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 .
Specification
The amendment filed 08 Feb 2024 is objected to under 35 U.S.C. 132(a) because it introduces new matter into the disclosure. 35 U.S.C. 132(a) states that no amendment shall introduce new matter into the disclosure of the invention. The added material which is not supported by the original disclosure is as follows: the incorporation by reference of the international patent application PCT/AU2022/050865 and of the foreign patent application AU 2021902463 and AU 2022900954 is ineffective as it was added on the date of entry into the national phase, which is after the filing date of the instant application. The filing date of this national stage application is the filing date of associated PCT, in this case 09 Aug 2022, see MPEP 1893.03(b). Therefore the specification amendment of 08 Feb 2024 to include the incorporation by reference is new matter, per MPEP 608.01(p).
Applicant is required to cancel the new matter in the reply to this Office Action.
Claim Objections
Claim(s) 66 is/are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 66 needs a proper status identifier. At present claim 66 is clearly “New”.
Claim 66 must end with a period
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 47-66 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 47 recites the limitation “a region of the patient's face” in Ln. 16 which deems the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation is intended to refer to the same region of the patient’s face earlier recited in Ln. 7 as where sealing occurs or to a different region of the patient’s face. The former interpretation appears most accurate. For the purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as reading “the region of the patient’s face”.
Claim 64 recites the limitation “a region of the patient's face” in Ln. 16 which deems the claim indefinite. It is unclear whether the limitation is intended to refer to the same region of the patient’s face earlier recited in Ln. 7 as where sealing occurs or to a different region of the patient’s face. The former interpretation appears most accurate. For the purposes of examination the limitation will be interpreted as reading “the region of the patient’s face”.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 47-50, 54-57, 60 and 62-66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0008320).
Regarding claim 47, Yu discloses a patient interface (Figs. 17R-17T; ¶¶0641-0642) for use in delivering breathable gas to a patient, the patient interface comprising: a plenum chamber (Figs. 17R-17S interior to #17200; ¶0641) pressurisable to a therapeutic pressure of at least 6 cmH2O above ambient air pressure (¶0018), said plenum chamber including a plenum chamber inlet port (Figs. 17R-17T connection of #17200 to #17005; ¶0641) configured to receive a flow of breathable gas at the therapeutic pressure for breathing by the patient; a seal-forming structure (Figs. 17R-17T #17300; ¶0641) provided to the plenum chamber, wherein the seal-forming structure is configured to form a seal with a region of the patient's face surrounding an entrance to the patient's airways (e.g. Fig. 17S), said seal-forming structure having an opening (Fig. 17M central opening of #17300) therein such that the flow of breathable gas is delivered to at least an entrance to the patient's nares, the seal-forming structure being configured to maintain said therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber throughout the patient's respiratory cycle in use; and a vent structure (Figs. 17R-17S vent holes shown on #17200 which are #17240 in Fig 17G-1; ¶¶0629, 0642) to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use, wherein the seal-forming structure comprises at least one adhesive surface (¶0633) configured in use to adhere to the region of the patient's face to form the seal, and wherein the region of the patient's face surrounds both the patient's nares (Figs. 17M & 17S) and the region comprises side regions of the patient's nasal alar (Figs. 17R-17S) and a superior region of the patient's lip superior (Figs. 17M & 17T).
Regarding claim 48, Yu discloses the region of the patient's face comprises the patient's pronasale region (Figs. 17R-17S).
Regarding claim 49, Yu discloses the region of the patient's face comprises an anterior region of the nose that is immediately inferior to the patient's pronasale (Figs. 17M & 17R-17S).
Regarding claim 50, Yu discloses the region of the patient's face comprises inferiorly facing surfaces of the nasal alar (Figs. 17M & 17R-17S).
Regarding claim 54, Yu discloses the seal-forming structure is configured so that the shape of the at least one adhesive surface substantially resembles the region of the patient's face (Figs. 17R-17S).
Regarding claim 55, Yu discloses the seal-forming structure is a substantially D-shaped band (Fig. 17L).
Regarding claim 56, Yu discloses the seal-forming structure comprises a notch (see annotated Figs. 17O & 17P below) in an edge of a region of the seal-forming structure configured to adhere to a region of the patient's nose substantially inferior to the patient's pronasale in use.
PNG
media_image1.png
456
521
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Yu – Annotated Figs. 17O & 17P showing possible notch locations
Regarding claim 57, Yu discloses a first region of the at least one adhesive surface adheres to the patient's face during use with a greater adhesion strength than a second region of the at least one adhesive surface. It is noted that the claim functionally recites a greater adhesion strength in use as opposed to particularly reciting the two regions as being formed with different adhesive characteristics. One of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that different regions of a patient’s face may have different skin texture, sweat characteristics, morphology, etc. which will be expected to create regions of different adhesion strength. Even the patient’s uneven application of pressure when connecting the adhesive surface to their face will be obviously expected to result in regions of different adhesion strength.
Regarding claim 60, Yu discloses the adhesive surface of the seal-forming structure is provided with an adhesive that is suitable for at least one re-application of the seal-forming structure on the patient's face (¶0633 – re-usable).
Regarding claim 62, Yu discloses the seal-forming structure is formed from silicone or a thermoplastic elastomer (¶0170).
Regarding claim 63, Yu discloses the adhesive surface comprises any adhesives selected from the following group: rubber zinc oxide adhesive; acrylic adhesive; acrylate adhesive; and silicone adhesive (¶0633).
Regarding claim 64, Yu discloses a patient interface (Figs. 17R-17T; ¶¶0641-0642) for use in delivering breathable gas to a patient, the patient interface comprising: a plenum chamber (Figs. 17R-17S interior to #17200; ¶0641) pressurisable to a therapeutic pressure of at least 6 cmH2O above ambient air pressure (¶0018), said plenum chamber including a plenum chamber inlet port (Figs. 17R-17T connection of #17200 to #17005; ¶0641) configured to receive a flow of breathable gas at the therapeutic pressure for breathing by the patient; a seal-forming structure (Figs. 17R-17T #17300; ¶0641) provided to the plenum chamber, wherein the seal-forming structure is configured to form a seal with a region of the patient's face surrounding an entrance to the patient's airways (e.g. Fig. 17S), said seal-forming structure having an opening (Fig. 17M central opening of #17300) therein such that the flow of breathable gas is delivered to at least an entrance to the patient's nares (Figs. 17M & 17S), the seal-forming structure being configured to maintain said therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber throughout the patient's respiratory cycle in use; and a vent structure (Figs. 17R-17S vent holes shown on #17200 which are #17240 in Fig 17G-1; ¶¶0629, 0642) to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use, wherein the seal-forming structure comprises at least one adhesive surface (¶0633) configured in use to adhere to the region of the patient's face to form the seal, and wherein the region of the patient's face surrounds both the patient's nares (Figs. 17M & 17S) and the region comprises inferiorly facing surfaces of the patient's nasal alar (Figs. 17M & 17R-17S) and a superior region of the patient's lip superior (Figs. 17M & 17T).
Regarding claim 65, Yu discloses the region of the patient's face comprises side regions of the nasal alar (Figs. 17R-17S).
Regarding claim 66, Yu discloses the region of the patient's face comprises the patient's pronasale region (Figs. 17R-17S).
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claim(s) 47-54, 56-57 and 60-66 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilbert et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0093823) in view of Yu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0008320).
Regarding claim 47, Gilbert discloses a patient interface (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D; ¶¶0033-0037, 0045) for use in delivering breathable gas to a patient, the patient interface comprising: a plenum chamber (Figs. 1 interior to #14; ¶0034) pressurisable to a therapeutic pressure of at least 6 cmH2O above ambient air pressure (¶0006 – CPAP), said plenum chamber including a plenum chamber inlet port (Fig. 1 connection of #14 to #20; ¶0033) configured to receive a flow of breathable gas at the therapeutic pressure for breathing by the patient; a seal-forming structure (Fig. 1 #16, 38; ¶0036) provided to the plenum chamber, wherein the seal-forming structure is configured to form a seal with a region of the patient's face surrounding an entrance to the patient's airways (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D; ¶0037), said seal-forming structure having an opening (Fig. 1 #40; ¶0037) therein such that the flow of breathable gas is delivered to at least an entrance to the patient's nares (Figs. 7A-7D; ¶0037), the seal-forming structure being configured to maintain said therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber throughout the patient's respiratory cycle in use; wherein the seal-forming structure comprises at least one adhesive surface (Fig. 1 #28; ¶0036) configured in use to adhere to the region of the patient's face to form the seal, and wherein the region of the patient's face surrounds both the patient's nares (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D) and the region comprises side regions of the patient's nasal alar (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D) and a superior region of the patient's lip superior (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Gilbert fails to explicitly disclose a vent structure to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use.
Yu teaches a nasal interface (e.g. Fig. 17A) including a vent structure (Fig 17G-1 #17200 with #17240; ¶¶0629-0630) to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by a patient from an interior of a plenum chamber (interior shown in Fig. 17F view) to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use. Yu teaches a vent structure as providing the benefit of facilitating carbon dioxide washout (¶0629).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated in Gilbert a vent structure to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use in order to provide the benefit of facilitating carbon dioxide washout in view of Yu.
Regarding claim 48, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises the patient's pronasale region (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Regarding claim 49, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises an anterior region of the nose that is immediately inferior to the patient's pronasale (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Regarding claim 50, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises inferiorly facing surfaces of the nasal alar (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Regarding claim 51, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the seal-forming structure is configured such that, when the seal-forming structure is adhered to the patient's face, a superior-most portion of the seal-forming structure adheres to the patient's alar crease (Figs. 1 & 7B-7C).
Regarding claim 52, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises regions of the patient's cheeks adjacent to the nasal alar (Figs. 1 & 7B-7C).
Regarding claim 53, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises regions between the patient's nasal alar and the patient's nasolabial sulcus (Figs. 1 & 7B-7C).
Regarding claim 54, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the seal-forming structure is configured so that the shape of the at least one adhesive surface substantially resembles the region of the patient's face (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Regarding claim 56, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the seal-forming structure comprises a notch (see annotated Fig. 1 below) in an edge of a region of the seal-forming structure configured to adhere to a region of the patient's nose substantially inferior to the patient's pronasale in use. It is noted that the notch can be in any position inferior to the patient's pronasale.
PNG
media_image2.png
740
458
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Gilbert – Annotated Fig. 1 showing possible notch locations
Regarding claim 57, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and suggests as obvious a first region of the at least one adhesive surface adheres to the patient's face during use with a greater adhesion strength than a second region of the at least one adhesive surface. It is noted that the claim functionally recites a greater adhesion strength in use as opposed to particularly reciting the two regions as being formed with different adhesive characteristics. One of ordinary skill in the art would obviously recognize that different regions of a patient’s face may have different skin texture, sweat characteristics, morphology, etc. which will be expected to create regions of different adhesion strength. Even the patient’s uneven application of pressure when connecting the adhesive surface to their face will be obviously expected to result in regions of different adhesion strength.
Regarding claim 60, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the adhesive surface of the seal-forming structure is provided with an adhesive that is suitable for at least one re-application of the seal-forming structure on the patient's face (¶¶0038-0040 – use on successive occasions obviously indicates the adhesive could be reused).
Regarding claim 61, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the seal-forming structure is a first seal-forming structure (Fig. 1 #16) and the patient interface further comprises a second seal-forming structure (Fig. 1 #38), wherein the first and second seal-forming structures are interchangeably connectable to the plenum chamber (¶0037 – adhesive on both securement arrangement 16 and secondary adhesive arrangement 38 allows them to each be connectable to contoured surface 24).
Regarding claim 62, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the seal-forming structure is formed from silicone or a thermoplastic elastomer (¶0035).
Regarding claim 63, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the adhesive surface comprises any adhesives selected from the following group: rubber zinc oxide adhesive; acrylic adhesive; acrylate adhesive; and silicone adhesive (¶0036).
Regarding claim 64, Gilbert discloses a patient interface (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D; ¶¶0033-0037, 0045) for use in delivering breathable gas to a patient, the patient interface comprising: a plenum chamber (Figs. 1 interior to #14; ¶0034) pressurisable to a therapeutic pressure of at least 6 cmH2O above ambient air pressure (¶0006 – CPAP), said plenum chamber including a plenum chamber inlet port (Fig. 1 connection of #14 to #20; ¶0033) configured to receive a flow of breathable gas at the therapeutic pressure for breathing by the patient; a seal-forming structure (Fig. 1 #16, 38; ¶0036) provided to the plenum chamber, wherein the seal-forming structure is configured to form a seal with a region of the patient's face surrounding an entrance to the patient's airways (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D; ¶0037), said seal-forming structure having an opening (Fig. 1 #40; ¶0037) therein such that the flow of breathable gas is delivered to at least an entrance to the patient's nares (Figs. 7A-7D; ¶0037), the seal-forming structure being configured to maintain said therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber throughout the patient's respiratory cycle in use; wherein the seal-forming structure comprises at least one adhesive surface (Fig. 1 #28; ¶0036) configured in use to adhere to the region of the patient's face to form the seal, and wherein the region of the patient's face surrounds both the patient's nares (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D) and the region comprises inferiorly facing surfaces of the patient's nasal alar (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D) and a superior region of the patient's lip superior (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Gilbert fails to explicitly disclose a vent structure to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use.
Yu teaches a nasal interface (e.g. Fig. 17A) including a vent structure (Fig 17G-1 #17200 with #17240; ¶¶0629-0630) to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by a patient from an interior of a plenum chamber (interior shown in Fig. 17F view) to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use. Yu teaches a vent structure as providing the benefit of facilitating carbon dioxide washout (¶0629).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have incorporated in Gilbert a vent structure to allow a continuous flow of gases exhaled by the patient from an interior of the plenum chamber to ambient, said vent structure being configured to maintain the therapeutic pressure in the plenum chamber in use in order to provide the benefit of facilitating carbon dioxide washout in view of Yu.
Regarding claim 65, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises side regions of the nasal alar (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Regarding claim 66, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above and further teaches the region of the patient's face comprises the patient's pronasale region (Figs. 1 & 7A-7D).
Claim(s) 51-53 and 59 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0008320).
Regarding claim 51, Yu fails to explicitly disclose the seal-forming structure is configured such that, when the seal-forming structure is adhered to the patient's face, a superior-most portion of the seal-forming structure adheres to the patient's alar crease.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art reviewing the overall illustrations of the seal-forming structure in Yu would have configured it prima facie obvious to have specified the seal-forming structure as adhering to the patient's alar crease based upon the lateral extension shown of the seal-forming structure (e.g. Figs. 16G-16J, 17A & 17C-17E). The instant claim thus fails to patentably distinguish over the obviously suggested positioning of Yu.
Regarding claim 52, Yu fails to explicitly disclose the region of the patient's face comprises regions of the patient's cheeks adjacent to the nasal alar.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art reviewing the overall illustrations of the seal-forming structure in Yu would have configured it prima facie obvious to have specified the seal-forming structure as adhering to the patient's cheeks adjacent to the nasal alar based upon the lateral extension shown of the seal-forming structure (e.g. Figs. 16G-16J, 17A & 17C-17E). The instant claim thus fails to patentably distinguish over the obviously suggested positioning of Yu.
Regarding claim 53, Yu further suggests as obvious the region of the patient's face comprises regions between the patient's nasal alar and the patient's nasolabial sulcus (e.g. Figs. 16G-16J, 17A & 17C-17E).
Regarding claim 59, Yu fails to explicitly disclose the seal-forming structure and the plenum chamber are integrally formed as a single component.
However, Yu teaches that the sealing element 17300 can be adhered to the frame 17200 with adhesive (¶0633). One of ordinary skill in the art considering two components being adhered with adhesive would have obviously considered those two components two be considered as integrally formed once adhered together. It is noted that the claim does not require the seal-forming structure and the plenum chamber to be formed of the same material. Further, Yu teaches that portions of a patient interface can be 3D printed (e.g. ¶¶0646, 0660-0661). One of ordinary skill in the art would have considered it prima facie obvious to have used the 3D printing techniques taught by Yu to have formed a unitary patient interface. The instant claim thus fails to patentably distinguish over the adhering connection and/or 3D printing techniques taught by Yu.
Claim(s) 58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0008320) in view of Bugamelli et al. (U.S. Pub. 2016/0114119).
Regarding claim 58, Yu is silent as to whether the seal-forming structure has a thickness in the range of approximately 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm when the patient interface is worn by the patient. However, one of ordinary skill in the art would have obviously expected the adhesive layer of Yu to have limited thickness based upon the types of adhesives taught in at least ¶0633 of Yu.
Bugamelli teaches an adhesively attached nasal interface (Fig. 1A; ¶0032) including an adhesive layer (Fig. 1B #34; ¶0040) applied in a range of 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm (¶0040). Bugamelli thus obviously teaches an adhesive layer thickness value within the recited range as its range fully encompasses the claimed range. Bugamelli teaches this thickness as effective for securing particular regions of the face (¶0040).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have specified in Yu the seal-forming structure has a thickness in the range of approximately 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm when the patient interface is worn by the patient in order to provide the benefit of specifying a particular thickness which is effective for securing particular regions of the face in view of Bugamelli.
Claim(s) 58 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilbert et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0093823) in view of Yu et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0008320) and further in view of Bugamelli et al. (U.S. Pub. 2016/0114119).
Regarding claim 58, Gilbert teaches the invention as modified above but fails to explicitly teach the seal-forming structure has a thickness in the range of approximately 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm when the patient interface is worn by the patient. Gilbert teaches a thickness which is “thin” and “at least 0.04 mm” (¶0034) but fails to define a particular thickness range.
Bugamelli teaches an adhesively attached nasal interface (Fig. 1A; ¶0032) including an adhesive layer (Fig. 1B #34; ¶0040) applied in a range of 0.1 mm to 0.5 mm (¶0040). Bugamelli thus obviously teaches an adhesive layer thickness value within the recited range as its range fully encompasses the claimed range. Bugamelli teaches this thickness as effective for securing particular regions of the face (¶0040).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have specified in the modified Gilbert the seal-forming structure has a thickness in the range of approximately 0.2 mm to 0.3 mm when the patient interface is worn by the patient in order to provide the benefit of specifying a particular “thin” thickness in Gilbert which is effective for securing particular regions of the face in view of Bugamelli.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO-892 for additional attached references. Regarding the independent claims further attention is specifically drawn to: Belfer et al. (U.S. Patent 6196223; Fig. 12), Romagnoli et al. (U.S. Pub. 2014/0158136; Figs. 10-1 to 13-4) and Eves et al. (U.S. Pub. 2021/0038848; ¶0408 – a seal-forming structure may comprise … a portion having a tacky or adhesive surface).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSEPH D BOECKER whose telephone number is (571)270-0376. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 AM - 4:00 PM.
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.
/JOSEPH D. BOECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights