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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 2/29/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 23, 25, and 26 are objected to because of the following informalities:
On line 1 of claim 23, “17” should read “20” to provide antecedent support for “the support” and “the connection structure”.
On line 1 of claim 25, “any one of” should be deleted because claim 25 is not a multiple dependent claim.
On lines 9-10 of claim 26, “the spring supports” should read “the at least two spring supports”.
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.
Claims 17-32 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.
In regard to claim 17, the limitation “at its distal end” on line 7 renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to which reference “its” is referencing. For the purpose of this action, it is assumed to be referencing the “at least one flexible arm”. Amendments are encouraged. A possible suggestion is “a plunger rod support at a distal end of the at least one flexible arm”.
In further regard to claim 17, the limitation “at least two spring supports each extending distally” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear what the supports are extending distally from. For the purposes of this action, the limitation is understood as “at least two spring supports each extending distally from the inner part”. Amendments are encouraged.
In regard to claim 25, there is no antecedent basis for “the proximally facing support of the protrusion or step” or “the distally facing stop surface of the radially inwards extending protrusion of the plunger rod support”.
In regard to claim 29, the limitation “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because of the conditional nature of the term.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-32 will be considered allowable upon resolution of the 112 rejections and claim objections discussed above.
The closest prior art made of record can be considered to be Brereton et al. (US 2013/0317427; hereafter Brereton). In regard to claim 1, Brereton discloses an activation member (see Figs. 1-27) for a medicament delivery device, wherein the activation member extends along a longitudinal axis from a proximal to a distal end, the activation member comprising: an outer part (7) and an inner part (10) coaxially connected to the outer part (see at least Figs. 1A-1B), and further includes at least one flexible arm (15), but Brereton does not disclose the rest of the features of claim 17. The examiner further notes the special definition of “proximal” and “distal” in par. [0012] of the pg-publication of the instant application which are used to interpret the limitations of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THEODORE J STIGELL whose telephone number is (571)272-8759. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30 EST.
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, Michael Tsai can be reached at 571-270-5246. 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.
THEODORE J. STIGELL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3783
/THEODORE J STIGELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights