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 .
Response to Amendments/Arguments
Applicant's amendments and arguments filed 18 May 2026 have been fully considered. Applicant’s amendments to the drawings are accepted.
Applicant’s arguments drawn to the claims are not persuasive. The Stuva reference discloses a machine with multiple pumps and control unit that carries out pressure measurements and evaluations at different times to determine the quality of the connection of the cassette to the machine. The manner in which the quality of connection is determined does not add patentable subject matter to the device itself. That is, “detection of a length sensor position of the one or more pumps” recites what the device does, not what it is. Accordingly, the claimed apparatus does not patentably distinguish over the prior art of record.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-6, 9-12, and 16-20 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being anticipated by US 2015/0335809 to Stuva et al.
In the specification and figures, Stuva discloses the apparatus substantially as claimed by Applicant. With regard to claims 1, 2, 3, 11, 17, 18, Stuva discloses a blood treatment system 310 comprising machine 360 with multiple pumps 325, 328, 346, 327, to be used with a disposable cassette 372, wherein the machine has a coupling region (see pump raceways 366), and a control unit 361 that carries out pressure measurements and evaluations at different times to determine the quality of the connection of the cassette to the machine 360 (see FIG 2, ¶0095, 0107, 0113-114). With regard to the recitation “detection of a length sensor position of the one or more pumps,” Applicant is setting forth the intended use of the claimed apparatus. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. See MPEP § 2114.
With regard to claims 4-5, Stuva discloses that the apparatus comprises multiple pumps (such as pump 14) and takes pressure measurements (Ppump) to test the connection between the pump 14 and a valve 90 to measure the decay of a connection to a return line 82 (see ¶0116).
With regard to claims 6 and 12, Stuva discloses that the pressure measurement may be carried out prior to pump operation as well as during pump operation (see ¶0108).
With regard to claims 9, 10, and 19, Stuva discloses that the apparatus is configured to store measured values and display results (see ¶0090-0091, 0071).
With regard to claims 16 and 20, the machine may comprise a dialysis machine and a disposable cassette (see ¶0002-0003).
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.
Claims 7, 8, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0335809 to Stuva et al in view of US 2005/0118030 to Kline et al.
In the specification and figures, Stuva discloses the apparatus substantially as claimed by Applicant (see rejections above).
With regard to claims 7, 8, and 13-15, Stuva does not disclose pressure measurements for a plurality of pumps and evaluation for coordination or tolerance. However, Kline discloses an extracorporeal blood treatment machine with a cassette and a testing protocol that tests the pressure at multiple pumps and a controller that determines whether the cassette is properly installed based on threshold values and controlled in a coordinated fashion (see Kline ¶0313-0320, 0153-0154). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to use the wet-test methods on multiple pumps as disclosed by Kline in the apparatus disclosed by Stuva, in order to ensure continuous proper connection between the cassette and the operating pumps, as taught by Kline.
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 LESLIE R DEAK whose telephone number is (571)272-4943. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 9am to 5:30pm.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached at 571-272-7159. 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.
/LESLIE R DEAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799 8 June 2026
Prosecution Insights