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 Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities: the terms “undesired material” and “undesirable material” are used in the same claim and refer to the same material but must be consistently named. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 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 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)(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. Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(2) as being anticipated by Yang et al. (US 20240173042 A1 ). Regarding claim 1, Yang discloses a method of filtering fluid from a patient, the method comprising: fluidly coupling a pump (50) to a filter system (300, fig. 5B) comprising a first tube (350), a first reservoir (para. [0051-0052]), a second tube (340), and a visualization device (370) comprising a first filter member (330); aspirating fluid from the patient using the pump wherein the fluid contains an undesired material (para. [0072, 0074]); filtering the fluid using the first filter member to capture at least a portion of the undesired material (para. [0072, 0076]); passing the filtered fluid to the reservoir (para. [0051-0052]); visualizing the undesirable material from the first filter member (para. [0072, 0075]); and replacing the first filter member with a replacement filter member ( the replacement filter being a duplicate of the filter used, para. [0061, 0070]). 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. 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 . This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. Claim (s) 4-5, 7-10, 12, 15-17, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al . (US 20240173042 A1) in view of Horowitz et al. (US 20240316258 A1 ). Regarding claim s 4 and 5 , Yang discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to disclose: (Claim 4) wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a pore size of about 750 µm to about 1000 µm ; (Claim 5) wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a conical shape . Horowitz teaches a similar method in the same field of endeavor: (Claim 4) wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a pore size of about 750 µm to about 1000 µm (para. [0149]) ; (Claim 5) wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a conical shape (fig. 16D). 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 filter member of Yang and incorporate the angled filter of Horowitz yielding predictable results—a filter with a small pore size to catch micro-scale debris. Regarding claims 7-10, Yang discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to disclose: (Claim 7) wherein the filter system comprises a second filter member positioned downstream of the first filter member, the method further comprising filtering the fluid using the second filter member to capture the undesired material ; (Claim 8) wherein the second filter member has a pore size of about 40 µm ; (Claim 9) wherein the second filter member is configured to be replaced ; (Claim 10) wherein the second filter member is positioned inside the visualization device. Horowitz teaches: (Claim 7) wherein the filter system comprises a second filter member positioned downstream of the first filter member, the method further comprising filtering the fluid using the second filter member to capture the undesired material (para. [0268-0271]). (Claim 8) wherein the second filter member has a pore size of about 40 µm (para. [0149]). (Claim 9) wherein the second filter member is configured to be replaced (para. [0296]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporate d a second filter as shown in Horowitz into the visualization device of Yang with predictable results namely, improved filtration and more visualization of collected debris (para. [0268-0271]). Regarding claim 12, Yang discloses a method of filtering fluid from a patient, the method comprising: fluidly coupling a pump (50) to a filter system (300, fig. 5B) comprising a first tube (350), a second tube (340), a visualization device (370) comprising a first filter member (330), aspirating fluid from the patient using the pump wherein the fluid contains an undesired material (para. [0072, 0074]); filtering the fluid using the first filter member to capture at least a first portion of undesired material (para. [0072, 0076]); thereby generating a filtered fluid (para. [0077]); visualizing the undesirable material from the first filter member (para. [0072, 0075]); and replacing the first filter member with a replacement filter member (para. [0061, 0070]). However, Yang fails to disclose a reinfusion cannula, a second filter member, filtering the fluid using the second filter member to capture a second portion of the undesired material , and reinfusing the filtered fluid into the patient using the reinfusion cannula . Horowitz teaches a reinfusion, a second filter member (para. [0268-0271]) , filtering the fluid using the second filter member to capture a second portion of the undesired material (para. [0268-0271]) , and reinfusing the filtered fluid into the patient for reinfusion (para. [0198, 0234]) . Although Horowitz does not specifically disclose a reinfusion cannula, para. [0234] denotes 700 as the patient blood infusing means to reinfuse the processed blood and using a reinfusion cannula is standard in the art to insert into the patient to deliver blood. 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 method of Yang and incorporate the second filtering and reinfusion process as shown in Horowitz for increased filtration and direct reintroduction of the cleaned blood into the patient with predictable results. Regarding claim 15, the combination of Yang and Horowitz discloses the method of claim 12. Yang further discloses wherein the visualization device comprises a first flushing port (para. [0072]), the method further comprising: flushing the visualization device by injecting a flushing liquid into the first flushing port (para. [0072]). Regarding claim 16, the combination of Yang and Horowitz discloses the method of claim 15. Yang further discloses wherein the flushing liquid is saline (para. [0072]). Regarding claim 17, the combination of Yang and Horowitz discloses the method of claim 12. However, Yang fails to disclose wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a conical shape . Horowitz teaches wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a conical shape (fig. 16D). 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 filter member of Yang and incorporate the angled filter of Horowitz yielding predictable results namely, filtration of blood through the unit. Regarding claim 19-20, the combination of Yang and Horowitz discloses the method of claim 12. However, Yang fails to disclose: (Claim 19) wherein the second filter member is configured to be replaced (para. [0296]). (Claim 20) wherein the second filter member is positioned inside the visualization device. Horowitz teaches: (Claim 19) wherein the second filter member is configured to be replaced (para. [0296]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated a second filter as shown in Horowitz into the visualization device of Yang with predictable results namely, improved filtration and more visualization of collected debris (para. [0268-0271]). Claim (s) 2 -3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al . (US 20240173042 A1) in view of Neatrou et al. (US 20140155847 A1 ). Regarding claim 2, Yang discloses the method of claim 1. However, Yang fails to disclose wherein replacing the first filter member with a replacement filter member sealing the first tube using a first fluid flow control device and sealing the second tube using a second fluid flow control device; opening the visualization device; removing the first filter member and the captured portion of the undesired material from the visualization device; inserting the replacement filter member in the visualization device; and closing the visualization device . Firstly, Yang already teaches one fluid control device upstream of the filter but not a second device downstream of the filter; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have duplicated the clamp to have more control over the flow—which is already contemplated and described by Yang—to also stop flow after the filter (para. [0074]) . Secondly, Neatrou teaches the opening of the lid of a blood canister to replace the filter element held inside (para. [0020]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the steps of opening the lid of the cartridge to replace the filter as shown in Neatrou because Yang already teaches replacing the removable filters (para. [0061, 0070]). Regarding claim 3, the combination of Yang and Neatrou discloses the method of claim 2. Yang further discloses wherein the visualization device comprises a first flushing port, the method further comprising: flushing the visualization device by injecting a flushing liquid into the first flushing port (para. [0014, 0072]). Claim(s) 1 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20240173042 A1) in view of Horowitz et al. (US 20240316258 A1), Neatrou et al. (US 20140155847 A1) , and Aklog et al. (US 20110213393 A1). Regarding claim 13 , Yang discloses the method of claim 1 and further discloses a valve (360 , para. [0074] ). However, Yang fails to disclose wherein replacing the first filter member with a replacement filter member comprises: sealing the first tube using a first fluid flow control device and sealing the second tube using a second fluid flow control device; opening the visualization device; removing the first filter member and the captured portion of the undesired material from the visualization device; inserting the replacement filter member in the visualization device; and closing the visualization device. Firstly, Yang already teaches one fluid control device upstream of the filter but not a second device downstream of the filter; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have duplicated the clamp to have more control over the flow—which is already contemplated and described by Yang—to also stop flow after the filter (para. [0074]). Secondly, Neatrou teaches the opening of the lid of a blood canister to replace the filter element held inside (para. [0020]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the steps of opening the lid of the cartridge to replace the filter as shown in Neatrou because Yang already teaches replacing the removable filters (para. [0061, 0070]). However, the combination fails to disclose priming the filter system with a priming fluid to remove air from the filter system. Aklog teaches a similar method in the same field of endeavor including priming the filter system with a priming fluid to remove air from the filter system (para. [0077, 0106]). 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 method of Yang to include priming the filter system as shown in Aklog because it is a common practice in the art to remove air for flushing out any residual agents in the line and preventing air emboli. Regarding claim 14, the combination of Yang, Horowitz, Neatrou , and Aklog discloses the method of claim 13. Yang further discloses wherein the first fluid flow control device is one of a clamp or a stopcock. Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20240173042 A1) in view of Schaefer et al. ( US 12080412 B2 ). Regarding claim 11, Yang discloses the method of claim 1 but fails to disclose sealing the second tube using a second fluid flow control device; and replacing the first reservoir with a second reservoir . Firstly, Yang already teaches one fluid control device upstream of the filter but not a second device downstream of the filter; however, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have duplicated the clamp to have more control over the flow—which is already contemplated and described by Yang—to also stop flow after the filter (para. [0074]). Secondly, Schaefer teaches replacing the first reservoir with a second reservoir (column 1 lines 40-44, column 11 lines 30-37). 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 method of Yang and incorporate the step of replacing the reservoirs as shown in Schaefer to avoid overflowing one container and provide more volumetric space to collect the fluid. Claim (s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al . (US 20240173042 A1) in view of DeSousa et al. ( US 4637873 A ). Regarding claim 6, Yang teaches the method of claim 1 but fails to disclose wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a tab positioned on a top surface of the first filter member and the replacement filter member . DeSousa teaches a filter for fluid circulation wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a tab positioned on a top surface of the first filter member and the replacement filter member (column 5 lines 61-63, fig. 2). 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 method of Yang and incorporate a tab as shown in DeSousa to make replacing the filters easier by having the user grab onto a tab (column 5 lines 61-63). Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang et al. (US 20240173042 A1) in view of Horowitz et al. (US 20240316258 A1 ), and in further view of DeSousa et al. ( US 4637873 A ). Regarding claim 18, the combination of Yang and Horowitz teaches the method of claim 1 but fails to disclose wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a tab positioned on a top surface of the first filter member and the replacement filter member . DeSousa teaches a filter for fluid circulation wherein at least one of the first filter member and the replacement filter member has a tab positioned on a top surface of the first filter member and the replacement filter member (column 5 lines 61-63, fig. 2). 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 method of Yang and incorporate a tab as shown in DeSousa to make replacing the filters easier by having the user grab onto a tab (column 5 lines 61-63). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT ERIN A KIM whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (703)756-4738 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm (EST) . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-5879 . 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. /ERIN A KIM/ Examiner, Art Unit 3781 /SUSAN S SU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781 1 April 2026