DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of a preliminary amendment on 8/07/2023. As per the preliminary amendment, claims 1-12 have been amended, and no claims have been added or cancelled. Thus, claims 1-12 are pending in the application.
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 .
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it includes the phrases “The invention pertain to” and “The invention comprises” in lines 8-9, which are implied phrases that should be omitted. 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
Claims 1, 4, 6, 10, and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites the term “a rotary air pumps” in line 3. Examiner suggests changing to read --rotary air pumps-- in order to correct a grammatical issue.
Claim 4 recites the language “with sliding body and external rotor” in lines 3-4. Examiner suggests changing to read --with a sliding body and an external rotor-- in order to improve the readability of the claim.
Claim 6 recites the term “with asymmetric center” in line 3. Examiner suggests changing to read --with an asymmetric center-- in order to improve the readability of the claim.
Claim 10 recites the term “following items,” in line 4. Examiner suggests changing to read --following items:-- in order to have proper punctuation.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “in at least one of the located cited ahead,” in line 3. Examiner suggests changing to read --located in at least one of:-- in order to improve the readability of the claim and have proper punctuation.
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.
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the air distribution chamber for exhaling" first in line 6, and “the air distribution chamber for inhaling” first in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the rotary cylinder" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the air distribution chamber" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the atmospheric air" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the air distribution chamber" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Any remaining claims are rejected for being dependent on a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor (US Pat. 9,084,859) in view of Arnott (US Pat. 6,595,212).
Regarding claim 1, Connor discloses a device for transferring energy between exhaling and inhaling phases (see Col. 19 line 30 to Col. 20 line 2) comprising: a rotary air pumps (1)(see Figs. 8-9 the pump system shown within housing 801, containing two pumps as impellers 803/ 812), exhaling chamber (8)(see Figs. 8-9 gas flow channel 802 to the right of impeller 803; see also Col. 35 line 56 to Col. 36 line 15) and inhaling chamber (9) (see Figs. 8-9 gas flow channel 811 to the right of 812; see also Col. 35 line 56 to Col. 36 line 15) and air valves (10) and (11)(see Figs. 8-9 the members 817, which move in order to selectively block and unblock the flow channels 802/811, and thus acts as air valves) directly connected to a face mask (7)(see Fig. 4 where the system is designed to be connected to a mask 401 and integrated therewith, such that the valves 817 in Figs. 8-9 are in substantially the same style device, and also directly connected to a face mask; see also Col. 30 lines 10-23), wherein the air valves (10) and (11), connected independently to the air distribution chamber for exhaling (8) and to the air distribution chamber for inhaling (9), respectively (see Figs. 8-9 where each of the valve members 817 are placed in either the gas flow channel 802 or gas flow channel 811, independent of one another, and assist in the inhalation/ exhalation respectively); the exhaling (8) and inhaling (9) chambers are each connected through an air communication channel (2-A) to the rotary air pumps (1)(see Figs. 8-9, the sections of gas channels 802/811 which pass through the impellers 803/812, communicating with the rest of the gas channels and fluidly connected therewith), which transfers the energy between the air pumps (1) (see Col. 19 line 30 to Col. 20 line 2, via battery 807 in Figs. 8-9) and wherein said air pumps (1) are connected to the outside environment by way of an air outlet and inlet ducts (2-B)(see Figs. 8-9 the section of gas channels 802/811 that is to the left of the figures and left of the impellers 803/812, which communicated with the outside environment; see also the external end of gas channel 402 in Fig. 5, which Figs. 8-9 are analogous to).
The Connor embodiment lacks a detailed description of and one-way air valves (10) and (11), wherein the one-way air valves (10) and (11), connected independently to the air distribution chamber for exhaling (8) and to the air distribution chamber for inhaling (9), respectively. It is noted that Figs. 8-9 of Connor do have a valving system that selectively and independently opens and closes the inhalation/ exhalation flow paths (see Figs. 8-9 where a member 817 is shown to move to allow air flow through the passages, thus acting as a valve).
However, Connor teaches a separate embodiment where each of an inhalation flow path and exhalation flow path contain one-way valves that are independently connected to each of the exhaling and inhaling chambers, respectively (see Figs. 14-15 where each of the gas channels 1002/1011 have one-way gas valves 1401/ 1402/ 1403/ 1404 to direct the gas flow during inhalation/ exhalation; see Col. 38 lines 33-43).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inhalation exhalation channels of the Figs. 8-9 embodiment of Connor to further have one-way valves in each channel and on either side of the impeller as taught by the embodiment of Connor in Figs. 14-15, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of valve for controlling the airflow during inhalation and exhalation, to yield the predictable result of only allowing a single direction of airflow through each channel.
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of the rotary air pumps containing a single rotary axis (3) connected simultaneously to the two pumps (1), which transfers the energy between the air pumps (1). It is noted that Connor does appear to contemplate the physical connection from one impeller to another for energy storing and transfer (Connor; see Col. 38 line 65 to Col. 39 line 4; see also Col. 31 lines 33-34).
However, Arnott teaches an inhalation/ exhalation respiratory device that stores energy from one phase to transfer to the other, where rotary air pumps containing a single rotary axis (3) connected simultaneously to the two pumps (1)(see Fig. 9 two vanes 270, sharing a single axis shaft 272), which transfers the energy between the air pumps (1)(see Col. 8 lines 46-61, via a spring energy storing system 278 in Fig. 9).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the orientation of the rotary air pumps and the energy storing mechanism of the modified Connor device to have the rotary pumps share an axis and store energy via spring as taught by Arnott, as it would provide a mechanical means of collecting and transferring energy from one rotary air pump to the other, removing the need for an energy source/ battery for the energy transfer (Arnott; see Col. 4 lines 15-25).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Connor device has a valve (12 or 13) in the air path (2-A or 2-B) that passes through the rotary pumps (1)(Connor; see Figs. 8-9 where each channel 802/811 is modified with one-way valves one both ends, such that the patient-side one-way valves are the one-way valves, and the environment-facing one-way valves are the valves in the airflow path of channels 802/811; see also Figs. 14-15).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Connor device has the air pump.
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of wherein the air pump (1) is of the external gearing type (1-A) with external gearing (1-A-1).
However, Connor teaches another embodiment where the air pump (1) is of the external gearing type (1-A) with external gearing (1-A-1) (Connor; see Col. 38 line 65 to Col. 39 line 4).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the impeller style of the modified Connor device to be an external gear type as taught by the embodiment of Connor (Col. 38 line 65 to Col. 39 line 4) as it would be a simple substitution of one type of impeller means for another, to yield the predictable result of moving the airflow along and storing energy therefrom.
Regarding claim 5, the modified Connor device has wherein the air pump (1) is of the lobular type (1-C) comprising lobes (1-C-1) )(Connor; see Col. 31 lines 23-34, the impeller arms able to be fan blades, being curved and radially asymmetric such that they form lobes).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Connor device has wherein the air pump (1) is of the vane air pump type (1- E) comprising vanes (1-E-1)(Connor; see Col. 31 lines 23-34, the impeller arms able to be fan blades).
Regrading claim 10, the modified Connor device has an air distribution chamber.
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of an air distribution chamber (8 or 9) having at least one of the following items, expansion or elastic retraction chambers (17 or 18).
However, another Connor embodiment teaches where the housing can have a pair of expandable gas-containing chambers are able to expand and retract to bring fresh air from the environment to the patient and expel exhaled air out to the environment (Connor; see Figs. 18-19 and Col. 39 line 53 to Col. 40 line 27).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air distribution chambers of the modified Connor device to include expandable gas-containing chambers as taught by the Connor embodiment of Figs. 18-19, as it would be a simple substitution of one mechanism for supplying fresh air to a user and expelling exhaled air, to yield the predictable result of assisting with the inhalation/ exhalation of a user while storing energy from the breathing phases (Connor; see Figs. 18-19 and Col. 39 line 53 to Col. 40 line 27).
Claims 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor in view of Arnott as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of DeVries et al. (US Pat. 7,188,621).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Connor device has the air pump, and a sliding body (Connor; see Figs. 8-9 the sliding valve member 817).
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of wherein the air pump (1) is of the internal gearing slide type (1-B) comprised with internal gearing (1-B-1) with sliding body (1-B-2) and external rotor (1-B-3).
However, DeVries teaches a respiratory ventilation system, where an impeller blower system has a pair of impellers (Fig. 12 impellers 1103/1203), with an external rotor and shaft (Fig. 12 see rotor 1101 and its shaft), and internal gearing (Fig. 12 see gears 1201/1202; and Col. 18 lines 15-21).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air pump mechanism of the modified Connor device to be a geared impeller system with a rotor as taught by DeVries, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of driven impeller system for a pump for another, to yield the predictable result of moving the air during inhalation and exhalation.
Regarding claim 6, the modified Connor device has the air pump (1).
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of wherein the air pump (1) is of the internal gearing type with asymmetric center (1-D) comprising gearings (1-D- 1).
However, DeVries teaches a respiratory ventilation system, where an impeller blower system has a pair of impellers (Fig. 12 impellers 1103/1203), with an asymmetric center (Fig. 12 where impeller 1203 is off-center and thus asymmetric to the shaft of rotor 1101) and comprising gearings (Fig. 12 see gears 1201/1202; and Col. 18 lines 15-21).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air pump mechanism of the modified Connor device to be a geared impeller system with an off-set rotor as taught by DeVries, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of driven impeller system for a pump for another, to yield the predictable result of moving the air during inhalation and exhalation.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor in view of Arnott as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of McAuliffe et al. (US Pat. 6,895,964).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Connor device has wherein the air pump (1) is of the vane air pump type (1-F) comprising vanes (1-F-1) )(Connor; see Col. 31 lines 23-34, the impeller arms able to be fan blades). It is noted that Connor does disclose the housing being made of well-known and flexible materials (Connor; see Col. 30 lines 33-38).
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of wherein the air pump (1) is of the flexible vane air pump type (1-F) comprising flexible vanes (1-F-1).
However, McAuliffe teaches a respiratory device, where a movable member placed within the flow path is made of flexible vanes (see Fig. 4 vane 10 in the flow path, able to made be of a flexible material; see Col. 8 lines 47-58).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the material of the vanes of the modified Connor device to be flexible as taught by McAuliffe, as it would allow be a simple substitution of one type of material for the vane for another, to yield the predictable result of providing a vane within the air flow path.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor in view of Arnott as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Shaffer et al. (US Pat. 6,105,572).
Regrading claim 9, the modified Connor device has the air pump (1).
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of wherein the air pump (1) is of the peristaltic type (1-G) comprising rollers (1-G-1), two or more hoses (30) inside the rotary cylinder (32).
However, Shaffer teaches a ventilation system, where a fluid pump uses a peristaltic pump comprising rollers and two hoses in order to move the fluid (see Fig. 2 and Col. 6 lines 16-32 where peristaltic pump 26 is a roller type pump, having conduits 28/32 and 22/24 as inputs and outputs, contained within the housing section of the pump).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the pumps of the modified Connor device to be peristaltic pumps as taught by Shaffer, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of pump for fluids for another, to yield the predictable result of being able to move inhalation/ exhalation air through the system.
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Connor in view of Arnott as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Chalvignac et al. (US Pat. 10,335,571).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Connor device has the air distribution chamber (8 or 9) and the atmospheric air.
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of an air pressure escape valve (14 or 15) located between the air distribution chamber (8 or 9) and the atmospheric air.
However, Chalvignac teaches a controlled air flow system for respiratory use, where a pressure relief valve is located between an air distribution chamber and atmospheric air (see Fig. 9 flow control valve/ pressure relief valve 772, which is placed between a air distribution chamber (muffler chamber 777) and the atmosphere (proximal to inlet 108)).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the airflow path of the modified Connor device to have a pressure relief valve between the air distribution chamber and atmosphere as taught by Chalvignac, as it would provide an escape for accidental high-pressure gas to prevent harm or discomfort to the patient.
Regarding claim 12, the modified Connor device has the air inlet or outlet of the air distribution chamber (8 or 9), the inside of the air distribution chamber (8 or 9), the air inlet or outlet of the air pump (1) or in the air inlet or outlet of the escape valve (14 or 15).
The modified Connor device lacks a detailed description of an air filter (16) in at least one of the locations cited ahead, in the air inlet or outlet of the air distribution chamber (8 or 9), inside the air distribution chamber (8 or 9), in the air inlet or outlet of the air pump (1) or in the air inlet or outlet of the escape valve (14 or 15).
However, Arnott further teaches that an air filter can be placed on the air inlet of the air pump (see Fig. 6 air filter 124).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the inlet of the air pump of the modified Connor device to have an air filter as taught by Arnott, as it would filter the incoming air to ensure that clean purified air is being delivered to the patient.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D ZIEGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-3349. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. 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.
/MATTHEW D ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785