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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/30/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 24-43 are currently pending. Claims 24, and 36 are currently amened. No new subject matter is added.
Claim Objections
Claims 24 and 36 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 24 and 36 mention a “an organ protection layer” in line 1 of the claim, but it is unclear in the specification and the drawings if the organ protection layer is the same as the drainage layer (organ protection layer 105 vs drainage layer 300). Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 24 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 24 and 36 recite the limitation “wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings” and “wherein at least some of the plurality of welds are arranged in discrete unconnected concentric ring” respectively. The specification does not mention the welds nor the spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings. Therefore, Claims 24 and 36 are rejected for introducing new matter.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 24 and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, Claims 24 and 36 recite the limitation “wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings” and “a plurality of rounded spacer material sections… wherein at least some of the plurality of welds are arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings” respectively. It is unclear if the applicant is referring to the plurality of inner welds, the spacer material section, of both to be arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings. For examination purposes the claims will be interpreted as the spacer material section arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings.
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.
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.
Claims 24-25, 27-28, 32-39, and 41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt (US 20040030304 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Hunt” in view of Simmons et al. (US 20110224631 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Simmons”.
Regarding Claim 24, Hunt teaches an organ protection layer for contacting a wound site (at least one lower layer of foam may be enclosed in elastomeric material 38 and placed in direct contact with the tissue within the open wound, see Paragraph [0022]; Figure 2), comprising:
a top film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 having an upper wall 28) overlying a plurality of rounded spacer material sections (foam layers 40 and 42; abdominal wounds are approximately elliptical in shape and the foam pad is also preferably elliptical in shape, see Paragraph [0021]), the spacer material sections overlying a bottom film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 having a lower wall 30) configured to be minimally adherent to the wound site (the film layers comprises holes so that there is limited in growth of fibrous tissue into the sheet. In this way, the film does not become adhered to the wound but remains relatively easy to remove, see Paragraph [0015]), the rounded spacer material sections configured to transmit fluid (fluids are drawn by negative pressure through the holes in the flexible or elastomeric material, and then through the foam, see Paragraph [0023]); and
wherein the top film layer comprises a plurality of welds connecting the top film layer to the bottom film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 are sealed on their periphery, e.g. by welding or 117 adhesive, in a manner that surrounds the lower layer of foam, see Paragraph [0030]), the plurality of welds comprising:
a peripheral weld connecting a peripheral edge of the top film layer to a peripheral edge of the bottom film layer (upper wall 28 and lower wall 30 are welded at the periphery of the envelope, see Figure 2).
However, Hunt does not explicitly disclose a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer, wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete concentric rings.
Simmons teaches a reduced-pressure abdominal treatment device (104) comprising a plurality of liquid-impermeable layers (a first liquid-impermeable layer 204 and a second liquid-impermeable layer 206) with a spacer layer (208) between two of the liquid-impermeable layers (see Figure 2) comprising a plurality of peripheral welds (a plurality of bonds 212 at the periphery, wherein the plurality of bonds 212 may be formed using any known technique, including without limitation welding (e.g., ultrasonic or RF welding), see Paragraph [0044]; see below) and a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer (a plurality of bonds 212 a between peripheral welds and the center of the layer 200, see Paragraph [0044]; Figure 2; see below) , wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds (212) surround one or more spacer material sections (plurality of bonds 212 surround spacer layer 208, see below).
PNG
media_image1.png
461
780
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Hunt and Simmons are analogous art because both teach a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the top film layer of Hunt and further include welded spacer bonds in the spacer layer wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more spacer material sections, as taught by Simmons. Simmons teaches the plurality of inner welds surrounding the plurality of spacers provide areas of separation between adjacent members of the plurality of liquid-impermeable layers and thereby help create a plurality of flow paths (see Paragraph [0042]).
Hunt and Simmons teaches all of the limitations as discussed above and Simmons further teaches the plurality of bonds 212 may also be circular in nature or any other shape (see Paragraph [0044]). However, Hunt and Simmons do not explicitly disclose wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Modified Hunt to have the plurality of spacers arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings. In the instant case, the device of Modified Hunt would not operate differently with the claimed arrangement of spacers and since the shape of the spacers is used for the purpose of providing areas of separation between adjacent members of the plurality of liquid-impermeable layers and thereby help create a plurality of flow paths. The device would function appropriately having the claimed shape. Further, applicant places no criticality on the shape of the spacers claimed, indicating simply that the spacer layer “may be” various shapes and sizes (specification pp. [0053]-[0054]).
Regarding Claim 25, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein individual rounded spacer material sections are elongated (typical sizes for the foam pads may be about 280, 320 and 380 mm for the major dimension and about 140, 175 and 250 mm for the minor dimension, see Paragraph [0021]).
Regarding Claim 27, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein the spacer material comprises foam (foam layers 40 and 42, see Paragraph [0047]).
Regarding Claim 28, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 27 and Hunt further teaches wherein the spacer material comprises hydrophilic foam (lower foam layer 36 is preferably constructed from polyurethane, the polyurethane foams are prepared by reacting a hydrophilic polyether polyol with a tolylene diisocyanate in the presence of water, see Paragraph [0034]).
Regarding Claim 32, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein individual spacer material sections are curved (abdominal wounds are approximately elliptical in shape and the foam pad is also preferably elliptical in shape, see Paragraph [0021]).
Regarding Claim 33, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein individual spacer material sections are perforated (foam layers 40 and 42 has a plurality of holes, see Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 34, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein the top film layer comprises polyurethane, polyethylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, or blends thereof (suitable elastomeric film materials include polyurethane, see Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding Claim 35, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein the bottom film layer comprises polyurethane, polyethylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, or blends thereof (suitable elastomeric film materials include polyurethane, see Paragraph [0020]).
Regarding Claim 36, Hunt teaches a method of treating a wound site using negative pressure (see Abstract), wherein the treatment comprises:
placing an organ protection layer onto a wound site (at least one lower layer of foam may be enclosed in elastomeric material 38 and placed in direct contact with the tissue within the open wound, see Paragraph [0022]; Figure 2), the organ protection layer comprising:
a top film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 having an upper wall 28) overlying a plurality of rounded spacer material sections (foam layers 40 and 42; abdominal wounds are approximately elliptical in shape and the foam pad is also preferably elliptical in shape, see Paragraph [0021]), the rounded spacer material sections overlying a bottom film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 having a lower wall 30) configured to be minimally adherent to the wound site (the film layers comprises holes so that there is limited in growth of fibrous tissue into the sheet. In this way, the film does not become adhered to the wound but remains relatively easy to remove, see Paragraph [0015]), the rounded spacer material sections configured to transmit fluid (fluids are drawn by negative pressure through the holes in the flexible or elastomeric material, and then through the foam, see Paragraph [0023]), and
wherein the top film layer comprises a plurality of welds connecting the top film layer to the bottom film layer (elastomeric sheets 38 are sealed on their periphery, e.g. by welding or adhesive, in a manner that surrounds the lower layer of foam, see Paragraph [0030]); sealing the wound site with a flexible drape (drape 14) positioned over the wound and sealed to the skin surrounding the wound (drape 14 for creating an airtight seal against the skin, effectively closing the dressing and the wound beneath it, see Paragraph [0039]); and
applying negative pressure to the wound site from a source of negative pressure (a suction tube connector 16 is provided on an upper surface of a layer of foam 12 for connection to a negative pressure source, see Abstract), wherein the source of negative pressure is applied through a conduit (16) fluidically connected between the drape and the source of negative pressure (see Figure 2),
However, Hunt does not explicitly disclose wherein welded spacer bonds in the spacer layer wherein at least some of the plurality welds surround one or more spacer material sections.
Simmons teaches a reduced-pressure abdominal treatment device (104) comprising a plurality of liquid-impermeable layers (a first liquid-impermeable layer 204 and a second liquid-impermeable layer 206) with a spacer layer (208) between two of the liquid-impermeable layers (see Figure 2) comprising a plurality of peripheral welds (a plurality of bonds 212 at the periphery, wherein the plurality of bonds 212 may be formed using any known technique, including without limitation welding (e.g., ultrasonic or RF welding), see Paragraph [0044]; see annotated Figure 2 above) and a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer (a plurality of bonds 212 a between peripheral welds and the center of the layer 200, see Paragraph [0044]; Figure 2; see annotated Figure 2 above) , wherein at least some of the plurality of welds (212) surround one or more spacer material sections (plurality of bonds 212 surround spacer layer 208, see annotated Figure above).
Hunt and Simmons are analogous art because both teach a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the top film layer of Hunt and further include welded spacer bonds in the spacer layer wherein at least some of the plurality welds surround one or more spacer material sections, as taught by Simmons. Simmons teaches the plurality of inner welds surrounding the plurality of spacers provide areas of separation between adjacent members of the plurality of liquid-impermeable layers and thereby help create a plurality of flow paths (see Paragraph [0042]).
Hunt and Simmons teaches all of the limitations as discussed above and Simmons further teaches the plurality of bonds 212 may also be circular in nature or any other shape (see Paragraph [0044]). However, Hunt and Simmons do not explicitly disclose wherein at least some of the plurality of welds are arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device of Modified Hunt to have the plurality of spacers arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings. In the instant case, the device of Modified Hunt would not operate differently with the claimed arrangement of spacers and since the shape of the spacers is used for the purpose of providing areas of separation between adjacent members of the plurality of liquid-impermeable layers and thereby help create a plurality of flow paths. The device would function appropriately having the claimed shape. Further, applicant places no criticality on the shape of the spacers claimed, indicating simply that the spacer layer “may be” various shapes and sizes (specification pp. [0053]-[0054]).
Regarding Claim 37, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 36 and Hunt further teaches wherein the plurality of welds comprise a peripheral weld connecting a peripheral edge of the top film layer to a peripheral edge of the bottom film layer (upper wall 28 and lower wall 30 are welded at the periphery of the envelope, see Figure 2).
Regarding Claim 38, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 36. However, Hunt does not explicitly disclose a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer.
Simmons teaches a reduced-pressure abdominal treatment device (104) comprising a plurality of liquid-impermeable layers (a first liquid-impermeable layer 204 and a second liquid-impermeable layer 206) with a foam spacer (208) between two of the liquid-impermeable layers (see Figure 2) comprising a plurality of peripheral welds (a plurality of bonds 212 at the periphery, wherein the plurality of bonds 212 may be formed using any known technique, including without limitation welding (e.g., ultrasonic or RF welding), see Paragraph [0044]; see annotated Figure 2 above) and a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer (a plurality of bonds 212 a between peripheral welds and the center of the layer 200, see Paragraph [0044]; Figure 2; see annotated Figure 2 above).
Hunt and Simmons are analogous art because both teach a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the top film layer of Hunt and further include a plurality of peripheral and inner welded spacer bonds in the spacer layer, as taught by Simmons. Simmons teaches the plurality of inner welds surrounding the plurality of spacers provide areas of separation between adjacent members of the plurality of liquid-impermeable layers and thereby help create a plurality of flow paths (see Paragraph [0042]).
Regarding Claim 39, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 36 and Hunt further teaches wherein individual rounded spacer material sections are elongated (typical sizes for the foam pads may be about 280, 320 and 380 mm for the major dimension and about 140, 175 and 250 mm for the minor dimension, see Paragraph [0021]).
Regarding Claim 41, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 36 and Hunt further teaches wherein the spacer material comprises foam (foam layers 40 and 42, see Paragraph [0047]).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt and Simmons, as applied in claim 24, and in further view of Hoffman et al. (US 20070027414 A1).
Regarding Claim 26, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 24 and Hunt further teaches wherein the top film layer and the bottom film layer are heat welded (welding the film to form the envelope comprises using ultrasonic or heat welding, see Paragraph [0021]), thereby creating fluid channels (creating fluid channels through openings in the foam layer, see Figure 2).
However, Hunt and Simmons does not explicitly disclose wherein the top film layer and the bottom film layer are spot-welded.
Hoffman teaches a laminated negative pressure wound dressing system (see Abstract, Figure 1) comprising a bioabsorbable fluid communicating layer (40) bonded by means of a medical grade adhesive to the bioabsorbable wound bed layer (20), wherein the two layer are spot welded (see Paragraph [0057]).
Modified Hunt and Hoffman are analogous art because both disclose a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the heat welding of the top and bottom film layer of Hunt and replace it with spot-welding, as taught by Hoffman. Hoffman teaches spot welding allow fluid communication around and between the bonded areas (see Paragraph [0057]). The bonding is distributed in small spots, taking care to leave adequate areas without adhesive bond so that fluid may easily flow through the breathable silicone layer to the fluid communicating layer (see Paragraph [0075]).
Claims 29-31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt and Simmons, as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Collison et al. (US 20160120706 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Collison”.
Regarding Claim 29, Modified Hunt teach all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 24. However, Hunt and Simmons do not explicitly disclose wherein the spacer material comprises acquisition distribution material.
Collison teaches a therapeutic negative pressure wound treatment system (see Abstract) comprising a spacer layer (transmission layers that may be in direct or indirect contact with a lower surface of the backing layer, see Paragraph [0284]) wherein the spacer material comprises acquisition distribution material (the one or more transmission layers may further comprise an acquisition distribution material layer configured to horizontally wick fluid, see Paragraph [0284]; i.e. a wicking or acquisition distribution layer (ADL) 3440).
Modified Hunt and Collison are both analogous art because all teach a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the lower spacer layer of modified Hunt and further include the lower spacer layer to comprise acquisition distribution layer, as taught by Collison. Collison teaches lateral wicking of fluid may allow maximum distribution of the fluid through the absorbent layer and may enable the absorbent layer to reach its full holding capacity (see Paragraph [0385]).
Regarding Claim 30, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 29 and Collison further teaches wherein the acquisition distribution material comprises fibers (suitable acquisition distribution layer material (ADL) materials, which may be used in any of the dressing embodiments, may be composed of multiple fiber types and be complex in structure and design, see Paragraph [0460]).
Regarding Claim 31, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 30 and Collison further teaches wherein the acquisition distribution material comprises a plurality of fiber types suitable acquisition distribution layer material (ADL) materials, which may be used in any of the dressing embodiments, may be composed of multiple fiber types and be complex in structure and design, see Paragraph [0460]).
Claim 40 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt and Simmons, as applied in claim 36, and in further view of Hoffman et al. (US 20070027414 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Hoffman”.
Regarding Claim 40, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 36 and Hunt further teaches wherein the top film layer and the bottom film layer are heat welded (welding the film to form the envelope comprises using ultrasonic or heat welding, see Paragraph [0021]) thereby creating fluid channels (creating fluid channels through openings in the foam layer, see Figure 2).
However, Modified Hunt does not explicitly disclose wherein the top film layer and the bottom film layer are spot-welded.
Hoffman teaches a laminated negative pressure wound dressing system (see Abstract, Figure 1) comprising a bioabsorbable fluid communicating layer (40) bonded by means of a medical grade adhesive to the bioabsorbable wound bed layer (20), wherein the two layer are spot welded (see Paragraph [0057]).
Modified Hunt and Hoffman are analogous art because both disclose a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the heat welding of the top and bottom film layer of Modified Hunt and replace it with spot-welding, as taught by Hoffman. Hoffman teaches spot welding allow fluid communication around and between the bonded areas (see Paragraph [0057]). The bonding is distributed in small spots, taking care to leave adequate areas without adhesive bond so that fluid may easily flow through the breathable silicone layer to the fluid communicating layer (see Paragraph [0075]).
Claims 42-43 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hunt and Simmons, as applied in claim 36, and in further view of Collison (US 20160120706 A1).
Regarding Claim 42, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations as discussed above in claim 36. However, Modified Hunt does not explicitly disclose wherein the spacer material comprises acquisition distribution material.
Collison teaches a therapeutic negative pressure wound treatment system (see Abstract) comprising a spacer layer (transmission layers that may be in direct or indirect contact with a lower surface of the backing layer, see Paragraph [0284]) wherein the spacer material comprises acquisition distribution material (the one or more transmission layers may further comprise an acquisition distribution material layer configured to horizontally wick fluid, see Paragraph [0284]; i.e. a wicking or acquisition distribution layer (ADL) 3440).
Modified Hunt and Collison are all analogous art because both teach a negative pressure wound dressing.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the invention to modify the lower spacer layer of Modified Hunt and further include the lower spacer layer to comprise acquisition distribution layer, as taught by Collison. Collison teaches lateral wicking of fluid may allow maximum distribution of the fluid through the absorbent layer and may enable the absorbent layer to reach its full holding capacity (see Paragraph [0385]).
Regarding Claim 43, Modified Hunt teaches all of the limitations, as discussed above in claim 43 and Collison further teaches wherein the acquisition distribution material comprises fibers (suitable acquisition distribution layer material (ADL) materials, which may be used in any of the dressing embodiments, may be composed of multiple fiber types and be complex in structure and design, see Paragraph [0460]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues in claims 24 and 36 that the prior art of Simmons (US 8469935 B2) teaches an interconnected concentric foam spacer layer and would not read on the limitation “wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings”. The examiner agrees with the applicant and now uses Simmons (US 20110224631 A1) to read on the new limitations. Accordingly, applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 24 and 36 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rogozinski (US 5264218 A) teaches an organ protection layer (10) for contacting a wound site (see Abstract), comprising: a top film (105) layer overlying a plurality of rounded spacer material sections (a layer 101 of polyethylene foam), the rounded spacer material sections overlying a bottom film layer (104) configured to be minimally adherent to the wound site, the rounded spacer material sections configured to transmit fluid; and rounded spacer material sections arranged in discrete unconnected concentric rings (the layer of foam is formed in the shape of a disk cut into a plurality of concentric rings A, B, C and D by concentric cuts 201, 202, and 203, see Figure 1).
However, Rogozinski fails to teach wherein the top film layer comprises a plurality of welds connecting the top film layer to the bottom film layer, the plurality of welds comprising: a peripheral weld connecting a peripheral edge of the top film layer to a peripheral edge of the bottom film layer, and a plurality of inner welds positioned between the peripheral weld and a center of the organ protection layer, wherein at least some of the plurality of inner welds surround one or more rounded spacer material sections.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC RASSAVONG whose telephone number is (408)918-7549. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am-5:30pm PT.
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.
/ERIC RASSAVONG/ (4/4/2026)Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/SARAH AL HASHIMI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights