DETAILED ACTION
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 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jafari et al. (US 8,585,412) in view of Horvath (US 2008/0085499) and Trotta et al. (US 2012/0214144).
Regarding claims 1, 2, 4, 7, Jafari discloses a breathing simulation comprising a housing with a processor and a memory that provides a control signal to a lung simulation system. See col. 5: 7-11 and col. 6: 39-64.
Jafari discloses wherein the settings and parameters can be defined as inputs to the lung simulator. See col. 7: 11-33.
Jafari does not disclose dedicated inputs including protruding knobs and potentiometers (claims 2 4, and 7). However, this manner of input control is established with regard to simulation systems, as is disclosed by the medical simulation system of Horvath in paragraph 0020. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing to consider such control knobs with the Jafari system, in order to provide a simple manner of control and adjustment.
Jafari does not disclose details about the lung system itself, as described in col. 6: 39-45. However, Trotta discloses a lung simulation system with a control arm driven by a motor that moves a wall of a chamber to control ventilation. See paragraph 0075. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider this with the Jafari system, in order to provide an effective breathing simulation system.
Regarding claims 3 and 5, Jafari discloses various parameters for inputs, including effort speed, effort size, offset, and frequency of effort. See col. 3: 1-10 and col. 7: 33-40.
Regarding claim 6, Jafari discloses a pattern from an offset to a peak effort in col. 15: 3-5 (e.g. the obstruction would be an offset in the pattern).
Claims 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jafari et al. (US 8,585,412) and Trotta et al. (US 2012/0214144).
Regarding claims 15, 19, Jafari discloses a system for selection of a type of simulated lung, inputs to define parameters and simulation settings, generation of a control signal for a simulated lung. See col. 5: 7-11, col. 6: 39-64, and col. 7: 11-33. The use of a simulated lung with a control arm and motor would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claims 16-18, Jafari discloses various parameters to control the lung. see col. 3: 1-10 and col. 7: 33-40. The use of a motor and arm would be obvious as described above with regard to claim 1
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jafari et al. (US 8,585,412) in view of Horvath (US 2008/0085499) and Trotta et al. (US 2012/0214144).
Regarding claim 20, the use of dedicated inputs would be obvious as described above with regard to Horvath and claim 1.
Allowable Subject matter
Claims 8-14 are indicated as allowed because the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed subject matter including the housing, simulation elements, and adapters as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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.
TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715