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 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) 1-7, 10, 11, 13, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naidu (US 2021/0228126 A1) in view of Jones (US 2019/0160262) and White et al. (US 2020/0289791 A1).
With regard to claims 1-7, 14, Naidu teaches a catheter assembly comprising: a catheter adapter (Fig. 1B member 110) comprising: a distal end (Fig. 1B direction of 121); a proximal end (Fig. 1B direction of 120); a lumen extending between the distal end and the proximal end (Fig. 1B lumen through which 120 is inserted); and a proximally-directed side port arranged between the distal end and the proximal end, the proximally-directed side port in fluid communication with the lumen (Fig. 1B port 112, [0041]); a catheter secured to the distal end of the catheter adapter and extending distally from the catheter adapter (Fig. 1B member 111); a first fluid conduit having a proximal end coupled to the proximally-directed side port and a distal end, the first fluid conduit in fluid communication with the proximally-directed side port (Fig. 1B conduit 113); a needle free connector (Fig. 1B member 130) positioned at a distal end of the first fluid conduit, the needle free connector having a connector side port (Fig. 1B member 131); a second fluid conduit coupled to the connector side port (Fig. 1B member 141). Naidu does not disclose an elongated arm or a stabilization platform. However, Jones teaches using a stabilization platform for a fluid conduit extending along the arm from the inserted catheter which is beneficial to absorb movement of the patient and reduce the impact of movement by the patient to reduce unwanted forces translating to the cannula resulting in bruising, swelling, and dislodging (Figs. 3 and 5 member 20, [0057], [0070]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a stabilizing platform to retain the second fluid conduit along the patient in Naidu as Jones teaches this is beneficial for aiding in absorbing movement of the patient and reducing the impact of movement by the patient to reduce unwanted forces translating to the cannula resulting in bruising, swelling, and dislodging. Naidu and Jones do not teach an elongated arm to extend from the catheter adapter. However, White et al. teach a plurality of arms may extend between a catheter adapter and stabilizing platform to allow visualization of the insertion site and provides structural stability (Fig. 1 member 140, [0015], [0020], [0028]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a plurality of elongated arms extending between the adapter and stabilization platform in Naidu and Jones as White et al. teach this is beneficial for providing enhance stability. As combined such arms intersect at the stabilization platform, the platform is spaced from the end of the arms attached to the adapter.
With regard to claims 10 and 11, see Jones [0022], an adhesive pad may be used to attach the platform.
With regard to claim 13, Naidu teaches a clamp (Fig. 1B 142) but in view of Jones it is not explicitly taught as to the placement of the platform relative to the clamp. However, there are a limited number of options for placement, the platform can be on one of two sides of the clamp. As such it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the platform between the clamp and connector port in Naidu as combined with Jones as this would yield the same predictable result of retention and there are only two potions for placement relative to the clamp.
Claim(s) 15-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naidu (US 2021/0228126 A1), Jones (US 2019/0160262), and White et al. (US 2020/0289791 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Smith (US 8,795,256 B1).
With regard to claims 15-17, Naidu teaches a connector 143 (Fig. 1B) but do not disclose details of the connectors including that it is a force release connector with a disconnect connector, release feature, or valve. However, Smith teaches a breakaway connector which includes a disconnect connector 30, release feature 50, and valve 45 which allows for disconnect without stressing or jeopardizing an intravenous site (Fig. 2a, Col. 2 lines45-48). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a connection in Naidu as in Smith as this allows for disconnect without stressing or jeopardizing an intravenous site.
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Naidu (US 2021/0228126 A1), Jones (US 2019/0160262), White et al. (US 2020/0289791 A1), and Smith (US 8,795,256 B1) as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Naidu (US 2020/0324100 A1).
With regard to claims 18 and 19, Naidu does not disclose what connector 143 attaches to. However, Naidu ‘100 teach lines which may be connected to one or a plurality of needless connector and multiple connectors may be provided as needed to facilitate coupling to various medical devices ([0041], Fig. 2A plural members 65, Fig. 4A single member 65). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to connect to a plurality of needle free connector ports in Naidu as Naidu ‘100 teach using multiple connectors as needed depending on desired connections to various medical devices.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The objection to the drawings is withdrawn.
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 EMILY L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-3648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:00 AM to 4:30 PM.
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.
/EMILY L SCHMIDT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights