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 .
This action is in response to the Election/Restriction response filed on 08/27/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 7, and 19 are independent. Claims 19 and 20 are withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Invention I (claims 1-18) in the reply filed on 08/27/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search associated with the non-elected invention would be coextensive with the elected invention and can be done without serious burden. This is not found persuasive because there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply: (a) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; (b) the inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; (c) the inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different groups/subgroups or electronic resources, or employing different search queries); (d) the prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
The restrictions among all the species are withdrawn because independent claim 1 is found allowable and claim 7 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the 35 USC 112 issues as indicated below.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 3, 14, 15, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 3, line 8, a comma should be added after “member side”.
Claim 14, line 2, the limitation “each include” should be amended to --each includes--.
Claim 15, line 2, the limitation “each include” should be amended to --each includes--.
Claim 18, line 1, the limitation “tubing” should be amended to --a tube--.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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.
Claim 7-18 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.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the covering member" in line 20 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Instead, line 3 of claim 7 provides the antecedent basis for “covering portion.” Claim 16 also recites “covering member” in lines 2, 3-4, and 5. Claims 8-18 are rejected because they depend on claim 7.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the inner surface of the covering member" in lines 2, 3-4, and 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 are allowed.
Claim 7-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance on claims 1-6: the prior art fails to teach or render obvious a hemostatic device, comprising, inter alia, the support member possessing a rigidity higher than the rigidity of the pressing member; and the support member being configured such that the width of the support member becomes shorter from the upper end portion toward the lower end portion and the thickness of the side surface portion becoming thinner from the upper end portion toward the lower end portion.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance on claims 7-18 if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action: a hemostatic device, comprising, inter alia, a support member positioned between the covering portion and the pressing portion so that the covering member overlies the support member and the support member overlies the pressing member, the support member being more rigid than the pressing member, wherein the thickness of the first end portion of the support member being greater than the thickness of the second end portion of the support member.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20040098035 A1 Wada, Satoshi et al. discloses a hemostatic device having a band and a balloon.
US 20150018869 A1 Benz; Philip et al. discloses a compression wristband hemostatic device.
US 20150335334 A1 PANCHOLY; SAMIR BIPIN et al. discloses a compression wristband hemostatic device.
US 20160206298 A1 Keene; Talmadge Kelly et al. discloses a hemostatic tablet and a radial arterial compression band
US 20180014831 A1 Salimi; Reza et al. discloses a hemostatic device having transparent dressing
US 20190133602 A1 Kiemeneij; Ferdinand et al. discloses a hemostatic device for applying a compressing force to a puncture site and having three bands.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JING RUI OU whose telephone number is (571)270-5036. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00am -5:00pm.
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, Jackie Ho can be reached at (571) 272-4696. 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.
/JING RUI OU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771
Prosecution Insights