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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s reply filed on 6/24/26 is acknowledged. Claim 9 was canceled. Claims 1-8 and 10-21 are pending and are under examination.
Response to Reply
Drawings
In light of applicant’s claim amendments, the prior drawing objections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
In light of applicant’s claim amendments, the prior rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, are withdrawn, and new rejections follow.
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.
Claims 1-8 and 10-19 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 applica-nt), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is rejected because “the first linear peristaltic pump” in part (c) should be deleted since it is recited twice.
Claims 1, 7, 13 and 14 are rejected because “an input” in each claim appears to raise an antecedent basis issue. Is each “input” intended to refer to different inputs?
Claim 5 is rejected because “the fluid routing system” raises an antecedent basis issue.
Claim 15 is rejected because “the linear peristaltic pump” in part (c) should be deleted since it is recited twice.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 9-14, filed 6/24/26, with respect to claims 1-8 and 10-21 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejections have been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 20-21 are allowed.
Claims 1-8 and 10-19 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 withdrawing the prior art rejections for claims 1-8 and 10-19, and allowing claims 20-21: the prior art of record (Wanders) fails to teach or fairly suggest a first tubing compression member moveable along the first longitudinal axis in response to an input from the first actuation assembly to advance fluid within the first hollow flexible tubing along the first longitudinal axis; and a second tubing compression member configured to move relative to the second hollow flexible tubing along a predetermined path in response to an input from the second actuation assembly to advance the sheath fluid within the second hollow flexible tubing along the second longitudinal axis in combination with the remaining features and elements of the claimed invention.
Conclusion
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 LORE RAMILLANO JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7420. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at 571-272-1254.
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.
/LORE R JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797
9/15/2026
Prosecution Insights