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's election with traverse of Group I and Species B in the reply filed on 9/15/20206 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the grounds that the claims of Groups I and II have unity of invention based on 37 CFR 1.475(b) reciting that groups “will be considered to have unity of invention if the claims are drawn only to one of the following combination of categories” with one category being “(1) A product and a process specifically adapted for the manufacture of said product”. This is not found persuasive because the process of Group II is not “specifically adapted” for the manufacture of the product of Group I; specifically, the process of Group II does not include any steps for forming an inlet, and outlet and a flow path configured to vent gas out of the outlet and inhibit flow of liquid out of the outlet as is required by independent claim 1 (note that claims 20 and 21 never even mention an “inlet”, an “outlet” or a “flow path”); rather, the process of Group II includes steps for forming a body from a hydrophobic material having a specific shape. Therefore, the process of Group II is not “specifically adapted” for the manufacture of the product of claim 1.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
In the 9/15/2026 reply, Applicant indicated claims 10, 14, 15 and 17-21 as withdrawn from consideration; additionally, a review of the claims reveal that claim 9 should also be withdrawn from consideration as it reads on non-elected Species C, not on elected Species B. Accordingly, claims 9, 10, 14, 15 and 17-21 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group or species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: The “medical device” is only functionally recited in the entirety of claim 1 except for in line 3 wherein it appears to be positively recited. Accordingly, line 3 should be amended to only functionally recite the “medical device” (for example, by stating “an outlet open, in use, to air outside of the medical device” like in line 2). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 4-7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the phrase “the hydrophobic material”, but this phrase lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 2 introduces “a gas-permeable hydrophobic material”, but claim 4 does not depend from claim 2. It is unclear if claim 4 was intended to depend from claim 2 or if claim 4 was intended to introduce “a hydrophobic material”. For the sake of examination, the former is the interpretation applied to the claim. Accordingly, it is suggested to amend claim 3 to recite dependence on claim 2 instead of on claim 1; as a result, claim 4 would not need to change its dependence. Claims 5 and 6 are rejected due to their dependence on claim 4.
Claim 5 recites “the housing comprises one or more proximal outlet apertures”. Because claim 1 introduces “an outlet”, it is unclear if claim 5 is intended to require both the outlet of claim 1 and one or more proximal outlet apertures or if claim 5 is intended to define the outlet of claim 1 as comprising one or more proximal outlet apertures. For the sake of examination, the latter is the interpretation applied to the claim. Accordingly, it is suggested to amend claim 5 to recite “the outlet comprises one or more proximal outlet apertures”. Claim 6 is rejected due to its dependence on claim 5.
Claim 5 recites “the hydrophobic material is located at the outlet or a strip of hydrophobic material is positioned across the one or more outlet apertures”. This passage sets forth two options: that the hydrophobic material is located at the outlet or that a strip of hydrophobic material is positioned across the one or more outlet apertures. It is unclear if the “strip of hydrophobic material” is intended to be the same as or different from the “hydrophobic material” introduced in claim 2. For the sake of examination, the latter is the interpretation applied for the sake of examination. Accordingly, it is suggested to amend claim 5 to recite “the hydrophobic material is located at the outlet or the hydrophobic material comprises a strip of hydrophobic material [[is]] positioned across the one or more outlet apertures”. Claim 6 is rejected due to its dependence on claim 5.
Claim 7 recites the phrase “the hydrophobic material”, but this phrase lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 2 introduces “a gas-permeable hydrophobic material”, but claim 7 does not depend from claim 2. It is unclear if claim 4 was intended to depend from claim 2 or if claim 7 was intended to introduce “a hydrophobic material”. For the sake of examination, the former is the interpretation applied to the claim. Accordingly, it is suggested to amend claim 3 to recite dependence on claim 2 instead of on claim 1; as a result, claim 7 would not need to change its dependence.
Claim 13 recites the phrase “the second thickness”, but this phrase lacks proper antecedent basis. Claim 12 introduces “a second thickness”, but claim 13 does not depend from claim 12. It is unclear if claim 13 was intended to depend from claim 12 or if claim 13 was intended to introduce “a second thickness”. For the sake of examination, the former is the interpretation applied to the claim. Accordingly, it is suggested to amend claim 13 to recite dependence on claim 12 instead of on claim 11.
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.
Claims 1-8, 11-13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matsuura et al. (PG PUB 2006/0111667).
Re claim 1, Matsuura discloses a vent device 30 (Fig 1a; it is noted that all reference characters cited below refer to Fig 1a unless otherwise noted) for venting gas from a medical device (it is noted that the italicized text constitutes functional language and, therefore, “a medical device” is not a part of the claimed invention; this limitation is met in view of Fig 1a and Para 95), the vent device comprising: an inlet 36 in communication, in use, with an interior of the medical device (Para 95); and an outlet 60 open to air outside of the medical device (Para 97); wherein the inlet and the outlet define opposite ends of a flow path (extending vertically in Fig 1a) configured to vent gas from the interior of the medical device out the outlet and inhibit flow of liquid from the interior of the medical device out the outlet (Para 95,97).
Re claim 2, Matsuura discloses that the flow path comprises a gas-permeable hydrophobic material 62 (Para 91).
Re claim 3, Matsuura discloses a housing 30a, the inlet being at a distal region 34 of the housing, the outlet being at a proximal region (the entirety of housing 30a not including neck 34) of the housing, and the flow path forming a conduit (formed by the inner surface of the housing 30a) within the housing (as seen in Fig 1a).
Re claim 4, Matsuura discloses that the hydrophobic material is located at the outlet (as seen in Fig 1a).
Re claim 5, Matsuura discloses that the housing comprises one or more proximal outlet apertures (labeled in Fig A below) and the hydrophobic material is located at the outlet or a strip of hydrophobic material is positioned across the one or more outlet apertures (as seen in Fig 1a; Para 91).
PNG
media_image1.png
652
752
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Re claim 6, Matsuura discloses that the strip of hydrophobic material covers the one or more outlet apertures such that gas flowing out of the one or more apertures must flow through the strip of hydrophobic material (as seen in Fig 1a; Para 91,97).
Re claim 7, Matsuura discloses that the hydrophobic material is formed as an insert and the insert is located in a cavity (formed by the inner surface of the wall of housing 30a) of the housing and disposed between the inlet and outlet (as seen in Fig 1a; Para 91).
Re claim 8, Matsuura discloses that the inlet comprises one or more inlet apertures (labeled in Fig A above) formed in the distal region of the housing (as seen in Fig 1a).
Re claim 11, Matsuura discloses that the vent device comprises a distal region (the portion of neck 34 consisting of the distal flange, labeled in Fig A above) at least partially comprising the inlet (as seen in Fig 1a), a proximal region (the entirety of the housing 30a that does not include neck 34) comprising the outlet (as seen in Fig 1a) and an intermediate region (the portion of neck 34 spanning between the flange and the lower wall of housing 30a, labeled in Fig A above) intermediate the distal region and proximal region.
Re claim 12, Matsuura discloses that the distal region has a first thickness (the radial thickness of the distal flange, labeled in Fig A above) and the intermediate region has a second thickness (the radial thickness of the wall of neck 34) that is smaller than the first thickness (as seen in Fig 1A).
Re claim 13, Matsuura discloses that the proximal region has a third thickness (the radial thickness of the lower wall of housing 30a, labeled in Fig A above) that is greater than the second thickness (as seen in Fig 1a).
Re claim 16, Matsuura discloses that the distal region has a first width (defined by the outer diameter of the distal flange, labeled in Fig A above) and the proximal region has a second width (defined by the portion of the outer housing 30a that does not include neck 34) that is greater than the first width (as seen in Fig 1a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Although not used to reject the claims in the current Office Action, US Pat 4,336,036 to Leeke, US Pat 4,515,606 to de Winter, US Pat 5,439,587 to Stankowski, and US Pat 6,508,859 to Zia each disclose a vent device that reads on all of the pending claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAMI A BOSWORTH whose telephone number is (571)270-5414. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8 am - 4 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, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at (571)272-4965. 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.
/KAMI A BOSWORTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
