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 Applicant’s amendment filed 9 April 2026 wherein Claims 1, 3 – 11, 13, 14, and 16 – 19 are amended, no claims are cancelled or newly added, and no claims were previously withdrawn. Therefore Claims 1 – 20 are currently pending.
The Applicant’s replacement drawing sheets filed 9 April 2026 has been fully considered. The Applicant’s replacement drawing sheets has overcome each Drawing Objection set forth in the Non-Final Rejection dated 13 January 2026 (hereinafter referred to as the “Non-Final Rejection”). Therefore, each Drawing Objection set forth in the Non-Final Rejection is withdrawn.
The Applicant’s amendments to the Claims dated 9 April 2026 has been fully considered. The Applicant’s amendments to the Claims has overcome each Claim Objection and Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) set forth in the Non-Final Rejection barring Claim Objections to Claims 8 and 17. Therefore, each of the Claim Objection and Claim Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) are withdrawn and the Claim Objections to Claims 8 and 17 are maintained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9 April 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 1 – 3, 5, 15, 16, and 18 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Felber (US 2014/0227112 A1).
The Applicant alleges that Felber does not teach “the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber and/or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breast pump.” See page 10 of the Applicant’s Remarks dated 9 April 2026. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Claim 1 recites:
A breastpump for expressing human breastmilk, wherein the breastpump comprises a breast shield with an interior for receiving a mother's breast and a pump chamber, wherein a cyclically changing negative pressure is appliable to the interior by means of the pump chamber, wherein a milk channel leads from the interior into the pump chamber through a first inlet opening, expressed milk flowing through said milk channel from the interior of the breast shield into the pump chamber, and wherein the pump chamber has an outlet opening, through which the expressed milk flows from the pump chamber into a milk collection container, wherein the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber and/or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump.
The Applicant’s argument focuses on the meaning of the last limitation of Claim 1 which recites:
wherein the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber and/or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump.
The conjunction “or” is used to connect two or more claim features. For prior art to read upon the claim limitation it must read upon one or more of the features connected by the conjunction “or.” Based on the current claim language, Felber must teach either (1) the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber and above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump or (2) the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump.
Page 8 of the Non-Final Rejection set forth that Felber teaches the second alternative where the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump. Figure 3 of Felber shows the outlet opening 18, at least at a start of an expressing process, being located in the upper region 14 of the pump chamber 14,15 in a vertical use position of the breast pump. Due to the “or” conjunction within the claim language the outlet opening does not need to meet the second part of this claim limitation that the outlet opening, at least at the start of an expressing process, is arranged above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breast pump.
The Applicant’s argument is unpersuasive in view of the aforementioned understanding of the claim language and teaching of Felber.
Claim Objections
Claim 8, 17, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8 is suggested to be amended to recite the following to resolve antecedent basis issues regarding “the end of an expressing process”:
The breastpump as claimed in claim 1, wherein the milk channel is able to be closed off by means of a first valve in order to remove the expressed milk from the pump chamber at [[the]] an end of [[an]] the expressing process.
Claim 17 is suggested to be amended to recite the following to resolve a spelling error and add antecedent basis for a claim limitation:
The breastpump as claimed in claim 16, wherein the module moreover comprises a first part with a flow opening for connecting to the interior, a valve body with at least one valve and a second part with the first rigid first cup for forming the pump chamber, wherein the valve body is arranged between the first and second part and [[where in]] wherein the module as a whole is connectable to the pump housing of the breastpump in a sealing and detachable manner.
Claim 18 is suggested to be amended to recite the following to resolve an antecedent basis issue:
The breastpump as claimed in claim 3, wherein the rigid first cup is a constituent part of a multipart module, which is connectable together to [[the]] a pump housing, wherein the rigid first cup is a constituent part of an adapter part and wherein a valve body is held in a receptacle of the adapter part.
Appropriate correction is required.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 3, 5, 15 – 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Felber (US 2014/0227112 A1).
With regards to claim 1, Felber discloses (Figs. 1 – 6) a breastpump for expressing human breastmilk (see Fig. 1 and [0037]), wherein the breastpump comprises a breast shield (52) (see [0037]) with an interior (see at 52 in Fig. 1) (see [0037]) for receiving a mother's breast and a pump chamber (14, 15) (see [0038] “The pump chamber is composed of two chamber areas 14, 15.”), wherein a cyclically changing negative pressure is appliable to the interior by means of the pump chamber (see [0037], [0044], [0049], and [0050]), wherein a milk channel (50) (see [0037]) leads from the interior into the pump chamber through a first inlet opening (143) (see [0039]), expressed milk flowing through said milk channel from the interior of the breast shield into the pump chamber (see Fig. 2 and [0039] – [0041]), and wherein the pump chamber has an outlet opening (see at 18 in Fig. 3 and see [0038]), through which the expressed milk flows from the pump chamber into a milk collection container (4) (see [0037]), wherein the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the pump chamber (see Fig. 3 where the outlet opening 18 is located in the upper region 14 of the pump chamber 14, 15) and/or above the inlet opening in a vertical use position of the breastpump (the “or” conjunction makes the limitation “the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged above the inlet opening in the vertical use position of the breastpump” not required for meeting the claim limitation since the limitation “the outlet opening, at least at a start of an expressing process, is arranged at an upper region of the pump chamber in a vertical use position of the breast pump” is met).
With regards to claim 2, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the milk channel (50) (see [0037]) forms a vacuum channel (see [0037], [0044], [0049], and [0050]) for applying the cyclically changing negative pressure to the interior (see at 52 in Fig. 1) (see [0037]) of the breast shield (52) (see [0037]).
With regards to claim 3, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the pump chamber (14, 15) (see [0038]) comprises a rigid first cup (14) and a flexible pump membrane (2) (see [0142]), wherein the pump membrane rests against the rigid first cup in sealing fashion (see [0040] and [0048]) and wherein the pump membrane is driven and a negative pressure is producible in the pump chamber as a result of the movement of said pump membrane relative to the rigid first cup (see [0037], [0044] “By means of the linear movement of the diaphragm 2 along the longitudinal axis of the connection head 22, it is possible to generate an underpressure in the interior of the cavity and therefore in the first chamber area 14,” [0049], and [0050]).
With regards to claim 5, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 3, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the rigid first cup (14) has an outlet groove (18) (see [0038] and Fig. 5), which extends from the outlet opening (see at 18 in Fig. 3 and see [0038]) of the pump chamber (14, 15) to an output (150) (see [0039] and Fig. 5), wherein the outlet groove, at least over a portion, extends in a direction perpendicular to the movement direction of the pump membrane (2) (see Figs. 5 – 6 and the outlet groove 18 extending up-down while the pump membrane 2 moves right-left).
With regards to claim 15, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 3, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the breastpump (see Fig. 1) comprises a pump housing (1) (see [0037]) with a drive (10)(see [0037]) for the pump membrane (2) (see [0042]) and wherein the rigid first cup (14) is detachably connected to the pump housing (see [0038] “As can be seen from FIG. 2, a cover 13 is fastened on an outer wall of the housing 1. It is preferably fastened releasably, for example screwed on.”).
With regards to claim 16, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 15, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the rigid first cup (14) is a constituent part of a multipart module (3, 5, 13), which is connectable together to the pump housing (1) (see [0038]).
With regards to claim 18, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 3, and Felber further discloses (see Figs. 1 – 6) wherein the rigid first cup (14) is a constituent part of a multipart module (3, 5, 13), which is connectable together to the pump housing (1) (see [0038]), wherein the rigid first cup is a constituent part of an adapter part (13) and wherein a valve body (3) (see [0039]) is held in a receptacle (see near 150 in Fig. 5) of the adapter part (see [0039] and Fig. 5).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Felber in view of Weber et al. (US 2012/0277728 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Weber”).
With regards to claim 7, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein the breast shield has a first passage opening, which forms part of the milk channel, wherein the first passage opening, at least at the start of the expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the interior in a use position of the breast shield such that the interior below the first passage opening is fillable with the expressed milk.
Nonetheless Weber, which is within the analogous art of devices and methods for expressing human breast milk (see abstract and title), teaches the breast shield (4) has a first passage opening (see passage opening at 43 in Fig. 7a), which forms part of the milk channel (the channel formed by the opening at 43 in Fig. 7a and channel of first line 2), wherein the first passage opening, at least at the start of the expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the interior in a use position of the breast shield such that the interior below the first passage opening is fillable with the expressed milk (see Examiner annotated Fig. 7a below; hereinafter referred to as “Fig. A”)
PNG
media_image1.png
435
691
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breast shield of Felber in view of a teaching of Weber such that the breast shield has a first passage opening, which forms part of the milk channel, wherein the first passage opening, at least at the start of the expressing process, is arranged in an upper region of the interior in a use position of the breast shield such that the interior below the first passage opening is fillable with the expressed milk. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Weber teaches that this configuration of a breast shield is designed to approximate the natural sucking of babies (see [0076] of Weber).
With regards to claim 17, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 16, however Felber is silent with regards to the module moreover comprises a first part with a flow opening for connecting to the interior, a valve body with at least one valve and a second part with the rigid first cup for forming the pump chamber, wherein the valve body is arranged between the first and second part and where in the module as a whole is connectable to the housing of the breast pump in a sealing and detachable manner.
Nonetheless Weber, which is within the analogous art of devices and methods for expressing human breast milk (see abstract and title), teaches the module (3, 5, 13) moreover comprises a first part (3) with a flow opening (31) for connecting to the interior (see Fig. A above), a valve body (see at 5 in Fig. 1) with at least one valve (5) and a second part (13) with the rigid first cup (133) for forming the pump chamber (see [0071]), wherein the valve body is arranged between the first and second part (see Figs. 1-5 which shows the valve body comprising at least one valve 5 arranged/located between the first and second part) and where in the hygiene module as a whole is connectable to the housing of the breastpump in a sealing and detachable manner (see [0071] as the cover 13 is detachably connectable to the housing the hygiene module as a whole is then connectable to the housing of the breastpump in a sealing and detachable manner).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the module of the breastpump of Felber in view of a teaching of Weber such that the module moreover comprises a first part with a flow opening for connecting to the interior, a valve body with at least one valve and a second part with the rigid first cup for forming the pump chamber, wherein the valve body is arranged between the first and second part and where in the module as a whole is connectable to the housing of the breast pump in a sealing and detachable manner. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Weber teaches a variety of locations for a flow opening to be present (see [0093] of Weber). Furthermore, the a nonreturn valve opens only when there is sufficient pressure when the pump chamber is sufficiently filled with milk. Thereby keeping the dead volume to a minimum (see [0079] of Weber). Finally, the detachable connection of the cover allows for maintaining the internal pump structure (see [0073] of Weber).
Claim(s) 8 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Felber in view of Alvarez et al. (US 2016/0000982 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Alvarez”).
With regards to claim 8, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however Felber is silent with regards to wherein the milk channel is able to be closed off by means of a first valve in order to remove the expressed milk from the pump chamber at the end of an expressing process.
Nonetheless Alvarez, which is within the analogous art of methods and apparatuses for expressing human breast milk (see title and abstract), teaches (see Fig. 3) the milk channel (see the channel at 265 in Fig. 3) is able to be closed off by means of a first valve (280) in order to remove the expressed milk from the pump chamber (260) at the end of an expressing process (see [0054] and [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the milk channel of Felber in view of a teaching of Alvarez such that the milk channel is able to be closed off by means of a first valve in order to remove the expressed milk from the pump chamber at the end of an expressing process. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Alvarez teaches that the inclusion of a first valve in the milk channel provides for passage of milk while maintaining vacuum pressure in the pressure chamber (see [0054] of Alvarez).
With regards to claim 13, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however Felber is silent with regards to wherein a fourth valve is present in the milk channel, said fourth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure.
Nonetheless, Alvarez teaches (Fig. 3) a fourth valve (280) is present in the milk channel (see channel at 265 in Fig. 3), said fourth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure (see [0054], [0065] and [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the milk channel of Felber with a teaching of Alvarez such that a fourth valve is present in the milk channel, said fourth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Alvarez teaches that the inclusion of a valve in the milk channel provides for the passage of milk while maintaining vacuum pressure in the pressure chamber (see [0054] of Alvarez).
Claim(s) 9 – 11, 14, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Felber in view of Jaeger-Waldau (US 2013/0053764 A1).
With regards to claim 9, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein a draining channel is present between the interior of the breast shield and the pump chamber, said draining channel extending separately from the milk channel, and wherein the draining channel is able to be closed off by means of a second valve, wherein the draining channel is closed during the expressing process and opened at an end of the expressing process.
Nonetheless Jaeger-Waldau, which is within the analogous art of pumps for breast milk (see abstract), teaches a draining channel (3) is present between the interior (see at 21 in Fig. 1) of the breast shield (21) and the pump chamber (see at 20 in Fig. 1), said draining channel extending separately from the milk channel (see at 16 in Fig. 1), and wherein the draining channel is able to be closed off by means of a second valve (17) (see [0031]), wherein the draining channel is closed during the expressing process (see [0031]) and opened at an end of the expressing process (see [0031]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breastpump of Felber in view of a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau such that a draining channel is present between the interior of the breast shield and the pump chamber, said draining channel extending separately from the milk channel, and wherein the draining channel is able to be closed off by means of a second valve, wherein the draining channel is closed during the expressing process and opened at an end of the expressing process. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Jaeger-Waldau teaches the floater valve/second valve prevents liquid from being aspirated into the pump. Dried milk can agglutinate and block the inlet-and-outlet valves of the pump (see [0031] of Jaeger-Waldau). Furthermore, the addition of a suction line/draining channel allows for connection to a venting line with a vent that vents to the atmosphere. The venting valve lowers the wear on an electric motor because on average the motor works with reduced speed. Moreover, the electric motor does not have to provide the power of the operation of a gyro valve. In fact this saving is more or less compensated by the energy consumption of the electrically activated venting valve (see [0019] and [0041] of Jaeger-Waldau).
The breastpump of Felber modified in view of a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau will hereinafter be referred to as the breastpump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau.
With regards to claim 10, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein a venting valve for venting the interior of the breast shield is present.
Nonetheless Jaeger-Waldau, which is within the analogous art of pumps for breast milk (see abstract), teaches a venting valve (6) for venting the interior (see at 21 in Fig. 1) of the breast shield (21) (see [0019], [0048], and [0049]) is present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breastpump of Felber in view of a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau such that the breast pump comprises a venting valve for venting the interior of the breast shield is present. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because a venting valve lowers the wear on an electric motor because on average the motor works with reduced speed. Moreover, the electric motor does not have to provide the power of the operation of a gyro valve. In fact this saving is more or less compensated by the energy consumption of the electrically activated venting valve (see [0019] and [0041] of Jaeger-Waldau).
With regards to claim 11, the breastpump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau teaches the claimed invention of claim 9, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein a venting valve for venting the interior of the breast shield is present and wherein the venting valve is able to be closed off together with the second valve and said venting valve can be opened together with the second valve.
Nonetheless Jaeger-Waldau, which is within the analogous art of pumps for breast milk (see abstract), further teaches (Fig. 1) a venting valve (6) for venting the interior (see at 21 in Fig. 1) of the breast shield (21; see [0019] and [0048-0049]) is present and wherein the venting valve is able to be closed off together with the second valve (17) and said venting valve can be opened together with the second valve (see abstract, [0018], and [0031-0032] wherein the venting valve 6 is closed when the electric motor switched on and when the electric motor is turned on milk accumulates in the milk outlet vale 18 and the second valve 17 is closed when the accumulating milk is not discharged sufficiently fast enough into the reservoir/the bottle via the milk outlet valve when the electric motor is off both valves are then open).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breast pump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau with a further teaching of Jaeger-Waldau such that a venting valve for venting the interior of the breast shield is present and wherein the venting valve is able to be closed off together with the second valve and said venting valve can be opened together with the second valve. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, as Jaeger-Waldau teaches that a venting valve lowers the wear on an electric motor because on average the motor works with reduced speed. Moreover, the electric motor does not have to provide the power for the operation of a gyro valve. In fact, this saving is more or less compensated by the energy consumption of the electrically activated venting valve (see [0019] and [0041] of Jaeger-Waldau).
With regards to claim 14, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein a fifth valve is present in a draining channel, said fifth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure.
Nonetheless, Jaeger-Waldau teaches (Fig. 1) a fifth valve (17) is present in a draining channel (3), said fifth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure (see [0019] and [0031-0032]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breastpump of Felber with a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau such that a fifth valve is present in a draining channel, said fifth valve opening and closing in accordance with an applied negative pressure. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because Jaeger-Waldau teaches that the fifth valve or floater valve prevents liquid from being aspirated into the pump as dried milk can agglutinate and block the inlet-outlet valves of the pump (see [0031] of Jaeger-Waldau).
With regards to claim 19, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 18, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein the multipart module further comprises a manual actuation means for simultaneous actuation of a first valve and a second valve.
Nonetheless, Jaeger-Waldau further teaches the module further comprises a manual actuation (11; see [0042]) means for simultaneous actuation of a first valve (18) and a second (6) valve (see the abstract, [0042], and [0047-0048] wherein the electronic control system controls the pump via the venting valve which in turn controls the level of milk within the milk outlet valve which requires a sufficient amount to open the valve slit. The valves would be simultaneously actuatable because once the pump is turned off the venting valve is actuated open which would then cause the milk outlet valve to be closed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the module of the breastpump of Felber in view of a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau such that the module further comprises a manual actuation means for simultaneous actuation of a first valve and a second valve. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, as Jaeger-Waldau teaches that controlling a venting valve via an electronic control system lowers the wear on an electric motor because on average the motor works with reduced speed. Moreover, the electric motor does not have to provide the power for the operation of a gyro valve. In fact, this saving is more or less compensated by the energy consumption of the electrically activated venting valve (see [0019] and [0041] of Jaeger-Waldau).
The breastpump of Felber modified in view of a teaching of Jaeger-Waldau will hereinafter be referred to as the breastpump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau.
With regards to claim 20, the breastpump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau teaches the claimed invention of claim 19, and the breastpump of Felber and Jaeger-Waldau further teaches (Figs. 1-5 and 7a-8 of Weber) the adapter part (13 of Felber) and the actuation part (the electronic control system 11 of Jaeger-Waldau) are not detachable from one another in a non-destructive manner (see Fig. 1 which shows that the electronic control system is connected in a non-detachable manner wherein detaching would require cutting what appears to be electrical lines which would be a destructive manner see [0025] of Jaeger-Waldau).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Felber and Quackenbush et al. (US 2008/0255503 A1; hereinafter referred to as “Quackenbush”).
With regards to claim 12, Felber discloses the claimed invention of claim 1, however, Felber is silent with regards to wherein a third valve is present, said third valve maintaining a baseline negative pressure in the interior of the breast shield when the pressure of the cyclically changing negative pressure increases.
Nonetheless, Quackenbush teaches (Figs. 6 and 11) a third valve (280) is present, said third valve maintaining a baseline negative pressure in the interior (see at 212 in Fig. 6) of the breast shield (212) when the pressure of the cyclically changing negative pressure increases (see [0063], [0066-0068], and [0070]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify the breastpump of Felber with a teaching of Quackenbush such that a third valve is present, said third valve maintaining a baseline negative pressure in the interior of the breast shield when the pressure of the cyclically changing negative pressure increases. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, as Quackenbush teaches benefits would include for example, reducing the amount of energy required to thereafter reach maximum vacuum. The "elastic rebound" of the nipple upon release of vacuum would also be minimized. Further benefits may result from being able to control a given vacuum cycle between desired set points of actually sensed, and thereby actually applied pressures, which set points may be made numerous for more complex, yet precisely controlled suction curves. The present invention also provides comfort to the nursing mother in that the reciprocation of a breast or nipple within the breast shield is minimized (see [0013] of Quackenbush).
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 ROBERT F ALLEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6232. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 AM - 4:30 PM ET.
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, Chelsea Stinson can be reached at (571)270-1744. 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.
/ROBERT F ALLEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/WILLIAM R CARPENTER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
06/22/2026
Prosecution Insights