DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/06/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/06/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because the coil and patch disclosed by Geissler would not be made from identical materials and thus are of different materials. The combination of Geissler and Martin is proper because Geissler teaches the use of RFID and one with ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to adapt materials taught within the RFID field of endeavor.
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 may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Geissler (US 2017/0228627, of record) in view of Martin (US 10402600, of record).
Regarding claim 2, Geissler discloses an electromagnetic coil between the first portion and the second portion of the housing (Fig. 6: “coil 616” is somewhere between the boundaries of the first and second portions).
Regarding claim 3, Geissler discloses an integrated circuit chip coupled to an electromagnetic coil ([0011]…[0013]).
Regarding claims 4-6 and 8, Geissler does not explicitly disclose that certain parts of the housing comprise polymers and non-ferromagnetic metal of different types. However, Geissler teaches the use of biocompatible plastics ([0066]) and non-ferromagnetic metals ([0010]: “transponder does not include a ferromagnetic material”), and, polymers and non-ferromagnetic metals are widely-known and conventionally used to construct implantable devices. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply the recited polymers and non-ferromagnetic metals, as to provide conventional and well-known materials for making a device.
Regarding claim 7, Geissler discloses a coil located between the first portion and the second portion (Fig. 6, [0109]: “coil 616” is between the ends of the first and second portions); wherein the housing forms a chamber configured to receive a fluid, the chamber including the first portion and the second portion (Fig. 6, [0107]: “main chamber 612” is in contact with “plug 621” which is part of the second portion); wherein the first portion is configured as a needle stop (Fig. 6, [0107]: “needle stopping surface 617”); and wherein the first portion allows transmission of electromagnetic signals from the coil (Fig. 6: “coil 616” emits electromagnetic signals which penetrate through materials of both first and second portions of the integrated device). Geissler does not explicitly disclose that the second portion prevents transmission of electromagnetic signals from the coil. However, Martin teaches a reflective material that blocks transmission of RFID signals (4:6-36). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply the reflective/deflective surface of Martin to the claimed second portion as taught by Geissler, as to provide a manner of concentrating and directing radiation for detection.
Regarding claim 9, Geissler discloses that coil may be made of aluminum ([0047]; [0092] – coil may be made from aluminum wire).
Regarding claim 10, Geissler discloses that the first portion comprises poly-ether-ether-ketone ([0038]; [0089] – “PEEK”).
Regarding claim 11, Geissler discloses that the cover is self-sealing ([0102]; [0106]; [0111]).
Regarding claim 12, Geissler discloses that a coil is contained within a fluid-tight compartment of the housing that prevents contact between the coil and a fluid within the housing ([0109]: “coil housing 614 may be sealed shut”).
Regarding claim 13, Geissler discloses that the integrated port does not comprise any ferromagnetic materials ([0010]: “transponder does not include a ferromagnetic material”).
Regarding claim 14, Geissler discloses that the housing is cylindrical in shape (Figs. 7A and 7B).
Regarding claim 15, Geissler discloses a medical implant comprising: an integrated port comprising: a housing comprising: a first portion coupled to a second portion ([0107], Fig. 6: “valve assembly 610” is second portion, “integrated port dome 620” is first portion); wherein the first portion is formed from a first material and the second portion is formed from a second material different from the first material (Fig. 6: “coil 616” and “patch 622” are made of different materials, the coil is an electrical device and the patch is a self-sealing fluid cover); and a cover over an opening into the housing (Fig. 6: “patch 622” is considered a cover as shown in Fig. 7; “integrated port dome 310” performs a similar function of covering); wherein the first portion faces the cover and the first material allows transmission of electromagnetic signals through the first portion, the first portion being between the second portion and the cover (Fig. 6: “coil 616” emits electromagnetic signals which penetrate through materials of both first and second portions of the integrated device). Geissler does not explicitly disclose that the second material blocks, attenuates, or prevents transmission of RFID signals from the electromagnetic coil through the second portion in a direction away from the cover. However, Martin teaches a reflective material that blocks transmission of RFID signals (4:6-36). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply the reflective/deflective surface of Martin to the claimed second portion as taught by Geissler, as to provide a manner of concentrating and directing radiation for detection.
Regarding claim 16, Geissler discloses a flexible shell ([0104]: “implant shell may be made of silicone”); wherein the cover of the integrated port is coupled to an inner/outer surface of the shell (Fig. 7A: the patch or integrated port dome is coupled to an outer surface of “shell 700”).
Regarding claim 17, while Geissler does not explicitly disclose that the cover is coupled to the shell with an adhesive, Geissler teaches sealing or bonding is used for attachment to the shell ([0074]). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to apply an adhesive, as to provide enhanced sealing against the shell.
Regarding claim 18, Geissler discloses that there is a shell including silicone ([0102], [0104]: “implant shell may be made of silicone”) and that the cover of the integrated port comprises silicone ([0106]: “integrated port dome 310 may be made of a self-sealing material, such as a silicone material”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason Ip whose telephone number is (571) 270-5387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9a-5p PST.
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, Christopher Koharski can be reached on (571) 272-7230. 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.
/JASON M IP/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3793
Prosecution Insights