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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “a first hole in circular top wall”. The examiner believes “a first hole in the circular top wall” are the correct words to use here.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication No. 2013/0338521 to Thompson et al. (hereinafter “Thompson”).
Regarding claim 1, Thompson discloses a nasal anchor, comprising: a circular top wall (110, Fig. 4, [0060]); a circular bottom wall substantially parallel to the circular top wall (110, Fig. 4, [0060]); a rounded wall connecting the circular top wall and the circular bottom wall (110, Fig. 4, [0060]); a first hole in circular top wall (110, Fig. 4, [0060]); a second hole in circular bottom wall (110, Fig. 4, [0060]); a channel bridging the first hole and the second hole (134, Fig. 2B, [0060]); a slit in rounded wall extending from an outer surface of the rounded wall to the channel (412, Fig. 4, [0060]).
Regarding claim 2, Thompson discloses the nasal anchor of Claim 1, and Thompson further discloses comprising a foam filler ([0105]).
Regarding claim 4, Thompson discloses the nasal anchor of Claim 1, and Thompson further discloses whereby the channel is sized and shaped to at least partially surround an outer tube of a laryngoscope (Fig. 3).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 2013/0338521 to Thompson et al. (hereinafter “Thompson”) and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2015/0068530 to Apolito.
Regarding claim 3, Thompson discloses the nasal anchor of Claim 2.
Thompson fails to expressly teach wherein the foam filler is memory foam.
However, Apolito teaches of an analogous device (Apolito: 1102, Fig. 11, [0068]) wherein the foam filler is memory foam (Apolito: [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the foam filler of Thompson in the manner taught by Apolito. It would have been advantageous to make the combination for the purpose of providing a deformable and flexible material ([0068] of Apolito).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTEN A. SHARPLESS whose telephone number is (571)272-2387. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday 6:00 AM - 2:00 PM, and Friday 6:00 AM - 10:00 AM.
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, Mike Carey can be reached at (571) 270-7235. 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.
/C.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/MICHAEL J CAREY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795