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 .
Status of the Claims
The amendment filed 04/29/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9, 11-24 and 36 are pending and under consideration.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 05/04/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non Final Rejection on 02/04/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
In response to the applicant’s argument with respect 35 USC 102/103 rejections that the prior of the record Alvarado (US 4515270 A) does not teach “each of the first and second side panels ha[s] a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container”, and further Alvarado fails to teach “the container is configured to transition from the first closed configuration to the open configuration in response to a user applying a first pulling force to the first side panel and a second pulling force in opposition to the first pulling force to the second side panel” because Alvarado does not meet the “each of the first and second side panels ha[s] a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container” have been considered and are at least partially persuasive, but are moot in light of new rejection/interpretation.
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.
Claims 1-7, 11, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A).
Regarding claim 1, Alvarado substantially teaches applicant’s claimed invention, and specifically discloses a device with every structural limitation of applicant’s claimed invention (except for the limitations shown in italics and grayed-out) including:
a medical package (figures 1-4), comprising:
a container (figures 1-4, carton 10 configured to transition from a first closed configuration to an open configuration shown in figures 3 and 4) configured to transition from a first closed configuration to an open configuration, the container comprising:
a bottom panel (figure 4, floor 22) defining a length and a width of the container (figure 4, length and a width of the floor 22), the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features;
first and second side panels (figure 4, side flaps 34) pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite sides of the bottom panel (figures 1 and 4, side flaps 34 pivotally attached to floor 22 along fold lines 36), each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container; and
first and second end panels (figures 1 and 4, side end flaps 30 and 31 are pivotably coupled with the floor along fold lines 32) pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite ends of the bottom panel, each of the first and second end panels further coupled with each of the first and second side panels (figure 4, side flaps and end flaps are coupled at its corners), wherein:
the first and second end panels and the first and second side panels are disposed substantially parallel to the bottom panel in the first closed configuration (figure 3, the end flaps and side flaps are folded substantially parallel to the floor in the closed configuration), the container is configured to transition from the first closed configuration to the open configuration in response to a user applying a first pulling force to the first side panel and a second pulling force in opposition to the first pulling force to the second side panel (figures 3-4 and col 3 lines 25-30, the cartoon is configured to transition from the closed configuration to open configuration when taps 54 are pulled in first and second opposing pulling forces), and
the container is configured to enclose a urinary catheter therein, the urinary catheter being sterile in the first closed configuration or used in a second closed configuration of the container (abstract col 1 lines 5-35, the carton is capable of enclosing disposable medical devices including sterile urinary catheter and used catheter can be stored in a second closed configuration).
Alvarado does not teach the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a folder to hold coil of plastic tubing, Jaeschke teaches the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features (figure 3 col 2 line 42-48, bottle wall 10 including tables 35-37 configured to retain and stabilize plastic tube ).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado to incorporate the teachings of Jaeschke and provides the one or more catheter-stabilization features as claimed for the purpose of retaining the catheter tube in place thereby prevent unnecessary abrasions during shipment as taught by Jaeschke (col 1 line 19-24).
The combination does not expressly teach each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a collapsible box, Becker teaches each of the first and second side panels (col 1 lines 9-11 “the height of each of said walls being greater than one half the width of the box”) having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container.
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, to incorporate the teachings of Becker and provides the first and second side panels as claimed, and one of skill in the art motivated to do so, for the purpose of providing desired profile in the open configuration to facilitate retention of used items within the container. Additionally, the modification enhances sealing when the container is folded, thereby reducing or preventing leakage from disposable medical devices.
Regarding claim 2, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein in the open configuration, the first and second end panels and the first and second side panels are disposed substantially perpendicular to the bottom panel (Alvarado; figure 4, the flaps 30, 31 and 34 disposed substantially perpendicular to the floor 22).
Regarding claim 3, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the container is biased away from the first closed configuration toward the open configuration (Alvarado; col 3 lines 30-35, the cartoon configured to be stay in open configuration, and further folded paper of the cartoon inherently biasing toward to return to a more planar or “open” state when opposing closing force is removed)
Regarding claim 4, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the urinary catheter is a male urinary catheter (Alvarado; the carton is capable of enclosing male unitary catheter)
Regarding claim 5, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the containers is configured for handling within a clean room (Alvarado; abstract, the cartoon is configured to be used during operating procedure).
Regarding claim 6, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the container is configured to enable sterilization of the catheter when the catheter is disposed within the container, the container disposed in the first closed configuration (Alvarado; col 2 lines 20-25, the material of the cartoon withstanding standard sterilization enabling sterilizing catheter when the catheter is disposed in the cartoon in the first closed configuration)
Regarding claim 7, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the container defines a sterile barrier for the catheter in the first closed configuration (Alvarado; figure 2, col 1 lines 20-25 col 2 lines 20-25, in the closed configuration, the carton substantially seals interior from the environment defining a sterile barrier).
Regarding claim 11, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 10.
The combination further teaches wherein:
the first side panel includes a first pull tab (Alvarado; figure 4 and col 3 lines 25-30, tabs 54 is configured to be pulled opposing direction) configured for grasping by the user when applying the first pulling force, and
the second side panel includes a second pull tab (Alvarado; figure 4 and col 3 lines 25-30, tabs 54are configured to be pulled opposing direction) configured for grasping by the user when applying the second pulling force.
Regarding claim 14, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the urinary catheter includes a bag for collecting urine therein (Alvarado; col 1 lines 5-35, the carton is capable of enclosing disposable medical devices, for example urinary catheter with a bag for collecting urine in the closed configuration)
Regarding claim 15, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 14.
The combination further teaches wherein the bag is coupled with the urinary catheter when the bag is enclosed within the container, such that the bag is in fluid communication with a lumen of the urinary catheter (Alvarado; col 1 lines 5-35, the carton is capable of enclosing disposable medical devices, for example urinary catheter with bag is in fluid communication with a lumen of the urinary catheter, in the closed configuration).
Claims 8 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Frojd (US 20110056852 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination does not teach wherein the container includes a number of adhesively bonded sections of one or more of the first and second side panels or the first and second end panels, the adhesively bonded sections configured to secure the container in the first closed configuration.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a catheter assembly with resealable opening, Frojd teaches wherein the container includes a number of adhesively ([0011]-[0016] a third sheet connected by means of an adhesive over flap opening, and the adhesive is adapted to maintain a sterile closure of the package before use) bonded sections of one or more of the first and second side panels or the first and second end panels, the adhesively bonded sections configured to secure the container in the first closed configuration.
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Frojd and provide the adhesively bonded sections as claimed for the purpose of maintaining a sterile closure of the package before use as taught by Frojd ([0015]).
Regarding claim 9, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Frojd, teaches the package according to claim 8.
The combination further teaches wherein the number of adhesively bonded sections are configured to define a sealed cavity for containing the urinary catheter therein in the first closed configuration (Fjord; the combination having adhesively bonded section, for example adhesively bonding flaps 30 and 31 to flaps and floor of Alvarado in closed continuation, defines a sealed cavity in the closed configuration capable of containing the urinary catheter).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Anders et al (US 5958483 A)
Regarding claim 12, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 11.
Alvarado does not teach wherein at least one of the first and second pull tabs includes a pull ring.
However, Anders teaches a package for food, which relatively pertinent to applicant’s posed problem of providing sterile package for its content and facilitating the opening of the packaging system, wherein at least one of the first and second pull tabs includes a pull ring (figure 3, pull-rings/tab 7).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Anders and provide the first and second pull tabs as claimed for the purpose of providing improved grip as taught by Anders (col 2 lines 30-40).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Barnes et al (US 2823847 A).
Regarding claim 13, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 11
The combination does not teach wherein at least a portion of each of the first and second pull tabs extends outward beyond a perimeter of the container in the first closed configuration.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a collapsible container structure, Barnes teaches wherein at least a portion of each of the first and second pull tabs extends outward beyond a perimeter of the container in the first closed configuration (figure 1, pull-tabs 21 and 22 extend outward beyond a perimeter of the bottom 10 of the box in the closed configuration).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Barnes and provide the pull tabs as claimed, and one of skill in the art motivated to do so, for the purpose of providing gripping surface that can be accessible while the container is in the first closed configuration.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Campbell (US 4186955 A).
Regarding claim 16, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination does not expressly teach wherein the container is configured to:
transition from the opened configuration to the second closed configuration, and
enclose the urinary catheter within the container in the second closed configuration after use of the urinary catheter
In the same field of endeavor, namely a waste matter removal implement and receptacle, Campbell teaches wherein the container (figures 1-6, 14) is configured to:
transition from the opened configuration to a second closed configuration (from open configuration of figure 3, to closed configuration in figure 6), and
enclose the urinary catheter within the container in the second closed configuration after use of the urinary catheter (col 3 lines 1-16, after disposing waster matter 44, flap 12 and glove 42 within the receiver, the receiver 14 can be collapsed to form a retentive envelope).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Campbell and provide the container as claimed for the purpose of providing convenient disposal of used urinary catheter as taught by Campbell (col 3 lines 1-16)
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A), Becker (US 2286399 A) and Campbell (US 4186955 A), and in further view of Frojd (US 20110056852 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Campbell, teaches the package according to claim 16.
The combination does not teach the container includes one or more adhesively bonded sections configured to secure the container in the second closed configuration
In the same field of endeavor, namely a catheter assembly with resealable opening, Frojd teaches the container includes one or more adhesively bonded sections configured to secure the container in the second closed configuration ([0011]-[0016] and [0022] flaps are provided with an adhesive configured to be resealed).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Campbell, and provide the container as claimed for the purpose of safely discard a wet product and/or a wetting fluid without any risk for spillage as taught by Fjord ([0004]).
Claims 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A), Becker (US 2286399 A) and Campbell (US 4186955 A), and in further view of Dalgleish (US 20170081072 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Campbell, teaches the package according to claim 16.
The combination does not teach wherein the container is configured to inhibit fluid disposed within the container from exiting the container with the container disposed in the second closed configuration.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a packaging and method of manufacturing same, Dalgleish teaches wherein the container is configured to inhibit fluid disposed within the container from exiting the container with the container disposed in the second closed configuration ([0101] the container is coated with hydrophobic material act as a barrier against water assisting in waterproofing the package).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Campbell, to incorporate the teachings of Dalgleish and provides the container as claimed, and one of skill in the art motivated to do so, for the purpose of providing fluid-impermeable barrier as taught by Dalgleish ([0101]). The fluid-impermeable barrier prevent the egress of liquid waste, such as residual fluid from discarded medical gloves, thereby preventing the saturation or structure failure of the paperboard substrate during disposal and preventing spillage.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A), Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Inwood (US 20210292041 A1)
Regarding claim 19, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
Alvarado does not teach further comprising a tamper evident mechanism configured to indicate that the container has been transitioned away from the first closed configuration.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a tamper-evident paperboard food container, Inwood teaches further comprising a tamper evident mechanism configured to indicate that the container has been transitioned away from the first closed configuration (figure 1 [0022], tamper-evident feature 172 is irreversibly split to open the closure).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado to incorporate the teachings of Inwood and provide the tamper evident mechanism as claimed for the purpose of providing visual indication of container sealing integrity as taught by Inwood ([0003]). For instance, the tamper evident mechanism would prevent accidental use of a contaminated device.
Regarding claim 20, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke, Becker and Inwood, teaches the package according to claim 19.
The combination further teaches wherein the tamper evident mechanism includes a tear-able adhesive tape extending between the first and second side panels (Inwood; figure 1, [0022] and [0025], region 156 with adhesive assembly 170 can be tearable along perforations 174 extending between panels 132 and 136 when the box is assembled ).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarado (US 4515270 A), in view of Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A), Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Dalgleish (US 20170081072 A1).
Regarding claim 21, Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 1.
The combination does not teach wherein a bottom panel, the first and second side panels, and the first and second end panels each include a hydrophobic inside surface.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a paperboard packaging containers, Dalgleish teaches wherein a bottom panel, the first and second side panels, and the first and second end panels each include a hydrophobic inside surface ([0101] the container is coated with hydrophobic material act as a barrier against water assisting in waterproofing the package).
Therefore, 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 Alvarado, as modified by Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Dalgleish and provide the container as claimed for the purpose of providing fluid-impermeable barrier as taught by Dalgleish ([0101]).. The fluid-impermeable barrier prevent the egress of liquid waste, such as residual fluid from discarded medical gloves, thereby preventing the saturation or structure failure of the paperboard substrate during disposal and preventing spillage.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conway et al ( US 20120239005 A1) in view of Alvarado (US 4515270 A), Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A).
Regarding claim 22, Conway teaches a urinary catheter assembly, comprising:
a urinary catheter (figure 3, catheter 3); and
a container (figure 3, package 29) configured to transition from a first closed configuration to an open configuration (figure 3 and [0031-0033], the catheter package formed from a sheet forming a cavity by sealing the edges which can be sealed and opened), the container including:
a bottom panel defining a length and a width of the container, the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features;
first and second side panels pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite sides of the bottom panel, each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container; and
first and second end panels pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite ends of the bottom panel, each of the first and second end panels further coupled with each of the first and second side panels, wherein:
the first and second end panels and the first and second side panels are disposed substantially parallel to the bottom panel in the first closed configuration,
the container is configured to transition from the first closed configuration to the open configuration in response to a user applying a first pulling force to the first side panel and a second pulling force in opposition to the first pulling force to the second side panel,
the urinary catheter is enclosed within the container in the first closed configuration of the container with the urinary catheter being sterile (figure 3 and [0031-0034] the catheter 3 is enclosed within the package 29 in the sealed sterile configuration), and
the container is configured to enclose the urinary catheter therein in a second closed configuration of the container after use of the urinary catheter.
Conway does not teach the container including:
a bottom panel defining a length and a width of the container, the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features;
first and second side panels pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite sides of the bottom panel, each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container; and
first and second end panels pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite ends of the bottom panel, each of the first and second end panels further coupled with each of the first and second side panels, wherein:
the first and second end panels and the first and second side panels are disposed substantially parallel to the bottom panel in the first closed configuration,
the container is configured to transition from the first closed configuration to the open configuration in response to a user applying a first pulling force to the first side panel and a second pulling force in opposition to the first pulling force to the second side panel, and
the container is configured to enclose the urinary catheter therein in a second closed configuration of the container after use of the urinary catheter.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a surgical glove carton and trash receptacle, Alvarado teaches the container (figures 1-4, carton 10) including:
a bottom panel (figure 4, floor 22) defining a length and a width of the container (figure 4, length and width of the floor 22), the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features;
first and second side panels (figure 4, side flaps 34 are pivotally attached to floor 22 along fold lines 36) pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite sides of the bottom panel, each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container; and
first and second end panels (figures 1 and 4, side end flaps 30 and 31 are pivotably coupled to the floor along fold lines 32) pivotably coupled with the bottom panel along opposite ends of the bottom panel, each of the first and second end panels further coupled with each of the first and second side panels (figure 4, side flaps and end flaps are coupled at its corners), wherein:
the first and second end panels and the first and second side panels are disposed substantially parallel to the bottom panel in the first closed configuration (figure 3, the end flaps and side flaps are folded substantially parallel to the floor in the closed configuration),
the container is configured to transition from the first closed configuration to the open configuration in response to a user applying a first pulling force to the first side panel and a second pulling force in opposition to the first pulling force to the second side panel (figures 3-4 and col 3 lines 25-30, the cartoon is configured to transition from the closed configuration to open configuration when taps 54 are pulled in first and second opposing pulling forces), and
the container is configured to enclose the urinary catheter therein in a second closed configuration of the container after use of the urinary catheter (abstract col 1 lines 5-35, the carton is capable of enclosing disposable medical devices including used catheter in a second closed configuration).
Therefore, 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 Conway to incorporate the teachings of Alvarado and provide the package as claimed for the purpose of keeping the urinary catheter and sterile before use and to enable easy disposal afterwards as taught by Alvarado (col 1 lines 5-10).
The combination does not teach the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features
In the same field of endeavor, namely a folder to hold coil of plastic tubing, Jaeschke teaches the bottom panel including one or more catheter-stabilization features (figure 3 col 2 line 42-48, bottle wall 10 including tables 35-37 configured to retain and stabilize plastic tube ).
Therefore, 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 Conway, as modified by Alvarado, to incorporate the teachings of Jaeschke and provides the one or more catheter-stabilization features as claimed for the purpose of retaining the catheter tube in place thereby prevent unnecessary abrasions during shipment as taught by Jaeschke (col 1 line 19-24).
The combination does not expressly teach each of the first and second side panels having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a collapsible box, Becker teaches each of the first and second side panels (col 1 lines 9-11 “the height of each of said walls being greater than one half the width of the box”) having a height equal to or greater than one half of the width of the container.
Therefore, 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 Conway, as modified by Alvarado and Jaeschke, to incorporate the teachings of Becker and provides the first and second side panels as claimed, and one of skill in the art motivated to do so, for the purpose of providing desired profile in the open configuration to facilitate retention of used items within the container. Additionally, the modification enhances sealing when the container is folded, thereby reducing or preventing leakage from disposable medical devices.
Claims 23 and 24 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conway et al ( US 20120239005 A1) in view of Alvarado (US 4515270 A), Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Knapp (US 20140262859 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Conway, as modified by Alvarado, Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the assembly according to claim 22.
The combination does not teach a collection bag enclosed within the container.
In the same field of endeavor, namely an intermittent catheter, Knapp teaches further comprising a collection bag enclosed within the container ([0044] and figures 7a, bag 40 is packaged together with the catheter).
Therefore, 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 Conway, as modified by Alvarado, Jaeschke and Becker, to incorporate the teachings of Knapp and provide the collection bag as claimed for the purpose of providing closed system that prevent exposure to contaminants to the user as taught by Knapp ([0043]).
Regarding claim 24, Conway, as modified by Alvarado, Jaeschke, Becker and Knapp, teaches the assembly according to claim 23.
The combination further teaches wherein the collection bag is coupled with the catheter such that the bag is in fluid communication with a lumen of the urinary catheter (Knapp; figure 7a and [0043] bag sealed to funnel 26 of catheter).
Claim 36 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Conway et al ( US 20120239005 A1) in view of Alvarado (US 4515270 A), Jaeschke et al (US 4332322 A) and Becker (US 2286399 A), and in further view of Dalgleish (US 20170081072 A1).
Regarding claim 36, Conway, as modified by Alvarado, Jaeschke and Becker, teaches the package according to claim 16.
The combination does not teach wherein the container is configured with a hydrophobic inner surface to inhibit fluid disposed within the container from exiting the container while enclosing the urinary catheter therein after use of the urinary catheter.
In the same field of endeavor, namely a packaging and method of manufacturing same, Dalgleish teaches wherein the container is configured with a hydrophobic inner surface to inhibit fluid disposed within the container from exiting the container while enclosing the urinary catheter therein after use of the urinary catheter ([0101] the container is coated with hydrophobic material act as a barrier against water assisting in waterproofing the package).
Therefore, 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 Conway, as modified by Alvarado, Jaeschke, to incorporate the teachings of Dalgleish and provides the container as claimed, and one of skill in the art motivated to do so, for the purpose of providing fluid-impermeable barrier as taught by Dalgleish ([0101]). The fluid-impermeable barrier prevent the egress of liquid waste, such as residual fluid from discarded medical gloves, thereby preventing the saturation or structure failure of the paperboard substrate during disposal and preventing spillage.
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 SETH HAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2545. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0900-1700.
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.
/S.H./Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/SARAH AL HASHIMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights