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 .
Claims 1-20, filed 5/17/23, are currently pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 5/17/23 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because references 4 and 7 do not have a date listed on the IDS. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 250 in fig. 7. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5 recites “each flexible cell” suggested to be changed to --each flexible cell of the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 1, lines 8-9 recites “the flexible cells” suggested to be changed to --the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 1, line 11 recites “flexible cells” suggested to be changed to --flexible cells of the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 1, last line recites “network from” suggested to be changed to --network of flexible cells from-- for consistency.
Claim 2, line 1 recites “the flexible cells” suggested to be changed to --the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 2, lines 8 and 10 and claim 18, lines 6 and 7 recite “the wall” suggested to be changed to --the perimeter wall-- for consistency.
Claim 4 recites “other” suggested to be changed to --another--for grammatical reasons.
Claim 13 recites “more than one channel is couple to and extends” suggested to be changed to --the at least one channel comprises more than one channel couples to and extending-- for consistency.
Claim 16 recites “comprising at least two channels wherein at least one of the channels has a size that is different than the size of another of the channels” suggested to be changed to --wherein the at least one channel comprises at least two channels has a size that is different than the size of another of the at least two channels-- for consistency.
Claim 17 recites “another of the cells” suggested to be changed to --another cell-- for grammatical reasons.
Claim 18, line 2 recites “each cell” suggested to be changed to --each cell of the plurality of cells-- for consistency.
Claim 18, line 9 recites “each channel” suggested to be changed to --each channel of the plurality of channels-- for consistency.
Claim 20 recites “each flexible cell” in line 5, suggested to be changed to --each flexible cell of the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 20 recites “the flexible cells” in lines 8-9 suggested to be changed to --the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
Claim 20 recites “flexible cells” in line 11, suggested to be changed to --flexible cells of the network of flexible cells-- for consistency.
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 4 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 4 recites “the plurality of cells,” which lacks proper antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Section 33(a) of the America Invents Act reads as follows:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no patent may issue on a claim directed to or encompassing a human organism.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 and section 33(a) of the America Invents Act as being directed to or encompassing a human organism. See also Animals - Patentability, 1077 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 24 (April 21, 1987) (indicating that human organisms are excluded from the scope of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101).
Claim 1 recites “an exterior surface facing away from the surface of the subject,” which appears to claim the subject.
Any remaining claims are rejected as being dependent on a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-2, 4-10 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Davis et al. (2013/0310719).
Regarding claim 1, in fig. 7a-7b Davis discloses a device 200 for providing a therapeutic stimulus to a subject, comprising: a material 273 configured to cover a portion of the subject [0053], the material having an inner surface (surface of 273 shown in fig. 7a) for engaging a surface of the subject [0053] and an exterior surface (surface of 273 facing chamber members 204) facing away from the surface of the subject; a network of flexible [0026][0034] cells (106 and 204) coupled to the material [0053], each flexible cell having an internal cavity (within chamber 204); at least one channel (120 in fig. 2, not labeled, but shown in fig. 7A); and a working material [0026] disposed within the internal cavities of the flexible cells; wherein the at least one channel 120 is arranged to allow exchange of the working material between flexible cells due to application of force upon the network from movement of the surface of the subject [0026].
Regarding claim 2, Davis discloses at least one cell of the flexible cells comprises: a perimeter wall 127 proximate to and extending away from the exterior surface of the material; an inner layer 129 proximate to the exterior surface of the material and coupled to the perimeter wall; and an outer layer 125 substantially parallel to the inner layer and displaced from the inner layer by the wall, the outer layer coupled to the perimeter wall (Fig. 3A-3C); wherein the wall, the inner layer, and the outer layer define the internal cavity of the at least one cell (Fig. 3A-3C).
Regarding claim 4, Davis discloses the perimeter wall of at least other cell of the plurality of cells is less elastic than the inner layer of the at least one cell (different chambers may have different resiliencies [0045]).
Regarding claim 5, Davis discloses the device is configured to interface with a predetermined portion of the subject [0022].
Regarding claim 6, Davis discloses the device is customized to interface with a predetermined portion of the subject [0022].
Regarding claim 7, Davis discloses configured to provide targeted stimulation to a specific portion of the subject using a varying fluidic resistance among the network of flexible cells or the at least one channel [0045].
Regarding claim 8, Davis discloses the material is configured to be tightly fit against the portion of the subject [0029].
Regarding claim 9, Davis discloses the portion of the subject is an extremity [0022] or joint of the subject [0029].
Regarding claim 10, Davis discloses the working material is fluid or gel [0026].
Regarding claim 14, Davis discloses at least one flexible cell of the network of flexible cells has a strength that is different from a strength of another flexible cell of the network of flexible cells (due to different resiliencies [0045]).
Regarding claim 15, Davis discloses at least one flexible cell of the network of flexible cells comprises an elastomer [0045].
Regarding claim 16, Davis discloses at least two channels 120 wherein at least one of the channels has a size that is different than the size of another of the channels (different cross sectional areas for different channels 120 [0045]).
Regarding claim 17, Davis discloses that the size of at least one cell of the network of flexible cells is different from the size of another of the cells of the network of flexible cells (different shapes of the chamber members 104 [0045]).
Regarding claim 18, in fig. 7a-7b Davis discloses a therapeutic garment (200 [0022]), comprising: a plurality of cells (106 and 204), each cell comprising: a perimeter wall 127; an inner layer 129 configured to be placed proximate to a subject (Fig. 3A and 7A [0053]); and an outer layer 125 substantially parallel to the inner layer (Fig. 3A) and displaced from the inner layer by the wall (Fig. 3A); wherein the wall, inner layer, and outer layer define an internal cavity 105; a plurality of channels 120, each channel coupling the internal cavity of one cell of the plurality of cells to the internal cavity of another cell of the plurality of cells (Fig. 7A); and a working material [0026] disposed in the internal cavity of at least one of the plurality of cells and the plurality of channels; wherein the plurality of cells, plurality of channels, and working material form a cell pack (Fig. 7A).
Regarding claim 19, Davis discloses that the garment is configured to provide targeted redistribution of the working material within the cell pack [0026].
Regarding claim 20, in fig. 7a-7b Davis discloses method for applying a therapeutic treatment to a subject [0026], comprising: attaching a therapeutic device to a portion of a surface of the subject [0022], the therapeutic device comprising: a material 173 configured to engage a portion of the subject [0053]; a network of flexible cells (106 and 204) coupled to the material, each flexible cell having an internal cavity 105; at least one channel 120; and a working material [0026] disposed within the internal cavities of the flexible cells; wherein the at least one channel is arranged to allow exchange of the working material between flexible cells due to application of force upon the network of flexible cells from movement of the surface of the subject [0026].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Hardman et al. (9,011,353).
Regarding claim 3, Davis discloses that the cell may be formed of any shape, but does not explicitly recite that the perimeter wall of the at least one cell forms a hexagon. However, in fig. 2 Hardman teaches a perimeter wall of at least one cell 232 forms a hexagon. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Davis’ at least one cell perimeter wall shape with a hexagon, as taught by Hardman, for the purpose of providing an alternate shape having the predictable results of providing compression therapy to a user.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Hall et al. (2003/0004445).
Regarding claim 11, Davis discloses that the working material is a gel, but is silent regarding that the gel is a hydrogel. However, Hall teaches a compression device having a hydrogel working material [0054]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Davis’ gel working material with hydrogel, as taught by Hall, for the purpose of providing an alternate working material having the predictable results of providing compression therapy to a user.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schwirian et al. (2016/0095787).
Regarding claim 12, Davis is silent regarding that the working material is a non-Newtonian fluid. However, Schwirian teaches a compression device having a non-Newtonian working fluid [0022]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Davis’ gel working material with a non-Newtonian fluid, as taught by Schwirian, for the purpose of providing an alternate working material having the predictable results of providing compression therapy to a user.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dye et al. (4,029,087).
Regarding claim 13, Davis is silent regarding that more than one channel is coupled to and extends from a first cell of the network of flexible cells to a second cell of the network of flexible cells. However, in fig. 12 Dye teaches that more than one channel 94 is coupled to and extends from a first cell of the network of flexible cells to a second cell of the network of flexible cells. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Davis’ at least one channel with more than one channel extending from a first cell of the network of flexible cells to a second cell of the network of flexible cells, as taught by Dye, for the purpose of providing an alternate number of channels having the predictable results of dispersing working fluid.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Wu et al. (2021/0330543) directed towards inflatable massage shoes, Cai (2020/0298514) directed towards massage cushion, Shek (5,105,490) and Thomas et al. (6,551,450) directed towards a massage cushion,
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RACHEL T SIPPEL whose telephone number is (571)270-1481. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 PM.
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, Justine Yu can be reached at 571-272-4835. 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.
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785