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 .
Election/Restriction
Restriction to one of the following inventions is required under 35 U.S.C. 121:
I. Claims 1-10, drawn to a male enteral feeding connector, classified in A61M 2039/1088.
II. Claim 11, drawn to an enteral feeding connector assembly, classified in A61M 2039/1033.
The inventions are independent or distinct, each from the other because:
Inventions I and II are related as combination and subcombination. Inventions in this relationship are distinct if it can be shown that (1) the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability, and (2) that the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations (MPEP § 806.05(c)). In the instant case, the combination as claimed does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed because Invention II (combination, claim 11) does not require the particulars of Invention I (sub-combination, claims 1-10). The subcombination has separate utility such as “a connecting portion connecting the first connector portion to the annular portion, the connecting portion being discontinuous permitting liquid to pass through the connecting portion so that liquid is prevented from pooling between the first connector portion and the annular portion”, not required by Invention II.
The examiner has required restriction between combination and subcombination inventions. Where applicant elects a subcombination, and claims thereto are subsequently found allowable, any claim(s) depending from or otherwise requiring all the limitations of the allowable subcombination will be examined for patentability in accordance with 37 CFR 1.104. See MPEP § 821.04(a). Applicant is advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application.
Restriction for examination purposes as indicated is proper because all the inventions listed in this action are independent or distinct for the reasons given above and there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
Groups I-II would require different fields of search, along with different text and classification searches.
Applicant is advised that the reply to this requirement to be complete must include (i) an election of an invention to be examined even though the requirement may be traversed (37 CFR 1.143) and (ii) identification of the claims encompassing the elected invention.
The election of an invention may be made with or without traverse. To reserve a right to petition, the election must be made with traverse. If the reply does not distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election shall be treated as an election without traverse. Traversal must be presented at the time of election in order to be considered timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are added after the election, applicant must indicate which of these claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
During a telephone conversation with Christopher Hinrichs on July 23, 2026 a provisional election was made without traverse to prosecute the invention of group I, claims 1-10. Affirmation of this election must be made by applicant in replying to this Office action. Claim 11 is withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-10 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.
Claim 1 lines 17-18 recite “…each connecting support extending from the annular portion to the first connector portion at a location axially spaced from the annular portion.”. However, the drawings show that the connecting supports 54 shown in Fig. 4 are spaced radially, not axially from each other, relative to the annular portion. For purposes of examination, the connecting supports are interpreted to be spaced relative to each other radially about the annular portion. Claims 2-10 are rejected at least because they depend from claim 1.
Claims 2-4 recite the limitation "The male tubing connector…" in the preamble. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The preamble for claims 2-4 is interpreted as “The male enteral feeding connector…”.
Claims 5-10 recites the limitation "The medical tubing connector…" in the preamble. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The preamble for claims 5-10 is interpreted as “The male enteral feeding connector…”.
Claim 6 depends from claim 8, and thus does not refer to a preceding claim, see MPEP 608.01(n). For purposes of examination, claim 6 is interpreted to depend from claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wlodarczyk et al. (Wlodarczyk), US 2014/0261758 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Wlodarczyk discloses a male enteral feeding connector (connector 400, P0051 and shown in Figs. 4-11B and 12-15), comprising: a first connector portion (proximal end 405 of body 401 extending to arms 423, P0053) configured for connecting to a female (Fig. 11a) enteral feeding connector (end 405 is fully capable of connecting to an enteral feeding connector); a tube engagement portion (distal end 404 of body 401 extending from arms 423, P0053) integral with and opposite the first connector portion (Fig. 7) and configured for connecting to an enteral feeding tube for delivering enteral feeding fluid to a patient (first connector portion is fully capable of connecting to an enteral feeding tube for delivering enteral fluid to a patient, see Fig. 15); a liquid passage (channel 403, P0053) extending along an axis through the first connector portion and the tube engagement portion, the first connector portion including a continuous outer surface for sealing engagement with the female enteral feeding connector (Fig. 12); an annular portion (annular connector portion 420, P0053) integral with and surrounding the first connector portion, the annular portion comprising a threaded inner surface (inward radially extending flanges 424, P0057); and a connecting portion (arms 423, P0057) connecting the first connector portion to the annular portion, the connecting portion being discontinuous permitting liquid to pass through the connecting portion so that liquid is prevented from pooling between the first connector portion and the annular portion (Fig. 4), wherein the connecting portion is defined by spaced apart connecting supports (arms 423, P0057) extending between the first connector portion and the annular portion, each connecting support extending from the annular portion to the first connector portion at a location radially spaced from the annular portion relative to one another (Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 2, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the spaced apart connecting supports comprise handles configured to manipulate rotational movement of the first connector about an axis with respect to the female enteral feeding connector (the arms 423 are fully capable of being manipulated for rotational movement of the first connector about an axis with respect to the female enteral feeding connector).
Regarding claim 3, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the first connector portion, the tube engagement portion, and the annular portion are formed as one piece of material (connector 400 may be integrally molded, P0061).
Regarding claim 4, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the connecting portion defines a drain (drain, see annotated Fig. 4 below) permitting liquid to pass through the connecting portion so that liquid is prevented from pooling between the first connector portion and the annular portion.
PNG
media_image1.png
722
1054
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the first connector portion extends to a distal end outside the annular portion (Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 6, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the connecting portion discontinuity comprises at least one aperture (aperture, see annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
722
1054
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the connecting portion discontinuity comprises at least one aperture (aperture, see annotated Fig. 4 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
722
1054
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the connecting portion discontinuity comprises at least one slot.
.
PNG
media_image1.png
722
1054
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 9, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the annular portion comprises a collar concentrically oriented about the first connector portion (Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 10, Wlodarczyk discloses the male enteral feeding connector of claim 1, wherein the first connector portion extends to a distal end outside the annular portion (see claim 5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN A DOUBRAVA whose telephone number is (408)918-7561. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 Pacific Time.
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, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at 571-272-3383. 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.
/J.A.D./Examiner, Art Unit 3783 /James D Ponton/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights