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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority to Application No. (SG10202107470S) filed on the July 07, 2021.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species (a) in the reply filed on July 06, 2026, is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 7-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species (b)-(e).
Claim Objections
Claims 2-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 2-6, "A patient interface according to claim," should read as "The patient interface according to claim".
Appropriate correction is required.
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scheiner et al. (US 20150352306 A1), hereafter as Scheiner, in view of Galgali et al. (US 20180256844 A1), hereafter as Galgali.
Regarding Claim 1, Scheiner discloses a patient interface (Fig. 71-73) comprising:
a plenum chamber (Fig. 71-73; 3200) pressurisable to a therapeutic pressure of at least 4 cmH20 above ambient air pressure (para. 0071, claim 143),
a seal-forming structure (Fig. 71; 3100) constructed and arranged to form a seal with a region of the patient's face surrounding an entrance to the patient's airways (Fig. 71; para. 0380-0382), the seal-forming structure constructed and arranged to maintain said therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber throughout the patient's respiratory cycle in use (claim 143);
and a positioning and stabilising structure (Fig. 71-7; 330, 3316, 3315, 3317) to provide a force to hold the seal-forming structure in a therapeutically effective position on the patient's head (para. 0542);
wherein the patient interface is configured to leave the patient's mouth uncovered (Fig. 71-73; Examiner notes: this limitation is functional however the mouth is uncovered),
Scheiner does not specifically disclose wherein the positioning and stabilising structure has an expanded configuration and a compact configuration that is more compact in at least one dimension than the expanded configuration, and comprises one or more resilient structures for transforming from the compact configuration to the expanded configuration.
Galgali teaches wherein the positioning and stabilising structure (Fig 38A-38D; 130, 118) has an expanded configuration (Fig 38A-38D; 130, with 710) and a compact configuration (Fig 38A-38D; 130, 712, 714) that is more compact in at least one dimension than the expanded configuration (examiner notes: the spring portion 710 is able to extend and contract), and comprises one or more resilient structures (712, 714 are the resilient members) for transforming from the compact configuration to the expanded configuration (para. 0417-0418).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the straps of Scheiner to include to have an expanded configuration and a compact configuration that is more compact in at least one dimension than the expanded configuration, and comprises one or more resilient structures for transforming from the compact configuration to the expanded configuration as taught by Galgali for the purpose of the spring portion being about to absorb at least a portion of and does not transfer an entirety of the momentary external horizontal force to the seal such that the position of the seal on the user's face remains undisturbed or is disturbed less than with other frame designs and to also to accommodate a wider range of facial geometries as well as to account for blow off force in the mask (para. 0417-0418).
Regarding Claim 2, Modified Scheiner discloses the patient interface according to claim 1, wherein the expanded configuration is a substantially in-use configuration (para. 0417-0418: Examiner notes: the mask interface can be in expanded configuration in use, making “substantially” in use configuration; Galgali).
Regarding Claim 3, Modified Scheiner discloses the patient interface according to claim 1, wherein the compact configuration(Fig 38A-38D; 130, 712, 714) is flattened and/or folded relative to the expanded configuration (Fig. Fig. 38C; Galgali).
Regarding Claim 4, Modified Scheiner discloses the patient interface according to claim 1, wherein the positioning and stabilising structure (Fig 38A-38D; 130, 71-) comprises one or more straps (Fig. 38A-38D; Galgali), and wherein at least one of said one or more resilient structures (710, 712, 714; Galgali) is attached to and/or integrated in the one or more straps (Examiner notes: Galgali teaches 710 may be unitarily-formed as integral one-piece side arms; para. 0417).
Regarding Claim 5, Modified Scheiner discloses the patient interface according to claim 4, wherein the one or more resilient structures (Fig. 38A-38D; 710) impart a predetermined curvature to the one or more straps (para. 0417-0418; Galgali).
Regarding Claim 6, Modified Scheiner discloses patient interface according to claim 4, wherein at least one of said one or more resilient structures (Fig. 38A-38D; 710).
Modified Scheiner does not specifically disclose that the strip of material having a different elasticity than that of the one or more strap.
However, Galgali teaches that spring portion (Fig. 38A-38D; 710) deforms to provide a temporary shape change and is formed as a series of straight segments 712 connected by bends 714. The bends 714 may form an acute angle between the straight segments 712 as to allow the spring portion 710 to bend, shorten in length or extend in length.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to configure the spring portion and the straps side arms (130; Galgali) to have different elasticities because the components perform different mechanical functions. The spring portion is intended to flex an accommodate relative movement , and the ends (130A, 130B) are intended to provide support and restraint. Accordingly one of the ordinary skill in the art world be able to recognize that selecting the different elastic properties for these components would enable each to perform its intended function and support/load transport.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO-892 for additional attached references. Other prior art of particular note include:
Amarasinghe et al. (EP 3865166 A1; Figs. 6-10, 6134, 6146) teaches arm that have intended that generally evenly spaced apart from one another, and include similar widths and depths into the thickness of the arm. However, it should be appreciated that the slots 6146 may include other suitable arrangements and configurations to modify the location and flexibility characteristics of the arm 6134, e.g., number of slots, slots on one or both sides of the arm (anterior and/or posterior sides), spacing between slots, width, depth, orientation or angle of slot on the arm.
Busch et al. (US 20130008449 A1; Figs. 4/5; 72/92) teaches pliable insert 72/92 is structured to flex, bend and/or twist in response to applied forces and hold the resulting shape when the forces are removed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAAP A ELLABIB whose telephone number is (571)272-5879. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, KENDRA CARTER can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
MAAP A. ELLABIB
Examiner
Art Unit 3785
/M.A.E./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights