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 .
Status of the Claims
The amendment filed 05/14/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2 and 4-19 are pending and under consideration.
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, 2, and 4-19 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.
Claims 1 and 19 recite “and which is surrounded by a valve channel which lies lower than the outlet opening”. It is not clear what the recitation “which” refers to. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “and the valve is surrounded by a valve channel, and the valve channel lies lower than the outlet opening”
Claims 2, 7, 8, 13 recite the limitation” a front side” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the front side”
Claims 2, 7, 8, 11,12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 recites “the full plastic body” or “a full plastic body” There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the flat substantially planar full plastic body”
Claim 4 recites “then outlet opening” in line 1, “a drainage channel” in line 3, and “the surface” line 3. There are insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the outlet opening”, “the drainage channel” and “an upper surface” respectively.
Claim 5 recites “an outlet opening” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the outlet opening”.
Claim 12 line 5 recites “the controlled inlet of a rinsing fluid” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “controlled inlet of a rinsing fluid”
Claim 14 line 2 recites “an upper side” which renders the claim indefinite. It is not clear if “an upper side” refers “the front side” recited in claim 1 or refers another side. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the front side”
Claim 14 line 4 recites “these”, it is not clear what “these” refers to. In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “the valve lugs”
Claim 15 line 5 recites “the instill channels” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, In an effort to compact prosecution, the limitation will be interpreted as “instill channels”
Claim 19 recites “a wound dressing having a full plastic body” and “a fluid-permeable pad disposed between the seal and a wound bed made of a flat, substantially planar full plastic body”. It is not clear if the full plastic body of the fluid-permeable pad refers the full plastic body of the wound dressing or they are different element. In an effort to compact prosecution, they will be treated as same element.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 18 recites “a full plastic body” which fails to limit “a flat substantially planar full plastic body” of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Examiner’s note: The above noted informalities should not be taken as an exhaustive list of all such instances. Therefore, it is requested that Applicant review the claims in their entirety for compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 2 and 4-19 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: No prior art, alone or in combination, could be found to teach (claim 1) a wound treatment system comprising a seal adapted to be applied to a skin surrounding a wound and a fluid-permeable pad disposed between the seal and a wound bed made of a flat, substantially planar full plastic body penetrated by drainage passages, at least one of the drainage passages having a valve, the valve forming an outlet opening which is exposed to a front side to be provided facing away from the wound bed and which is surrounded by a valve channel which lies lower than the outlet opening.
Applicant’s argument filed 05/14/2025 has been considered and are sufficient to overcome the closest prior art of the record Lockwoed et al (US 20040243073 A1), Locke (US 20190231602 A1) and Greener (US 20180361039 A1). While Lockwood, Locke and Greener may collectively teaches the valve forming an outlet opening which is exposed to a front side to be provided facing away from the wound bed and which is surrounded by a valve channel which lies lower than the outlet opening, i.e., valve 22 of Greener, the drainage passage of Lockwood is configured allow both irrigation fluid flow toward the wound bed and wound exudate away from the wound bed, therefore the one way valve of Greener would alter the intended operation of Lockwood.
Similarly, Claim 19 requires “full plastic body penetrated by drainage passages, at least one of the drainage passages having a valve, the valve forming an outlet opening which is exposed to a front side to be provided facing away from the wound bed and which is surrounded by a valve channel which lies lower than the outlet opening”, accordingly it is allowable over the prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH HAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2545. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0900-1700.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at (571) 272-7159. 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.
/SETH HAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights