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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 18 line 5 “a first barb and a second extending” should read “a first barb and a second barb extending”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Poncon (US 20140171875).
Regarding Claim 1, Poncon teaches (Figs 5a-5c) teaches a luer retaining device, comprising:
a male luer (20) having a syringe tip (23);
a female luer (30) having a bearing (31) for receiving the syringe tip (23);
the bearing (31) being a generally cylindrical shape (See Figs 5a-5c) having an inner surface (33);and
a first barb and a second barb (34; see Fig 3 there are two barbs) extending from the inner surface (33) of the bearing radially inward for engaging the syringe tip (23; see Figs 5a-5c 34 engages 23), the first barb and the second barb being evenly spaced apart on the bearing and on a single row (see Fig 3 barbs 34 are spaced apart evenly),wherein the male luer (20) and female luer (30) are in fluid communication when the bearing receives the syringe tip (See Fugs 5a-5c, both 20 and 30 are connected and in fluid communication).
Regarding Claim 5, Poncon teaches the luer retaining device of claim 1, wherein the barb (34) extends in a generally helical shape around the bearing (31; see Fig 3 and [0042] teaching 34 is helicodial).
Regarding Claim 13, Poncon teaches the luer retaining device of claim 1, wherein the barb (34) comprises a first material (See [0042] teaching material olefins, polyamide, polycarbonate, polyetherketone and combinations thereof) and the syringe tip (23) comprises a second material (see [0036] teaching materials of reservoir 10 as glass or plastic, since 20 is an extension of 10 it is interpreted that 20 and 23 are the same material as 10).
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.
Claim(s) 6-12, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Velde et al. (US 1778447 hereinafter “Velde”).
Regarding Claim 6, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 5 as described above. Poncon does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the syringe tip is rotatable relative to the bearing to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing.
Velde teaches (Figs 5-9) a device wherein a tip (74) is rotatable relative to a bearing (58) to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing (see Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the tip 74 which is a part of 70 is rotatable relative to bearing 58 which is a part of 56 as they are threaded together).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Poncon such that there are internal threads in the bearing and external threads on the male luer with the syringe tip as taught by Velde. This would result in the syringe tip is rotatable relative to the bearing to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing through the threaded connection. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as this is another form of ensuring the two elements mate together (see Velde Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches the luer retaining device of claim 6, wherein rotation of the syringe tip in a first direction tightens the engagement of the bearing and syringe tip (Velde Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the syringe tip 74 which is a part of 70 is rotatable relative to bearing 58 which is a part of 56 as they are threaded together).
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches the luer retaining device of claim 7, wherein rotation of the syringe tip in the first direction locks the bearing relative to the syringe tip (see Velde fig 9, after rotation, 70 and tip 74 are locked within bearing 58).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches the luer retaining device of claim 6, wherein rotation of the syringe tip in a second direction loosens the engagement of the bearing and syringe tip (See Velde Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaching how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the rotation in one direction tightens the threaded engagement as seen in Fig 9 and rotation in another direction would loosen the engagement back to the separate pieces as seen in Figs 5-8).
Regarding Claim 10, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 5 as described above. Poncon does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the syringe tip comprises threading on an outer surface.
Velde teaches (Figs 5-9) a device wherein a tip (74) is rotatable relative to a bearing (58) to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing (see Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the tip 74 which is a part of 70 is rotatable relative to bearing 58 which is a part of 56 as they are threaded together), where the tip comprises threading on an outer surface (See Figs 7-8; threads 84 are on an outer surface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Poncon such that there are internal threads in the bearing and external threads on the male luer with the syringe tip as taught by Velde. This would result in the syringe tip is rotatable relative to the bearing to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing through the threaded connection. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as this is another form of ensuring the two elements mate together (see Velde Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches the luer retaining device of claim 10, wherein the threading extends in a generally helical shape around the syringe tip (See Velde Figs 7-8, threading 84 is helically around the tip 74).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches the luer retaining device of claim 11, wherein the threading is configured to align with the barb (See Velde Fig 7-8, the threading is helically around tip 74; it is interpreted in the modification done in claim 10 the threading would similarly be in a helical configuration on male luer 20, which is interacting with the helical barbs 34 of Poncon, therefore the threads and barbs would align).
Regarding Claim 18, Poncon teaches (Figs 5a-5c) teaches a luer retaining device, comprising:
a male luer (20) having a syringe tip (23);
a female luer (30) having a bearing (31) for receiving the syringe tip (23);
the bearing (31) being a generally cylindrical shape (See Figs 5a-5c) having an inner surface (33);and
a first barb and a second barb (34; see Fig 3 there are two barbs) extending from the inner surface (33) of the bearing radially inward for engaging the syringe tip (23; see Figs 5a-5c, 34 engages 23), the first barb and the second barb being evenly spaced apart on the bearing and on a single row (see Fig 3 barbs 34 are spaced apart evenly),wherein the male luer (20) and female luer (30) are in fluid communication when the bearing receives the syringe tip (See Fugs 5a-5c, both 20 and 30 are connected and in fluid communication),
wherein the barb extends in a generally helical shape (see Fig 3 and [0042] teaching 34 is helicoidal).
Poncon does not specify wherein the syringe tip is rotatable relative to the bearing to control the engagement of the syringe tip and the bearing.
Velde teaches (Figs 5-9) a device wherein a tip (74) is rotatable relative to a bearing (58) to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing (see Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the tip 74 which is a part of 70 is rotatable relative to bearing 58 which is a part of 56 as they are threaded together).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Poncon such that there are internal threads in the bearing and external threads on the male luer with the syringe tip as taught by Velde. This would result in the syringe tip is rotatable relative to the bearing to control the engagement of the syringe tip and bearing through the threaded connection. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so as this is another form of ensuring the two elements mate together (see Velde Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches all elements of claim 18 as described above. Velde further teaches the luer retaining device wherein rotation of the syringe tip in a first direction tightens the engagement of the bearing and syringe tip (Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the tip 74 which is a part of 70 is rotatable relative to bearing 58 which is a part of 56 as they are threaded together; See fig 9, after rotation, 70 and tip 74 are locked within bearing 58).
Regarding Claim 20, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches all elements of claim 18 as described above. Velde further teaches the luer retaining device wherein rotation of the syringe tip in a second direction loosens the engagement of the bearing and syringe tip (See Col 6 line 67 - Col 7 line 13 teaches how 70 and 56 interact/engage through threads; therefore it is interpreted that the rotation in one direction tightens the threaded engagement as seen in Fig 9 and rotation in another direction would loosen the engagement back to the separate pieces as seen in Figs 5-8).
Claim(s) 14 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Shimazaki et al. (US 20060184138 hereinafter “Shimazaki”).
Regarding Claim 14, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 13 as described above. Poncon not specify the luer retaining device wherein the first material is harder than the second material.
Shimazaki teaches (Fig 10 and [0046]) a glass syringe tip (3) including a deformable material (9, 14) used to prevent breaking of the glass syringe in the case a glass syringe is dropped.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second material of Poncon such that it is a deformable material as taught by Shimazaki. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent breaking of the glass syringe if the syringe was dropped (Shimazaki [0046]). Furthermore it is interpreted that having the first material is harder than the second material would have been obvious as it has been held to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art to select a known material based on its suitability for its intended purpose (see MPEP 2144.07)
Regarding Claim 22, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Poncon not specify the luer retaining device wherein the syringe tip includes a deformable outer surface that engages the first barb and the second barb.
Shimazaki teaches (Fig 10 and [0046]) a glass syringe tip (3) including a deformable material (9, 14) used to prevent breaking of the glass syringe in the case a glass syringe is dropped.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second material of Poncon such that it is a deformable material as taught by Shimazaki. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent breaking of the glass syringe if the syringe was dropped (Shimazaki [0046]).
Claim(s) 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of 清水 康光 (JP H0668761U hereinafter “ JP’761”).
Regarding Claim 21, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Poncon does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the first barb and the second barb each have a generally triangular cross section.
JP ‘761 teaches (Fig 3b and Pg. 4 4th full paragraph of translation) a pressing protrusion 14 that has a triangular shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first and second barb of Poncon such that it has a generally triangular cross section as taught by JP ‘761. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Fangrow et al. (US 20080287920 hereinafter Fangrow).
Regarding Claim 23, Poncon teaches all elements of claim 1 as described above. Poncon does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the female luer includes a cavity, a post defined therein, and a compressible member disposed around the post, the compressible member being movable between a compressed position and a decompressed position.
Fangrow teaches (Figs 10-11) a the female luer (210) includes a cavity (inner cavity within walls of 211), a post (216) defined therein, and a compressible member (214) disposed around the post (216), the compressible member (214) being movable between a compressed position (Fig 11) and a decompressed position (Fig 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the female luer of Poncon such that the female luer includes a cavity, a post defined therein, and a compressible member disposed around the post, the compressible member being movable between a compressed position and a decompressed position as taught by Fangrow. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a compressible seal in the female luer to provide benefits of being water impermeable, and only compress once adequate force of the male luer is applied (protecting the female luer until use with the male luer) as taught by Fangrow [0180].
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Velde as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of 清水 康光 (JP H0668761U hereinafter “ JP’761”).
Regarding Claim 24, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches all elements of claim 18 as described above. The combination does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the first barb and the second barb each have a generally triangular cross section.
JP ‘761 teaches (Fig 3b and Pg. 4 4th full paragraph of translation) a pressing protrusion 14 that has a triangular shape.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the first and second barb of Poncon such that it has a generally triangular cross section as taught by JP ‘761. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in form or shape is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976).
Claim(s) 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Velde as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Shimazaki (US 20060184138).
Regarding Claim 25, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches all elements of claim 18 as described above. The combination does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the syringe tip includes a deformable outer surface that engages the first barb and the second barb.
Shimazaki teaches (Fig 10 and [0046]) a glass syringe tip (3) including a deformable material (9, 14) used to prevent breaking of the glass syringe in the case a glass syringe is dropped.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the second material of Poncon such that it is a deformable material as taught by Shimazaki. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to prevent breaking of the glass syringe if the syringe was dropped (Shimazaki [0046]).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poncon in view of Velde as applied to claim 18 above, and further in view of Fangrow et al. (US 20080287920 hereinafter Fangrow).
Regarding Claim 26, the combination of Poncon and Velde teaches all elements of claim 18 as described above. The combination does not specify the luer retaining device wherein the female luer includes a cavity, a post defined therein, and a compressible member disposed around the post, the compressible member being movable between a compressed position and a decompressed position.
Fangrow teaches (Figs 10-11) a the female luer (210) includes a cavity (inner cavity within walls of 211), a post (216) defined therein, and a compressible member (214) disposed around the post (216), the compressible member (214) being movable between a compressed position (Fig 11) and a decompressed position (Fig 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the female luer of Poncon such that the female luer includes a cavity, a post defined therein, and a compressible member disposed around the post, the compressible member being movable between a compressed position and a decompressed position as taught by Fangrow. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to provide a compressible seal in the female luer to provide benefits of being water impermeable, and only compress once adequate force of the male luer is applied (protecting the female luer until use with the male luer) as taught by Fangrow [0180].
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/28/2026 have been fully considered but some are not persuasive.
As to the remarks on Pg. 6, the applicant argues that the barbs (34) of Poncon are “flexible legs” and therefore do not read on the limitation of “first barb and a second barb extending from an inner surface of the bearing of radially engaging the syringe tip”. The examiner does not find this persuasive. Even if the barbs 34 of Poncon are “flexible legs” as seen in Fig 5c, the “flexible legs” 34 are “engaging” or interacting with the syringe tip 23 at portion 22. The claim does not specify any structure of the barbs other than extending from an inner surface and radially engaging the syringe tip. Since the barbs 34 are extending from the inner surface (33; see Fig 3) and radially engaging the syringe tip (See Fig 5c), and the rejection is maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection takes into account the amendments filed 4/28/2026.
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 NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI whose telephone number is (571)272-6449. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8-5.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571) 270-5246. 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.
/NEERAJA GOLLAMUDI/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/WESLEY G HARRIS/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights