DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Objections
Claim 116 objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “arts” should read “parts”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 “filter” (Claim 1) in figures 30a-31b must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). 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 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.
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 limitations are: “attachment means for attaching” in claim 102, and “an operation device configured to revolve” in claim 102.
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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of pre-AIA 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) the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention thereof by the applicant for a patent.
Claims 102-109, 112, and 115-118 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Helm et al. (US 7,488,302).
Regarding claim 102, an invention relating to filtration device, Helm discloses (Figs. 5a-b) an implantable cassette [i.e. filter arrangement] for holding filters (Col. 3, lines 37-43), wherein the cassette comprises a revolving compartment having a plurality of segments (see annotated figures below), wherein each segment is configured to hold a filter (71-77) configured to filter blood (Col. 4, lines 34-44), and attachment means for attaching the cassette to a blood flow passageway (70) to thereby allow blood to flow through a first segment of the revolving compartment (see annotated figure below & Col. 4, lines 34-44); an operation device (75) configured to revolve the revolving compartment, to thereby move the first segment out of the blood flow passageway (Col. 4, lines 34-44).
PNG
media_image1.png
269
414
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
182
331
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 103, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm further discloses wherein the revolution of the revolving compartment moves a second segment into the blood flow passageway (see annotated figure below & Col. 4, lines 34-44).
PNG
media_image3.png
250
372
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 104, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm further discloses wherein the revolving compartment comprises at least 2 segments [i.e. six segments] (Col. 4, lines 34-44).
Regarding claim 105, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm further discloses wherein the revolving compartment comprises at least 3 segments [i.e. six segments] (Col. 4, lines 34-44).
Regarding claim 106, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm further discloses wherein the revolving compartment comprises at least 4 segments [i.e. six segments] (Col. 4, lines 34-44).
Regarding claim 107, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm discloses further comprising a support configured to hold the compartment in place in the blood flow passageway (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image4.png
244
372
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 108, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 107. Helm discloses further comprising a further support configured to hold the compartment in place in the blood flow passageway (see annotated figure below).
PNG
media_image5.png
184
307
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 109, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm discloses (Fig. 5b) further comprising a power supply (76) for powering the operation device (Col. 4, lines 45-48).
Regarding claim 112, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm discloses (Fig. 5b) further comprising a control unit (76) for controlling the implantable cassette (Col. 4, lines 45-48).
Regarding claim 115, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm discloses wherein the revolving compartment is substantially cylindrical (Figs. 5a-b).
Regarding claim 116, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 115. Helm further discloses wherein the substantially cylindrical revolving compartment is divided into equally large parts forming the respective segments [i.e. elements surrounding filters create equally divided part] (Figs. 5a-b).
Regarding claim 117, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 112. Helm further discloses wherein the control unit comprises an implantable control device [i.e. element 76 along with the rest of the filter arrangement can be inside the patient’s body].
Regarding claim 118, Hem discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 112. Helm further discloses wherein the control unit comprises an external remote control [i.e. element 76 along with the rest of the filter arrangement can be outside the patient’s body].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 110 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Helm et al. US (7,488,302) as applied to claim 109 above, and further in view of Gura (US 2004/0254514).
Regarding claim 110, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 109. Helm fails to disclose wherein the power supply is rechargeable.
In the same field of endeavor, which is filtration devices, Gura teaches wherein the power supply is rechargeable (Par. 0040).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have wherein the power supply is rechargeable. Doing so would provide enough energy for at least 6 or more hours of continuous, uninterrupted device operation (Par. 0040), as taught by Gura.
Claim 111 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Helm et al. US (7,488,302), in view of Gura (US 2004/0254514), as applied to claim 110 above, and further in view of Mishkin (US 5,902,336).
Regarding claim 111, Helm, as modified by Gura, fails to disclose wherein the power supply is configured to be recharged by wireless energy.
In the same field of endeavor, which is filtration devices, Mishkin teaches wherein the power supply is configured to be recharged by wireless energy (Col. 6, lines 35-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm, in view of Gura, to have wherein the power supply is configured to be recharged by wireless energy. Doing so would have been obvious because a particular known technique was recognized as part of the ordinary capabilities of one skilled in the art (Col. 6, lines 35-37), as taught by Mishkin.
Claims 113-114 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Helm et al. US (7,488,302) as applied to claim 102 above, and further in view of Prince (US 4,994,188).
Regarding claim 113, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm fails to disclose wherein the operation device is configured to apply pressurized air to revolve the compartment.
In the same field of endeavor, which is filtration devices, Prince teaches wherein the operation device is configured to apply pressurized air to revolve the compartment (Col. 3, lines 53-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have wherein the operation device is configured to apply pressurized air to revolve the compartment. Doing so would provide digital position indicating feedback signals (Col. 3, lines 53-61), as taught by Prince.
Regarding claim 114, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm fails to disclose wherein the operation device is an electric motor.
In the same field of endeavor, which is filtration devices, Prince teaches wherein the operation device is an electric motor (Col. 3, lines 53-63).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have wherein the operation device is an electric motor. Doing so would provide digital position indicating feedback signals (Col. 3, lines 53-63), as taught by Prince.
Claims 119-121 rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Helm et al. (US 7,488,302) as applied to claim 102 above, and further in view of Helm et al. (US 7,488,302).
Regarding claims 119, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm fails to disclose further comprising a sensor configured to sense a physical parameter of the patient.
In an alternate embodiment, Helm teaches a sensor configured to sense a physical parameter of the patient (Col. 4, lines 27-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have a sensor configured to sense a physical parameter of the patient. Doing so would control switching between filters (Col. 4, lines 27-33), as taught by the alternate embodiment of Helm.
Regarding claim 120, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm fails to disclose further comprising a sensor configured to sense a functional parameter of the device.
In an alternate embodiment, Helm teaches a sensor configured to sense a functional parameter of the device (Col. 4, lines 27-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have a sensor configured to sense a functional parameter of the device. Doing so would control switching between filters (Col. 4, lines 27-33), as taught by the alternate embodiment of Helm.
Regarding claim 121, Helm discloses the implantable cassette according to claim 102. Helm fails discloses further comprising a sensor configured to sense an accumulation of blood clots in the filter.
In an alternate embodiment, Helm teaches a sensor configured to sense an accumulation of blood clots in the filter (Col. 4, lines 27-33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have modified Helm to have a sensor configured to sense an accumulation of blood clots in the filter. Doing so would control switching between filters (Col. 4, lines 27-33), as taught by the alternate embodiment of Helm.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Examiner Chima Igboko whose telephone number is (571)272-8422. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9:00am-6:00pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, please contact the examiner’s supervisor, Jackie Ho, at (571) 272-4696. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/C.U.I/ Examiner, Art Unit 3771
/ASHLEY L FISHBACK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3771 October 29, 2025