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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claims 8 and 10 recite “a handle mechanism engaged with the main handle body”. The present specification discloses that the handle mechanism includes the main handle body (¶0069), but does not appear to describe a handle mechanism engaging a main handle body. Therefore, for the purpose of examination, the “handle mechanism engaging with the main handle body” was interpreted to include the handle mechanism including the main handle body in its scope.
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.
Claims 1-3, 6, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kelly discloses an eyedrop administrative device (Figs. 1-4, feat. 1; ¶0071-0075; Fig. 7; ¶0110) comprising: a main device body (Figs. 1-4, feat. 10; ¶0072); an eyedrop vessel for receiving and maintaining at least one eyedrop (Figs. 2a and 4, feats. 33 and 63; ¶0080-0081), the eyedrop vessel engaged with a trajectory mechanism (Figs. 2a, feats. 17, 18, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31; Fig. 7, feat. 102; ¶0076, 0095-099, 0110: pressurizing mechanism 17, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31 provide pressure to the fluid to expel the fluid out of orifice 18 or 102 at a trajectory); and the trajectory mechanism, engaged with the main device body (Fig. 2a, feat. 15-17, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31; ¶0084: pressurizing mechanism part of trajectory mechanism is attached to body 10 by pivots 15 and 16), for expelling the eyedrop from the eyedrop vessel in an arced trajectory (Figs. 2a, feat. 18; Fig. 7, feat. 102; ¶0012-0013, 0073, 0110).
Regarding claim 2, Kelly discloses the device of claim 1, and further discloses that the trajectory mechanism is selected from the group consisting of a pressurizing mechanism (Fig. 2a, feats. 17, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31; ¶0095-0099), a spring-driven mechanism (Fig. 2a, feat. 24; ¶0095-0099: mechanism includes a spring 24), a motorized pressurizing mechanism, and a motorized spring-driven mechanism.
Regarding claim 3, Kelly discloses the device of claim 2, and further discloses that the trajectory mechanism further includes a lateral positioning mechanism for expelling the eyedrop laterally (Figs. 1 and 4, feats. 3 and 18; Fig. 7, feats. 3 and 102).
Regarding claim 6, Kelly discloses the device of claim 1, and further discloses that the eyedrop vessel is selected from the group consisting of a tip having an open receiving end and an open pressurizing end, semi-circular, square, and cylindrical shaped receptacles (Fig. 2a, feat. 63; ¶0080: eyedrop vessel 63 is a portion of a tube, and is therefore cylindrical).
Regarding claim 13, Kelly discloses the device of claim 1, and further discloses a method of administering an eyedrop (Figs. 1-4; ¶0095-0099), comprising the steps of: loading the eyedrop vessel (Figs. 2a and 4, feats. 33 and 63; ¶0080-0081) of the device with an eyedrop (¶0095: pressing the button 21 traps fluid within dosing chamber 33); positioning the device against a user’s face (Fig. 1b, feat. 5; ¶0090); and expelling the eyedrop from the device in an arced trajectory from the device (Fig. 1b, feat. 3; ¶0096-0098).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pozzi et al. (US 2011/0278323 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Pozzi discloses a method for reducing residuals in an eyedrop administrative device (Figs. 7-9; ¶0029-0036 and 0074-0084) comprising the steps of: applying positive pressure to accelerate an eyedrop (Fig. 8, feat. 11) out of the device after the eyedrop has left the device (Fig. 8, feat. 8; ¶0075-0077); and utilizing a motion activating mechanism (Figs. 7-9, feat. 13) to continue a flow of air exiting the device (¶0080-0081).
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.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1) in view of Benktzon et al. (US 6,423,040 B1).
Regarding claim 4, Kelly discloses the device of claim 1, but does not disclose a positioning component attached to the main body. Regarding claim 5, Kelly is further silent with respect to the positioning component being an eyecup.
Benktzon teaches an eye fluid applicator (Figs. 6A-C, feat. 600; Col. 13, line 66 – Col. 14, line 67) comprising an eye cup part (650) connected to a main body (610). Benktzon teaches that the eye cup advantageously contacts the eye socket to provide device orientation and stabilization (Col. 5, lines 30-49). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kelly so that it comprises a positioning component attached to the main body, with respect to claim 4, and so that the positioning component is an eyecup, with respect to claim 5, in order to contact the eye socket to provide device orientation and stabilization as taught Benktzon.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1) in view of Muir et al. (US 2015/0051557 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Kelly discloses the device of claim 1, but does not disclose a cheek bumper.
Muir teaches an eye dropper system for administering medication to the eye (Figs. 3A-D, feat. 200; ¶0039-0044) comprising a cheek rest (220; ¶0040). Muir teaches that the cheek rest advantageously stabilizes the eye dropper system, maintains the proper distance from the eye, and minimizes the potential contamination of the dispenser tip contacting the facial skin (¶0016). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kelly so that it further includes a cheek bumper in order to stabilize the device, maintain the proper distance from the eye, and minimize the potential contamination of the device contacting the facial skin as taught by Muir.
Claims 8-9 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1) in view of Ehrlich (US 4,386,608 A) and in further view of Muir et al. (US 2015/0051557 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kelly disclose the device of claim 1, but does not disclose an eyelid lowering mechanism comprising: a main handle body including a positioning component, a handle mechanism engaged with the main handle body, and a cheek bumper engaged with the handle mechanism, wherein the eyelid lowering mechanism opens a lower eyelid upon engagement of the handle mechanism.
Ehrlich teaches an eyelid opening device for applying fluid to the eye (Figs. 1-3, feat. 10; Col. 1, lines 6-36) comprising a handle mechanism comprising a pair of handles (Figs. 1-3, feats. 20 and 30), one of which may be considered to be a main handle, with a pair of pads (Figs. 2-3, feat. 60; Col. 1, lines 28-48; Col. 2, lines 21-35) at one end and finger grips (40 and 50; Col. 1, lines 28-36) at the other. The handles are pivotably interconnected via pins (Fig. 3, feat. 64; Col. 1, lines 37-48). The pads engage the upper and lower eyelids, thereby acting as positioning components which position the device near the eye (Col. 1, lines 28-36), and open the eyelids when the handle bodies are pivoted closer to each other (Col. 2, lines 21-35). Ehrlich teaches that such a mechanism allows users to easily maintain the eyelids in an open position while delivering fluid to the eye (Col. 1, lines 6-12; Col. 2, lines 51-60). Ehrlich teaches that the handle bodies are positioned on either side of the a fluid administration nozzle (Figs. 1-3, feat. 70; Col. 1, lines 53-59), and modifying the device of Kelly so that the handle bodies of Ehrlich are attached to the main body of the device (Kelly: Fig. 1, feat. 10) on either side of the nozzle (Kelly: 18) would allow the modified device to maintain the eyelids in an open position while administering eyedrops. Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kelly so that it further includes an eyelid lowering mechanism comprising: a main handle body including a positioning component, a handle mechanism engaged with the main handle body, wherein the eyelid lowering mechanism opens a lower eyelid upon engagement of the handle mechanism so that users may easily maintain their eyelids in an open position while administering eyedrops as taught by Ehrlich.
Kelly in view of Ehrlich does not disclose a cheek bumper engaged with the handle mechanism.
As discussed above, Muir teaches an eye dropper system for administering medication to the eye (Figs. 3A-D, feat. 200; ¶0039-0044) comprising a cheek rest (220; ¶0040). Muir teaches that the cheek rest advantageously stabilizes the eye dropper system, maintains the proper distance from the eye, and minimizes the potential contamination of the dispenser tip contacting the facial skin (¶0016). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kelly in view of Ehrlich so that it further includes a cheek bumper engaged with the main handle body in order to stabilize the device, maintain the proper distance from the eye, and minimize the potential contamination of the device contacting the facial skin as taught by Muir.
Regarding claim 9, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the device according to claim 8. As discussed above, Ehrlich teaches a pair of handles (Figs. 1-3, feats. 20 and 30) with finger grips (40 and 50) at one end. The thumb is a finger, and therefore Ehrlich teaches a thumb grip attached to a handle body. Furthermore, Ehrlich teaches that the handles, and their corresponding grips, are pivotably interconnected via pins, or an interconnecting mechanism (Fig. 3, feat. 64). Therefore, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir further discloses a thumb grip attached to the main handle body, a handle interconnected with the main handle body and matingly engaged with the thumb grip, and an interconnecting mechanism for interconnecting the thumb grip and handle.
Regarding claim 14, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the device of claim 8. Kelly, and therefore Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir, further discloses a method of administering an eyedrop (Figs. 1-4; ¶0095-0099), comprising the steps of: loading the eyedrop vessel (Figs. 2a and 4, feats. 33 and 63; ¶0080-0081) of the device with an eyedrop (¶0095: pressing the button 21 traps fluid within dosing chamber 33); aligning the device on a face (Fig. 1b, feat. 5; ¶0090); and expelling the eyedrop from the device in an arced trajectory (Fig. 1b, feat. 3; ¶0096-0098).
As discussed above, Ehrlich teaches an eyelid opening device for applying fluid to the eye (Figs. 1-3, feat. 10; Col. 1, lines 6-36) comprising handles (20, 30) with finger grips (40, 50) at one end and positioning pads (60) at the other for engaging the eyelids of the user and positioning the fluid dispensing nozzle (70) near the eye (Col. 2, lines 21-35). Closing the handles forces open the eyelids (Col. 2, lines 21-35), which exposes the cul-de-sac, or pocket, of the lower eyelid. Therefore, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir further discloses steps of aligning the device on a face with the positioning component, creating an eye pocket in an eye, and expelling the eyedrop into the eye pocket.
Regarding claim 15, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the method of claim 14, and Kelly further discloses that the method further includes administering an eyedrop using one hand (¶0090 and 0095-0099: the dispenser only requires a finger to press button 21 to dispense the eyedrop).
Regarding claim 16, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the method of claim 14, and Kelly further discloses that the method further includes administering an eyedrop without tilting the head or neck (¶0012-0014).
Regarding claim 17, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the method of claim 14, and Kelly further discloses that the method further includes administering an eyedrop without using a mirror (¶0090 and 0095-0099).
Claims 10 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehrlich (US 4,386,608 A) in view of Muir et al. (US 2015/0051557 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Ehrlich discloses an eyelid lowering mechanism (Figs. 1-3, feat. 10; Col. 1, lines 6-36) comprising: a main handle body (20) including a positioning component (60); a handle mechanism (Figs. 1-3, feats. 20 and 30) engaged with the main handle body; and wherein the eyelid lowering mechanism opens a lower eyelid upon engagement of the handle mechanism (Col. 2, lines 21-35).
Ehrlich does not disclose a cheek bumper attached to the handle mechanism.
As discussed above, Muir teaches an eye dropper system for administering medication to the eye (Figs. 3A-D, feat. 200; ¶0039-0044) comprising a cheek rest (220; ¶0040). Muir teaches that the cheek rest advantageously stabilizes the eye dropper system, maintains the proper distance from the eye, and minimizes the potential contamination of the dispenser tip contacting the facial skin (¶0016). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Ehrlich so that it includes a cheek bumper attached to the handle mechanism in order to stabilize the device, maintain the proper distance from the eye, and minimize the potential contamination of the device contacting the facial skin as taught by Muir.
Regarding claim 19, Ehrlich in view of Muir discloses the eyelid lowering mechanism of claim 10, and Ehrlich further discloses a method for creating an eye pocket using an eyelid lowering mechanism (Col. 2, lines 21-35), comprising the steps of: aligning the eyelid lowering mechanism using the positioning component (Col. 1, lines 6-48 and Col. 2, lines 21-26); and activating the eyelid lowering mechanism with the handle mechanism (Col. 2, lines 26-35).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ehrlich (US 4,386,608 A) in view of Muir et al. (US 2015/0051557 A1) and in further view of Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1).
Regarding claim 11, Ehrlich in view of Muir discloses the eyelid lowering mechanism of claim 10. As discussed above, Ehrlich further teaches that the mechanism is engaged with a device for administering fluid to the eye (Figs. 1-3, feat. 70; Col. 1, lines 53-59), but is silent with respect to the claimed device structure. As discussed above with respect to claim 8, Ehrlich teaches that the eyelid opening mechanism advantageously allows users to easily maintain the eyelids in an open position while delivering fluid to the eye (Col. 1, lines 6-12; Col. 2, lines 51-60).
As discussed above, Kelly teaches an eyedrop administrative device (Figs. 1-4, feat. 1; ¶0071-0075; Fig. 7; ¶0110) comprising: a main device body (Figs. 1-4, feat. 10; ¶0072); an eyedrop vessel for receiving and maintaining at least one eyedrop (Figs. 2a and 4, feats. 33 and 63; ¶0080-0081), the eyedrop vessel engaged with a trajectory mechanism (Figs. 2a, feats. 17, 18, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31; Fig. 7, feat. 102; ¶0076, 0095-099, 0110: pressurizing mechanism 17, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31 provide pressure to the fluid to expel the fluid out of orifice 18 or 102 at a trajectory); and the trajectory mechanism, engaged with the main device body (Fig. 2a, feat. 15-17, 21, 22, 24, 26-28, and 31; ¶0084: pressurizing mechanism part of trajectory mechanism is attached to body 10 by pivots 15 and 16), for expelling the eyedrop from the eyedrop vessel in an arced trajectory (Figs. 2a, feat. 18; Fig. 7, feat. 102; ¶0012-0013, 0073, 0110). Kelly teaches that such an eyedrop administrative device discharges a precise dose to the eye (¶0026). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Ehrlich in view of Muir so that the eyelid lowering mechanism is engaged with an eyedrop administrative device comprising: a main device body; an eyedrop vessel for receiving and maintaining at least one eyedrop, the eyedrop vessel engaged with a trajectory mechanism; and the trajectory mechanism, engaged with the main device body, for expelling the eyedrop from the eyedrop vessel in an arced trajectory in order to easily maintain the eyelids in an open, as taught by Ehrlich, while delivering a precise dose to the eye, as taught by Kelly.
Regarding claim 12, Ehrlich in view of Muir and in further view of Kelly discloses the mechanism of claim 10, and Ehrlich further discloses that the handle mechanism includes: a thumb grip (Figs. 1-3, feat. 40) engaged with the main handle body (20); a handle affixed to the main handle body and matingly engaged with the thumb grip (Figs. 1-3, feat. 30); and an interconnecting mechanism for interconnecting the thumb grip and the handle (Fig. 3, feat. 64).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelly (US 2014/0213989 A1) in view of Ehrlich (US 4,386,608 A), in further view of Muir et al. (US 2015/0051557 A1), and in further view of Wu (US 2010/0174248 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir discloses the method of claim 14, but does not disclose that the aligning step includes aligning the device with the eyedrop vessel positioned below a line of sight.
Wu teaches an eye-drop container (Figs. 1-4 and 6, feat. 20; ¶0040) with a dispenser cap (10) comprising an eyelid retractor portion (12; ¶0044-0047) which engages the lower eyelid to open a cul-de-sac, or pocket, and allows the eye-drop container to approach the eye from below the patient’s line of sight (¶0047). Wu teaches that the container being positioned below the patient’s line of sight helps to relieve the nervousness of the patient (¶0009 and 0047). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method disclosed by Kelly in view of Ehrlich and in further view of Muir so that the aligning step includes aligning the device with the eyedrop vessel positioned below a line of sight in order to relieve the nervousness of the patient as taught by Wu.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Barash (US 2019/0358083 A1) discloses an eye treatment apparatus comprising a cheek rest.
Pedersen (US 2012/0310184 A1) discloses an eye-washing apparatus with an eyelid lowering mechanism.
Collins (US 2009/0212133 A1) discloses an ophthalmic fluid delivery device with a cheek rest.
Py (US 5,133,702 A) discloses an ocular treatment apparatus with an eyelid lowering mechanism.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ARJUNA P CHATRATHI whose telephone number is (571)272-8063. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 5712727159. 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.
/ARJUNA P CHATRATHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/JESSICA ARBLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781