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 .
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.
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, 4-9, and 12-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by St. Etienne (US 2010/0126492).
Regarding claim 1, St. Etienne teaches a medical fluid warming system comprising:
a warmer having an exothermic warming composition (exothermic super-cooled salt solution in compartment 5 as in par. [0012]);
a medical fluid configured to be applied to a patient's body during a medical procedure (bottle 10 with fluid),
wherein the medical fluid is packaged within a single-use packet (bottle 10 can be thrown away after use), the single-use packet is bonded to the warmer with an adhesive (adhesive 7), and the medical fluid is thermally connected to the warmer (warmer to heat the bottle 10); and
a barrier configured to separate the exothermic warming composition from a reactant composition (barrier 5 separating the super-cooled salt solution from air), wherein the barrier is removable by a user to allow the reactant composition to contact the exothermic warming composition (rupturing punch as in par. [0012], [0013]) and wherein contact between the reactant composition and the exothermic warming composition causes the exothermic warming composition to release heat (par. [0012] with reaction with the solution and air causing an exothermic reaction generating heat).
Regarding claim 4, St. Etienne teaches wherein the warmer further has a casing with at least one hole (perforations 8 of 6), wherein the exothermic warming composition is positioned inside of the casing (salt inside 6 as in par. [0012]), and wherein a seal is removably adhered to the casing and covers the at least one hole to form the barrier (seal 4 covers the perforations).
Regarding claim 5, St. Etienne teaches a medical fluid warming system comprising:a warmer having an exothermic warming composition (super-cooled salt solution);
a medical fluid configured to be applied to a patient's body during a medical procedure (fluid from bottle 10), wherein the medical fluid is thermally connected to the warmer (medical fluid affected by the exothermic reaction); and
a barrier configured to separate the exothermic warming composition from a reactant composition (6 separating the salt solution from air), wherein the barrier is removable by a user to allow the reactant composition to contact the exothermic warming composition (perforations 8 to remove the barrier to allow the air and salt to mix as in par. [0012]) and wherein contact between the reactant composition and the exothermic warming composition causes the exothermic warming composition to release heat (at least par. [0012]).
Regarding claim 6, St. Etienne teaches wherein the medical fluid is packaged within a single-use packet (bottle 10 can be thrown away after use).
Regarding claim 7, St. Etienne teaches wherein the packet is bonded to the warmer (via adhesive 7).
Regarding claim 8, St. Etienne teaches wherein the packet is bonded to the warmer with an adhesive (adhesive 7).
Regarding claim 9, St. Etienne teaches wherein the barrier is an envelope configured to encase the warmer (envelope 6) and the reactant composition is ambient air (par. [0012]).
Regarding claim 12, St. Etienne teaches wherein the warmer further has a casing with at least one hole (6 as a casing with perforations 8), wherein the exothermic warming composition is positioned inside of the casing (salt solution within 6), and wherein a seal is removably adhered to the casing and covers the at least one hole to form the barrier (seal 4 covers the perforations).
Regarding claim 13, St. Etienne teaches a medical fluid warming system comprising:
a warmer having an exothermic warming composition (super cooled salt solution within 6); and
a medical fluid configured to be applied to a patient's body during a medical procedure (fluid within bottle 10), wherein the medical fluid is removably and thermally connected to the warmer (via adhesive 7).
Regarding claim 14, St. Etienne teaches wherein the exothermic warming composition is air-activated (par. [0012]).
Regarding claim 15, St. Etienne teaches further comprising a barrier configured to separate the exothermic warming composition from a reactant composition (6 separates the salt composition from air), wherein the barrier is removable by a user to allow the reactant composition to contact the exothermic warming composition (perforations 8 remove 6 to allow air and solution to create an exothermic reaction).
Regarding claim 16, St. Etienne teaches wherein the barrier is an envelope configured to encase the warmer and the reactant composition is ambient air (envelope 6 encases the sale solution and the reactant is air as in par. [0011]).
Regarding claim 17, St. Etienne teaches wherein contact between a reactant composition and the exothermic warming composition causes the exothermic warming composition to release heat (par. [0012] salt solution and air).
Regarding claim 18, St. Etienne teaches wherein the medical fluid is packaged within a single-use packet bonded to the warmer (bottle 10 may be discarded after use).
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) 2, 10, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Etienne in view of Ikagi (US 2004/0035410).
Regarding claim 2, St. Etienne is not explicit wherein the warmer is configured to warm the medical fluid to at least a selected temperature within twenty minutes and maintain the medical fluid at or above the selected temperature for at least ten minutes.However, Ikagi teaches reaching a target temperature within 5 minutes of activation (par. [0025], and kept above a threshold temperature for at least 10 minutes (par. [0026]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify St. Etienne with the selected temperature and durations of Ikagi, as known durations of a heating element.
Regarding claim 10, St. Etienne is not explicit wherein the warmer is configured to warm the medical fluid to at least a selected temperature within twenty minutes and maintain the medical fluid at or above the selected temperature for at least ten minutes.However, Ikagi teaches reaching a target temperature within 5 minutes of activation (par. [0025], and kept above a threshold temperature for at least 10 minutes (par. [0026]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify St. Etienne with the selected temperature and durations of Ikagi, as known durations of a heating element.
Regarding claim 19, St. Etienne teaches wherein the warmer is configured to warm the medical fluid to at least a selected temperature within twenty minutes.However, Ikagi teaches reaching a target temperature within 5 minutes of activation (par. [0025], and kept above a threshold temperature for at least 10 minutes (par. [0026]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify St. Etienne with the selected temperature and durations of Ikagi, as known durations of a heating element.
Regarding claim 20, St. Etienne teaches wherein the warmer is configured to maintain the medical fluid at or above a selected temperature for at least ten minutes.However, Ikagi teaches reaching a target temperature within 5 minutes of activation (par. [0025], and kept above a threshold temperature for at least 10 minutes (par. [0026]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify St. Etienne with the selected temperature and durations of Ikagi, as known durations of a heating element.
Claim(s) 3 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over St. Etienne in view of Ikagi, in view of Baumann (US 2007/0193588).
Regarding claim 3, St. Etienne is not explicit wherein the selected temperature is 98 degrees Fahrenheit.However, Baumann teaches a heat source for fluid at a temperature greater than 98 degrees Fahrenheit in the body (par. [0029]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination such that the temperature is 98 degrees Fahrenheit, as a temperature close to average body temperature.
Regarding claim 11, St. Etienne is silent wherein the selected temperature is 98 degrees Fahrenheit.However, Baumann teaches a heat source for fluid at a temperature greater than 98 degrees Fahrenheit in the body (par. [0029]).It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the combination such that the temperature is 98 degrees Fahrenheit, as a temperature close to average body temperature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Tabuchi (US 2006/0040082) teaches an exothermic device reacting with air and having a seal.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BO OUYANG whose telephone number is (571)272-8831. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5 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, Joanne Rodden can be reached at 303-297-4276. 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.
/BO OUYANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3794
/MICHAEL F PEFFLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3794
Prosecution Insights