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 .
Acknowledgments
In the reply, filed on June 22, 2026, Applicant amended claims 1-12 and 14-15.
In the non-final rejection of March 25, 2026, Examiner objected to the Abstract. Applicant amended the Abstract. Objection is withdrawn.
Examiner objected to claims 1-10, 12, and 14-15. Applicant amended claims 1-10, 12 and 14-15. Objection is withdrawn.
Examiner rejected claims 1, 3, and 5-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b). Applicant amended claims 1, 6, 8, and 11-12. Rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 4 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to claim 1, line 10, “the group” should be changed to “a group”.
In regards to claim 4, line 3, “a breast shield element” should be changed to “the breast shield element”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (WO 2019/194418).
In regards to claim 1, Kim teaches a breast pump (Figures 1-7) shaped at least in part to fit inside a bra and comprising a housing (700/100), containing an outer shell element (700) and a breast shield element (100), the breast shield element including a nipple tunnel (110) adapted to receive a nipple, a media separation element (500/300/200/600) and further comprising a milk compartment (bottom portion of 700) adapted to contain a predetermined amount of expressed milk, further comprising a working fluid chamber (top portion of 700) assigned to a vacuum source and a pumping chamber (between 500 and 300) in fluid communication with the nipple tunnel, wherein the working fluid chamber and the pumping chamber are fluidly separated from each other by the media separation element, the milk compartment, the working fluid chamber and the pumping chamber constructed by only three components, consisting of the group of the outer shell element, the breast shield element and the media separation element (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 2, Kim teaches a breast pump (Figures 1-7) shaped at least in part to fit inside a bra and comprising a housing (700/100), a breast shield element (100) including a nipple tunnel (110) adapted to receive a nipple and further comprising a milk compartment (bottom portion of 700) adapted to contain a predetermined amount of expressed milk, further comprising a working fluid chamber (top portion of 700) assigned to a vacuum source and a pumping chamber (between 500 and 300) in fluid communication with the nipple tunnel, wherein the working fluid chamber and the pumping chamber are fluidly separated from each other by a membrane (500), wherein a valve (600) is provided between the nipple tunnel and the milk compartment, the membrane and the valve being formed by a media separation element (500/300/200/600).
In regards to claim 3, Kim teaches wherein the media separation element is releasably arranged between the outer shell element and the breast shield element (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 4, Kim teaches wherein the media separation element comprises the membrane which is releasably sandwiched between an outer shell element (700) and a breast shield element (100) on one side of the nipple tunnel and the valve, which is releasably attached to the breast shield element on the other side of the nipple tunnel (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 5, Kim teaches wherein the housing is defined only by the outer shell element (700) and the breast shield element (100).
In regards to claim 8, Kim teaches wherein at least two walls defining the milk compartment are exclusively formed by the outer shell element (700) and the breast shield element (100).
In regards to claim 9, Kim teaches a valve (600) defined by one (500/300/200/600) of the only three components.
In regards to claim 10, Kim teaches wherein the outer shell element, the media separation element (500/300/200/600) and the breast shield element (100) in combination define the working fluid chamber (top portion of 700) assigned to the vacuum source, the pumping chamber (between 500 and 300) in fluid communication with the nipple tunnel and the milk compartment (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 11, Kim teaches wherein the media separation element defining a membrane (500) and a valve (600) is secured to an inner end of the nipple tunnel (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 12, Kim teaches wherein the outer shell element defines a plug receptacle (710) in communication with the working fluid chamber and exposed on an outer periphery of the breast pump, wherein the plug receptacle is adapted to receive a plug element, wherein the plug element is releasably connected and sealed within the plug receptacle and provided with an interface for the vacuum source (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 13, Kim teaches a sealing arrangement circumferentially sealing an interface between the outer shell element and the breast shield element (Figures 2-3 to Figure 1).
In regards to claim 14, Kim teaches a snapping connection comprising mating snapping elements, one of the mating snapping elements being formed as a unitary segment of the outer shell element (Figure 2) and the other of the mating snapping elements being formed as a unitary segment of the breast shield element (Figure 3).
In regards to claim 15, Kim teaches wherein the breast shield element has a wing defining a detachment surface allowing a user to remove the breast shield element from the outer shell element (Figures 1-3).
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 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of O’Toole et al (US 2020/0139026).
In regards to claim 6, Kim teaches wherein the media separation element comprises a membrane (500), wherein the outer shell element has a first section covering the membrane and a second section lateral of the first section (Figures 1-3). However, Kim is silent about wherein the second section has better transparent properties than the first section allowing a user to view the nipple tunnel through the outer shell element. O’Toole et al teaches a breast pump (Figure 1-8), wherein a second section (3) has better transparent properties than a first section (1) allowing a user to view a nipple tunnel (9) through an outer shell element (1/3). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the second section, of the breast pump of Kim, to have better transparent properties than the first section, as taught by O’Toole et al, as such will show the amount of milk collected (paragraph [0129]).
In regards to claim 7, Kim teaches wherein a flange section (of 100) surrounds the nipple tunnel and at least in part defines a contact surface for contacting a breast (Figures 1-2). However, Kim is silent about wherein the nipple tunnel is made of a material having better transparent properties than the flange section of the breast shield element. O’Toole et al teaches a breast pump (Figure 1-8) wherein a nipple tunnel (9) is made of a material having transparent properties (paragraph [0432]) and a flange section (7a) of a breast shield element (7) has transparent properties (paragraph [0436]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nipple tunnel and the flange section, of the breast pump of Kim, to be made of materials having transparent properties, as taught by O’Toole et al, as such will allow the user to observe the nipple while adjusting the position of the breast shield in order to align the nipple correctly near the center of the breast shield nipple tunnel (paragraph [0181]).
However, while O’Toole teaches the entire breast shield including the nipple tunnel and the flange section being transparent (paragraph [0436]), O’Toole et al is silent about wherein the nipple tunnel has better transparent properties than the flange section. But it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the nipple tunnel, of the modified breast pump of Kim and O’Toole et al, to have better transparent properties than the flange section, as an obvious matter of design choice, as either the entire breast shield including the nipple tunnel and the flange section being transparent, as taught by O’Toole et al, or the nipple tunnel having better transparent properties than the flange section, as taught by Applicant, will arrive at the same end result of allowing the user to observe the nipple while adjusting the position of the breast shield in order to align the nipple correctly near the center of the breast shield nipple tunnel.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed June 22, 2026, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive:
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argued: Nonetheless, the Applicant respectfully traverses the understanding provided in the Office action, that the working fluid chamber of claim 1 is realized by the top portion of the milk compartment 700. Rather, the working fluid chamber, which is considered the vacuum source, i.e. the pump module 810, is expressly disclosed as being the space between the lid 400 of the pump module 810 and the media separation element 500 (cf. [0030-0032]) (Remarks, page 10). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches a working fluid chamber (top portion of 700). “the space between the lid 400 of the pump module 810 and the media separation element 500”, identified by Applicant, is situated within the top portion of 700, this being the working fluid chamber, as claimed.
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argued: Furthermore, despite the assertion in the Office action that Figures 2 and 3 illustrate that the milk compartment, the working fluid chamber, and the pumping chamber of Kim, EP 3777911 Al are only constructed by the outer shell element, (i.e. the milk compartment 700), the breast shield element 100 and the media separation element 500, Kim, EP 3777911 Al does not disclose such a construction. The lid 400 of the milk compartment 700 is integrally formed with the pump module 810 (cf. [0029]). Therefore, the milk compartment, as required by Applicant's claim 1, is defined by the outer shell element, as given by the milk compartment 700, and the pump module 810, the latter of which is not one of only three components defined by claim 1 (Remarks, page 10). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches a milk compartment (bottom portion of 700) constructed by the outer shell element (700) the breast shield element (100).
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argued: As detailed above, the working fluid chamber is spatially defined by the lid 400 of the pump module 810 and the media separation element 500, the former of which is not the outer shell as given by the milk compartment 700, the breast shield element 100, or the media separation element 500 (Remarks, pages 10-11). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches a working fluid chamber (top portion of 700). “the space between the lid 400 of the pump module 810 and the media separation element 500”, identified by Applicant, is situated within the top portion of 700, this being the working fluid chamber, as claimed.
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argued: Additionally, as identified in the Office action, the pumping chamber is defined by the media separation element 500 and the funnel connector 300 (cf. [0030-0032]). However, the funnel connector 300 is not the outer shell as given by the milk compartment 700, the breast shield element 100, or the media separation element 500, as recited by Applicant's claim 1 (Remarks, page 11). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches a pumping chamber (between 500 and 300), wherein 500 and 300 are part of the media separation element (500/300/200/600).
In regards to claim 1, Applicant argued: Therefore, Applicant respectfully submits that Kim, EP 3777911 Al does not disclose the milk compartment, the working fluid chamber and the pumping chamber constructed by only three components-- the outer shell element, the breast shield element and the media separation element-- as required by claim 1 (as amended) (Remarks, page 11). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches the milk compartment ((bottom portion of 700)), the working fluid chamber (top portion of 700) and the pumping chamber (between 500 and 300) constructed by only three components, consisting of the group of the outer shell element (700), the breast shield element (100) and the media separation element (500/300/200/600) (Figures 2-3).
In regards to claim 2, Applicant argued: Claim 2 is novel and patentable over Kim, 3777911 A1, for at least the same reasons as claim 1. Additionally, as illustrated in Figure 2, the valve 600 of Kim, 3777911 Al is provided between the outlet tube 210 of the cap connector 200 and the milk compartment 700, while the media separation element 500 is located between the top of said cap connector 200 and the funnel connector 300. Consequently, the valve 600 of Kim is not formed by the media separation element 500, as required by Applicant's claim 2 (Remarks, page 11). Examiner disagrees. Kim teaches the valve (600) being formed by a media separation element (500/300/200/600).
In regards to claims 6-7, Applicant argued: Applicant respectfully submits that, with regard to claims 6 and 7, O'Toole fails to remedy the shortcomings of Kim. Applicant also respectfully submits that the proposed combination or modification of Kim in view of O'Toole would not involve a straightforward substitution of one known component for another, but instead would require a substantial rearrangement of parts. In particular, a person of ordinary skill in the art would need to redesign the internal geometry of the breast pump of Kim, EP 3777911 A1, to remove the required cap connector 200 and funnel connector 300 components, which would go well beyond routine design considerations, to incorporate the proposed modifications based on O'Toole in a manner that would result in a device within the scope of Applicant's claims 6 or 7 (Remarks, page 11). Examiner disagrees. Parts are not being rearranged in the modification of Kim with the teachings of O’Toole et al. Instead, components of Kim, such as the second section, the nipple tunnel, and the flange section, are modified by transparent properties/materials, as taught by O’Toole et al.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SHEFALI D PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3645. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30am-4:30pm 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 C 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.
/SHEFALI D PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights