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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 - 9 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.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Graves et al. (7163031).
Regarding claim 1, the Graves et al. reference discloses an apparatus for filling a syringe (Figure 4), comprising: a pipeline (71; i.e., fluid conduit) for delivering a low viscous material discharged from a container; at least one downwardly directed injection port (defined at needle valves 52, 54, 56) to connect with a syringe (44) to be filled with the material delivered through the pipeline; a piston (92) disposed within the syringe to be linearly movable in a longitudinal direction of the syringe and sealing the injected material between the injection port and the piston (Fig. 4); and a syringe rod (unlabeled; see Figure 4) coupled to the syringe so as to press the piston (via actuator 37) into the syringe and to indicate a position of the piston; wherein each injection port has a needle valve to open and close the injection port (see column 8, lines 1 – 8).
Regarding claim 2, wherein the injection port has a syringe filling nozzle (this would be inherent when using a needle valve).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the pipeline is disassembled for cleaning. This doesn’t further define the structure, and the device is capable of being disassembled for cleaning.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the injection port is opened or closed by the position of the piston. This would be inherent during operation of the Graves et al. device.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, the method would be inherent during normal use and operation of the device.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guo et al. (CN 208940533) in view of Graves et al. (7163031).
Regarding claim 1, the Guo et al. reference discloses an apparatus for filling a syringe (Figure 1), comprising: a pipeline (i.e., injection tube) for delivering a low viscous material discharged from a container; at least one downwardly directed injection port (check valve 140; Figure 2) to connect with a syringe (100) to be filled with the material delivered through the pipeline; a piston (130) disposed within the syringe to be linearly movable in a longitudinal direction of the syringe and sealing the injected material between the injection port and the piston (Fig. 1); and a syringe rod (160) coupled to the syringe so as to press the piston into the syringe and to indicate a position of the piston; but doesn’t disclose wherein each injection port has a needle valve to open and close the injection port. However, the Graves et al. reference discloses another medical syringe filling device having a needle valve (52, 54, 56) to precisely control flow of fluid to the syringe (discussed supra). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the Guo et al. device to substitute a needle valve for the check valve as, for example, taught by the Graves et al. reference to precisely control flow of fluid to the syringe.
Regarding claim 2, wherein the injection port has a syringe filling nozzle (this would be inherent when using a needle valve).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the pipeline is disassembled for cleaning. This doesn’t further define the structure, and the Guo et al. device is capable of being disassembled for cleaning.
Regarding claim 5, the Guo et al. reference further discloses wherein the syringe rod is composed of a syringe rod (160), a spring (170) to press the rod, and a syringe rod barrel (120) to set a lower end of the spring and to expose an upper end of the rod.
Regarding claim 7, wherein the injection port is opened or closed by the position of the piston. This would be inherent during operation of the Guo et al. device.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, the method would be inherent during normal use and operation of the device.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Graves et al. (7163031) and Guo et al. in view of Laukenmann et al (6640842).
Regarding claim 3, the Graves et al. and Guo et al. references disclose the invention (discussed supra), but don’t disclose being equipped with a mesh screen filter. However, the Laukenmann et al. reference discloses another syringe filling device having sterile filters (14) located at all product-contacting inlets and outlets in the system (col. 2, lines 21 and 22). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to modify the Graves et al. and Guo et al. devices to have a mesh filter within the pipeline as, for example, taught by the Laukenmann et al. reference in order to filter the system, since it is well known, conventional in the medical art and would be obvious to try without unexpected results.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY LEWIS MAUST whose telephone number is (571)272-4891. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7am - 5pm.
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, Craig Schneider can be reached at 571-272-3607. 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.
/TIMOTHY L MAUST/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights