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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-19 and 44 are pending and examined on the merits.
Claims 20-43 and 45-46 are cancelled.
Claims 1, 2, 8, 9, 16, and 44 are currently amended.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered.
Regarding Claim Rejections under 35 USC 112(b):
Applicant amended claims 2, 16, and 44 to correct an indefiniteness issue. Accordingly, the rejections of claims 2-5, 7-11, 16-19, and 44 under 35 USC 112(b) are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant provided amendments to the independent claims which necessitates a new ground of rejection. Accordingly, Applicant’s arguments filed 06/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot. Locke ‘707 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2013/0190707 A1) is introduced as a new primary reference in the present rejection for disclosing and rendering obvious some of the limitations presented via the amendments. Locke ‘499 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2014/0276499 A1), Lessing (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2021/0085518 A1), and Askem (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2018/0133378 A1) remain as secondary references in the present rejection for disclosing and rendering obvious some of the limitations presented via the amendments.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke ‘707 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2013/0190707 A1) in view of Locke ‘499 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2014/0276499 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Locke ‘707 teaches A system for negative-pressure therapy (see at least Abstract), the system comprising:
a dressing configured to be positioned adjacent to a tissue site (see manifold 104 in para. [0018] and Fig. 1);
a therapy unit (see reduced-pressure treatment device 106 at least in Fig. 1) comprising:
a pump module (see pump control unit 110 in Fig. 1 and para. [0018]), the pump module comprising:
a pump casing (see pump control unit housing 138 in Fig. 3):
a lid coupled to the pump casing (see first cover 142 in Fig. 3 and para. [0027]),
a forced air module (see air-movement device 151 in para. [0030] and Fig. 3) configured to couple with the pump module (see at least Fig. 3 and para. [0030]), the forced air module comprising:
a forced air device positioned proximate to the pump module (para. [0030] teaches that the air-movement device 151 comprises a fan), the forced air device configured to generate a fluid flow (see at least para. [0030]); and
a pathway enclosure configured to form a fluid path across the lid (para. [0030] teaches that the location shown as diaphragm 153 in Fig. 3 may be changed to an aperture sized and configured to align with the fan), the forced air device being disposed within the pathway enclosure (para. [0030] teaches that the fan may be secured to the first cover 142, which would align with the aperture indicated by numeral 153); and
a canister (see canister unit 108 in Fig. 3), the canister comprising:
a pathway connection (see for example vents 155 in Fig. 3), the pathway connection configured to allow fluid communication between the pathway enclosure and the canister (see at least para. [0030]);
an airflow pathway extending through the canister from the pathway connection (see at least para. [0030]); and
However, in the embodiment of Fig. 3, Locke ‘707 fails to teach a piezoelectric pump coupled to the pump casing and that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as required by the claim.
In a separate embodiment, Locke ‘707 teaches a piezoelectric member 463 coupled to the first diaphragm 456 (see at least Fig. 9 and para. [0057]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 by including a piezoelectric pump coupled to the pump casing such that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as well as including a piezoelectric controller and driver unit 461 (as taught in para. [0057]), at least in order to monitor pressure within the reduced-pressure device by measuring the position of the diaphragm, as taught by Locke ‘707 (see para. [0057]).
However, Locke ‘707 fails to explicitly teach an evaporative membrane lining the airflow pathway, as required by the claim.
Locke ‘499 teaches an analogous system for negative-pressure therapy (see reduced pressure treatment system 10 at least in Fig. 1) comprising an evaporative membrane lining the airflow pathway (para. [0035] teaches that when the container 303 is permeable to vapor, the reduced pressure treatment unit 101 may further comprise a positive pressure source 140 that may provide positive pressure to container 303 to facilitate the evaporation of collected bodily fluid into vapor and the subsequent transmission of vapor through the container 303 and into the atmosphere; therefore, the absorptive layers 132 sandwiched between wicking layers 134 allow for evaporation of collected bodily fluid into vapor).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 to incorporate the teachings of Locke ‘499 by including an evaporative membrane lining the airflow pathway at least in order to facilitate the evaporation of collected bodily fluid into vapor and the subsequent transmission of vapor through the system for negative-pressure therapy and into the atmosphere, as taught by Lock ‘499 (see para. [0035]).
PNG
media_image1.png
588
1011
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teach the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Additionally, Locke ‘707, with reference to Image 1 above, teaches: the pump casing comprising:
a base with a first side and a second side opposite the first side (see Image 1);
a first wall protruding from the first side of the base (see Image 1), a second wall opposite the first wall (see Image 1), a third wall perpendicular to and extending from the first wall to the second wall (see Image 1), and a fourth wall opposite the third wall (see Image 1);
a walled enclosure disposed inboard of the first wall (see Image 1), the second wall, the third wall, and the fourth wall defining a pump seat (as shown in Image 1, first and second diaphragms 156, 158 are included on the walled enclosure);
a first bore extending through the base from the pump seat on the first side of the base to the second side of the base (see Image 1);
a second bore extending through the base (see Image 1);
a first conduit extending from the second side of the base (see for example vent conduit 196 in Fig. 5), the first conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore (para. [0039] teaches that vent conduit 196 vents gas from the wound 112 to an exterior of the reduced-pressure treatment device 106; therefore, the vent conduit 196 has at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore); and
a second conduit extending from the second side of the base (see Image 1), the second conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the second bore (see reduced-pressure delivery conduit 126 in Figs. 1-3).
Regarding claim 3, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teach the invention as discussed above in claim 2. Additionally, in the combined device of Locke ‘707 and Locke ‘499, the piezoelectric pump is coupled to the first side of the base at the pump seat (para. [0030] of Locke ‘707 teaches that a piezoelectric device can be coupled to the first side of the base shown in Image 1).
Regarding claim 5, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 2. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches that the device includes a polyurethane material (see at least para. [0021]), which is an insulating material.
Regarding claim 12, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches that the forced air device is an axial fan (see para. [0030]).
Regarding claim 13, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teach the invention as discussed above in claim 1. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches the therapy unit further comprising a diaphragm pump proximal to the pump module (see for example first and second diaphragm 156, 158 in Fig. 3 and para. [0029]).
Regarding claim 14, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teach the invention as discussed above in claim 13. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches wherein the diaphragm pump is configured to operate in conjunction with the piezoelectric pump (see at least para. [0030]).
Claims 4 and 6-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke ‘707 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2013/0190707 A1) in view of Locke ‘499 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2014/0276499 A1), as applied above to claims 1 and 3, and further in view of Lessing (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2021/0085518 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 3. However, neither Locke ‘707 nor Locke ‘499 explicitly teach the pump module further comprising a temperature sensor, the temperature sensor disposed between the pump casing and the lid, as required by the claim.
Lessing teaches an analogous system for providing negative-pressure therapy (see Abstract) comprising a temperature sensor 126 coupled to a thermoelectric module 124 (see para. [0044]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a temperature sensor between the pump casing and the lid at least in order to monitor the temperature of the fluid moving between the pump casing and the lid in order to indicate to a user what that temperature is, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0007]).
Regarding claim 6, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, neither Locke ‘707 nor Locke ‘499 explicitly teach wherein the lid comprises a heat sink, as required by the claim.
Lessing teaches an analogous system for providing negative-pressure therapy (see Abstract) comprising a heat exchange chamber 330 (see para. [0075] and Fig. 2A) that includes a heatsink 350 (see para. [0075] and Fig. 2A).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a heatsink at least in order to add and extract heat from fluid which would help stimulate healing of a tissue site, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 7, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 2. However, neither Locke ‘707 nor Locke ‘499 explicitly teach wherein the lid comprises a plurality of ribs extending away from the pump module opposite the pump casing, as required by the claim.
Lessing teaches an analogous system for providing negative-pressure therapy (see Abstract) comprising a heat exchange chamber 330 (see para. [0075] and Fig. 2A) that includes a heatsink 350 (see para. [0075] and Fig. 2A) that comprises a plurality of ribs (see Fig. 2A) that extends away from a pump module (see thermoelectric module 124 in para. [0041 and 0073-0074]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a heatsink on the lid that comprises a plurality of ribs extending away from the pump module opposite the pump casing at least in order to add and extract heat from fluid which would help stimulate healing of a tissue site, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 7. Additionally, in the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing, the plurality of ribs extend from the third wall to the fourth wall such that the ribs are parallel to the first wall and the second wall of the pump casing (in the device of Locke ‘707, Locke ‘499, and Lessing, the heatsink 350 of Lessing would be included on the pump casing of Locke ‘707 such that the claimed structural configuration is met).
Regarding claim 9, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 8. Additionally, in the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing, the forced air device is configured to direct the fluid flow through the ribs the lid (since the heatsink of Lessing is included on the pump casing of Locke ‘707, directly adjacent the lid, the forced air device of Locke ‘707 is configured to direct fluid flow through the ribs of the heatsink).
Regarding claim 10, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 9. However, while neither Locke ‘707, Locke ‘499, nor Lessing explicitly teach that the forced air device is positioned relative to the third wall of the pump casing at a non-perpendicular angle, it has been held that the particular placement of a device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP 2144), therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to position the forced air device at a non-perpendicular angle relative to the third wall of the pump casing.
Regarding claim 11, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 10. Additionally, in the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499, and further in view of Lessing, the fluid flow defines a curved pathway (see at conduit 126 in Fig. 3 of Locke ‘707).
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke ‘707 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2013/0190707 A1) in view of Locke ‘499 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2014/0276499 A1), as applied above to claim 1, and further in view of Askem (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2018/0133378 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 1. However, neither Locke ‘707 nor Locke ‘499 explicitly teach wherein the pathway enclosure comprises a rigid plastic, as required by the claim.
Askem teaches an analogous system for negative pressure wound therapy (see Abstract) comprising a pathway enclosure that comprises a rigid plastic (para. [0163] teaches that the pump housing 420 can be made from plastics).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 to incorporate the teachings of Askem by comprising the pathway enclosure out of a rigid plastic at least because one of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably recognized that making the pathway enclosure comprise rigid plastic is beneficial to protect the inner components of the system.
Claims 16-19 and 44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Locke ‘707 (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2013/0190707 A1) in view of Lessing (U.S. Pre Grant Pub. No. 2021/0085518 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Locke ‘707, with reference to Image 1 above, teaches A pump module (see at least Abstract) comprising:
a pump casing (see pump control unit housing 138 in Fig. 3) comprising:
a base with a first side and a second side opposite the first side (see Image 1);
a first wall protruding from the first side of the base (see Image 1), a second wall protruding from the first side of the base opposite the first wall (see Image 1), a third wall protruding from the first side of the base perpendicular to and extending from the first wall to the second wall (see Image 1), and a fourth wall protruding from the first side of the base opposite the third wall (see Image 1);
a walled enclosure disposed inboard of the first wall (see Image 1), the second wall, the third wall, and the fourth wall defining a pump seat (as shown in Image 1, first and second diaphragms 156, 158 are included on the walled enclosure);
a first bore extending depending through the base from the pump seat on the first side of the base to the second side of the base (see Image 1);
a second bore extending depending through the base (see Image 1);
a first conduit extending from the second side of the base (see for example vent conduit 196 in Fig. 5), the first conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore (para. [0039] teaches that vent conduit 196 vents gas from the wound 112 to an exterior of the reduced-pressure treatment device 106; therefore, the vent conduit 196 has at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore); and
a second conduit extending from the second side of the base, the second conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the second bore a second conduit extending from the second side of the base (see Image 1), the second conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the second bore (see reduced-pressure delivery conduit 126 in Figs. 1-3);
a lid coupled to the pump casing (see first cover 142 in Fig. 3 and para. [0027]); and
wherein the pump casing and the lid are configured to optimize an efficiency of the piezoelectric pump (as broadly recited, since pump casing and the lid enclose the piezoelectric pump and defines a fluid flow path through the interior of the device, see for example para. [0030], the pump casing and the lid are configured to optimize the efficiency of the piezoelectric pump such as by forcing air to move within the interior, against the membrane, and through vents 155).
However, in the embodiment of Fig. 3, Locke ‘707 fails to teach a piezoelectric pump coupled to the first side of the base at the pump seat and that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as required by the claim.
In a separate embodiment, Locke ‘707 teaches a piezoelectric member 463 coupled to the first diaphragm 456 (see at least Fig. 9 and para. [0057]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 by including a piezoelectric pump coupled to the pump casing such that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as well as including a piezoelectric controller and driver unit 461 (as taught in para. [0057]), at least in order to monitor pressure within the reduced-pressure device by measuring the position of the diaphragm, as taught by Locke ‘707 (see para. [0057])
However, Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 fails to explicitly teach a temperature sensor disposed between the pump casing and the lid, as required by the claim.
Lessing teaches an analogous system for providing negative-pressure therapy (see Abstract) comprising a temperature sensor 126 coupled to a thermoelectric module 124 (see para. [0044]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Locke ‘499 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a temperature sensor between the pump casing and the lid at least in order to monitor the temperature of the fluid moving between the pump casing and the lid in order to indicate to a user what that temperature is, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0007]).
Regarding claim 17, Locke ‘707 in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 16. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches wherein the pump casing further comprises an opening extending through the first wall (see for example opening at the top of first cover 142 in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 18, Locke ‘707 in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 17. Additionally, Locke ‘707 teaches further comprising:
a projection extending from the piezoelectric pump (see Image 1), the projection configured to extend through the opening in the first wall (see Image 1); and
an electrical connection coupled to a first side of the projection (see user interface device 136 in Fig. 3), the electrical connection configured to be coupled to a potential source outside of the pump casing (para. [0035] teaches that the user interface device 136 may be electrically coupled to the power subsystem 178 and to the control device 152; see also Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 19, Locke ‘707 in view of Lessing teaches the invention as discussed above in claim 16. Additionally, in the device of Locke ‘707 in view of Lessing, the temperature sensor is coupled to the piezoelectric pump opposite of the pump seat at least because Lessing teaches that the temperature sensor 126 is coupled to the module 124 (see para. [0004]), and therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to couple the temperature sensor to the piezoelectric pump opposite of the pump seat at least in order to monitor the temperature of the fluid moving between the pump casing and the lid in order to indicate to a user what that temperature is, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0007]).
Regarding claim 44, Locke ‘707, with reference to Image 1 above, teaches A method for generating negative pressure (see at least Abstract) comprising:
positioning a dressing adjacent to a tissue site (see manifold 104 in para. [0018] and Fig. 1);
coupling a therapy unit (see reduced-pressure treatment device 106 at least in Fig. 1) having a pump module (see pump control unit 110 in Fig. 1 and para. [0018]) to the dressing (see Fig. 1), the pump module comprising:
a pump casing (see pump control unit housing 138 in Fig. 3), the pump casing comprising:
a base with a first side and a second side opposite the first side (see Image 1);
a first wall protruding from the first side of the base (see Image 1), a second wall protruding from the first side of the base opposite the first wall (see Image 1), a third wall protruding from the first side of the base perpendicular to and extending from the first wall to the second wall (see Image 1), and a fourth wall protruding from the first side of the base opposite the third wall (see Image 1);
a walled enclosure disposed inboard of the first wall (see Image 1), the second wall, the third wall, and the fourth wall defining a pump seat (as shown in Image 1, first and second diaphragms 156, 158 are included on the walled enclosure);
a first bore extending through the base from the pump seat on the first side of the base to the second side of the base (see Image 1);
a second bore extending through the base (see Image 1);
an exhaust conduit extending from the second side of the base (see for example vent conduit 196 in Fig. 5), the exhaust conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore (para. [0039] teaches that vent conduit 196 vents gas from the wound 112 to an exterior of the reduced-pressure treatment device 106; therefore, the vent conduit 196 has at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the first bore); and
an intake conduit (see for example second conduit in Image 1) extending from the second side of the base, the intake conduit having at least one lumen fluidly coupled to the second bore (see reduced-pressure delivery conduit 126 in Figs. 1-3);
a lid coupled to the pump casing (see first cover 142 in Fig. 3 and para. [0027]); and
drawing the tissue site to a desired negative pressure (see at least para. [0025]) comprising:
starting the piezoelectric pump (see at least para. [0030 and/or 0057]);
starting a diaphragm pump (see at least para. [0030]), the diaphragm pump positioned proximate to the pump module in the therapy unit and configured to be in fluid communication with the tissue site (as broadly recited, this limitation is met at least because the diaphragm pump and pump module are enclosed within the therapy device; see Fig. 3);
using the intake conduit to draw fluid from the tissue site into the pump module (see at least para. [0025]);
using the exhaust conduit to allow the fluid from the pump module to escape from the pump module (see for example para. [0039]); and
operating a forced air device positioned proximate to the pump module (see air-movement device 151 in para. [0030] and Fig. 3):
using the forced air device to direct a fluid flow over the lid (see at least para. [0030]).
However, in the embodiment of Fig. 3, Locke ‘707 fails to teach a piezoelectric pump coupled to the pump casing and that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as required by the claim.
In a separate embodiment, Locke ‘707 teaches a piezoelectric member 463 coupled to the first diaphragm 456 (see at least Fig. 9 and para. [0057]).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Locke ‘707 by including a piezoelectric pump coupled to the pump casing such that the lid is configured to seal the piezoelectric pump between the pump casing and the lid, as well as including a piezoelectric controller and driver unit 461 (as taught in para. [0057]), at least in order to monitor pressure within the reduced-pressure device by measuring the position of the diaphragm, as taught by Locke ‘707 (see para. [0057]).
However, Locke ‘707 fails to explicitly teach a temperature sensor or a forced air device, as required by the claim.
Lessing teaches an analogous system for providing negative-pressure therapy (see Abstract) comprising a temperature sensor 126 coupled to a thermoelectric module 124 (see para. [0044]). Additionally, Lessing teaches:
operating a forced air device (see fan 360 in Fig. 2A) positioned proximate to the pump module to regulate an internal temperature of the pump module (see at least para. [0075]) comprising:
monitoring the internal temperature of the pump module with the temperature sensor (para. [0044] teaches that the temperature sensor includes an output for providing temperature signal to a controller 110; para. [0089] teaches that the controller is coupled to the thermoelectric module 124 which is coupled to the fan 360; see para. [0075]);
if the internal temperature is greater than a predetermined temperature, starting a forced air device (see at least para. [0075]);
using the forced air device to direct a fluid flow over the lid (para. [0075] teaches that the fan 360 expels heat energy; as broadly recited, the fan 360 draws air, which is a fluid), the fluid flow configured to reduce the internal temperature of the pump module (see para. [0075]); and
if the internal temperature is less than the predetermined temperature, stopping the forced air device (para. [0005-0006] teaches that the thermoelectric module maintains a fluid within a predetermined temperature range in the second heat exchange chamber by extracting heat; para. [0075] teaches that the fan 360 is responsible for moderating the heat energy; therefore, the fan 360 stops if the internal temperature is less than the predetermined temperature).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Locke ‘707 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a temperature sensor between the pump casing and the lid at least in order to monitor the temperature of the fluid moving between the pump casing and the lid in order to indicate to a user what that temperature is, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0007]). Additionally, It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Locke ‘707 to incorporate the teachings of Lessing by including a forced air device positioned proximate the pump module at least in order to expel heat energy from the pump casing, as taught by Lessing (see para. [0075]).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIHAD DAKKAK whose telephone number is (571)272-0567. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 9AM - 5PM ET.
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.
/JIHAD DAKKAK/ Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/PHILIP R WIEST/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights