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 selected Invention I drawn to Claims 1-9 and 14-20 and Species A drawn to Figures 1A-1F and 2 in a restriction response.
Claims 10-13 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/15/2025.
Status of Claims
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending of which Claim(s) 1, 10, 14 is/are presented in independent form. Claims 10-13 are withdrawn.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-9 and 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poe (US 1498810 A) in view of Feld (US 11065410 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Poe discloses a bite block for use during an endoscopic operation (Fig. 1-7, Page 1 lines 15-20 device placed between teeth of user thus being a bite block, central opening 10 in tube member 4 enables endoscopic use), comprising:
a base 1 (Fig. 1 and 5);
a probe opening through the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, wherein the probe opening is a central opening in the base 1 in which the tubular member 4 is placed within, being a probe opening as the structure is capable of receiving a probe);
an upper biting platform 2U connected to an upper portion of the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, Page 1 lines 75-90 wherein the user’s teeth engages rubber strap 2 which has an upper biting platform 2U);
a lower biting platform 2L connected to a lower portion of the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, Page 1 lines 75-90 wherein the user’s teeth engages rubber strap 2 which has a lower biting platform 2L);
a first fluid passage 6F (Fig. 1, see Annotated Figures 1-7, the conduits 6 being fluid passages, Page 1 line 100 – Page 2 line 31), the first fluid passage 6F having a first proximal end 8 at the base 1 and a first distal end extending from the base 1 (Annotated Fig. 1-7) such that, when the bite block is in use with a patient, the first distal end is configured to extend to a throat of said patient (Page 1 lines 25-28, Annotated Fig. 1-7, the distal ends of the fluid passages will extend into a throat of the user), the first fluid passage 6F defining a first fluid path extending between the first proximal end and the first distal end (Annotated Fig. 1-7); and
a second fluid passage 6S (Fig. 1, see Annotated Figures 1-7, the conduits 6 being fluid passages, Page 1 line 100 – Page 2 line 31), the second fluid passage 6S having a second proximal end 8 at the base 1 (Annotated Fig. 1-7) and a second distal end extending from the base 1 (Annotated Fig. 1-7) such that, when the bite block is in use with said patient, the second distal end is configured to extend to the throat of said patient (Page 1 lines 25-28, Annotated Fig. 1-7, the distal ends of the fluid passages will extend into a throat of the user), the second fluid passage 6S defining a second fluid path extending between the second proximal end and the second distal end (Annotated Fig. 1-7).
Poe does not disclose a nasal cannula holder configured to retain a nasal cannula, and connected to the upper portion of the base.
However, Feld teaches an analogous bite block 10 (Fig. 1) for assisting with breathing (title) having a base 12 (Fig. 1) having an analogous upper portion 18 and lower portion 20 (Fig. 1), wherein there is a nasal cannula holder 40 configured to retain a nasal cannula 44, and connected to the upper portion 18 of the base 12 (Fig. 1 and Col. 3 lines 30-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided the nasal cannula holder 40 as taught by Feld to the upper portion of the base 1 of Poe in order to provide increased oxygen flow to patient with breathing disorders (Col. 1 lines 38-62).
PNG
media_image1.png
696
677
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the first fluid passage 6F includes a first connector 8 (Page 1 lines 105-110, Annotated Fig. 1-7, “enlargements 8” are connection adapters as they enable connection with a rubber hose 9) and the first connector 8 is an oxygen adapter, and wherein the first fluid path is an oxygen fluid path (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen, and the adapter is capable of being connected to oxygen thus being an oxygen adapter).
Regarding claim 3, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the first fluid passage 6F includes a first connector 8 (Page 1 lines 105-110, Annotated Fig. 1-7, “enlargements 8” are connection adapters as they enable connection with a rubber hose 9) that is angled away from the probe opening (Fig. 1 and Annotated Fig. 1-7, the adapters 8 are shown angled away from the central probe opening).
Regarding claim 4, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the second fluid passage 6S includes a second connector 8 (Page 1 lines 105-110, Annotated Fig. 1-7, “enlargements 8” are connection adapters as they enable connection with a rubber hose 9) and the second connector 8 is a suction adapter, and wherein the second fluid path is a suction fluid path (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is a suction fluid path and the connector 8 a suction adapter).
Regarding claim 5, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe further discloses the first fluid passage 6F includes a first connector 8 (Page 1 lines 105-110, Annotated Fig. 1-7, “enlargements 8” are connection adapters as they enable connection with a rubber hose 9), the first connector 8 being an oxygen adapter (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen, and the adapter is capable of being connected to oxygen thus being an oxygen adapter);
the second fluid passage 6S includes a second connector 8 (Page 1 lines 105-110, Annotated Fig. 1-7, “enlargements 8” are connection adapters as they enable connection with a rubber hose 9), the second connector 8 being an oxygen adapter (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen, and they adapter is capable of being connected to oxygen thus being an oxygen adapter);
and the first fluid path 6F is a first oxygen fluid path and the second fluid path 6S is a second oxygen fluid paths (Annotated Fig. 1-7, Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen, and the adapter is capable of being connected to oxygen thus being an oxygen adapter, thus each distinct first fluid path 6F and second fluid path 6S may be each first and second oxygen fluid paths).
Regarding claim 6, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the first fluid path 6F is a high-flow oxygen fluid path (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen, and the adapter is capable of being connected to oxygen thus being an oxygen adapter, wherein first fluid path is capable of being a high-flow oxygen fluid path, based on the instant application a high-flow oxygen path has no structural difference in regards to the apparatus itself)
Regarding claim 7, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Feld further teaches wherein the nasal cannula holder 40 is configured to retain the nasal cannula 44 in a position that is inserted in nostrils of said patient to deliver a flow of nasal oxygen (Feld Fig. 3 and Col. 3 lines 30-55).
Regarding claim 8, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Feld further teaches wherein the nasal cannula holder 40 is configured to retain the nasal cannula 44 without impeding a flow of oxygen through the nasal cannula (Feld Fig. 3 and Col. 3. Line 56 to Col. 4 line 9, oxygen moves freely from the nasal cannula 44 and is not impeded by the holder 40).
Regarding claim 9, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 1 above.
Poe in view of Feld discloses wherein the first fluid passage 6F is configured to provide an oral oxygen flow (Page 2 lines 6-31, the fluid passage 6 may transmit ether as well as vacuum/suction from the throat, thus the fluid passage is capable of transmitting oxygen) to said patient along a distinct fluid path from the nasal cannula 44 (Fig. 1-7 of Poe and Feld Fig. 1-3, these are distinct fluid paths with distinct structures).
Regarding claim 14, Poe discloses a bite block for use during an endoscopic operation (Fig. 1-7, Page 1 lines 15-20 device placed between teeth of user thus being a bite block, central opening 10 in tube member 4 enables endoscopic use), comprising:
a base 1 (Fig. 1 and 5) including:
a probe opening through the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, wherein the probe opening is a central opening in the base 1 in which the tubular member 4 is placed within, being a probe opening as the structure is capable of receiving a probe);
an upper biting platform 2U connected to an upper portion of the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, Page 1 lines 75-90 wherein the user’s teeth engages rubber strap 2 which has an upper biting platform 2U);
a lower biting platform 2L connected to a lower portion of the base 1 (See Annotated Figures 1-7, Page 1 lines 75-90 wherein the user’s teeth engages rubber strap 2 which has a lower biting platform 2L);
an oral airway 4 (Fig. 1-7), including:
a first fluid passage 6F (Fig. 1, see Annotated Figures 1-7, the conduits 6 being fluid passages, Page 1 line 100 – Page 2 line 31);
a second fluid passage 6S (Fig. 1, see Annotated Figures 1-7, the conduits 6 being fluid passages, Page 1 line 100 – Page 2 line 31);
an anterior portion (Annotated Fig. 1-7); and
a posterior portion (Annotated Fig. 1-7) configured to rest on a base of a tongue of a patient using the bite block (Page 2 lines 9-15, the posterior portion indicated is the inner end portion configured to extend into the throat wherein this structure is thus capable of resting on the base of a tongue).
Poe does not disclose the base including a nasal cannula holder configured to retain a nasal cannula, and connected to the upper portion of the base.
However, Feld teaches an analogous bite block 10 (Fig. 1) for assisting with breathing (title) having a base 12 (Fig. 1) having an analogous upper portion 18 and lower portion 20 (Fig. 1), wherein there is a nasal cannula holder 40 configured to retain a nasal cannula 44, and connected to the upper portion 18 of the base 12 (Fig. 1 and Col. 3 lines 30-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided the nasal cannula holder 40 as taught by Feld to the upper portion of the base 1 of Poe in order to provide increased oxygen flow to patient with breathing disorders (Col. 1 lines 38-62).
Regarding claim 15, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 14 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the oral airway 4 is curved downward (Fig. 2 and 4) and is configured to pull the tongue of the patient forward to provide posterior oral access (Page 2 lines 9-15, the posterior portion indicated is the inner end portion configured to extend into the throat wherein this structure is thus capable of resting on the base of a tongue, thus providing posterior oral access from opening 10, and based on its shape will be capable of pressing/pulling the tongue forward when contacting the tongue at its base).
Regarding claim 16, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 14 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the posterior portion (Annotated Fig. 1-7) further comprises a first portion and a second portion (Annotated Fig. 1-7, the first portion of the posterior portion containing distal end of 6F, and second portion of the posterior portion containing distal end of 6S) with a gap 10 therebetween (Fig. 1 and Annotated Fig. 1-7, the opening 10 is a gap between the first and second portions of the posterior portion).
Regarding claim 17, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 16 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the first fluid passage 6F passes through the first portion and the second fluid passage 6S passes through the second portion (See Annotated Fig. 1-7).
Regarding claim 18, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 16 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the gap 10 is configured to guide a medical device during oral application of the medical device (Fig. 1-7, the gap 10 extending from the probe opening of the base 1 to the posterior end of tube 4 makes the device capable of having a medical device slide therethrough).
Regarding claim 19, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 14 above.
Poe further discloses wherein the oral airway 4 is detachably connected to the base 1 (Page 1 lines 91-110, the oral airway is passed through the prop being the base 1 and conforms to the shape, the figures also further provide these being separable elements).
Regarding claim 20, Poe in view of Feld discloses the invention of claim 14 above.
Poe further discloses wherein an oral airway width is less than a probe opening width such that the oral airway 4 may fit through the probe opening 1 (Annotated Fig. 1-7, the oral airway 4 fits into the probe opening 1 of base 1 such that the oral airway width is less than the probe opening width).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20090266368 A1
US 20100030027 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEVIN S ALBERS whose telephone number is (571)272-0139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am to 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, Rachael Bredefeld can be reached at (571) 270-5237. 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.
/KEVIN S ALBERS/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/RACHAEL E BREDEFELD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786