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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 7/6/26, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 6, 8-11, 13, and 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of a new interpretation of Egilsson (20090036999).
The Applicant argues that Egilsson’s liner does not teach microchannels that work against gravity, and instead only discloses radial movement of droplets, and further that Aviles also fails to disclose microchannels and a capillary-driven against-gravity transport mechanism. A new interpretation of Egilsson has been set forth below with the microchannels being interpreted as the “network of pores, gaps and/or tunnels” in porous layer 62, wherein each microchannel is formed with soft hydrophilic material (74; [0031])) in such a way that, when the microchannel receives a liquid droplet, the microchannel is configured to exert a force on the liquid droplet so as to direct the liquid droplet against gravity to the liquid-retentive portion ([0064]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 9-10, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Egilsson (20090036999).
With regards to claim 1 , Egilsson discloses a prosthetic liner (63) for a prosthetic limb (FIG 11) having an interior surface (70) forming an interior cavity (FIG 11), the prosthetic liner comprising: a liner body, the liner body formed in a shape resembling a shape of at least a portion of the interior surface of the prosthetic limb ([0002]), the liner body having: a top section for receiving an insertion of a body part of a user (see annotated figure below) and a bottom section opposite to the top section (see annotated figure below), wherein the liner body includes: a liquid-retentive portion (62) formed in the top section of the liner body (FIG 11), the liquid-retentive portion (62) configured to collect liquid (FIG 11; [00105]), the liquid-retentive portion formed using liquid retentive materials ([0028]); and a plurality of microchannels (network of pores, gaps and/or tunnels in porous layer 62) formed along an inner surface of the liner body (FIG 11, [0064]), the plurality of microchannels connected at one end to the liquid-retentive portion (FIG 11), wherein each microchannel is formed with soft hydrophilic material (74; [0031])) in such a way that, when the microchannel receives a liquid droplet, the microchannel is configured to exert a force on the liquid droplet so as to direct the liquid droplet against gravity to the liquid- retentive portion ([0064]).
With regards to claim 5, Egilsson discloses a prosthetic liner for a prosthetic limb, the prosthetic limb having an interior surface forming an interior cavity (FIG 11), the prosthetic liner comprising: a liner body, the liner body formed in a shape resembling a shape of at least a portion of the interior surface of the prosthetic limb (FIG 11), the liner body configured to be housed in the interior cavity of the prosthetic limb ([0004]), the liner body having a top section for receiving an insertion of a body part of a user (see annotated figure below) and a bottom section opposite to the top section (see annotated figure below), wherein the liner body includes: a liquid-retentive portion (62) formed in the top section of the liner body (FIG 11), the liquid-retentive portion configured to collect liquid (FIG 11; [0064]), the liquid retentive portion formed using liquid retentive materials (74, [0113]); an inner surface (66) formed between the top section and bottom section, the inner surface of the liner body for contacting with at least a portion of the body part of the user ([00105]), the inner surface of the liner body including: a plurality of microchannels (network of pores, gaps and/or tunnels in porous layer 62; [0064]) formed along the inner surface (66) of the liner body (FIG 11), the plurality of microchannels connected at one end to the liquid-retentive portion ([00105]), wherein each microchannel is formed with soft hydrophilic material (74, [0031], [0113]) in such a way that, when the microchannel receives a liquid droplet, the microchannel is configured to exert a force on the liquid droplet so as to direct the liquid droplet against gravity to the liquid-retentive portion ([0064]); and an outer surface (64) opposite to the inner surface of the liner body (FIG 11), the outer surface of the liner body facing the interior surface of the prosthetic limb and provided in the interior cavity of the prosthetic limb ([0004]).
With regards to claim 9, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 5, wherein at least a portion of the bottom section of the liner body includes a second liquid-retentive portion (FIG 11, see annotated figure below).
With regards to claim 10, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 9, wherein the second liquid-retentive portion is formed using liquid absorbent or retentive materials ([0028]).
With regards to claim 13, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 5, wherein the outer surface (64) of the liner body includes: a plurality of second microchannels ([0064]) formed along the outer surface (64) of the liner body ([00105]), the plurality of second microchannels connected at one end to the liquid-retentive portion (FIG 11), wherein each of the plurality of second microchannels is formed with soft hydrophilic material (74, [0113]) in such a way that, when the second microchannel receives a liquid droplet, the second microchannel is configured to exert a force on the liquid droplet so as to direct the liquid droplet against gravity to the liquid-retentive portion ([0014]).
PNG
media_image1.png
589
639
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 6, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egilsson (20090036999).
With regards to claim 6, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein each of the plurality of microchannels has a width of not more than 0.2 mm. There is no evidence of record that establishes that an angle ranging from 10 to 15 degrees would result in a difference in the function of Egilsson’s prosthetic liner. A person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying Egilsson’s prosthetic liner, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears that the device would function as intended. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range solves any stated problem, indicating that the cohesiveness “may” be within the claimed range (specification pg 7), and therefore there appears to be no criticality places on the range as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prosthetic liner of Egilsson to have a width of not more than 0.2 mm as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
With regards to claim 14, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 13, but fails to disclose wherein each of the plurality of second microchannels has a width of not more than 0.2 mm. There is no evidence of record that establishes that an angle ranging from 10 to 15 degrees would result in a difference in the function of Egilsson’s prosthetic liner. A person having ordinary skill in the art, being faced with modifying Egilsson’s prosthetic liner, would have a reasonable expectation of success in making such a modification and it appears that the device would function as intended. Lastly, applicant has not disclosed that the claimed range solves any stated problem, indicating that the cohesiveness “may” be within the claimed range (specification pg 7, and therefore there appears to be no criticality places on the range as claimed such that it produces an unexpected result. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the prosthetic liner of Egilsson to have a width of not more than 0.2 mm as an obvious matter of design choice within the skill of the art.
Claim(s) 3, 8, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Egilsson (20090036999) as applied to claims 1, 5, 9 above, and further in view of Aviles (20190000691).
With regards to claim 3, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the liquid-retentive portion includes super absorbent polymers.
Aviles also discloses an absorbent article (10) comprising a liquid retentive portion (30). Aviles teaches the liquid-retentive portion (30) includes super absorbent polymers ([0110]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egilsson’s liquid-retentive portion to include super absorbent polymers, as taught by Aviles, in order to provide a liquid retentive portion that is compressible, conformable, non-irritating to the wearer's skin, and capable of absorbing and retaining liquids ([0110]).
With regards to claim 8, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 5, but fails to disclose wherein the liquid-retentive portion includes super absorbent polymers.
Aviles also discloses an absorbent article (10) comprising a liquid retentive portion (30). Aviles teaches the liquid-retentive portion (30) includes super absorbent polymers ([0110]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egilsson’s liquid-retentive portion to include super absorbent polymers, as taught by Aviles, in order to provide a liquid retentive portion that is compressible, conformable, non-irritating to the wearer's skin, and capable of absorbing and retaining liquids ([0110]).
With regards to claim 11, Egilsson discloses the prosthetic liner according to claim 9, but fails to disclose wherein the second liquid-retentive portion includes super absorbent polymers.
Aviles also discloses an absorbent article (10) comprising a second liquid retentive portion. Aviles teaches the second liquid-retentive portion includes super absorbent polymers ([0110]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Egilsson’s second liquid-retentive portion to include super absorbent polymers, as taught by Aviles, in order to provide a second liquid retentive portion that is compressible, conformable, non-irritating to the wearer's skin, and capable of absorbing and retaining liquids ([0110]).
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 RENEE FLORENCIA NERENBERG whose telephone number is (571)272-9599. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5.
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, Melanie Tyson can be reached at (571) 272-9062. 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.
/R.F.N./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774
/MELANIE R TYSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3774
Prosecution Insights