modified by Mandro and Kamen disclosed all limitations of claim 8 . However , Kruse as modified by Mandro failed to explicitly disclose wherein the voltage regulator is configured to stabilize an input voltage to the controller. However Kamen teaches the hub 3910 converts the AC power to a regulat ed DC power to be used to charge an internal backup battery, provide power to various circuitry therein, or to power the patient care devices 3906, 3902 via their respective USB cables [page 137, 00553] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a regulated or stabilized DC power can be used to power the controller of Kruse in similar manner as was used in Kamen to power other circuitry and devices. Therefore , it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro to include wherein the voltage regulator is configured to stabilize an input voltage to the controller as taught by Kamen since a modification may enable the device of Kruse to maintain continuous operation with constant voltage without possibilities for device reset due to voltage drop. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Regarding claim 18, Kruse as modified by Mandro disclosed all limitations of claim 11 . However, Kruse as modified by Mandro failed to explicitly disclose further comprising: stabilizing an input voltage from the primary power source to a controller of the infusion pump. However Kamen teaches the hub 3910 converts the AC power to a regulat ed DC power to be used to charge an internal backup battery, provide power to various circuitry therein, or to power the patient care devices 3906, 3902 via their respective USB cables [page 137, 00553] . One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize a regulated or stabilized DC power can be used to power the controller of Kruse from its primary power source in similar manner as was used in Kamen to power other circuitry and devices. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention to modify the infusion pump of Kruse as modified by Mandro to include further comprising: stabilizing an input voltage from the primary power source to a controller of the infusion pump as taught by Kamen since a modification may enable the device of Kruse to maintain continuous operation with constant voltage without possibilities for device reset due to voltage drop. Such reasoning is consistent with known engineering principles and represents a predictable design choice (See MPEP 2143.I.D). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHMOOD FAROOQ whose telephone number is (571)272-7276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday 8am - 5pm 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, 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. /M.F./ Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /KAMI A BOSWORTH/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783