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. (63/202,987) filed on the July 02, 2021.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, Species B, Sub-species I in the reply filed is acknowledged.
Claims 10, 12, and 21-27 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, and Species A and Species B II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 10, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 8, 15-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Volberg et al. (US 6016803 A), hereafter as Volberg.
Regrading Claims 1, Volberg discloses an oxygen delivery and reclamation system (Fig. 1-7), the system comprising:
one or more rebreather devices in a chamber (chamber 4; Col. 6 lines 20-37; Volberg teaches that there are mask won by the patient), each of the one or more rebreather devices comprising a mask configured to be worn by a user (Col 6 lines 30-34);
an oxygen-enriched gas supply source ( Fig. 5; 60; Col. 6 lines 52-67) configured to supply an oxygen-concentrated inhalation gas upon activation to the one or more rebreather devices (this limitation is functional however Volberg teaches that oxygen-concentrated it deliver through supply line 28);
a purge line (Fig. 5; 30) configured to purge exhalation gas from the one or more rebreather devices (Col. 6 lines 38-51);
a recycle line (Fig. 5; 41) coupled to the purge line (30) and configured to receive the exhalation gas from the purge line (Fig. 5); and
an oxygen concentrator (Fig. 5; sieves 18, 20) coupled to the recycle line (through lines 42 or 46), wherein the oxygen concentrator is configured to receive the exhalation gas and output an oxygen-enriched gas to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source (back to mixing 60) and an oxygen-depleted gas to an ambient environment outside the chamber, to a storage source, or to the chamber (Fig. 5; through 22 and 50-51; Col. 6 line 20- Col. 7 line 7).
Regrading Claims 2, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, wherein the oxygen-enriched gas comprises at least 90% oxygen by volume (claim 12; Col. 4 lines 61-66).
Regrading Claims 4, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, further comprising:
a chamber pump configured to supply chamber air from the chamber to the recycle line (Col. 8 lines 38-54; the chamber has pump and valve that pumps the air out of the chamber), wherein the oxygen concentrator (Fig. 5; sieves 18, 20) is configured to receive the chamber air or a mixture of the chamber air and the exhalation gas and output the oxygen-enriched gas and the oxygen-depleted gas (Fig. 5; Col. 6 lines 20-Col. 7 lines 7) .
Regrading Claims 8, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, wherein the chamber (Fig. 1-5; 4) is a pressurized vessel (Col. 4 lines 6-26).
Regrading Claims 15, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, further comprising:
a hygiene/trace contaminant removal device (Fig. 5; 32) to the purge line (31) and configured to remove contaminants from the exhalation gas prior to reaching the recycle line (41; Col. 6 lines 38-51).
Regrading Claims 16, Volberg discloses a method of delivering and reclaiming oxygen, the method comprising:
receiving an input for a desired oxygen concentration to be supplied to a user of a rebreather device inside a chamber (Fig. 5; chamber 4; 24, 62, 64; Col. 6 lines 20-37; Volberg teaches that there are mask won by the patient);
delivering an inhalation gas to the user at the desired oxygen concentration from an oxygen-enriched gas supply source ( Fig. 5; 60; Col. 6 lines 52-67; Volberg teaches that oxygen-concentrated it deliver through supply line 28);
purging exhalation gas from the rebreather device by a vacuum generated in a purge line (Fig. 5; 30) coupled to the rebreather device;
recycling the exhalation gas (Fig. 5; 41) to an oxygen concentrator(Fig. 5; sieves 18, 20); and producing, by the oxygen concentrator, an oxygen-enriched gas that is supplied to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source (Fig. 5; through 22 and 50-51; Col. 6 line 20- Col. 7 line 7).
Regrading Claims 17, Volberg discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising:
producing, by the oxygen concentrator(Fig. 5; sieves 18, 20), an oxygen-depleted gas that is delivered to the chamber (Fig 5; Col. 6 lines 20-Col. 7 lines 7).
Regrading Claims 18, Volberg discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising:
pulling chamber air (Col. 8 lines 38-54; the chamber has pump and valve that pumps the air out of the chamber) from the chamber into a recycle line (31) fluidly coupled to the oxygen concentrator(Fig. 5; sieves 18, 20); and
supplying the chamber air to the oxygen concentrator (Fig. 5), wherein the oxygen-enriched gas is produced by one or both of the chamber air and the exhalation gas (through the recycled system Col. 6 lines 20-Col. 7 line 7).
Regrading Claims 19, Volberg discloses the method of claim 16,
wherein the oxygen-enriched gas comprises at least 90% oxygen by volume (claim 12; Col. 4 lines 61-66).
Regrading Claims 20, Volberg discloses the method of claim 16, further comprising:
venting the exhalation gas from the rebreather device (inside of 4) to an ambient environment outside the chamber (Fig. 1-5; 4; through 51 or 36).
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) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volberg, as applied to claim 1, in view of Gurnee et at. (US 20020144683 A1), hereafter as Gurnee.
Regrading Claims 3, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, further comprising:
Volberg does not disclose specifically a carbon dioxide (C02) scrubber coupled to the recycle line, wherein the carbon dioxide scrubber is configured to remove carbon dioxide from the exhalation gas prior to being received by the oxygen concentrator.
However, Gurnee teaches a carbon dioxide (C02) scrubber (Fig. 1; 41) coupled to the recycle line, wherein the carbon dioxide scrubber is configured to remove carbon dioxide from the exhalation gas prior to being received by the oxygen concentrator (para. 0057-0059).
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 system of Volberg to include a carbon dioxide (C02) scrubber as taught by Gurnee for the purpose of remove carbon dioxide from the exhalation gas prior to being received by the oxygen concentrator (para. 0057-0059).
Claim(s) 5 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volberg, as applied to claim 4, in view of Alexander (US 20160175623 A1).
Regrading Claims 5, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 4, further comprising the system controlled by a programmable logic controller (PLC) and are turned on/off independently in order to vary the flow rate of fresh filtered compressed air flowing into the hyperbaric chamber (Col. 6 lines 38-51).
Volberg does not specifically disclose a controller configured with instructions to perform the following operations: receive an indication that an ambient pressure or oxygen concentration/partial pressure of the chamber is above a threshold value; and actuate an electronically or mechanically actuated valve coupled to the chamber pump to pull the chamber air into the recycle line and regulate the ambient pressure.
However, Alexander teaches a controller (Fig. 1; 14, 15) configured with instructions to perform the following operations: receive an indication that an ambient pressure or oxygen concentration/partial pressure of the chamber is above a threshold value; and actuate an electronically or mechanically actuated valve coupled to the chamber pump to pull the chamber air into the recycle line and regulate the ambient pressure (para. 0021-0022).
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 system of Volberg to include the controller system as taught by Alexander for the purpose of the percentage of oxygen in the room can be altered by removing carbon dioxide, and bringing in fresh air (abstract; para. 0021-0022).
Regrading Claims 11, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, further comprising: the system controlled by a programmable logic controller (PLC) and are turned on/off independently in order to vary the flow rate of fresh filtered compressed air flowing into the hyperbaric chamber (Col. 6 lines 38-51).
Volberg does not specifically disclose a controller configured with instructions to perform the following operations: receive an input for a desired oxygen concentration to be supplied to a user of one of the one or more rebreather devices; and actuate an oxygen intake valve fluidly coupled to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source and a chamber air intake valve fluidly coupled to the chamber to deliver the desired oxygen concentration to a rebreather device associated with a user.
However, Alexander teachers a controller (Fig. 1; 14, 15) configured with instructions to perform the following operations (this limitation is functional): receive an input for a desired oxygen concentration to be supplied to a user of one of the one or more rebreather devices; and actuate an oxygen intake valve fluidly coupled to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source and a chamber air intake valve fluidly coupled to the chamber to deliver the desired oxygen concentration to a rebreather device associated with a user (para. 0021-0022; Alexander teaches controller is used to regulate the oxygen concentrator, the CO.sub.2 scrubber, and the ventilation fan so the percentage of oxygen in the room can be altered by removing carbon dioxide, and bringing in fresh air. The controller also monitors oxygen and carbon dioxide levels).
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 system of Volberg to include a controller as taught by Alexander for the purpose of the percentage of oxygen in the room can be altered by removing carbon dioxide, and bringing in fresh air (abstract; para. 0021-0022).
Claim(s) 6-7, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volberg, as applied to claim 1, in view of Hill et al. (US 20020096174 A1), hereafter as Hill.
Regrading Claims 6, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, further comprising: compressor (16) compresses the air and then directs the compressed air through heat exchanger 38 in order to remove excess heat generated by the air compression process,
Volberg does not specifically disclose a purge pump configured to generate a vacuum in the recycle line and pull the exhalation gas from the purge line to the recycle line.
However, Hill teaches a purge pump (compressor 112 with vacuum/pressure levels) configured to generate a vacuum in the recycle line and pull the exhalation gas from the purge line to the recycle line (para. 0038).
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 system of Volberg to include the a purge pump as taught by Hill for the purpose of providing the required vacuum/pressure levels and flow rates, emit little noise and vibration, emit little heat, be small, not be heavy, and consume little power (para. 0038).
Regrading Claims 7, Modified Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 6, further comprising:
an atmospheric line (through 36 Fig. 5; Volberg ) coupled to the purge line (30; Volberg) and configured to vent the exhalation gas to the ambient environment outside the chamber (Through valve 36 and/or 22; Volberg) wherein the exhalation gas is supplied to the recycle line or the atmospheric line via an electronically or mechanically actuated valve (claims 9-10; Volberg).
Regrading Claims 14, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1, wherein the oxygen concentrator (Fig. 5; 18, 20)
Volberg does not disclose that the oxygen concentrator is an electrochemical oxygen concentrator.
However, Hill teaches oxygen concentrator is an electrochemical oxygen concentrator (Claim 9, para. 0086).
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 oxygen concentrator to include the electrochemical oxygen concentrator as taught by Hill for the purpose of deliver oxygen gas at a relatively high pressure (para. 0086).
Claim(s) 9 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Volberg, as applied to claim 1, in view of Curiel et al. (US 20220008276 A1), hereafter as Curiel.
Regrading Claims 9, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1,
Volberg does not disclose an oxygen tank coupled to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source and configured to supply oxygen to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source, wherein the oxygen-concentrated inhalation gas includes the oxygen or a mixture of the oxygen and the oxygen-enriched gas.
However, Curiel teaches an oxygen tank (Fig. 14A-18C; 72, 78, 71a) coupled to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source (71, 70) and configured to supply oxygen to the oxygen-enriched gas supply source (para. 0111-0118), wherein the oxygen-concentrated inhalation gas includes the oxygen or a mixture of the oxygen and the oxygen-enriched gas (para. 0118).
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 system of Volberg include the oxygen tank as taught by Curiel as it is known in the art that tanks are used because they are able to delivered pressuizerd gas or fluid (para. 0111-0117).
Regrading Claims 13, Volberg discloses the oxygen delivery and reclamation system of claim 1,
Volberg does not disclose that wherein the one or more rebreather devices comprises a plurality of rebreather devices comprising masks worn by a plurality of users (Volberg teaches that two people could be in the chamber).
However, Curiel teaches wherein the one or more rebreather devices comprises a plurality of rebreather devices comprising masks worn by a plurality of users (Fig. 14A-18C; 70).
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 system of Volberg to include the a plurality of rebreather devices comprising masks worn by a plurality of users as taught by Curiel for the purpose of providing oxygen to multiple patients (para. 0117).
Conclusion
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