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. Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Invention I in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged. Applicant’s election of Species I(b) and Species II(a) in the reply filed on 03/11/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Drawings The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). The pressing portion is a motor, as claimed in Claim 8 No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claim s 1-9 are objected to because of the following informalities. Claim 1 should read –A continuous administration device configured to be indwelled in a living body for sustained release of a substance to be administered, the continuous administration device comprising: a cylindrical main body portion having an inner cavity; a plug slidable in the inner cavity in a liquid-tight manner; a pressing portion disposed on an upstream side with respect to the plug and configured to press the plug toward a downstream side with respect to the plug ; the substance to be administered, which is stored in the inner cavity on the downstream side with respect to the plug and released into the living body by the plug sliding toward the downstream side; and a sliding solid coating layer , that reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance of the plug, on at least one of an outer surface of the plug or a region where the plug slides in the inner cavity. — Claim 9 should read -- A continuous administration device configured to be indwelled in a living body for sustained release of a substance to be administered, the continuous administration device comprising: a cylindrical main body portion having an inner cavity; a plug slidable in the inner cavity in a liquid-tight manner; an osmotic engine disposed on an upstream side with respect to the plug and configured to press the plug toward a downstream side with respect to the plug ; the substance to be administered, which is stored in the inner cavity on the downstream side with respect to the plug and released into the living body by the plug sliding toward the downstream side; and a sliding solid coating layer , that reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance of the plug, on at least one of an outer surface of the plug or a region where the plug slides in the inner cavity. -- Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. Claims 1- 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lautenbach (U.S. PGPub 2004/0019345) , in view of Horiuchi (U.S. PGPub 201 0/0324501 ). As to Claim 1 , Lautenbach teaches a continuous administration device (20) configured to be indwelled in a living body for sustained release of a substance to be administered ( 24; Paragraph 0040; this is considered intended use –see end of paragraph for clarification), the continuous administration device (20) comprising: a cylindrical main body portion (22) having an inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1); a plug (30) slidable in (Paragraph 0025) the inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1) in a liquid-tight manner (Paragraph 0025); a pressing portion (26) disposed on (as shown in Figure 1) an upstream side (the top side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) with respect to (as shown in Figure 1) the plug (30) and configured to press (Paragraph 0025) the plug (30) toward a downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1); the substance to be administered (24), which is stored in (as shown in Figure 1) the inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1) on (as shown in Figure 1) the downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) with respect to (as shown in Figure 1) the plug (30) and released into (Paragraph 0025) the living body (intended use) by the plug (30) sliding toward (Paragraph 0025) the downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1); and a sliding solid coating layer (Paragraph 0056) … on at least one of an outer surface ( one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the outer surface of plug 30 is being coated in view of Paragraph 0056) of the plug (30) or a region where the plug slides in the inner cavity (since the first option was taught, the second option does not need to be taught) . The intention to use the device in an intended environment is not a patentable limitation, as a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.” Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647; MPEP 2114(II). Also see MPEP 2115. Lautenbach is silent on the function of the coating, so does not explicitly teach the sliding solid coating layer reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance of the plug. Horiuchi describes a means for reducing friction between plugs and main bodies , and teaches the sliding solid coating layer (3) reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance (Paragraph 0031) of the plug (1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the coating , as taught by Horiuchi , as the coating on the plug , as taught by Lautenbach , to provide a lower friction than the plug (Paragraph 0031). As to Claim 2, Lautenbach , as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, and continues to teach the sliding solid coating layer (Horiuchi 3) comprises a silicone-based resin composition (Horiuchi Paragraph 0033) or a fluorine-based resin film (since the first option was taught, the second option does not need to be taught). As to Claim 3 , Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 1-2, and continues to teach the sliding solid coating layer (Horiuchi 3) comprises the silicone-based resin composition (Horiuchi Paragraph 0033) ; and the silicone-based resin composition (Horiuchi Paragraph 0033) is formed with a composition containing a silicone-based resin formed with a condensate of reactive silicone having a terminal silanol group and having a siloxane bond derived from the silanol group, and does not contain solid fine particles (Horiuchi Paragraph 0033) . As to Claim 4, Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claims 1-3, and continues to teach the silicone-based resin composition (Horiuchi 3) further contains alkylalkoxysilane as a second silicone-based compound different from the silicone-based resin having the siloxane bond (Horiuchi Paragraph 0037) , aminoalkyl alkoxysilane as a third silicone-based compound, and further glycidoxyalkyl alkoxysilane as a fourth silicone-based compound (Horiuchi Paragraph 0039) . As to Claim 5 , Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, and continues to teach Lautenbach pressing portion 26 presses Lautenbach plug 30 at a desired rate (Lautenbach Paragraph 0053). Lautenbach is silent on the exact rate, so does not explicitly teach the pressing portion is configured to press the plug so as to slide at 1 mm/min or less. Lautenbach Paragraph 0053 continues to teach desired rate of the pressing portion and plug is a result-effective variable determined by the number of ribs 38 on plug 30 (see MPEP 2144.05(II)(B)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to press the plug so as to slide at 1 mm/min or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. (1955) As to Claim 6 , Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, and continues to teach Lautenbach pressing portion 26 presses Lautenbach plug 30 at a desired rate (Lautenbach Paragraph 0053). Lautenbach is silent on the exact rate, so does not explicitly teach the pressing portion is configured to press the plug so as to slide at 0.0 1 mm/min or less. Lautenbach Paragraph 0053 continues to teach desired rate of the pressing portion and plug is a result-effective variable determined by the number of ribs 38 on plug 30 (see MPEP 2144.05(II)(B)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to press the plug so as to slide at 0.0 1 mm/min or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. (1955) As to Claim 7 , Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, and continues to teach Lautenbach pressing portion 26 presses Lautenbach plug 30 at a desired rate (Lautenbach Paragraph 0053). Lautenbach is silent on the exact rate, so does not explicitly teach the pressing portion is configured to press the plug so as to slide at 0.00 1 5 mm/min or less. Lautenbach Paragraph 0053 continues to teach desired rate of the pressing portion and plug is a result-effective variable determined by the number of ribs 38 on plug 30 (see MPEP 2144.05(II)(B)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to press the plug so as to slide at 0.00 1 5 mm/min or less, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller , 105 USPQ 233. (1955) As to Claim 8, Lautenbach, as modified, teaches all the limitations of Claim 1, and continues to teach the pressing portion (Lautenbach 26) comprises an osmotic engine (Lautenbach Paragraph 0025) or a motor (since the first option was taught, the second option does not need to be taught). As to Claim 9 , Lautenbach teaches a continuous administration device (20) configured to be indwelled in a living body for sustained release of a substance to be administered ( 24; Paragraph 0040; this is considered intended use –see end of paragraph for clarification), the continuous administration device (20) comprising: a cylindrical main body portion (22) having an inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1); a plug (30) slidable in (Paragraph 0025) the inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1) in a liquid-tight manner (Paragraph 0025); an osmotic engine (26) disposed on (as shown in Figure 1) an upstream side (the top side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) with respect to (as shown in Figure 1) the plug (30) and configured to press (Paragraph 0025) the plug toward (30) a downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) ; the substance to be administered (24) , which is stored in (as shown in Figure 1) the inner cavity (the volume within 22, as viewed within Figure 1) on (as shown in Figure 1) the downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) with respect to (as shown in Figure 1) the plug (30) and released into (Paragraph 0025) the living body (intended use) by the plug (30) sliding toward (Paragraph 0025) the downstream side (the bottom side of plug 30, as viewed in Figure 1) ; and a sliding solid coating layer (Paragraph 0056) … on at least one of an outer surface (one of ordinary skill in the art would conclude the outer surface of plug 30 is being coated in view of Paragraph 0056) of the plug (30) or a region where the plug slides in the inner cavity (since the first option was taught, the second option does not need to be taught). The intention to use the device in an intended environment is not a patentable limitation, as a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim.” Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647; MPEP 2114(II). Also see MPEP 2115. Lautenbach is silent on the function of the coating, so does not explicitly teach the sliding solid coating layer reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance of the plug. Horiuchi describes a means for reducing friction between plugs and main bodies, and teaches the sliding solid coating layer (3) reduces initial sliding resistance and normal sliding resistance (Paragraph 0031) of the plug (1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the coating, as taught by Horiuchi, as the coating on the plug, as taught by Lautenbach, to provide a lower friction than the plug (Paragraph 0031). Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Alessi (2009/0202608) describes a similar device. Li (2014/0094770) describes the use of coatings to reduce friction between a piston and vial. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT DAVID BRANDT whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (303)297-4776 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday-Thursday 10-6, MT . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Bhisma Mehta can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 272-3383 . 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. /DAVID N BRANDT/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783