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 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.
Claim 4 is 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, “a surface area of liquid provided to the nebulizer outlet is greater when the liquid is in the multiple channels, annular, channel, or segmented channel than when the liquid is in the tubular channel.” This new functional limitation does not clearly describe what function or structure is to be achieved. It is unclear whether “a surface area of liquid provided to the nebulizer outlet” describes the flow of liquid into the nebulizer outlet, or the surface area of contact between the nebulizer outlet and the liquid, or a surface area of the nebulized liquid as it leaves the nebulizer outlet. The specification does little to clarify this issue. As such, the claims are rejected as indefinite. For the purposes of examination, the claims will be treated as best understood in light of the specification, which states, “An increased surface area could also be achieved e.g. by the second portion 24 b comprising more channels than the first portion 24 a, e.g. by the second portion 24 b comprising multiple channels, and the first portion 24 a comprising a single channel (where a convergence/nebulisation region is provided within each of the multiple channels).” PgPub para 197.
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, 4, 7-10, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (2) as being anticipated by US 2019/0255544 A1 [Ueda].
Regarding Claim 1:
Ueda discloses a nebuliser outlet (para 29, the device of Ueda atomizes a liquid, which is equivalent to nebulizing) comprising:
one or more first channels, wherein the nebuliser outlet is configured such that liquid received by the nebuliser outlet can pass to one or more nebulisation regions via the one or more first channels (see annotated Fig. 2 (21, 32)) below, paras 34-36); and
one or more second channels, wherein the nebuliser outlet is configured such that gas received by the nebuliser outlet can pass to the one or more nebulisation regions via the one or more second channels (see annotated Fig. 2 (22, 41, 42), para 41);
wherein the one or more first channels comprise a first portion and a second portion (see annotated Fig. 2, wherein the first and second portions are separated by the dotted line),
wherein the first portion comprises a tubular channel (Fig. 2 (21)), and wherein the second portion comprises multiple channels, an annular channel, or a segmented annular channel (see annotated Fig. 2 (32) shows the multiple channels of the second portion), and wherein the tubular channel is in fluid communication with and diverges into the multiple channels, the annular channel, or the segmented annular channel (see annotated Fig. 2 wherein (21) is in fluid communication with and diverges into (32)); and
wherein the one or more second channels converge with the second portion at the one or more nebulisation regions (as shown in Fig. 2 (60)).
PNG
media_image1.png
995
811
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4:
Ueda discloses the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, wherein the tubular channel diverges into the multiple channels, the annular channel, or the segmented annular channel such that a surface area of liquid provided to the nebuliser outlet is greater when the liquid passes from the tubular channel into the multiple channels, annular channel, or segmented annular channel than when the liquid is in the tubular channel. Ueda has the same structure as is described in the specification at PgPub para 197 for achieving the claimed function. As such, it inherently achieves the claimed function.
Regarding Claim 7:
Ueda discloses the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, wherein the nebuliser outlet is configured such that gas provided to the nebuliser outlet can pass via the one or more second channels to the one or more nebulisation regions, and can nebulise liquid in the one or more nebulisation regions. Fig. 2 (60), para 55.
Regarding Claim 8:
Ueda discloses the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, wherein the one or more nebulisation regions are downstream of the nebuliser outlet. Para 55, spout (52) and the region adjacent thereto.
Regarding Claim 9:
Ueda discloses the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, wherein the one or more nebulisation regions are within the nebuliser outlet (Fig. 2 (60) closest to the passages), and the one or more first channels and the one or more second channels converge at the one or more nebulisation regions. As can be seen in Fig. 2, all of the outlets converge to the nebulization region.
Regarding Claim 10:
Ueda discloses the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, wherein one or more of the second channels surrounds one or more of the first channels. See Fig. 2 above.
Regarding Claim 18:
Ueda discloses a method of nebulising a liquid, the method comprising using the nebuliser outlet and/or the nebuliser of claim 1 to nebulise a liquid. Para 55.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
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.
Claims 5-6 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ueda in view of WO 2019/193191 A1 [Schlichting].
Regarding Claims 5-6:
Ueda teaches the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, but fails to teach that the nebuliser outlet is formed using Selective Laser Melting (SLM).
Schlichting teaches making analytical components, such as the inlet, outlets, and electrodes described from 29:24-34:15, using the additive manufacturing process of Selective Laser Melting. 34:20-21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to use the SLM manufacturing of Schlichting to make the outlet of Ueda. One would have been motivated to do so in order to since such a technique is taught to yield suitable precision in a cost-efficient manner. Schlichting 27:31-33.
Regarding Claims 19-20:
Ueda teaches the nebuliser outlet of claim 1, but fails to teach that the nebuliser outlet is formed using the additive manufacturing process of Selective Laser Melting (SLM).
Schlichting teaches making analytical components, such as the inlet, outlets, and electrodes described from 29:24-34:15, using the additive manufacturing process of Selective Laser Melting. 34:20-21. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to use the SLM manufacturing of Schlichting to make the outlet of Ueda. One would have been motivated to do so in order to since such a technique is taught to yield suitable precision in a cost-efficient manner. Schlichting 27:31-33.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the anticipation and obviousness rejections of record have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues that the present amendments overcome the indefiniteness rejections of record. The rejections of claims 18-20 are withdrawn. Amended claim 4 is rejected as indefinite again, but concerning the amended language.
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 WYATT A STOFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0700-1600 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, ROBERT KIM can be reached at 571 272 2293. 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.
WYATT STOFFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights