DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
2. This office action is responsive to the preliminary amendment filed on 09/27/2023. As directed by the amendment: claims 6-7, 9-10, 12-13, 15-18, 22-25, and 28-29 have been amended, no claims have been cancelled, and no claims have been added. Thus, claims 1-29 are presently pending in this application.
Claim Interpretation
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. 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 limitation(s) uses 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 limitation(s) is/are:
“positioning and stabilising structure” in claim 1 line 10 is interpreted as a strap, harness, headgear or the like according to specification paragraph [042]-[043].
“connecting mechanism” in claim 1 line 18 and claim 3 line 7 is interpreted as a first and second cuff and a first and second collar or the like according to specification paragraph [149]. “Connecting mechanism” is not invoked for claim 4 as adequate structure is provided.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/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 limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
6. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
7. Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 2, the limitation “the patient interface is one of the following mask types: nasal cushion, nasal pillows, ora-nasal mask, or a full-face mask” in lines 1-3 is indefinite because it is unclear if the “patient interface” is part of the device. In independent claim 1, the “patient interface” is not positively claimed (it is preceded by “and/or”), but seems to be positively claimed in claim 2. It is recommended to replace “the respiratory therapy system of claim 1” with –the respiratory therapy system of claim 1, comprising the patient interface—to clarify that the “patient interface” is definitively part of the device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
8. 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.
9. 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
11. Claim(s) 1, 3-11, 13, 15, and 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(2) as being anticipated by Bahr (US 2001/0017134).
Regarding claim 1, Bahr discloses a respiratory therapy system (fig. 3), the respiratory therapy system comprising:
a respiratory pressure therapy (RPT) device (fig. 3, ventilator 40 acts as a fluid transfer device to provide gas to a patient, see [0021]);
wherein the respiratory therapy system also comprises an air circuit (fig. 3, conduits 2 and 22), the air circuit comprising:
two or more lengths of tubing (fig. 3, conduits 2 and 22), wherein each length of tubing has an upstream end and a downstream end (fig. 3, conduits 2 and 22 have an upstream end defined as the end closer to the ventilator 40 and a downstream end defined closer to the patient), and wherein each length of tubing includes one or more electrical wires (fig. 2, shows an embodiment of conduit 22 where cable 36 communicates between a sensor 28 and electrical contacts 30a and 30b; fig. 1, shows an embodiment of conduit 2 where electrical contacts 18a-b and 12a-b are connected via cable 14); and
a connecting mechanism (fig. 3, male interface 6 and interface 34 which is a female connector), wherein the connecting mechanism is configured to connect a downstream end of one of the two or more lengths of tubing fluidly and electrically to an upstream end of another of the two or more lengths of tubing (fig. 3, the downstream end of conduit 2 connects to the upstream end of conduit 22 via interfaces 6 and 34).
Regarding claim 3, Bahr discloses an air circuit for use in a respiratory therapy system (fig. 3), wherein the air circuit is configured to be connected to a respiratory pressure therapy device at a first end (fig. 3, ventilator 40) and connected to a patient interface at a second end (fig. 3, endotracheal tube 42), the air circuit comprising: two or more lengths of tubing (fig. 3, conduits 2 and 22), wherein each length of tubing has an upstream end and a downstream end (fig. 3, upstream end located closer to the ventilator and downstream end located closer to the endotracheal tube), and wherein each length of tubing includes one or more electrical wire(s) (fig. 2, shows an embodiment of conduit 22 where cable 36 communicates between a sensor 28 and electrical contacts 30a and 30b; fig. 1, shows an embodiment of conduit 2 where electrical contacts 18a-b and 12a-b are connected via cable 14); and a connecting mechanism (fig. 3, male interface 6 and interface 34 which is a female connector), wherein the connecting mechanism is configured to connect a downstream end of one of the two or more lengths of tubing fluidly and electrically to an upstream end of another of the two or more lengths of tubing (fig. 3, the downstream end of conduit 2 connects to the upstream end of conduit 22 via interfaces 6 and 34).
Regarding claim 4, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on the connecting mechanism comprises a first cuff (fig. 1, the opening to conduit 2 and internal surface of external mating surface 10) and first collar (fig. 1, external mating surface 10 of male interface 6) for a downstream end of a first length of tubing (fig. 3, male interface 6 is located downstream of ventilator 40) and a second cuff (fig. 2, internal mating surface 32) and a second collar (fig. 2, female interface 34) for an upstream end of a second length of tubing (fig. 3, female interface 34 is located upstream relative to endotracheal tube 42).
Regarding claim 5, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein first cuff includes a mouth (fig. 1, the opening to conduit 2 located near male interface 6), an inner surface of the mouth forming part of a flow path through the first length of tubing (fig. 1, the inner surface of male interface 6 forms part of conduit 6 which allows gas to pass through).
Regarding claim 6, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein the second cuff includes a mouth (fig. 2, the opening to conduit 22 located near female interface 34), an inner surface of the mouth forming part of a flow path through the second length of tubing (fig. 2, the inner surface of female interface 34 forms part of conduit 6 which allows gas to pass through).
Regarding claim 7, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein the first cuff is configured with at least one electrical contact (fig. 1, electrical contacts 12a and 12b) that is electrically connected to the one or more electrical wire(s) of the first length of tubing ([0019] states that contacts 12a and 12b are connected to cable 14).
Regarding claim 8, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 7 and further reads on wherein the first cuff is configured with one electrical contact for each of the one or more electrical wire(s) of the first length of tubing ([0019] states that each of the electrical contacts is connected with respective electrical wires located in two-core cable 14).
Regarding claim 9, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 7 and further reads on wherein the electrical connection between the at least one electrical contact of the first cuff and the electrical wire(s) of the first length of tubing comprises at least one conductor path (fig. 1, the contacts electrically coupled to wires in 14 form a conductor path due to them forming an electrical signal transmission path, see [0019]).
Regarding claim 10, the device of Bahr read on the limitations of claim 7 and further reads on wherein the second cuff is configured with a contact surface (fig. 2, electrical contacts 30a and 30b) that, in use, is received or otherwise contacted by the electrical contact of the first cuff ([0023] states that when male interface 6 is connected with female interface 34, an electrical connection is established between electrical contacts 12a, 12b, 30a, and 30b).
Regarding claim 11, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 10 and further reads on wherein the contact surface of the second cuff (fig. 2, electrical contacts 30a and 30b) is electrically connected to at least one or more electrical wire(s) of the second length of tubing (fig. 2, electrical contacts 30a and 30b are connected to cable 36 to form an electrical signal transmission path, see [0020]).
Regarding claim 13, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein the first collar comprises a first end and a second end (fig. 3, male interface 6 has a first end located closer to ventilator 40 and a second end located closer to endotracheal tube 42 where an opening to conduit 2 is located).
Regarding claim 15, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 13 and further reads on wherein the second end of the first collar is configured with a mouth (fig. 1, male interface 6 has a mouth where the opening to conduit 2 is located, where the second end is closer to the nearest opening of conduit 2).
Regarding claim 25, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein an exterior surface of the first collar comprises a first gripping surface (fig. 1, defined as the outer surface of male interface 6 which can be gripped) and an exterior surface of the second collar comprises a second gripping surface (fig. 2, defined as the outer surface of female interface 34 which can be gripped).
Regarding claim 26, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 25 and further reads on wherein the first gripping surface (fig. 3, outer surface of male interface 6) and second gripping surface (fig. 3, outer surface of female interface 34) are arranged to be continuous in a first condition (where a first condition is the male and female interfaces are connected [0019] states that they form a gas seal) and discontinuous in a second condition (fig. 3, when interfaces 6 and 34 are disconnected, a gas seal is not formed).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
12. 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.
13. Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahr as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Dantanarayana et al. (US 2018/0264222).
Regarding claim 2, Bahr further discloses that the device is to fluidly connect to a patient ([0002], [0004]) via an endotracheal tube (fig. 3, 42), but does not expressly disclose:
a patient interface for delivery of a flow of pressurized air from the RPT device, via an air circuit, to an entrance of a patient's airways, the patient interface comprising:
a plenum chamber;
a seal-forming structure provided to the plenum chamber;
at least one connection port configured to receive the flow of air from the air circuit and to deliver the flow of air to the entrance of the patient's airways via the seal- forming structure;
one or more positioning and stabilizing structures configured to provide a force to hold the seal-forming structure in a therapeutically effective position on a patient's head in use;
wherein the patient interface is one of the following mask types: nasal cushion, nasal pillows, ora-nasal mask, or a full-face mask.
However, Dantanarayana teaches of a CPAP system that uses a patient interface for gas delivery (fig. 3A, patient interface 3000).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the endotracheal tube of Bahr with the patient interface of Dantanarayana as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of providing breathing gas to a patient.
The modified device of Bahr reads on: a patient interface for delivery of a flow of pressurized air from the RPT device (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, patient interface 3000), via an air circuit (Bahr fig. 3, conduits 2 and 22), to an entrance of a patient's airways (Dantanarayana [0264] states the patient interface supplies air to the airways), the patient interface comprising:
a plenum chamber (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, plenum chamber 3200);
a seal-forming structure provided to the plenum chamber (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, seal-forming structure 3100);
at least one connection port configured to receive the flow of air from the air circuit and to deliver the flow of air to the entrance of the patient's airways via the seal- forming structure (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, connection port 3600);
one or more positioning and stabilising structures configured to provide a force to hold the seal-forming structure in a therapeutically effective position on a patient's head in use (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, positioning and stabilizing structure 3300);
wherein the patient interface is one of the following mask types: nasal cushion (Dantanarayana fig. 3A, shows a patient interface 3000 in the form of a nasal mask).
14. Claim(s) 12, 14, 16, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahr as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Edirisuriya et al. (US 2004/0239001).
Regarding claim 12, Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4, but does not disclose the first collar is configured to fit over the first cuff.
However, Edirisuriya teaches of a method of connecting end connectors to a delivery conduit by placing a sleeve over a conduit and then over molding a connector (figs. 4-6) to prevent damage to the conduit ([0006]-[0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the male interface of Bahr with the sleeve and over molding connection as taught by Edirisuriya between the male and female interfaces and the conduit underneath to prevent damage to the conduit during manufacturing (Edirisuriya [0006]-[0009]).
The modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein the first collar (Bahr fig. 3, male interface 6) is configured to fit over (Edirisuriya figs. 4-6, sleeve 22 and over molding fits a connector over a tube) the first cuff (Bahr fig. 3, the opening to the conduit 2).
Regarding claim 14, Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 13, but does not disclose wherein the first end of the first collar is configured to engage with an overmould provided to the first length of tubing and/or an exterior surface of the first cuff.
However, Edirisuriya teaches of a method of connecting end connectors to a delivery conduit by placing a sleeve over a conduit and then over molding a connector (figs. 4-6) to prevent damage to the conduit ([0006]-[0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the male interface of Bahr with the sleeve and over molding connection as taught by Edirisuriya between the male and female interfaces and the conduit underneath to prevent damage to the conduit during manufacturing (Edirisuriya [0006]-[0009]).
The modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 13 and further reads on wherein the first end of the first collar (Bahr fig. 3, the side of the male interface 6 that is closer to ventilator 40) is configured to engage with an overmould provided to the first length of tubing and/or an exterior surface of the first cuff (Edirisuriya figs 4-6, sleeve 22 and overmolded connector 33 connect to conduit 29 upstream of the conduit opening, thereby representing the first end of connector 33).
Regarding claim 16, Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4, but does not disclose wherein the second collar is configured to fit over the second cuff.
However, Edirisuriya teaches of a method of connecting end connectors to a delivery conduit by placing a sleeve over a conduit and then over molding a connector (figs. 4-6) to prevent damage to the conduit ([0006]-[0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the female interface of Bahr with the sleeve and over molding connection as taught by Edirisuriya between the male and female interfaces and the conduit underneath to prevent damage to the conduit during manufacturing (Edirisuriya [0006]-[0009]).
The modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4 and further reads on wherein the second collar (Bahr fig. 3, female interface 34) is configured to fit over (Edirisuriya figs. 4-6, sleeve 22 and over molding fits a connector over a tube) the second cuff (Bahr fig. 3, the opening to the conduit 22).
Regarding claim 29, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4, but does not expressly disclose wherein the first cuff and the second cuff are secured to their respective lengths of tubing with an overmould.
However, Edirisuriya teaches of a method of connecting end connectors to a delivery conduit by placing a sleeve over a conduit and then over molding a connector (figs. 4-6) to prevent damage to the conduit ([0006]-[0009]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the male and female interfaces of Bahr with the sleeve and over molding connection as taught by Edirisuriya between the male and female interfaces and the conduit underneath to prevent damage to the conduit during manufacturing (Edirisuriya [0006]-[0009]). Further, "[E]ven though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process." In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985)
15. Claim(s) 17-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahr as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Hinshaw et al. (US 4,306,743).
Regarding claim 17, Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4, and further discloses that conduits 2 and 22 are connectable (fig. 3, see [0021]), but does not expressly disclose wherein the first collar is configured with an interlocking feature for engagement with a complementary interlocking feature provided to the second collar.
However, Hinshaw teaches of a connector arrangement for a breathing circuit which has a safety connection made of a lug (fig. 7, 24’) and access grooves (fig. 7, 14’ and 16’) to prevent disconnection while maintaining an effective gas seal (col. 2, lines 7-19).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the connection between male and female interfaces of Bahr with the lug and access grooves as taught by Hinshaw to connect the interfaces (Bahr [0021]) while maintaining an effective gas seal and allowing quick disconnection (Hinshaw col. 2, lines 7-19).
The modified device of Bahr reads on wherein the first collar (Bahr fig. 3, male interface 6) is configured with an interlocking feature (Hinshaw fig. 7, lug 24’) for engagement with a complementary interlocking feature (Hinshaw fig. 7, grooves 14’ and 16’) provided to the second collar (Bahr fig. 3, female interface 34).
Regarding claim 18, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 17 and further reads on the interlocking feature of the first collar comprises one or more keys (Hinshaw fig. 7, lug 24’) arranged around an exterior surface of a mouth provided to an end of the first collar (see annotated Hinshaw fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
473
817
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 19, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 18 and further reads on wherein the complementary interlocking feature of the second collar is one or more channels (Hinshaw fig. 7, grooves 14’ and 16’) configured to receive the one or more keys of the first collar (Hinshaw fig. 5, shows and example connection between a lug 24 and grooves 14 and 16).
Regarding claim 20, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 19 and further reads on wherein the one or more channels of the second collar include a first leg (Hinshaw fig. 7, groove 16’) and a second leg (Hinshaw fig. 7, groove 14’), wherein the second leg is perpendicular to the first leg (Hinshaw fig. 7, grooves 14’ and 16’ are perpendicular to each other).
Regarding claim 21, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 20 and further reads on wherein the one or more keys of the first collar (Hinshaw fig. 7, lug 24’) are configured to be only moveable along the first leg (Hinshaw fig. 7, groove 16’) of the one or more channels of the second collar in a linear movement (Hinshaw col. 4 lines 18-32 states that in a similar embodiment the lug is aligned with groove 16 to connect the tubes, also see fig. 7 which has the width of groove 16’ similar to that of lug 24’).
Regarding claim 22, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 20 and further reads on wherein the one of more keys of the first collar (Hinshaw fig. 7, lug 24’) are configured to be only moveable along the second leg (Hinshaw fig. 7, groove 14’) of the one or more channels of the second collar in a rotational movement (Hinshaw col. 4 lines 18-32 states that in a similar embodiment the tube is rotated to allow the lug to slide along groove 14, also see fig. 7 which has the height of groove 14’ similar to that of lug 24’).
16. Claim(s) 23-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahr as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Laurent et al. (US 2007/0079982).
Regarding claim 23, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 4, but does not expressly disclose wherein the second collar is configured with a mouth, the mouth being defined, in use, by an inner surface of the collar and an outer surface of the second cuff.
However, Laurent teaches of a connector for coupling a breathing conduit to another conduit (abstract) that uses a female connector (fig. 5, 42) that has an inner tube (fig. 5, 44), a recess (fig. 5, 45), and an outer tube (fig. 5, 46).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the shape of the female interface of Bahr with the shape of the female connector as taught by Laurent as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of allowing coupling between two conduits.
The modified device of Bahr reads on wherein the second collar is configured with a mouth (Laurent fig. 5, recess 45), the mouth being defined, in use, by an inner surface of the collar (Laurent fig. 5, inner surface of outer tube 46) and an outer surface of the second cuff (Laurent fig. 5, outer surface of inner tube 44).
Regarding claim 24, the modified device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 23 and further reads on wherein a mouth is provided to an end of the first collar (Bahr fig. 3, the opening edge to male interface 6) and the mouth of the second collar (Laurent fig. 5, recess 45) is configured to receive the mouth of the first collar (see Laurent fig. 6, where the female connector accommodates the male connector in recess 45).
17. Claim(s) 27-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bahr as applied to claim 26 above, and further in view of Hinshaw.
Regarding claim 27, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 26, but does not disclose wherein the first condition is when the first length of tubing and second length of tubing are connected, but not locked.
However, Hinshaw teaches of a connector arrangement for a breathing circuit which has a safety connection made of a lug (fig. 7, 24’) and access grooves (fig. 7, 14’ and 16’) to prevent disconnection while maintaining an effective gas seal (col. 2, lines 7-19) which can be aligned using exterior marks for the lug and access groove on the two tubes (see col. 3, lines 6-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the connection between male and female interfaces of Bahr with the lug, access grooves, and exterior marks as taught by Hinshaw to connect the interfaces (Bahr [0021]) easily while maintaining an effective gas seal and allowing quick disconnection (Hinshaw col. 2, lines 7-19).
The modified device of Bahr reads on wherein the first condition (according to claim 26, the gripping surfaces must be continuous in a first condition, and the exterior markings being aligned correctly means the markings, which are on the gripping surface, are continuous) is when the first length of tubing and second length of tubing are connected, but not locked (Hinshaw fig. 7, the exterior markings to align the lug and groove, Hinshaw col. 3, lines 6-10, are continuous when the lug 24’ is positioned in groove 16’ which constitutes a connected, but not locked state, see also annotated Hinshaw fig. 7 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
471
825
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 28, the device of Bahr reads on the limitations of claim 26, but does not disclose wherein the second condition is when the first length of tubing and second length of tubing are connected and locked.
However, Hinshaw teaches of a connector arrangement for a breathing circuit which has a safety connection made of a lug (fig. 7, 24’) and access grooves (fig. 7, 14’ and 16’) to prevent disconnection while maintaining an effective gas seal (col. 2, lines 7-19) which can be aligned using exterior marks for the lug and access groove on the two tubes (see col. 3, lines 6-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the connection between male and female interfaces of Bahr with the lug, access grooves, and exterior marks as taught by Hinshaw to connect the interfaces (Bahr [0021]) easily while maintaining an effective gas seal and allowing quick disconnection (Hinshaw col. 2, lines 7-19).
The modified device of Bahr reads on wherein the second condition (according to claim 26, the gripping surfaces must be discontinuous in a second condition, and the exterior markings being misaligned means the markings, which are on the gripping surface, are discontinuous) is when the first length of tubing and second length of tubing are connected and locked (Hinshaw fig. 7, the exterior markings to align the lug and groove, Hinshaw col. 3, lines 6-10, are discontinuous when the lug 24’ is twisted into groove 14’ which constitutes a connected and locked state, see also annotated Hinshaw fig. 7 above).
Conclusion
18. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lindkamp et al. (US 2018/0248274) discloses a connection apparatus for electrical cables to be attached to the outside of a hose.
Edirisuriya et al. (US 2003/0236015) discloses a connector that is over molded to a conduit.
19. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS Z CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm.
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.
/THOMAS Z CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights