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 Amendments
The Amendment filed 7/31/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 7, 15, 17, 23, and 26 were amended. Thus, claims 1-28 are pending in the application.
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitations use a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “a flow management device” in claim 1 line 2, claim 15 line 2, and claim 23 lines 2-3, and “an accessory receiving mechanism” in claim 12 line 1.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
According to the Applicant’s specification para. [00019], “a flow management device” is being interpreted as an electronic solenoid valve, and equivalents thereof. According to the Applicant’s specification para. [00039], “an accessory receiving mechanism” is being interpreted as a lip, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitations to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 recites “with medium” in line 2, and is suggested to read --with a medium-- in order to ensure proper antecedent basis and be grammatically correct.
Claim 26 recites “with medium” in line 2, and is suggested to read --with a medium-- in order to ensure proper antecedent basis and be grammatically correct.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1, 3-7, 11-15, 17, 20, and 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Walker (US 5,247,962) in view of Yan (US 2012/0209243 A1) and Sermet et al. (US 2009/0020015 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Walker discloses a pod (unit 10 with shell 14 defining a recess 26) (Figs. 1-2; col. 3 lines 65-68) comprising: a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (gas service outlet 30 within the shell 14 and guard 132) (Figs. 1-2, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3); at least one fluidic coupling within the casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 inside shell 14 and guard 132 is fluidically attached to gas service outlet 30) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3), the at least one fluidic coupling configured to fluidically connect with a removable accessory insertable within the pod casing (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 fluidically connects to the gas service device 38, 40 insertable into the recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132; port 80 is threaded to receive an adapter 81 and the gas service device 38, 40, wherein threaded mechanisms are known to provide removability) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14).
Walker does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker device to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Walker does not disclose a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing.
However, Sermet teaches an oxygen reserve coupled to a filling station (Sermet; abstract) including a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (level sensor 12 measures the level of oxygen in tank 8 of reserve 2; sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; level sensor 12 is inside portable oxygen reserve 2 which is in turn housed within oxygen filling station 1) (Sermet; Figs. 1, 4; para. [0029]; para. [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker device to include a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing, as taught by Sermet, for the purpose of providing the system with an automatic feedback control loop to ensure the tank is filled with an acceptable supply of liquid oxygen (Sermet; para. [0042]).
With this modification, the modified Walker would thus teach a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (Sermet level sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; the Sermet level sensor 12 would be within the Walker gas service device 38, 40 which is in turn housed within the Walker recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132) (Walker, Figs. 1-3, and 9, col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, and 63-68, col. 5 lines 1-14; Sermet, Figs. 1 and 4, para. [0029], para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 3, the modified Walker teaches wherein the first state of the removable accessory is a level of a medium inside a canister of the removable accessory that is above a predefined level, and the second state of the canister is the level of the medium inside the canister falling below the predefined level (the level sensor 12 determines when the level in the tank 8 is above or below a threshold value, the first state being above and the second state being below) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Walker teaches when the sensor detects the change from the first state to the second state, the sensor sends a signal to a control interface of the pod for performing at least one function (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 falls below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would supply the tank 8 with liquid oxygen, thereby increasing the liquid oxygen level) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Walker teaches wherein the at least one function is returning the removable accessory to the first state (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would supply the tank 8 with liquid oxygen to increasing the liquid oxygen level back above the threshold value) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Walker teaches wherein the at least one function is an injection of a solution into a canister of the removable accessory storing a medium (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would inject more liquid oxygen into the tank 8) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Walker teaches wherein the at least one function is filling a canister of the removable accessory with medium (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would inject additional liquid oxygen into the tank 8) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Walker teaches wherein, when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing, the at least one fluidic coupling mates with at least one corresponding fluidic coupling of the removable accessory within the casing (gas service device 38, 40 is insertable into the recess 26 of space defined by the shell 14 and guard 132; the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and adapter 81 fluidically mates with the tubing of device 38, 40 at adapter 81) (Walker; Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3), and fluid managed by the flow management device flows through the removable accessory and in or out of an outlet of the removable accessory that is fluidically connected to the at least one corresponding fluidic coupling (the Yan solenoid pressure regulating valve would manage the Walker fluid flow; fluid flows from the Walker gas service device 38, 40 to or from a patient, and so gas service device 38, 40 has an outlet; the Walker mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and adapter 81 fluidically connects with gas service device 38, 40) (Walker, Figs. 1-3 and 9, col. 4 lines 3-50, and 63-68, col. 5 lines 1-14, col. 6 lines 49-68, col. 7 lines 1-3; Yan, para. [0112]).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Walker teaches further comprising an accessory receiving mechanism located within the pod casing, the accessory receiving mechanism facilitating an insertion and fluidic coupling of the accessory within the pod casing (the port 80 and/or the adapter 81 is within the recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132; the port 80 and/or adapter 81 is used to fluidly connect and insert the gas service device 38, 40 into the recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132) (Walker; Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 5 lines 7-14).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Walker teaches further comprising a cover that at least partially covers an interior of the pod casing (picture 130 can conceal the unit 10 with shell 14 and recess 26) (Walker; Figs. 1-2; col. 6 lines 29-35).
Regarding claim 14, the modified Walker teaches wherein the pod casing is configured to be disposed at least partially within a wall cavity (unit 10 with shell 14 is disposed inside a recess in a wall of the medical facility) (Walker; Figs. 1-2; col. 3 lines 54-64).
Regarding claim 15, Walker discloses a system comprising: a pod (unit 10 with shell 14 defining a recess 26) (Figs. 1-2; col. 3 lines 65-68) comprising a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (gas service outlet 30 within the shell 14 and guard 132) (Figs. 1-2, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3), at least one fluidic coupling within the casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 inside shell 14 and guard 132 is fluidically attached to gas service outlet 30) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3), the at least one fluidic coupling configured to fluidically connect with a removable accessory insertable within the pod casing (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 fluidically connects to the gas service device 38, 40 insertable into the recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132; port 80 is threaded to receive an adapter 81 and the device 38, 40, wherein threaded mechanisms are known to provide removability) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14); the removable accessory for use with the pod, the removable accessory comprising: a body portion having a first side and a second side, and at least one fluidic coupling disposed on the body portion (gas service device 38, 40 has a body with a top and bottom side, with tubing to fluidically connect it to adapter 81 on its body) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14).
Walker does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker device to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Walker does not disclose a canister operably attached to the body portion, configured to store a medium; a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the canister when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing; and a control interface electrically connected to the sensor and configured to receive a signal from the sensor indicating the change.
However, Sermet teaches an oxygen reserve coupled to a filling station (Sermet; abstract) including a canister operably attached to the body portion, configured to store a medium (the body of the reserve 2 has a tank 8 operably attached, wherein the tank 8 is for storing liquid oxygen) (Sermet; Figs. 2, 4; para. [0042]); a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the canister when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (level sensor 12 measures the level of oxygen in tank 8 of reserve 2; sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; level sensor 12 is inside portable oxygen reserve 2 which is in turn housed within oxygen filling station 1) (Sermet; Figs. 1, 4; para. [0029]; para. [0042]); and a control interface electrically connected to the sensor and configured to receive a signal from the sensor indicating the change (automatic feedback control loop 13 uses electronic signals from the level sensor 12 to indicate the change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker device to include a canister operably attached to the body portion, configured to store a medium; a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the canister when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing; and a control interface electrically connected to the sensor and configured to receive a signal from the sensor indicating the change, as taught by Sermet, for the purpose of providing the system with an automatic feedback control loop to ensure a tank is filled with an acceptable supply of liquid oxygen (Sermet; para. [0042]).
With this modification, the modified Walker would thus teach a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the canister when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (Sermet level sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; the Sermet level sensor 12 would be within the Walker gas service device 38, 40 which is in turn housed within the Walker recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132) (Walker, Figs. 1-3, and 9, col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, and 63-68, col. 5 lines 1-14; Sermet, Figs. 1 and 4, para. [0029], para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Walker teaches wherein the first state of the canister is a level of a medium inside the canister that is above a predefined level, and the second state of the canister is the level of the medium inside the canister falling below the predefined level (the level sensor 12 determines when the level in the tank 8 is above or below a threshold value, the first state being above and the second state being below) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 20, the modified Walker teaches the invention as previously claimed, including further comprising to inject a solution into the interior of the canister in response to a signal from the control interface based on the sensor detecting the change (automatic feedback control loop 13 used to inject liquid oxygen into the inside of the tank 8 in response to a signal detecting a change from the level being above a threshold value to below it) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]), but does not teach a pump fluidically connected to an interior of the canister, the pump electrically connected to the control interface.
However, Yan further teaches a pump, the pump electrically connected to the control interface (a pressure modifying device such as a pump is used to dispense the liquid or fluid; pressure modifying device 125 is controlled by a computer or user interface) (Yan; para. [0077]; para. [0111]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified Walker device to include a pump fluidically connected to an interior of the canister, the pump electrically connected to the control interface, as taught by Yam, for the purpose of enabling the fluid to be dispensed in a controlled manner (Yan; para. [0077]).
With this modification, the modified Walker device would thus teach a pump fluidically connected to an interior of the canister (Sermet automatic feedback control loop 13 would use a Yan pump to inject liquid oxygen into the inside of the tank 8 in response to a signal detecting a change from the level being above a threshold value to below it) (Sermet, Fig. 4, para. [0042]; Yan, para. [0077]).
Regarding claim 22, the modified Walker teaches further comprising a pump fluidically connected to an interior of the canister, the pump electrically connected to the control interface and configured to add an additional medium to the interior of the canister in response to a signal from the control interface based on the sensor detecting the change (Sermet automatic feedback control loop 13 would use a Yan pump to inject liquid oxygen into the inside of the tank 8 in response to a signal detecting a change from the level being above a threshold value to below it; the Yan pump would be electrically connected to the Sermet automatic feedback control loop 13) (Sermet, Fig. 4, para. [0042]; Yan, para. [0077], para. [0111]).
Regarding claim 23, Walker discloses a method comprising: the pod comprising a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (using a gas service outlet 30 within the shell 14 and guard 132) (Figs. 1-2, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3), at least one fluidic coupling within the pod casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 inside shell 14 and guard 132 is fluidically attached to gas service outlet 30) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14; col. 6 lines 49-68; col. 7 lines 1-3) and configured to fluidically connect with the removable accessory (the mechanism including the gas conduit adapter 36, first conduit member 60, gas conduit 68, second conduit member 70, gas conduit 78, and/or adapter 81 fluidically connects to the gas service device 38, 40 insertable into the recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132; port 80 is threaded to receive an adapter 81 and the device 38, 40, wherein threaded mechanisms are known to provide removability) (Figs. 1-3, 9; col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, 63-68; col. 5 lines 1-14).
Walker does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker device to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Walker does not disclose monitoring a removable accessory inserted into a pod; a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by a sensor of the pod the sensor housed within the pod casing; and performing a function by a control interface of the pod, in response to the detecting.
However, Sermet teaches using an oxygen reserve coupled to a filling station (Sermet; abstract) including monitoring a removable accessory inserted into a pod; a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by a sensor of the pod the sensor housed within the pod casing (level sensor 12 measures the level of oxygen in tank 8 of reserve 2; sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; level sensor 12 is inside portable oxygen reserve 2 which is in turn housed within oxygen filling station 1) (Sermet; Figs. 1, 4; para. [0029]; para. [0042]); and performing a function by a control interface of the pod, in response to the detecting (automatic feedback control loop 13 uses electronic signals from the level sensor 12 to indicate the change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Walker method to include monitoring a removable accessory inserted into a pod; a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by a sensor of the pod the sensor housed within the pod casing; and performing a function by a control interface of the pod, in response to the detecting, as taught by Sermet, for the purpose of providing the system with an automatic feedback control loop to ensure a tank is filled with an acceptable supply of liquid oxygen (Sermet; para. [0042]).
With this modification, the modified Walker would thus teach a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by a sensor of the pod the sensor housed within the pod casing (Sermet level sensor 12 determines if the level in the tank 8 is below or above a threshold value, and so can detect a change in the level of oxygen in tank 8 to above or below the threshold value; the Sermet level sensor 12 would be within the Walker gas service device 38, 40 which is in turn housed within the Walker recess 26 of shell 40 and guard 132) (Walker, Figs. 1-3, and 9, col. 4 lines 3-16, 21-50, and 63-68, col. 5 lines 1-14; Sermet, Figs. 1 and 4, para. [0029], para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Walker teaches wherein the function is returning the removable accessory to the first state (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would supply the tank 8 with oxygen to increase the oxygen level back above the threshold value) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Walker teaches wherein the function is injecting a solution into a canister of the removable accessory storing a medium (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would inject more oxygen into the tank 8) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Walker teaches wherein the function is filling a canister of the removable accessory with medium (if the level sensor 12 determines the level in the tank 8 has dropped to below a threshold value, the automatic feedback control loop 13 would inject additional oxygen into the tank 8) (Sermet; Fig. 4; para. [0042]).
Claims 1-2, 4, 8, 11-13, 15-16, 18-19, 21, 23, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lina et al. (US 2004/0006319 A1) in view of Yan.
Regarding claim 1, Lina discloses a pod (wound closure apparatus) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; abstract) comprising: a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (the housing of apparatus 10 contains vacuum pump 84) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; abstract; paras. [0061-0062]); at least one fluidic coupling within the casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device, the at least one fluidic coupling configured to fluidically connect with a removable accessory insertable within the pod casing (port 45 in the apparatus 10 fluidly connects the canister 19 and vacuum pump 84; canister 19 is inserted into and removed from the housing of apparatus 10 in the recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; paras. [0061-0062]); and a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (fill sensor 64 inside the apparatus 10 housing to detect when the canister 19 changes from a non-filled state to a filled state when the canister 19 is in the apparatus 10 recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; para. [0061]; para. [0068]).
Lina does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lina method to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Lina teaches wherein the first state of the removable accessory is a level of a medium inside a canister of the removable accessory that is below a predefined level, and the second state of the removable accessory is the level of the medium inside the canister exceeding the predefined level (fill sensor 64 detects when the canister 19 changes from a non-filled state to a filled state by determining when the fluid inside has reached a certain level; below the level is the non-filled state and above the level is the filled state) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0068]).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Lina teaches when the sensor detects the change from the first state to the second state, the sensor sends a signal to a control interface of the pod for performing at least one function (when the fill sensor 64 detects the canister 19 is filled, the fill sensor 64 outputs a signal to microcontroller 72 to deactivate the pump motor 83 and fan 74 while activating the alarm 95) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0068]; para. [0087]).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Lina teaches wherein the at least one function is notifying a clinician with an audible notification (control system 70 with microcontroller 72 activates an alarm 95, which is audible) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A, 9; para. [0085]; para. [0087]).
Regarding claim 11, the modified Lina teaches wherein, when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing, the at least one fluidic coupling mates with at least one corresponding fluidic coupling of the removable accessory within the casing (port 45 in the apparatus 10 mates with the filter cap 49 of the canister 19 within the housing of apparatus 10; canister 19 is inserted into and removed from the housing of apparatus 10 in the recess 18) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-8; paras. [0061-0062]; para. [0065]), and fluid managed by the flow management device flows through the removable accessory and in or out of an outlet of the removable accessory that is fluidically connected to the at least one corresponding fluidic coupling (vacuum pump 84 manages air out of the canister 19 via the fluidically coupled outlet 44, filter cap 49, and port 45) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-8; paras. [0061-0062]; para. [0065]).
Regarding claim 12, the modified Lina teaches further comprising an accessory receiving mechanism located within the pod casing, the accessory receiving mechanism facilitating an insertion and fluidic coupling of the accessory within the pod casing (keys 29, 30 inside the apparatus 10 housing on the side walls 100, 101 that aid in aligning the canister 19 within the chamber 18, thereby facilitating the insertion and fluidic coupling of the canister to the apparatus 10) (Lina; Fig. 1; para. [0040]).
Regarding claim 13, the modified Lina teaches further comprising a cover that at least partially covers an interior of the pod casing (top wall 23 and/or handle 13 covers the interior of apparatus 10) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A; paras. [0039-0040]).
Regarding claim 15, Lina discloses a system (wound closure apparatus) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; abstract) comprising: a pod comprising a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (apparatus 10 has a housing that contains a vacuum pump 84) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; abstract; paras. [0061-0062]), at least one fluidic coupling within the casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device, the at least one fluidic coupling configured to fluidically connect with a removable accessory insertable within the pod casing (port 45 in the apparatus 10 fluidly connects the canister 19 and vacuum pump 84; canister 19 is inserted into and removed from the housing of apparatus 10 in the recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; paras. [0061-0062]); the removable accessory for use with the pod, the removable accessory comprising: a body portion having a first side and a second side (canister 19 used in apparatus 10 has a filter carrier 48 with two sides) (Figs. 1, 6-8; para. [0063]), at least one fluidic coupling disposed on the body portion (outlet 44 is on the filter carrier 48) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0063]), and a canister operably attached to the body portion, configured to store a medium (the rectangular chamber of canister 19 to store blood defined by the side walls 20, 21, top wall 23, bottom wall 22, back wall 22, and front wall 25 is attached to the filter carrier 48) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0042]); a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the canister when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (fill sensor 64 inside the apparatus 10 housing to detect when the canister 19 changes from a non-filled state to a filled state when the canister 19 is in the apparatus 10 recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; para. [0061]; para. [0068]); and a control interface electrically connected to the sensor and configured to receive a signal from the sensor indicating the change (control system 70 provides a signal to microcontroller 72 after receiving a signal from fill sensor 64 that the canister 19 is filled, at which point the pump motor 83 and fan 74 are deactivated and an alarm 95 is activated) (Figs. 1, 6-6A, 9; para. [0087]).
Lina does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lina method to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Regarding claim 16, the modified Lina teaches wherein the first state of the canister is a level of a medium inside the canister that is below a predefined level, and the second state of the removable accessory is the level of the medium inside the canister exceeding the predefined level (fill sensor 64 detects when the canister 19 changes from a non-filled state to a filled state by determining when the fluid inside has reached a certain level; below the level is the non-filled state and above the level is the filled state) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0068]).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Lina teaches wherein the control interface sends a notification in response to receiving the signal from the sensor (when the fill sensor 64 detects the canister 19 is filled, the fill sensor 64 outputs a signal to microcontroller 72 to activate the alarm 95) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0068]; para. [0087]).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Lina teaches wherein the notification is an audible alarm (control system 70 with microcontroller 72 activates an alarm 95, which is audible) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A, 9; para. [0085]; para. [0087]).
Regarding claim 23, Lina discloses a method comprising: monitoring a removable accessory inserted into a pod (using a fill sensor 64 to detect when the canister 19 is filled; canister 19 is inserted into and removed from the housing of apparatus 10 in the recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; para. [0061]; para. [0068]), the pod comprising a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (the housing of apparatus 10 contains vacuum pump 84) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; abstract; paras. [0061-0062]), at least one fluidic coupling within the pod casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device and configured to fluidically connect with the removable accessory (port 45 in the apparatus 10 fluidly connects the canister 19 and vacuum pump 84) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; paras. [0061-0062]), and a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by the sensor housed within the pod casing (fill sensor 64 inside the apparatus 10 housing to detect when the canister 19 changes from a non-filled state to a filled state when the canister 19 is in the apparatus 10 recess 18) (Figs. 1, 6-6A; para. [0043]; para. [0061]; para. [0068]); and performing a function by a control interface of the pod, in response to the detecting (control system 70 provides a signal to microcontroller 72 after receiving a signal from fill sensor 64 that the canister 19 is filled, at which point the pump motor 83 and fan 74 are deactivated and an alarm 95 is activated) (Figs. 1, 6-6A, 9; para. [0087]).
Lina does not disclose a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) as detailed above.
However, Yan discloses a fluid delivery device (Yan; abstract) including a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve (pressure regulating valves can include solenoids, and can be opened and closed by a computer thereby requiring electricity) (Yan; para. [0112]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lina method to include a flow management device as interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e. an electronic solenoid valve, as taught by Yan, for the purpose of enabling the device to control the amount of pressure that a cartridge can receive from pressure modifying devices (Yan; para. [0112]).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Lina teaches wherein the function is notifying a clinician with an audible alarm (control system 70 with microcontroller 72 activates an alarm 95, which is audible) (Lina; Figs. 1, 6-6A, 9; para. [0085]; para. [0087]).
Claims 5, 9, 21, 24, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lina in view of Yan as applied to claims 1, 15, and 23 above, and further in view of Combs et al. (US 2022/0213885 A1).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Lina teaches the invention as previously claimed, but does not teach wherein the at least one function is returning the removable accessory to the first state.
However, Combs teaches a system for managing liquid waste (Combs; abstract) including wherein the at least one function is returning the removable accessory to the first state (transfer container 140 can be drained manually or via drain 260, drain pump 262, and drain line 184; draining transfer container 140 would have the transfer container 140 return from a full state back to an empty state) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lina removable accessory to include a drain, drain pump, and drain line such that the at least one function is returning the removable accessory to the first state, as taught by Combs, for the purpose of reducing or eliminating the need to remove the removable accessory for emptying (Combs; para. [0109]).
Regarding claim 9, the modified Lina teaches wherein the at least one function is an evacuation of a canister of the removable accessory to remove a medium from the canister (draining transfer container 140 to remove the liquid inside) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]).
Regarding claim 21, the modified Lina teaches further comprising a vacuum pump fluidically connected to an interior of the canister (drain pump 262 fluidly connected to transfer container 140) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]), the vacuum electrically connected to the control interface and configured to evacuate the interior of the canister in response to a signal from the control interface based on the sensor detecting the change (drain pump 262 is used to drain the transfer container 140 to remove the liquid inside in response to the signal from the liquid level sensor 266 detecting a predefined level of liquid has been reached; liquid level sensor 266 can communicate with the drain pump 262 indirectly through a system controller, which would then activate the drain pump 262 when signaled) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Lina teaches wherein the function is returning the removable accessory to the first state (draining transfer container 140 would have the transfer container 140 return from a full state back to an empty state) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Lina teaches wherein the function is evacuating a canister of the removable accessory to remove a medium from the canister (draining transfer container 140 to remove the liquid inside) (Combs; Figs. 1-18; paras. [0133-0134]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lina in view of Yan as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Meijer (US 4,920,336).
Regarding claim 10, the modified Lina teaches the invention as previously claimed, but does not teach wherein the sensor is an optical sensor housed within the pod.
However, Meijer teaches a method and apparatus for monitoring the contents of a container (Meijer; abstract) wherein the sensor is an optical sensor housed within the pod (light source 44 and light sensor 48 used to determine when the fluid in drip chamber 10 is or is not above a predetermined level; light source 44 and light sensor 48 are in the lower retaining arms 28, 30, respectively) (Meijer; Figs. 1-4; col. 5 lines 51-56; col. 6 lines 13-19, 35-68).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Lina apparatus by substituting Lina’s sensor for an optical sensor, such that the sensor is an optical sensor housed within the pod, as taught by Meijer, for the purpose of producing a monitor that does not require an intimate fit with the exterior of the container and so is operable with containers of differing dimensions, as well as a monitor that is not susceptible to erroneous functioning due to light ambient conditions (Miejer; col. 2 lines 60-68).
Double Patenting
Claims 1, 4, 11, and 23 of this application is patentably indistinct from claim 17 of Application No. 18/472,838, hereinafter ‘838. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.78(f), when two or more applications filed by the same applicant or assignee contain patentably indistinct claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their retention during pendency in more than one application. Applicant is required to either cancel the patentably indistinct claims from all but one application or maintain a clear line of demarcation between the applications. See MPEP § 822.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 4, 11, and 23 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 17 of copending Application No. 18/472,838, hereinafter ‘838 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
Regarding claim 1, ‘838 discloses a pod comprising: a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (‘838; claim 17); at least one fluidic coupling within the casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device (‘838; claim 17), the at least one fluidic coupling configured to fluidically connect with a removable accessory insertable within the pod casing (at least one fluidic coupling fluidically connects with the at least one fluidic coupling within the casing of the pod as a function of the removable accessory) (‘838; claim 17); and a sensor housed within the pod casing and configured to detect a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing (a sensor configured to detect a change in pressure at the outlet of the removable accessory; a change in pressure means a first pressure state has gone to a second pressure state; the removable accessory with the sensor is inserted into the pod) (‘838; claim 17).
Regarding claim 4, ‘838 discloses when the sensor detects the change from the first state to the second state, the sensor sends a signal to a control interface of the pod for performing at least one function (a control interface receives the signal from the sensor indicating the change in pressure, and then the control interface sends a control signal to perform the function of stopping a gas from flowing through the outlet) (‘838; claim 17).
Regarding claim 11, ‘838 discloses wherein, when the removable accessory is inserted within the pod casing, the at least one fluidic coupling mates with at least one corresponding fluidic coupling of the removable accessory within the casing, and fluid managed by the flow management device flows through the removable accessory and in or out of an outlet of the removable accessory that is fluidically connected to the at least one corresponding fluidic coupling (the removable accessory has at least one fluidic coupling fluidically connecting with the at least one fluidic coupling withing the casing of the pod as a function of the removable accessory being inserted into the pod; the fluidic couplings are fluidically connected to the flow management device, which controls when a gas flows or stops flowing through the outlet of the removable accessory) (‘838; claim 17).
Regarding claim 23, ‘838 discloses a method comprising: monitoring a removable accessory inserted into a pod (using a sensor at the outlet of the removable accessory to detect a change in pressure) (‘838; claim 17), the pod comprising a flow management device disposed within a pod casing (‘838; claim 17), at least one fluidic coupling within the pod casing that is fluidically connected to the flow management device and configured to fluidically connect with the removable accessory (at least one fluidic coupling fluidically connects with the at least one fluidic coupling within the casing of the pod as a function of the removable accessory) (‘838; claim 17), and a sensor housed within the pod casing; detecting a change from a first state to a second state of the removable accessory, by the sensor housed within the pod casing (a sensor configured to detect a change in pressure at the outlet of the removable accessory; a change in pressure means a first pressure state has gone to a second pressure state; the removable accessory with the sensor is inserted into the pod) (‘838; claim 17); and performing a function by a control interface of the pod, in response to the detecting (a control interface receives a signal from the sensors indicating the pressure change and sends a control signal to the flow management device) (‘838; claim 17).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/31/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 10 in the “Double Patenting” section of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant states that they will address the double patenting rejections once they are the only remaining rejections. Thus, the Examiner is maintaining the double patenting rejections as detailed above.
On pages 11-12 in the “35 U.S.C. 112(b)” and “35 U.S.C. 112(d)” sections of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) and 35 U.S.C. 112(d) rejections of the previous office action. The Examiner agrees, and has thus withdrawn those rejections.
On pages 13-16 in the “35 U.S.C. 102” section of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) rejections of the previous office action. The Examiner agrees, and has thus withdrawn those rejections. However, the newly amended claims are still rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as detailed above.
On page 17 in the second paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that the combination of Walker, Yan, and Sermet does not teach the limitation of a sensor housed within the pod casing, as the Serment sensor is part of the reserve 2 (i.e. the removable accessory). However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Serment does teach this limitation, as its level sensor 12 is inside the portable oxygen reserve 2 (i.e. the removable accessory) which is in turn inserted into and housed within the oxygen filling station 1 (i.e. the pod casing) (Sermet; Figs. 1, 4; para. [0029]; para. [0042]). Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
On page 17 in the last paragraph to page 18 in the first paragraph of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that Walker’s gas service device of flow meter 40 has no tank, canister, or medium whose state could be sensed, and so the combination with Sermet’s sensor is impermissible hindsight. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Walker’s flow meter 40 is itself a container meant to hold oxygen (flow meter 40 used to dispense compressed air/oxygen) (Walker; Fig. 9; col. 3 lines 16-22; col. 4 lines 21-29). As such, the Walker flow meter 40 can be modified in view of Serment to include a level sensor for oxygen. Thus, the current prior art of record can still be used to teach the Applicant’s claimed invention.
Applicant’s arguments on page 18 in the last paragraph to page 19 in the last paragraph with respect the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections of the previous office action using Walker in view of Yan and Carr have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection with new additional Lina reference being used in the current rejection as discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-4:00.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at 571-272-5139. 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.
/JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
