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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/28/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: item 26. Examiner notes item 26A and 26B appear in figure 5A, however item 26, which appears to be a pin of a different embodiment, does not appear to be present in the figures. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: item 52b. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because:
Line 5 recites “per delivery cycle of a predetermined dose amount”. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests replacing “per delivery cycle of a predetermined dose amount” in line 5 with “per a delivery cycle of a predetermined dose amount”.
Line 6 recites “a selected amount or rotation to another”. It appears a typo has been made and “a selected amount or rotation to another” in line 6 should state “a selected amount of rotation to another”.
Line 7 recites “the power train”. As the power train has not been previously introduced, Examiner suggests replacing “the power train” in line 7 with “a power train” to put the abstract in clearer form.
Line 7 recites “of direction”. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests replacing “of direction” in line 7 with “of a direction”.
Line 8 recites “the actuator”. Line 7-8 introduces an actuator input. Examiner suggests replacing “an actuator input” in line 7-8 with “an input of an actuator” to clearly introduce the actuator which line 8 refers to in order to put the abstract in clearer form.
Line 8 recites “the arc path”. Line 4 recites “a desired arc path”. Examiner suggests replacing “the arc path” in line 8 with “the desired arc path” to put the abstract in clearer form.
A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 7 recites “a plate with pin”. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests replacing “a plate with pin” in line 7 of claim 1 with “a plate with a pin” to put the claim in clearer form.
Line 11-12 recites “the plate with pin”. Examiner suggests replacing “the plate with pin” in line 11-12 of claim 1 with “the plate with the pin” to put the claim in clearer form.
Line 16 recites “also configured”. Examiner suggests replacing “also configured” in line 16 of claim 1 with “also are configured” to put the claim in clearer form.
Line 16 recites “to lose contact”. Examiner suggests replacing “to lose contact” with “to disengage” to put the claim in clearer form as to what is meant by the term “to lose contact”.
Line17 recites “reverses direction of rotation”. Examiner suggests replacing “reverses direction of rotation” with “reverses a direction of rotation” to put the claim in clearer grammatical form.
Claim 2-12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 1 recites “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim”. The independent claim is drawn to a fluid delivery device. Examiner suggests replacing “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim” in claim 2-12 with “The fluid delivery device of claim”.
Claim 4 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 4 recites “a fluid dose of predetermined amount”. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests replacing “a fluid dose of predetermined amount” in line 4 of claim 4 with “a fluid dose of a predetermined amount”.
Claim 5 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 4-5 recites “the fluid dose of predetermined amount”. This is grammatically incorrect. Examiner suggests replacing “the fluid dose of predetermined amount” in line 4-5 of claim 5 with “the fluid dose of the predetermined amount”.
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 1-2 recites “the double concave lens-shaped protrusion”. Claim 7 depends on claim 6. Claim 6 introduces a center double concave lens-shaped protrusion. Examiner suggests replacing “the double concave lens-shaped protrusion” in line 1-2 of claim 7 with “the center double concave lens-shaped protrusion” to put the claim in clearer form and clearly refer to the center double concave lens-shaped protrusion of claim 6.
Claim 8 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 2-3 recites “to lose engagement of the pin”. Examiner suggests replacing “to lose engagement of the pin” with “to disengage the pin” to put the claim in clearer form as to what is meant by the term “to lose engagement”.
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities:
Line 3 recites “reverse direction”. Examiner suggests replacing “reverse direction” in line 3 of claim 12 with “reverse a direction” to put the claim in clearer grammatical form.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-12 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 applicant), regards as the invention.
In regard to claim 1,
Line 1-3 recites “In a fluid delivery device with a drive mechanism that uses a rotary input to control fluid delivery components and an actuator to operate the drive mechanism, an overrun prevention mechanism comprises”. It is unclear if claim 1 is drawn to a fluid delivery device or to an overrun prevention mechanism due to the unclear language and structure of line 1-3. It is also unclear what components are positively required by claim 1 and which components are components of the fluid delivery device. For examination purposes Examiner construes “In a fluid delivery device with a drive mechanism that uses a rotary input to control fluid delivery components and an actuator to operate the drive mechanism, an overrun prevention mechanism comprises” to be “A fluid delivery device comprising a drive mechanism which comprises a rotary input configured to control fluid delivery components, the fluid delivery device comprising an actuator to operate the drive mechanism and an overrun prevention mechanism, the overrun prevention mechanism comprises”. Examiner suggests replacing “In a fluid delivery device with a drive mechanism that uses a rotary input to control fluid delivery components and an actuator to operate the drive mechanism, an overrun prevention mechanism comprises” in line 1-3 of claim 1 with “A fluid delivery device comprising a drive mechanism which comprises a rotary input configured to control fluid delivery components, the fluid delivery device comprising an actuator to operate the drive mechanism and an overrun prevention mechanism, the overrun prevention mechanism comprises”.
Line 1 recites “a drive mechanism that uses a rotary input”. It is unclear due to the phrase “that uses” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “that uses a rotary input” to be “which comprises a rotary input”. Examiner suggests amending line 1-3 of claim 1 as suggested above.
Line 5 recites “their corresponding gear teeth”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for the limitation in this claim. It is unclear if their corresponding gear teeth refers to the gear teeth of the first spur gear which engage the gear teeth of the second spur gear or if their corresponding gear teeth refers to teeth of another structure. For examination purposes Examiner construes “and disposed adjacent to each other to engage a selected number of their corresponding gear teeth” to be “and disposed adjacent to each other, a selected number of the gear teeth of the first spur gear configured to engage a selected number of the gear teeth of the second spur gear which correspond to the selected number of the gear teeth of the first spur gear”. Examiner suggests replacing “and disposed adjacent to each other to engage a selected number of their corresponding gear teeth” in line 4-5 of claim 1 with “and disposed adjacent to each other, a selected number of the gear teeth of the first spur gear configured to engage a selected number of the gear teeth of the second spur gear which correspond to the selected number of the gear teeth of the first spur gear”.
Line 7 recites “a plate with pin actuated by the actuator”. It is unclear due to the phrase “actuated” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “a plate with pin actuated by the actuator” to be “a plate with a pin configured to be actuated by the actuator”. Examiner suggests replacing “a plate with pin actuated by the actuator” in line 7 of claim 1 with “a plate with a pin configured to be actuated by the actuator”.
Line 9 recites “the plate being actuated to rotate”. It is unclear due to the phrase “being actuated” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “the plate being actuated to rotate” to be “the plate configured to be actuated to rotate”. Examiner suggests replacing “the plate being actuated to rotate” in line 9 of claim 1 with “the plate configured to be actuated to rotate”.
Line 13 recites “the surface feature”. Line 12 recites “each face being configured with at least one surface feature”. It is unclear which surface feature “the surface feature” of line 13 refers to. It is unclear if the surface feature is the at least one surface feature of each face or a specific surface feature of the least one surface feature. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the surface feature” to be “the at least one surface feature”. Examiner suggests replacing “the surface feature” in line 13 of claim 1 with “the at least one surface feature”.
Line 13 recites “the spur gears”. It is unclear if the spur gears refer to the first and second spur gears or to different spur gears. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the spur gears” to be “the first and second spur gears”. Examiner suggests replacing “the spur gears” in line 13 of claim 1 with “the first and second spur gears”.
Line 13-14 recites “each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin”. It is unclear due to the phrase “being contacted” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “being contacted” to be “configured to be contacted”. Examiner suggests replacing “being contacted” in line 13 of claim 1 with “configured to be contacted”.
Line 14 recites “that spur gear”. It is unclear what spur gear “that spur gear” refers to. It is unclear if that spur gear refers to the first spur gear or the second spur gear. For examination purposes Examiner construes that spur gear to refer to one of the first spur gear or the second spur gear. Examiner suggests clarifying which spur gear “that spur gear” refers to.
Line 15 recites “teeth of that spur gear”. Line 4 recites “first and second spur gears comprising gear teeth”. It is unclear if the teeth of line 15 are in addition to the gear teeth of line 4 or if the teeth of line 15 are the same as the gear teeth. It is also unclear which gear “that spur gear” refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes teeth of that spur gear to refer to the gear teeth of the one of the first spur gear or the second spur gear. Examiner suggests clarifying which spur gear “that spur gear” refers to and clarifying if the teeth are additional teeth to the gear teeth.
Line 15 recites “teeth of the other spur gear”. Line 4 recites “first and second spur gears comprising gear teeth”. It is unclear if the teeth of line 15 are in addition to the gear teeth of line 4 or if the teeth of line 15 are the same as the gear teeth. It is also unclear which gear “the other spur gear” refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes teeth of the other spur gear to refer to the gear teeth of the other of the first spur gear or the second spur gear. Examiner suggests clarifying which spur gear “the other spur gear” refers to and clarifying if the teeth are additional teeth to the gear teeth.
Line 13-16 recites “the surface feature of each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path to rotate that spur gear by a selected amount and teeth of that spur gear engaging teeth of the other spur gear to impart rotation”. It is unclear what is meant by this. It is unclear if the at least one surface feature of first spur gear and the at least one surface feature of the second spur gear are each required to be contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path i.e. both surface features are in contact by the pin at the same time. However, based on paragraph [0019]-[0020] of the instant disclosure each spur gear appears to be engaged with the pin at different times depending on which end the pin is traveling toward. Examiner suggests clarifying what is meant by line 13-16. For examination purposes Examiner construes the surface feature of each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin at different times when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path’
Line 16 recites “the surface feature”. Line 12 recites “each face being configured with at least one surface feature”. It is unclear which surface feature “the surface feature” of line 16 refers to. It is unclear if the surface feature is the at least one surface feature of each face or a specific surface feature of the least one surface feature. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the surface feature” to be “the at least one surface feature”. Examiner suggests replacing “the surface feature” in line 16 of claim 1 with “the at least one surface feature”.
Line 16 recites “the spur gears”. It is unclear if the spur gears refer to the first and second spur gears or to different spur gears. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the spur gears” to be “the first and second spur gears”. Examiner suggests replacing “the spur gears” in line 16 of claim 1 with “the first and second spur gears”.
Line 17 recites “the respective end”. Line 14 introduces respective ends. It is unclear which respective end of the respective ends “the respective end” of line 17 refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the respective end” to be “each of the respective ends”. Examiner suggests replacing “the respective end” in line 17 of claim 1 with “each of the respective ends”.
Line 16-18 recites “the surface feature of each of the spur gears also configured to lose contact with the pin at the respective end of the arc path before the actuator reverses direction of rotation of the plate to commence another cycle”. It is unclear what is meany by this. Based on paragraph [0019]-[0020] of the instant disclosure, only the spur gear that is engaged with the pin would lose contact with the pin at one respective end as the other spur gear would already not be engaged. Examiner suggests clarifying what is meant by this. For examination purposes Examiner construes each surface feature of the spur gear when engaged with the pin to be configured to lose contact with the pin at a respective end.
Examiner notes claims 2-12 are similarly rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
In regard to claim 2,
Line 3 recites “the spur gears”. It is unclear if the spur gears refer to the first and second spur gears or to different spur gears. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the spur gears” to be “the first and second spur gears”. Examiner suggests replacing “the spur gears” in line 3 of claim 2 with “the first and second spur gears”.
Line 3 recites “that cycle”. Line 3 of claim 2 recites “a cycle”. Claim 1, which claim 2 depends on, also recites “a cycle” in line 8, “alternating cycles” in line 10, and “another cycle” in line 18. It is unclear which cycle “that cycle” in claim 2 refers to. Examiner suggests clarifying which cycle “that cycle” refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the cycle” to be “the cycle in which the plate rotates 126 degrees”.
Examiner notes claims 3-5 are similarly rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 2.
In regard to claim 3,
Line 2 recites “the spur gears”. It is unclear if the spur gears refer to the first and second spur gears or to different spur gears. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the spur gears” to be “the first and second spur gears”. Examiner suggests replacing “the spur gears” in line 2 of claim 3 with “the first and second spur gears”.
Line 3 recites “a cycle”. Claim 3 depends on claim 2 and claim 1. Claim 2 recites “a cycle” and “that cycle”. Claim 1 recites “a cycle” in line 8, “alternating cycles” in line 10, and “another cycle” in line 18. It is unclear if the cycle of line 3 of claim 3 introduces a different cycle or refers to one of the cycles already introduced. For examination purposes Examiner construes the cycle of line 3 to be the same as claim 2. Examiner suggests replacing “a cycle” with “the cycle in which the plate rotates 126 degrees”.
Examiner notes claims 4-5 are similarly rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 3.
In regard to claim 4,
Line 1 recites “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 3, wherein the fluid delivery device”. It is unclear if claim 4 is attempting to claim the fluid delivery device as a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Based on claim 1, the fluid delivery device is not a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Examiner suggests replacing “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 3, wherein the fluid delivery device” in line 1 with “The fluid delivery device of claim 3, wherein the fluid delivery device”. For examination purposes Examiner construes the fluid delivery device to not be a component of the overrun prevention mechanism.
Examiner notes claim 5 is similarly rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 4.
In regard to claim 5,
Line 1 recites “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 4, wherein the fluid delivery device”. It is unclear if claim 5 is attempting to claim the fluid delivery device as a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Based on claim 1, the fluid delivery device is not a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Examiner suggests replacing “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 4, wherein the fluid delivery device” in line 1 with “The fluid delivery device of claim 4, wherein the fluid delivery device”. For examination purposes Examiner construes the fluid delivery device to not be a component of the overrun prevention mechanism.
Line 2 recites “a syringe-type pump that moves a plunger”. It is unclear due to the phrase “that moves” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “a syringe-type pump that moves a plunger” to be “a syringe-type pump configured to move a plunger”. Examiner suggests replacing “a syringe-type pump that moves a plunger” in line 2 of claim 5 with “a syringe-type pump configured to move a plunger”.
Line 3-5 recites “the second output being provided to the drive mechanism to move the plunger a distance commensurate to deliver the fluid dose of predetermined amount”. It is unclear due to the phrase “being provided” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “the second output being provided to the drive mechanism to move the plunger a distance commensurate to deliver the fluid dose of predetermined amount” to be “the second output configured to be provided to the drive mechanism to move the plunger a distance commensurate to deliver the fluid dose of the predetermined amount”. Examiner suggests replacing “the second output being provided to the drive mechanism to move the plunger a distance commensurate to deliver the fluid dose of predetermined amount” in line 3-5 of claim 5 with “the second output configured to be provided to the drive mechanism to move the plunger a distance commensurate to deliver the fluid dose of the predetermined amount”.
In regard to claim 6,
Line 1-2 recites “the at least one surface feature”. Claim 6 depends on claim 1. Claim 1 recites “each face being configured with at least one surface feature”. As each face has at least one surface feature, it is unclear which surface feature line 1-2 of claim 6 refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the at least one surface feature” to be “the at least one surface feature of each face”. Examiner suggests replacing “the at least one surface feature” in line 1-2 of claim 6 with “the at least one surface feature of each face”.
Examiner notes claims 7-8 are similarly rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 6.
In regard to claim 7,
Line 1-2 recites “wherein a convex surface on the double concave lens-shaped protrusion is contacted by the pin when traveling”. It is unclear due to the phrase “is contacted” if a method step is being claimed. A single claim which claims both an apparatus and the method steps of using the apparatus is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. See MPEP 2173.05(p). For examination purposes Examiner construes “wherein a convex surface on the double concave lens-shaped protrusion is contacted by the pin when traveling” to be “wherein a convex surface on the center double concave lens-shaped protrusion is configured to be contacted by the pin when traveling”. Examiner suggests replacing “wherein a convex surface on the double concave lens-shaped protrusion is contacted by the pin when traveling” in line 1-2 of claim 7 with “wherein a convex surface on the center double concave lens-shaped protrusion is configured to be contacted by the pin when traveling”.
Line 2-3 recites “traveling toward respective an end of the arc path”. It is unclear what is meant by this. Claim 7 depends on claim 6 and claim 1. Claim 1 recites “respective ends of the arc path”. It is unclear if the “respective an end of the arc path” is intended to state “the respective ends of the arc path” or “one of the respective ends of the arc path”. For examination purposes Examiner construes “respective an end of the arc path” in line 3 of claim 7 to be “one of the respective ends of the arc path”. Examiner suggests replacing “respective an end of the arc path” in line 3 of claim 7 with “one of the respective ends of the arc path”.
Line 3 recites “that spur gear”. It is unclear what spur gear “that spur gear” refers to. Claim 7 depends on claim 6 and claim 1. Claim 1 introduces a first spur gear and a second spur gear. It is unclear if that spur gear refers to the first spur gear or the second spur gear. For examination purposes Examiner construes that spur gear to refer to the first spur gear or the second spur gear. Examiner suggests clarifying which spur gear “that spur gear” refers to.
In regard to claim 8,
Line 3-4 recites “the end of the arc path”. Claim 8 depends on claim 6 and claim 1. Claim 1 states “respective ends of the arc path”. It is unclear if the end of the arc path of claim 8 is intended to refer to one of the respective ends of the arc path or to a different end. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the end of the arc path” to be “one of the respective ends of the arc path”. Examiner suggests clarifying which end “the end of the arc path” refers to.
In regard to claim 9,
Line 1-2 recites “the at least one surface feature”. Claim 9 depends on claim 1. Claim 1 recites “each face being configured with at least one surface feature”. As each face has at least one surface feature, it is unclear which surface feature line 1-2 of claim 9 refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the at least one surface feature” to be “the at least one surface feature of each face”. Examiner suggests replacing “the at least one surface feature” in line 1-2 of claim 9 with “the at least one surface feature of each face”.
Line 2 recites “each having a flat surface”. It is unclear what structure the term “each” refers to. For examination purposes Examiner construes “each having a flat surface” to be “each of the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions having a flat surface”. Examiner suggests replacing “each having a flat surface” in line 2 of claim 9 “each of the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions having a flat surface”.
Examiner notes claim 10 is similarly rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 9.
In regard to claim 10,
Line 1-2 recites “wherein half-teardrop-shaped protrusions are arranged diagonally”. Claim 10 depends on claim 9. Claim 9 introduces half-teardrop-shaped protrusions. It is unclear if claim 10 is introducing additional half-teardrop-shaped protrusions or intended to refer to the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions of claim 9. For examination purposes Examiner construes the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions of claim 9 and 10 to be the same. Examiner suggests replacing “wherein half-teardrop-shaped protrusions are arranged diagonally” in line 1-2 of claim 10 with “wherein the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions are arranged diagonally”.
Line 2 recites “the spur gears”. It is unclear if the spur gears refer to the first and second spur gears or to different spur gears. For examination purposes Examiner construes “the spur gears” to be “the first and second spur gears”. Examiner suggests replacing “the spur gears” in line 2 of claim 10 with “the first and second spur gears”.
Line 3 recites “their respective flat surfaces”. It is unclear if “their respective flat surfaces” refers to the flat surface of each of the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions or to a different flat surface. For examination purposes Examiner construes “their respective flat surfaces” to be “the flat surface of each of the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions”. Examiner suggests replacing “their respective flat surfaces” in line 3 of claim 10 with “the flat surface of each of the half-teardrop-shaped protrusions”.
In regard to claim 11,
Line 2 recites “an end of the arc path”. Claim 11 depends on claim 1. Claim 1 introduces “respective ends of the arc path”. It is unclear if an end of the arc path of claim 11 is intended to refer to one of the respective ends of the arc path or to introduce a different end. For examination purposes Examiner construes “an end of the arc path” to be “one of the respective ends of the arc path”. Examiner suggests clarifying which end “an end of the arc path” refers to.
Examiner notes claim 12 is similarly rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 11.
In regard to claim 12,
Line 1 recites “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 11, wherein the fluid delivery device”. It is unclear if claim 12 is attempting to claim the fluid delivery device as a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Based on claim 1, the fluid delivery device is not a component of the overrun prevention mechanism. Examiner suggests replacing “The overrun prevention mechanism of claim 11, wherein the fluid delivery device” in line 1 of claim 12 with “The fluid delivery device of claim 11, wherein the fluid delivery device”. For examination purposes Examiner construes the fluid delivery device to not be a component of the overrun prevention mechanism.
Line 3 recites “an end of the arc path”. Claim 12 depends on claim 11 and claim 1. Claim 11 states “an end of the arc path”. Claim 1 introduces “respective ends of the arc path”. It is unclear if an end of the arc path of claim 12 is intended to refer to one of the respective ends of the arc path or to introduce a different end. For examination purposes Examiner construes “an end of the arc path” in claim 12 to be “one of the respective ends of the arc path”. Examiner suggests clarifying which end “an end of the arc path” refers to.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 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. Examiner notes the indication of allowability is on the condition that the claims are amended in such a way as to be in line with the interpretation that has been applied in view of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and any other amendments to the claims may affect their allowability.
In regard to claim 1,
The prior art of record does not teach or otherwise render obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in combination with all claim limitations a fluid delivery device as claimed in claim 1 comprising an overrun prevention mechanism comprising each face being configured with at least one surface feature along which the pin can follow as the plate is rotating, the surface feature of each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path to rotate that spur gear by a selected amount and teeth of that spur gear engaging teeth of the other spur gear to impart rotation, the surface feature of each of the spur gears also configured to lose contact with the pin at the respective end of the arc path before the actuator reverses direction of rotation of the plate to commence another cycle.
Hanson (U.S. PG publication 20210128830) discloses an overrun prevention mechanism comprises: first (figure 2B, item 516) and second spur gears (figure 2B, item 562) comprising gear teeth (see figure 2B) and disposed adjacent to each other (see figure 3A) to engage a selected number of their corresponding gear teeth (paragraph [0068]; see figure 3A), the first spur gear rotatable clockwise and the second spur gear rotatable counterclockwise (paragraph [0068]-[0070]; Examiner notes the claim does not require the first spur gear to rotate clockwise while the second spur gear rotates counterclockwise. The claim also does not preclude the first spur gear from rotating counterclockwise or the second spur gear from rotating clockwise); and a plate (figure 2B, item 566) with pin (item 566b and 566A; see paragraph [0069]-[0070]) actuated by the actuator in the fluid delivery device to rotate a controlled amount during a cycle to move the pin in an arc path relative to the first and second spur gears (paragraph [0068]-[0070]), the plate being actuated to rotate in clockwise and counterclockwise directions in alternating cycles (paragraph [0070]), wherein the first and second spur gears each have a face directed toward the plate with pin (see figure 3A), one face being configured with at least one surface feature (figure 4A-4H, item 564) along which the pin can follow as the plate is rotating (paragraph [0069-0070]), one of the spur gears (figure 2B, item 562) being contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path to rotate that spur gear by a selected amount (see figure 4A-4H; paragraph [0069-0070]) and teeth of that spur gear engaging teeth of the other spur gear to impart rotation (paragraph [0068]), the surface feature of the one spur gear also configured to lose contact with the pin at the respective end of the arc path before the actuator reverses direction of rotation of the plate to commence another cycle (see figure 4D and 4H). As Hanson only discloses one spur gear selectively engageable with the pin, Hanson fails to disclose an overrun prevention mechanism comprising each face being configured with at least one surface feature along which the pin can follow as the plate is rotating, the surface feature of each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path to rotate that spur gear by a selected amount and teeth of that spur gear engaging teeth of the other spur gear to impart rotation, the surface feature of each of the spur gears also configured to lose contact with the pin at the respective end of the arc path before the actuator reverses direction of rotation of the plate to commence another cycle. The subject matter of an overrun prevention mechanism comprising each face being configured with at least one surface feature along which the pin can follow as the plate is rotating, the surface feature of each of the spur gears being contacted by the pin when traveling toward respective ends of the arc path to rotate that spur gear by a selected amount and teeth of that spur gear engaging teeth of the other spur gear to impart rotation, the surface feature of each of the spur gears also configured to lose contact with the pin at the respective end of the arc path before the actuator reverses direction of rotation of the plate to commence another cycle in combination with all other limitations of claim 1 could not be found nor was suggested elsewhere in the prior art of record.
Dependent claims 2-12 would be allowable by virtue of being dependent upon allowable independent claim 1 and 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDRA ELIZABETH LALONDE whose telephone number is (313)446-6594. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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.
/ALEXANDRA LALONDE/ Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/KEVIN C SIRMONS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783