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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a wick” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “140” has been used to designate both “a layer of ECP material”, “an ECP material”, and “a plastic heater plate (ECP material substrate)”, see paragraphs [0078, 0080, 0083, 0084,…, 0091]. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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 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 33, 35, 47, 54, and 56 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 33, 35, 54, and 56 contain the trademark/trade name Arnitel. Where a trademark or trade name is used in a claim as a limitation to identify or describe a particular material or product, the claim does not comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph. See Ex parte Simpson, 218 USPQ 1020 (Bd. App. 1982). The claim scope is uncertain since the trademark or trade name cannot be used properly to identify any particular material or product. A trademark or trade name is used to identify a source of goods, and not the goods themselves. Thus, a trademark or trade name does not identify or describe the goods associated with the trademark or trade name. In the present case, the trademark/trade name is used to identify/describe a synthetic polymer thermoplastic and, accordingly, the identification/description is indefinite.
Claim 47 recites the limitation "heater wire" at line 1 renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear for whether this heater wire is the same as the one recited in the preceding claim 42 at line 6. If it is so, then "the" or "said" should be used.
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) 21-30, 34-35, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308).
Regarding claims 21 and 42, Row discloses a humidifier 51 (fig. 5a, i.e. called a respiratory humidifier device), comprising:
a liquid reservoir (50, i.e. called a humidifier tub); and
a heater (41, i.e. called an in-mold heater element) for heating a liquid (W) in the liquid reservoir (50) (¶ 0017), the heater comprising:
a first material (43, i.e. called a second film), wherein the first material is a thermoconductive material (abstract; ¶ 0062, 0071, 0095, i.e. a conductive polymer film is electrically insulating);
a second material 42 (i.e. a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer
material) (¶ 0061); and
a heater wire (72, i.e. called a heating element) to heat the liquid (W) (¶ 0013, 0019-0021, 0060, 0071, 0087-0088).
Row discloses all the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for the liquid reservoir comprising a wick.
However, Klasek teaches the liquid reservoir 25 (fig. 8A, i.e. called a tub or a water reservoir) comprising a wick (36) (¶ 0069-0071).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of a respiratory apparatus. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row and Klasek before him or her, to include such wick of Klasek because it increases the surface area in contact with the flow of breathable gas. As the flow of breathable gas passes the wicking element, the water held by the wicking element is vaporized and carried through the outlet of the humidifier chamber into the patient conduit. The suggestion/motivation for including a wick is because it allows a steady supply of liquid for use in the control of the temperature and humidity throughout the components of the respiratory apparatus (¶ 0087).
With respect to claims 22 and 43, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material (42) is an electrically conductive plastic (ECP) material (i.e. called a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material (i.e. electrically insulating) in claim 22; and wherein the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material and a heating element) is an electrically conductive plastic (ECP) material in claim 43 (¶ 0019-0023, 0061).
With respect to claims 23 and 44, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the first material (43) is electrically insulating (abstract; ¶ 0019, 0021, 0062, i.e. a conductive polymer film is electrically insulating).
With respect to claims 24 and 45, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the first material (43) at least partially covers the second material (42, see figures 14-15, i.e. the conductive polymer film 43 is covered the polymer film 42 from the bottom) in claim 24; and the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) in claim 45 (¶ 0062, 0071, 0095).
With respect to claims 25 and 46, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material (42) at least partially covers the first material (43, see figures 14-15, i.e. the polymer film 42 is covered the conductive polymer film 43 from the top) in claim 25; wherein the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) is arranged to at least partially cover the first material (43, i.e. called a second film) in claim 46.
With respect to claims 26 and 47, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material 42 (figs. 4i, 4j) is provided between two layers (57, 44) formed of the first material (43) in claim 26; and wherein heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) is provided between two layers formed of the first material (43, i.e. called a second film) in claim 47.
With respect to claims 27 and 48, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material (42) is overmoulded by the first material (43, i.e. called a second film) in claim 27; wherein the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) is overmoulded by the first material (43, i.e. called a second film) in claim 48 (¶ 0073, 0095).
With respect to claims 28 and 49, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the first material (43) is integrated with and/or part of the second material (42) (see figures 4i and 4j) in claim 28; and wherein the first material (43) is integrated with and/or part of the heater wire (71, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) in claim 49.
With respect to claims 29 and 50, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material (42, i.e. a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material film) has a varying thickness across its width and/or length in claim 29; wherein the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset
polymer material) has a varying thickness across its width and/or length in claim 50 (¶ 0061).
With respect to claims 30 and 51, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the heater (41) comprises sections of the second material (42) spaced apart (see figures 14-15, i.e. by the overmold material 57) across a width and/or length of the heater (41) in claim 30; and wherein the heater (41) comprises sections of the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer
material) spaced apart across a width and/or length of the heater (41) in claim 51.
With respect to claims 34 and 55, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the first material (43) is hydrophilic (¶ 0095, i.e. a conductive polymer film).
With respect to claims 35 and 56, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the first material (43) comprises Arnitel (¶ 0062, i.e. alternatively, the second film 43 may also be formed from a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material.).
With respect to claims 38 and 59, Row in view of Klasek discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above of which Row further discloses wherein the second material (42) comprises one or more plastic or polymer materials in claim 38; wherein the heater wire (72, i.e. the molded object is formed with different components including a polymer film or a thermoplastic or thermoset polymer material) comprises one or more
plastic or polymer materials in claim 59 (¶ 0009, 0061).
Claim(s) 31 and 52 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Velazquez et al. (US 20080138051).
Regarding claims 31 and 52, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. discloses all the claimed limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein the second material is provided in a form of strands; and wherein the heater wire is provided in a form of strands.
However, Velazquez teaches wherein the second material (i.e. thermoplastic material) is provided in a form of strands; wherein the heater wire is provided in a form of strands (¶ 0044-0045, 0049, i.e. fibers/threads/filaments/strands/yarns).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of a vaporizer device. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Velazquez before him or her, to include such form of fibers of Velazquez because a sufficient amount of solid surface to help increase the surface area of liquid water from which water molecules may escape into the gas phase, thereby creating water vapor The suggestion/motivation for doing so is because it permits liquid/water to diffuse or be transported through the substrate, thereby contacting the chemical ingredient(s) and initiating the chemical reaction that produces heat (¶ 0057).
Claim(s) 32-33 and 53-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Catton et al. (US 20140090817).
Regarding claims 32-33 and 53-54, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. discloses all the claimed limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein the heater further comprises a hydrophilic layer; and wherein the hydrophilic layer comprises Arnitel.
However, Catton teaches wherein the heater further comprises a hydrophilic layer (¶ 0073); and wherein the hydrophilic layer comprises Arnitel (i.e. thermoplastic or thermoset polymer).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of heat transfer device. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Catton before him or her, to include such material(s) of Catton because it provides different temperature ranges. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it improves performance as a greater percentage of the evaporator area is covered with this coating (¶ 0130).
Claim(s) 36 and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 20120053577).
Regarding claims 36 and 57, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. discloses all the claimed limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein the heater further comprises a biocompatible layer.
However, Lee teaches wherein the heater (i.e. energy delivery systems) further comprises a biocompatible layer (¶ 0022, 0125, 0143, 0188).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of heating/energy devices. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek and Lee before him or her, to include such biocompatible material of Le because it prevents undesired the temperature increase did not rise above a certain temperature threshold. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it maximizes the ability to control the characteristic impedance of the device, to maximize heat transfer to, or to optimize a combination of control of the characteristic impedance and heat transfer (¶ 0121).
Claim(s) 37, 39, 58, and 60 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Althorpe et al. (US 20170360092).
Regarding claims 37 and 58, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. discloses all the claimed limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein one or more of the first material, the second material, and the heater wire are formed as part of the wick.
However, Althorpe teaches wherein one or more of the first material (i.e. thermal conductivity material), the second material (i.e. thermoplastic material), and the heater wire (¶ 0057) are formed as part of the wick (30) (¶ 0058-0060, 0077, 0082).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of generating a vapor from a liquid. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Althorpe before him or her, to include such a combination of materials of Althorpe because it provides sufficiently rigid and robust to resist damage and significant distortion while moving axially with respect to the inner surfaces of and electric heater and/or with respect to the port of the disposable cartridge. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it reduces the likelihood of overheating of the components and permits the use of wicks that cannot operate directly contact with metallic and resistance heating elements (¶ 0057).
With respect to claims 39 and 60, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Althorpe discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 38 of which Althorpe further discloses wherein the one or more plastic or polymer materials comprise one or more of polyphenylene sulfides, polyacetylenes, polyanilines, polypyrroles, polythiophenes, polyphenylenes, polyphenylene vinylenes, polyalkylthiophenes, polypyrenes, polyazulenes, polynaphthalenes, polycarbazoles, polyindoles, polyazepines, polyethylenedioxythiophenes, polymers comprising metal atoms, and polymer- metal complexes (¶ 0077, 0082).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek and Althorpe before him or her, to include such material(s) of Althorpe it provides sufficiently rigid and robust to resist damage and significant distortion while moving axially with respect to the inner surfaces of and electric heater and/or with respect to the port of the disposable cartridge. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it reduces the likelihood of overheating of the components and permits the use of wicks that cannot operate directly contact with metallic and resistance heating elements (¶ 0057).
Claim(s) 40-41 and 61-62 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over over Row et al. (US 20140352694) in view of Klasek et al. (US 20100206308) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Mayer (US 20050155985).
Regarding claims 40-41, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. discloses all the claimed limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above, except for wherein the second material comprises an additive material, the additive material being one or more of: carbon black, carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, graphite, graphene, stainless steel fibers, metal flakes or powders (e.g. gold, silver, copper, etc), metal composites, organometallic complexes, phthalocyanine salts, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
However, Mayer teaches wherein the second material (i.e. a thermoplastic or thermosetting polymeric material) comprises an additive material, the additive material being one or more of: carbon black, carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, graphite, graphene, stainless steel fibers, metal flakes or powders (e.g. gold, silver, copper, etc), metal composites, organometallic complexes, phthalocyanine salts, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; wherein the second material comprises the additive material in conjunction with one or more plastic or polymer materials (¶ 0014, 0017, 0020, i.e. in conjunction with polymer material).
The combination of references are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of an electrically heated vapour dispensing apparatus. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Mayer before him or her, to include such additional material(s) of Mayer because it provides maximum thermal efficiency. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it allows sufficient heat tolerance such that it is not undesirably softened or melted when the heating means is energised during normal use of the apparatus (¶ 0014).
With respect to claims 61-62, Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Mayer discloses the limitations of the claimed invention as set forth above in claim 42 of which Mayer further discloses wherein the heater wire (7) comprises an additive material, the additive material being one or more of: carbon black, carbon fibers, carbon nanotubes, graphite, graphene, stainless steel fibers, metal flakes or powders, metal composites, organometallic complexes, phthalocyanine salts, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; wherein the heater wire comprises the additive material in conjunction with one or more plastic or polymer materials (¶ 0014, 0017, 0020, i.e. in conjunction with polymer material).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Row et al. in view of Klasek et al. and Mayer before him or her, to include such additional material(s) of Mayer because it provides maximum thermal efficiency. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been obvious because it allows sufficient heat tolerance such that it is not undesirably softened or melted when the heating means is energised during normal use of the apparatus (¶ 0014).
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tang et al. (US 20140131904). Row et al. (US 20100147299). Pandya et al. (US 20170157341). Ques Ramos et al. (US 20140064714). And Meyer et al. (US 7,263,282).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KET D DANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7827. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Wednesday 7:30 AM - 4:30 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, Steven W. Crabb can be reached at (571) 270-5095. 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.
/KET D DANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/STEVEN W CRABB/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761