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 .
Response to Amendment
The arguments filed June 17, 2026 in response to the Office Action of February 17, 2026 have been acknowledged.
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 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Devgon (US 20170216564) (cited by Applicant) in view of Ribelin (SG 10202006530) (previously cited), Jaros (WO 2021038041) (previously cited) and Stamp (US 20180311438) (cited by Applicant).
Regarding claim 1, Devgon teaches (Fig. 3) a blood draw device (200) for use with a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIVC) comprising: a catheter (260); an introducer housing (exterior of 210) having a proximal end and a distal end (Fig. 3), and a top surface and a bottom surface (See Fig. 5), the housing having a first housing member (220) and a second housing member (230) each extending between the proximal end and the distal end (Fig. 5), and an actuator (270) movably coupled to the introducer housing (Fig. 5), the actuator configured to move relative to the introducer housing to move a distal end of the catheter from a position within the introducer housing to a position outside the introducer housing (Figs. 23-25; Paragraph [0097]).
However, Devgon does not teach “with the first housing member and the second housing member coupled together via a plurality of snaps formed thereon to define an inner volume configured to movably receive the catheter; wherein the plurality of snaps comprises: a plurality of lower snaps formed on the first housing member and spaced apart between the proximal end and the distal end, each of the plurality of lower snaps extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of each of the plurality of lower snaps comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface; a first upper snap formed on the first housing member at the distal end, the first upper snap extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the first upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented upward toward the top surface; and a second upper snap formed on the second housing member at the proximal end, the second upper snap extending out from the second housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the second upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface.”
Ribelin, in a related field of endeavor, teaches a catheter device (Fig. 49) comprising a first housing member (12A) and the second housing member (12B) coupled together via a plurality of snaps (1230) formed thereon to define an inner volume configured to movably receive the catheter (Fig. 49), wherein the plurality of snaps comprises: a plurality of lower snaps (1230) formed on the first housing member (12A) and spaced apart between the proximal end and the distal end (Fig. 49), each of the plurality of lower snaps extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of each of the plurality of lower snaps comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface. (Paragraph [000196]; See Fig. 49 downwardly protruding tabs 1230 with curved, hook-shaped body).
Jaros, in a related field of endeavor, teaches a catheter assembly (Figs. 19 and 25) comprising a comprising a first upper snap (tab 398) formed on the first housing member (193) at the distal end (Fig. 25), the first upper snap extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, (Fig. 25), the snap distal end of the first upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented upward toward the top surface (Fig. 25, tab 398 illustrates upwardly protruding tab 398 with curved, hook-shaped body).
Stamp, in a related field of endeavor, teaches an injection device (Fig. 2) comprising a second upper snap (100) formed on the second housing member at the proximal end (See Fig. 2, one of the half shells of position control member 20), the second upper snap extending out from the second housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, (Fig. 2), the snap distal end of the second upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface. (Fig. 2; Paragraph [0056] downwardly protruding snap-locking means 100 with curved, hook-shaped body);
As a result, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Devgon to teach “with the first housing member and the second housing member coupled together via a plurality of snaps formed thereon to define an inner volume configured to movably receive the catheter; wherein the plurality of snaps comprises: a plurality of lower snaps formed on the first housing member and spaced apart between the proximal end and the distal end, each of the plurality of lower snaps extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of each of the plurality of lower snaps comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface” as taught by Ribelin, “a first upper snap formed on the first housing member at the distal end, the first upper snap extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the first upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented upward toward the top surface” as taught by Jaros, “and a second upper snap formed on the second housing member at the proximal end, the second upper snap extending out from the second housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the second upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface” as taught by Stamp. Doing so provides a secure mating mechanism for joining the top and bottom housing portions. (Paragraph [000196] of Ribelin).
Regarding claim 2, Devgon does not teach “wherein the first upper snap is driven further into a mating surface of the second housing member in response to a twisting of the proximal end of the introducer housing relative to the distal end of the introducer housing, preventing separation of the first housing member from the second housing member”.
Jaros teaches a catheter assembly (Figs. 19 and 25) wherein the first upper snap (tab 398) is driven further into a mating surface (recess 378) of the second housing member (194) in response to a twisting of the proximal end of the introducer housing relative to the distal end of the introducer housing, to prevent separation of the first housing member from the second housing member. (Paragraphs [00475]-[00476], [00481]).
As a result, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Devgon to teach “wherein the first upper snap is driven further into a mating surface of the second housing member in response to a twisting of the proximal end of the introducer housing relative to the distal end of the introducer housing, preventing separation of the first housing member from the second housing member” as taught by Jaros. Doing so provides a secure mating mechanism for joining the left and right housing frames. (Paragraph [00482]).
Regarding claim 3, Devgon does not teach “an alignment feature formed on the first housing member on the distal end thereof, below the first upper snap, the alignment feature engaging another mating feature on the second housing member to prevent disengaging of the first upper snap from the mating surface on the second housing member.”
Jaros teaches (Fig. 25) an alignment feature (392) formed on the first housing member (193), the alignment feature engaging another mating feature (Fig. 19, slot 368) on the second housing member (194) to prevent disengaging of the first upper snap from the mating surface on the second housing member. (Paragraph [00476]).
Though the alignment feature in Jaros is “on the proximal end”, and therefore not “below the first upper snap” as claimed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Devgon to teach “an alignment feature formed on the first housing member on the distal end thereof, below the first upper snap, the alignment feature engaging another mating feature on the second housing member to prevent disengaging of the first upper snap from the mating surface on the second housing member” as an obvious matter of design choice, as shifting the positional arrangement of the snap connections that join the two halves of the housing together would not have modified the operation of the device.
Regarding claim 5, Devgon does not teach “wherein the first housing member forms a portion of the top surface and the second housing member forms another portion of the top surface, the portion of the top surface separated from the another portion of the top surface to define a groove that extends generally from the proximal end to the distal end, and wherein a portion of the actuator is engaged with the groove to enable movement of the actuator relative to the introducer housing”.
Jaros teaches wherein the first housing member (193) forms a portion of the top surface and the second housing member (194) forms another portion of the top surface, the portion of the top surface separated from the another portion of the top surface to define a groove that extends generally from the proximal end to the distal end, (See Fig. 32; Paragraphs [00492]-[00493]), and wherein a portion of the actuator (404) is engaged with the groove to enable movement of the actuator relative to the introducer housing. (Paragraph [00492]).
As a result, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have modified Devgon to teach “wherein the first housing member forms a portion of the top surface and the second housing member forms another portion of the top surface, the portion of the top surface separated from the another portion of the top surface to define a groove that extends generally from the proximal end to the distal end, and wherein a portion of the actuator is engaged with the groove to enable movement of the actuator relative to the introducer housing” as taught by Jaros. Doing so provides a secure mating mechanism for joining the left and right housing frames. (Paragraph [00482]). Doing so presents a mechanism for pushing or grasping by a practitioner. (Paragraph [00488]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 4 and 20 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:
Regarding claim 4, Devgon does not teach “wherein the alignment feature comprises another lower snap extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the another lower snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface.”
Jaros teaches (Fig. 25) wherein the alignment feature comprises another lower snap (bottom detent 392) extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, Paragraph [00476]), however, Jaros does not specifically teach “the snap distal end of the another lower snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface.”
Regarding claim 20, Devgon does not teach “an alignment feature formed on the first housing member, the alignment feature comprising another lower snap extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, the snap distal end of the another lower snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface.”
Jaros teaches (Fig. 25) an alignment feature (392) formed on the first housing member (193), the alignment feature comprising another lower snap (392) extending out from the first housing member from a snap proximal end to a snap distal end, (Paragraph [00476]), however, Jaros does not specifically teach “the snap distal end of the another lower snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface”.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see “Remarks”, filed 6/17/2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-5 have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that the prior art of record fails to disclose or teach "the snap distal end of each of the plurality of lower snaps comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface", "the snap distal end of the first upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented upward toward the top surface", and "the snap distal end of the second upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface", as required by independent claim 1.
This argument is not persuasive.
First, Applicant argues that the tabs (1230) of Ribelin cannot be properly equated to the plurality of lower snaps which comprise hooks oriented downward toward the bottom surface because the tabs are oriented upwards in order to engage with the recesses (1232) of the bottom housing portion (12B).
This argument is not persuasive in light of Fig. 49, which clearly illustrates tabs 1230 comprising a downwardly protruding tab that further projects a curved, hook-shaped body. (See annotated and magnified Fig. 49 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
267
442
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Downwardly oriented protruding tab)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Curved, hook-shaped body)]
Second, Applicant argues that Jaros fails to disclose a first upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented upward toward the top surface.
This argument is not persuasive in light of Fig. 25, which clearly illustrates tab 398 comprising an upwardly protruding tab that further projects a curved, hook-shaped body. (See annotated and magnified Fig. 25 below).
PNG
media_image3.png
327
301
media_image3.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Upwardly oriented protruding tab)][AltContent: textbox (Curved, hook-shaped body)][AltContent: arrow]
Third, Applicant argues that Stamp fails to disclose a second upper snap comprising a hook that is oriented downward toward the bottom surface.
PNG
media_image5.png
327
371
media_image5.png
Greyscale
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Downwardly oriented snap-locking tab)][AltContent: textbox (Curved, hook-shaped body)]This argument is not persuasive in light of Fig. 2, which clearly illustrates tabs 100 comprising a downwardly protruding tab that further projects a curved, hook-shaped body. (See annotated and magnified Fig. 2 below).
Conclusion
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 Om A. Patel whose telephone number is (571)272-6331. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Etsub Berhanu can be reached at (571) 270-5410. 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.
/OM PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/ETSUB D BERHANU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights