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 .
Response to Amendment
This office action is in response to the amendment filed 07/03/26. Claim(s) 1, 4-5, and 14 have been amended, no new claims have been added, and claim 3 has been cancelled. Thus, claims 1-2 and 4-15 are presently pending in this application.
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(s) 1-2 and 4-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu (2010/0213274) in view of Aherne (WO2019/115221).
PNG
media_image1.png
438
338
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 5 of Yu.
With respect to claim 1, Yu discloses a nebulizing module (20, fig 5), comprising a base (24, fig 5) including a supporting portion (see annotated fig 5 of Yu), wherein the supporting portion has a first opening (242, fig 5) and a first engaging surface (see annotated fig 5 of Yu) surrounding the first opening (see fig 5); an auxiliary fixing element (262, fig 5) disposed on the supporting portion (see [0026] and fig 6), wherein the auxiliary fixing element has a second opening (2622, fig 5) and a second engaging surface (underside of 262 facing 264 in fig 5) surrounding the second opening (see fig 5), and the second engaging surface faces the first engaging surface (see fig 6; top of 24 faces underside of 262); a nebulizing unit (264, fig 5) disposed between the supporting portion and the auxiliary fixing element (see location in figs 5-6 and [0027]); and an adhesive (bonding material; 28, fig 6) disposed in gaps formed between the first engaging surface, the second engaging surface, and the nebulizing unit (see 28 in the gaps between the elements in fig 6 and [0025]), but lacks the first engaging surface includes a plurality of first grooves, and the adhesive is filled into the plurality of grooves.
However, Aherne teaches a nebulizing module (fig 6) comprising a surface (203, fig 7) including a plurality of first grooves (204, fig 7) and an adhesive (220, fig 7) is filled into the plurality of grooves (see fig 7 and pg. 11, lines 26-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first engaging surface of Yu to include a plurality of grooves as taught by Aherne so as to increase anchorage of the adhesive, allowing for optimum bond strength and energy transfer (see pg. 11, lines 16-18 of Aherne).
With respect to claim 2, the modified Yu shows an area of an orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit (see annotated fig 5 of Yu) projected onto the first engaging surface is smaller than an area of the first engaging surface (see 264 with the projection on 24 is smaller diameter; figs 5-6).
With respect to claim 4, the modified Yu shows an area of an orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit projected onto the first engaging surface (see annotated fig 5 of Yu) overlaps with areas of the first grooves that are distributed on the first engaging surface (see modification by Aherne where the first surface includes a plurality of grooves over the entire surface), and the area of the orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit projected onto the first engaging surface is smaller than the areas of the first grooves that are distributed on the first engaging surface (see 264 with the projection on 24 is smaller diameter; figs 5-6).
With respect to claim 5, the modified Yu shows the plurality of first grooves are in a shape of concentric circles (see the modification by Aherne where the zig zags 251, fig 5 are in a concentric circle and would be the same when modifying Yu).
With respect to claim 6, the modified Yu shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the second engaging surface includes a plurality of second grooves, and the adhesive is filled into the plurality of second grooves.
However, Aherne teaches a nebulizing module (fig 6) comprising a surface (203, fig 7) including a plurality of first grooves (204, fig 7) and an adhesive (220, fig 7) is filled into the plurality of grooves (see fig 7 and pg. 11, lines 26-28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second engaging surface of Yu to include a plurality of grooves as taught by Aherne so as to increase anchorage of the adhesive, allowing for optimum bond strength and energy transfer (see pg. 11, lines 16-18 of Aherne).
With respect to claim 7, the modified Yu shows an area of an orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit projected onto the second engaging surface (see annotated fig 5 of Yu) is smaller than an area of the second engaging surface (see 262 having a larger diameter than 264 in figs 5-6 of Yu).
With respect to claim 8, the modified Yu shows the area of the orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit projected onto the second engaging surface overlaps with areas of the first grooves that are distributed on the second engaging surface (see modification by Aherne where the second surface includes a plurality of grooves over the entire surface), and the area of the orthogonal projection of the nebulizing unit projected onto the second engaging surface is smaller than the areas of the second grooves that are distributed on the second engaging surface (see 262 having a larger diameter than 264 in figs 5-6 of Yu).
With respect to claim 9, the modified Yu shows the plurality of second grooves are in a shape of concentric circles (see the modification by Aherne where the zig zags 251, fig 5 are in a concentric circle and would be the same when modifying Yu).
With respect to claim 10, the modified Yu shows the nebulizing unit has a plurality of through holes (2642, fig 5 and [0026]), and the plurality of through holes, the first opening, and the second opening are in communication with each other (see fig 6 and [0026]).
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu and Aherne as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Yu (2009/0242660).
With respect to claim 11, the modified Yu shows the base further includes a peripheral region (see annotated fig 5 of Yu), the peripheral region surrounds the supporting portion (see annotated fig 5 of Yu), but lacks the supporting portion protrudes relative to the peripheral region.
However, Yu teaches a nebulizing module (4, fig 3B) comprising a base (40, fig 3B) including a peripheral region (401, fig 3B), the peripheral region surrounds a supporting portion (4010, fig 3B), and the supporting portion protrudes relative to the peripheral region (see fig 3B and [0029]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the supporting portion of Yu to protrude above the base as taught by Yu (‘660) so as to provide a workable height that results in liquid medicament being nebulized.
With respect to claim 12, the modified Yu shows the supporting portion and the peripheral region have a height difference therebetween (see height of 4010 different than the height of the horizontal plane in fig 3B of Yu (‘660)), but is silent regarding the height difference ranges between 550 μm and 650 μm.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the height difference ranges between 550 μm and 650 μm, for the purpose of keeping the nebulizing module on the micro scale and not oversized, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05(II)
PNG
media_image2.png
321
380
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated fig 3B of Yu (‘660).
With respect to claim 13, the modified Yu shows the supporting portion and the peripheral region have a supporting inclined plane (see plane as indicated by 4010 in fig 3B of Yu (‘660)) therebetween, the supporting inclined plane is inclined relative to a horizontal plane by an inclined angle (see annotated fig 3B of Yu (‘660) where the cone shape of 4010 creates an incline), but is silent regarding the inclined angle ranges between 35 degrees and 45 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have the inclined angle between 35 degrees and 45 degrees, for the purpose of raising the supporting portion above the base, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05(II)
With respect to claim 14, the modified Yu shows a piezoelectric element (22, fig 5 of Yu (‘274)), wherein the piezoelectric element is disposed on a side of the peripheral area facing the nebulizing unit (see location of 22 in fig 6 of Yu (‘274) where the piezoelectric element is on top of the base 24).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu and Aherne as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu (CN217658169).
With respect to claim 15, the modified Yu shows all the elements as claimed above but lacks the first engaging surface and the second engaging surface are rough surfaces treated by surface roughening.
However, Liu teaches a nebulizing module (40, fig 2) having a rough surface (43, fig 2 and [0052]) treated by surface roughening (the surface would be treated to not be smooth).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first and second engaging surfaces of Yu to be rough as taught by Liu so as to increase friction thereby enhancing connection stability (see [0052] of Liu).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/03/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues on pg. 8 of remarks that "Yu and Aherne, whether taken alone or in combination, at least fail to disclose, teach or suggest "the first engaging surface includes a plurality of first grooves, and the adhesive filled into the plurality of first grooves" a.
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 KELSEY E BALLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8153. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 AM - 4 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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/KELSEY E BALLER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TU A VO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights