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
Applicant has amended claims 19 and 29 which were previously objected to; Examiner accordingly withdraws the objection of claims 19 and 29. The objection of claim 15 is maintained since amendments were not appropriately made by Applicant.
Applicant has canceled the claims 21 and 22. Examiner accordingly withdraws the 112(b) rejection of claims 21 and 22 and Drawings objection.
Applicant has amended claims 32 and 33 which were previously rejected under the U.S.C § 112(b) rejection. Examiner accordingly withdraws the 112(b) rejection of claims 32 and 33. The 112(b) rejection of claim 24 is maintained since the amendments were not appropriately made by Applicant.
Claim Objections
Claims 15 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 15, line 13, “the longitudinal extension” should be corrected to “a longitudinal extension” since this is the first time this feature is introduced.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 24 is/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.
Claim 24 introduces a “second” cog axle and a “second” hollow rolling member, the scope of which is unclear. Claim 24 is dependent on claim 19, a “first” cog axle or “first” hollow rolling member is not recited in claims 15, 17, 18 and 19. It is unclear if the Applicant intended to use the term “second” to represent a numerical value and depend on claim 23 to provide missing “first” cog axle and “first” hollow rolling member. For the sake of examination, based on the interpretation being applied, the Examiner is interpreting claim 24 as being dependent on claim 23 instead of claim 19. Applicant is suggested to amend claim 24 to show dependency on claim 23 instead of claim 19 to overcome rejection.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objection set forth in this Office Action. Claims 17-20, 23, and 25-28 depend from claim 15 and would be allowable if claim 15 were amended to overcome the objection set forth above. Claim 24 depends from claim 15 and would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action, and if claim 15 were amended to overcome the objection set forth above.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The subject matter of independent claim 15 could not be found nor was suggested in the prior art of record. Applicant incorporated subject matter of claim 16 into claim 15, which was previously indicated and set forth in this Office Action as allowable.
Regarding Claim 15, Moeller discloses a delivery device for delivering liquid from a flexible container (Fig. 7), the delivery device comprising:
a housing (2 in Fig. 7) having a first wall (10, not shown in the cross-sectional view of Fig 7, but labeled in Fig 6; it is noted that Col 8, Lines 34-68 sets forth that the device of Fig 7 has the same structural configuration as the device of Fig 6 except for the lever 201, rack 204 and spring 206 assembly) provided with a housing first linear gear having housing first linear gear teeth (226 in Fig. 7); the housing being configured to receive the flexible container (220 in Fig. 7),
a first roller (222 in Fig. 7) having a first compound gear comprising a first gearwheel provided with first gearwheel teeth (224 in Fig. 7) and a second gearwheel provided with second gearwheel teeth (206 in Fig. 7); and
an actuator (201 in combination with 204 in Fig. 7) comprising an actuator first linear gear provided with actuator first linear gear teeth (204 in Fig. 7);
wherein the first gearwheel teeth are configured to mesh with the housing first linear gear teeth (224 engage with 226, Col.8, line 45-46), and the second gearwheel teeth are configured to mesh with the actuator first linear gear teeth (204 engage with 206, Col. 8, line 42);
wherein the actuator is configured to be moved linearly from a first position to a second position along a longitudinal axis defined by the longitudinal extension of the housing first linear gear (204 move rearwardly, Col. 8, line 53), causing the first roller to be translated along the housing first linear gear, to squeeze liquid from the flexible container (222 move toward 220, line Col. 8, 55-58); but does not disclose wherein a diameter of the first gearwheel is smaller than that of the second gearwheel.
Moeller discloses the opposite, with the diameter of the first gearwheel being larger than the diameter of the second gearwheel. Therefore, modifying the size of the gearwheels to have the first gearwheel possess a smaller diameter than that of the second gearwheel would render Moeller inoperable as the first gearwheel has to be larger to engage with the housing first linear gear and the second gearwheel has to be smaller to engage with the actuator first linear gear.
Claim 29 is allowed. Claims 30-34 depend from claim 29 and are also allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Upon consideration of the prior of record, the limitations recited in independent claim 29 are not taught or suggested by prior art and therefore define allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 29, Moeller discloses a delivery device for delivering liquid (Fig. 7) comprising:
a flexible container containing the liquid (220 in Fig. 7);
a housing (2 in Fig 7) having a first wall (10, not shown in the cross-sectional view of Fig 7, but labeled in Fig 6; it is noted that Col 8, Lines 34-68 sets forth that the device of Fig 7 has the same structural configuration as the device of Fig 6 except for the lever 201, rack 204 and spring 206 assembly ) provided with a housing first linear gear having housing first linear gear teeth(226 in Fig. 7) and a second wall (see annotated Fig. 6 above) provided with a housing second linear gear having housing second linear gear teeth(see annotated Fig. 6 above), where the housing is configured to receive the flexible container(220 in housing 10, Fig. 7);
a first roller (222 in Fig. 7) having a first compound gear comprising a first gearwheel provided with first gearwheel teeth (224 in Fig. 7), a second gearwheel provided with second gearwheel teeth (206 in Fig. 7) and a third gearwheel in rotating engagement with the housing second linear gear teeth (see annotated Fig. 6 above); and
an actuator (201 and 204 in combination in Fig. 7) comprising an actuator first linear gear provided with actuator first linear gear teeth (204 in Fig. 7),
wherein the first gearwheel teeth are configured to mesh with the housing first linear gear teeth (224 engage with 226, Col. 8, line 45-46) and the second gearwheel teeth are configured to mesh with the actuator first linear gear teeth (204 engage with 206, Col. 8, line 42),
wherein the actuator is configured to be moved linearly from a first position to a second position along a longitudinal axis defined by the longitudinal extension of the housing first linear gear (204 move rearwardly, Col. 8, line 53), causing the first roller to be translated along the housing first linear gear, to squeeze liquid from the flexible container (222 move toward 220, line Col. 8, 55-58), but does not disclose that the first gearwheel has a diameter that is less than a diameter of the second gearwheel.
Moeller discloses the opposite, with the diameter of the first gearwheel being larger than the diameter of the second gearwheel. Therefore, modifying the size of the gearwheels to have the first gearwheel possess a smaller diameter than that of the second gearwheel would render Moeller inoperable as the first gearwheel has to be larger to engage with the housing first linear gear and the second gearwheel has to be smaller to engage with the actuator first linear gear.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
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 MAHMOOD FAROOQ whose telephone number is (571)272-7276. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 7:30-5:00p 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