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 .
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.
Claims 1-2, 9-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarez (US 2013/0087593 A1) and Adams (US 5,997,481 A).
Regarding claim 1, Alvarez teaches an electromechanical connector cover for covering an electromechanical connector of an ultrasound imaging probe, comprising:
a three-dimensional container [[fig. 1] shows rigid shell #1 which will hold the electronic device itself], including:
a cavity configured to receive the electromechanical connector, the cavity including [[0051] cavity between the basket #1 and the rectangular base #5]:
a rim configured to provide a hermetic seal with the received electromechanical connector [[abstract] holder is suitable for devices with or without cover, but in this latter case with no anti-rain protection. Adding some pieces, this protection can be achieved, but would not allow for the opening of devices with cover, unless the device be removed from the holder];
at least one side with at least one opening [[0050] basket that will shelter the device is on the top side. It usually is a rectangular, low hollow box, lacking one of the transverse walls in order to create a space for inserting and extracting the device. On this end will be attached another moveable piece that will close the basket allowing to host and transport the device]; and
a membrane disposed in the cavity and adjacent to the at least one opening, wherein the membrane is liquid-proof and air-permeable [[0085] each opening for a speaker, microphone or data connector has a small engraving around it on the inner side of the basket to be safely plugged by means of an expanded polytetraflouroethylene membrane (36) with a microporous structure capable of allowing sounds to pass both ways, as well as an exchange of hot air from the inside to the outside, while preventing water, dust and salt crystals from getting through. Such a membrane will be fixed from the inner side of the box by ultrasonic techniques or manually; note: as compared with instant para. 0074 - an example of a suitable material includes a material that is liquid-proof and air permeable such as expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) or Teflon®, a product of Chemours, a company headquartered in DE, US, or the like].
Alvarez does not explicitly teach and yet Rothberg teaches a first plate, wherein the membrane is disposed between the first plate and the at least one side [[abstract] probe cover for an ultrasonic imaging probe, the cover including a reservoir for containing a quantity of ultrasonically transmissive gel. The reservoir is formed by a deformable membrane having a passage allowing a portion of the gel to flow through the membrane].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention with a reasonable expectation of success to combine the polytetrafluoroethylene membrane as taught by Alvarez, with the ultrasonic imaging probe cover as taught by Adams because a sterile probe cover can be removed between probe reuses (Adams) [[col. 1:25-40]].
Regarding claim 2, Alvarez teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 1, further including: a member housing the membrane [[0085] each opening for a speaker, microphone or data connector has a small engraving around it on the inner side of the basket to be safely plugged by means of an expanded polytetraflouroethylene membrane].
Regarding claim 9, Alvarez teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 1, the at least one side including: an outer convex face; and an inner convex surface inside of the cavity [[0032] if the bottom side of the devise is flat or almost flat, the holder base will be flat. On the other hand, if the bottom side of the device is curved, the holder base may have the same curvature, or another a similar one, provided it better fits the wrist's natural shape.], wherein the at least one opening extends entirely through the at least one side [[0050] box has other openings, but none of them big enough for the device to be extracted. The biggest of these openings is on the upper face of the basket, completely open, but for a small ledge that extends along the entire perimeter].
Regarding claim 10, Alvarez teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 1, wherein the membrane includes expanded polytetrafluoroethylene [[0085] each opening for a speaker, microphone or data connector has a small engraving around it on the inner side of the basket to be safely plugged by means of an expanded polytetraflouroethylene membrane].
Regarding claim 12, Alvarez teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 1, further includes: a mechanical seal disposed on the rim of the cavity and sandwiched the electromechanical connector cover and the received electromechanical connector [[0085] membrane (36) with a microporous structure … preventing water … such a membrane will be fixed from the inner side of the box by ultrasonic techniques or manually, provided it has previously been prepared for such a purpose, in addition to being protected by means of a metallic grill (37), pressure-couched, from the external side of the opening. Into the upper side of the basket, formerly wide open except on an engraved perimeter overhang].
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarez (US 2013/0087593 A1) and Adams (US 5,997,481 A) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Clingenpeel (US 2,972,001 A).
Regarding claim 8, Alvarez does not explicitly teach and yet Clingenpeel teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 2, further including: an adhesive between the member and the at least one side [[title] water proof vent seal for batteries; [prior art claim 1] in a hermetic seal for the filling opening of a battery container, "a vent plug adapted to fit into said filling opening in a threaded relation, an impermeable membrane positioned between the vent plug and the filling opening in the threaded portions. and an adhesive -between the membrane and the container adhering to the container to hold the membrane in position to form the seal.].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to attach the membrane liquid proofing the member as shown in Alvarez, with the adhesive for attaching the membrane as taught by Clingenpeel so that water is kept out of the container while air is allowed to vent (Clingenpeel) [[title]].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alvarez (US 2013/0087593 A1) and Adams (US 5,997,481 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of BK Medical (2020, Care and Cleaning Guide; cited IDS).
Regarding claim 11, Alvarez does not explicitly teach and yet BK Medical teaches the electromechanical connector cover of claim 1, further includes: a mechanical fastener configured to engage a complementary locking mechanism of the electromechanical connector to fasten the electromechanical connector cover and the electromechanical connector together [[pg. 44 BK connector lid]; [pg. 52, fig. 2] watertight lid kept dry; [pg. 56, figs. 3-4] show watertight plug lid type 1 and type 2 with locking pins; [pg. 57, fig. 5] show locking pins in locked and unlocked positions].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to attach the membrane liquid proofing the member as shown in Alvarez, with the locking pins and cover as shown by BK Medical so that the cover can be removed without tools similar to how thumb screws operate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: (see below).
Regarding claim 3, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the electromechanical connector cover of claim 2, wherein the member includes the first plate.
Regarding claim 4, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the electromechanical connector cover of claim 3, the first plate including: at least one opening, wherein the at least one opening of the first plate and the at least one opening of at least one side are spatially aligned.
Regarding claim 5, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the electromechanical connector cover of claim 4, the member further including: a second plate, wherein the membrane is disposed between the first plate and the second plate, and the second plate is disposed at the at least one side.
Regarding claim 6, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the electromechanical connector cover of claim 5, the second plate including: at least one opening, wherein the at least one opening of the second plate and the at least one opening of the at least one are spatially aligned.
Regarding claim 7, the closest prior art of record does not appear to teach the electromechanical connector cover of claim 5, further including: an adhesive between the first plate and the second plate.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pg. 6, filed 4/23/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Adams (US 5,997,481 A).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See Rothberg (US 2020/0383660 A1) and in particular fig. 1 which appears similar to instant fig. 7.
PNG
media_image1.png
526
395
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG whose telephone number is (571)270-7339. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 9am-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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/JONATHAN D ARMSTRONG/ Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights