DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the filing of a preliminary amendment to the claims on 5/03/2024. As per the preliminary amendment, claims 1-15 have been cancelled, claims 16-30 have been added, and no claims have been amended. Thus, claims 16-30 are pending in the application.
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
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 16-17, 22-24, and 26-30 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burns (US Pub. 2011/0139151) in view of Rambosek et al. (US Pat. 3,915,165).
Regarding claim 16, Burns discloses an apparatus for attaching an intubated non-human animal to a gas delivery system (see the tracheal tube system of Fig. 1, which delivers gases, and is capable of intubating a non-human animal of similar anatomical proportions, or otherwise being resized for the purpose; further see [0014] where the size can be adjusted for different sized patients), the apparatus comprising: a first component having a first end configured to attach to an outlet of a gas delivery system (see Fig. 1 the tube system making up ventilator 28, having an end connected to the ventilator source); a second component having a first end configured to intubate a non-human animal (see Fig. 1 tracheal tube 12 for intubating a patient, which could be a non-human animal, with an end that is placed into the respiratory tract); and a hollow tubular component connecting the first component to the second component to form a gas flow path within the apparatus (see Fig. 1 tracheal tube extension 26), the gas flow path extending from the first end of the first component to the first end of the second component (see Fig. 1 where a gas flow path through tracheal extension 26 connects the ventilator 28 to the tracheal tube 12), wherein the hollow tubular component is movable between at least: a first position, in which the first end of first component has a first orientation relative to the first end of second component, and a second position, in which the first end of first component has a second orientation relative to the first end of second component (see Figs. 1-2 and [0018] where the intermediate portion 34 of tracheal extension 26 is flexible such that it can be bent into a variety of different positions, such that the relative position between the ventilator 28 and tracheal tube 12 changes, for example the position of tracheal extensions 26 in Fig. 1 being a first position, and the position of tracheal extension 26 in Fig. 2 being a second position).
In the alternative that Burns does not disclose being configured to intubate a non-human animal, then it is taught by Rambosek.
Rambosek teaches a tracheal device for connecting a tracheal tube to a gas source, where the device is sized and shaped for use with a non-human animal (see Fig. 1 animal 12; see also the abstract and Col. 3 lines 1-46).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the size, shape, and intended use of the tracheal device of Burns to be used for intubating a non-human animal as taught by Rambosek, as it would be a simple matter of design choice for a person of ordinary skill in the art to choose a different type of patient to receive the respiratory treatment. Furthermore, by adjusting the device for animal use, the system can be adjusted for veterinary use for treating animals with respiratory issues, thus enhancing the usability of the device (Rambosek; see Col. 2 lines 56-65).
Regarding claim 17, the modified Burns device has wherein the hollow tubular component comprises a flexible tube (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 and [0018] where the intermediate portion 34 of tracheal extension 26 is flexible such that it can be bent into a variety of different positions).
Regarding claim 22, the modified Burns device has wherein the first end of the first component comprises an opening defining a gas inlet for the apparatus (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the first end of ventilator 28 connects to the ventilator source, and thus is a gas inlet).
Regarding claim 23, the modified Burns device has wherein the first component comprises a hollow tube (Burns; see the tubular structure of the ventilator 28 in Fig. 1, between the ventilator source and the tracheal tube extension 26), the hollow tube having a first end defining the first end of the first component and an opposed second end (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where a first end of the tube of the ventilator 28 is an end that connects to the ventilator source, and a second opposed end connects to upper end connector 32).
Regarding claim 24, the modified Burns device has wherein the second end of the hollow tube is attached to the hollow tubular component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the second end of the tube of ventilator 28 connects to connector 32 of the tracheal tube extensions 26, and thus connects the hollow tube (28) to the hollow tubular component (26)).
Regarding claim 26, the modified Burns device has wherein the first end of the second component comprises an opening defining a gas outlet for the apparatus (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the distal opening 18 of tracheal tube 12 is the first end of the second component, and is a gas outlet into the patient).
Regarding claim 27, the modified Burns device has wherein the second component comprises a hollow tube (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 the tube structure of the tracheal tube 12), the hollow tube having a first end defining the first end of the second component and an opposed second end (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where distal opening 18 of tracheal tube 12 is opposed to another end at proximal end connector 24).
Regarding claim 28, the modified Burns device has wherein the second component comprises a catheter configured for intubating a non-human animal (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 tracheal tube 12 for intubating a patient, which is a non-human animal in light of the teachings of Rambosek).
Regarding claim 29, the modified Burns device has wherein the first end of the second component is bevelled (Burns; see [0014] and Fig. 1 where a distal opening 18 can be bevelled).
Regarding claim 30, the modified Burns device has a gas delivery system for delivering gas to at least one non-human animal (Burns; see the system in Figs. 1-2 as adapted for an animal in light of the teachings of Rambosek), the gas delivery system comprising: a body defining a gas chamber (Burns; see Fig. 1 where the ventilator source 28 is a ventilator having some body, with some gas chamber located within the ventilator), the body having a gas chamber inlet configured to receive a supply of gas (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the ventilator source 28 has some inlet for receiving a gas into its gas chamber), and at least one gas chamber outlet (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the ventilator source 28 has some gas chamber outlet in order to expel the gas out of the ventilator and to the patient); and an apparatus according to claim 16 (see rejection of claim 16), wherein the apparatus is configured to attach an intubated non-human animal to the at least one gas chamber outlet of the body of the gas delivery system (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where the apparatus connects to the gas chamber outlet of the ventilator source 28, as leads to the patient, which is a non-human animal as taught by Rambosek).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burns in view of Rambosek as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Rubin (US Pat. 8,707,950).
Regarding claim 18, the modified Burns device has the hollow tubular component comprises a first portion connected to a second portion.
The modified Burns device lacks a detailed description of the first and second portions connected by one or more articulated joints. It is noted that Burns does disclose that the hollow tubular component is flexible and thus articulates (Burns; see [0018]).
However, Rubin teaches a gas delivery tubing system with an adapter, where a first and second tubing portion are connected through a hollow tubular component that is an articulated joint (see Figs. 1 and 7 where swivel adaptor 104 connects the two different sections of tubing 30, and the swivel adaptor can be a ball joint that allows for articulation; see Col. 10 lines 54-64).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the hollow tubular component to include an articulating joint as taught by Rubin, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of articulating connection between the first and second portions for another articulating connection, with the benefit of allowing for free rotation relative one another (Rubin; see Col. 10 lines 54-64).
Claims 19-21 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Burns in view of Rambosek as applied to claims 16 and 23 above, respectively, and further in view of Kunishige et al. (US Pub. 2016/0206516) and Trombley, III et al. (US Pat. 5,591,143; hereinafter “Trombley”).
Regarding claim 19, the modified Burns device has a connecting mechanism positioned between the first component and the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where a connecting mechanism comprises the connectors 30 and 32), the connecting mechanism comprising: a first connecting member attached to a second end of the first component (Burns; see connector 32 and its interfacing member of ventilator 28 in Figs. 1-2), and a second connecting member attached to a second end of the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 connector 30 and its interfacing member of connector 24), wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to releasably connect the first component to the second component and form a gas flow path within the apparatus (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 and [0016] where the connectors are used to releasably connect the two tubing portions on either end of the extension 26 and create a gas flow path therein), the gas flow path extending from the first end of the first component to the first end of the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 the gas flow path through extensions 26 when the device is connected).
The modified Burns device lacks a detailed description of the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to engage with one another to releasably connect the first component to the second component, and wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member.
However, Kunishige teaches a connection between two tube members for a medical device via an adaptor, where the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to engage with one another to releasably connect the first component to the second component (see Figs. 8A-8B and 11A-12B and [0004] where a connection between two tube members can be done by the interfacing connection between a male luer 910 and a female luer 920).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adaptor of the modified Burns device to be a luer connection that directly connects the first and second connecting members to one another as taught by Kunishige, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of connection between the first and second components for another type of connection, with the benefit of ensuring that the two components are held tightly together in a fluid-proof connection that can withstand high pressures (Kunishige; see [0004]).
The modified Burns device lacks a detailed description of wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member.
However, Trombley teaches a luer connection system for medical tubing, where first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member (see Fig. 1 and Col. 1 lines 12-29 where a luer connector is known to be commonly designed for either a 90 degree or 180 degree rotation for full connection).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the connective rotation of the luer connection of the modified Burns device to be 180 degrees or less as taught by Trombley, as it would be a simple matter of design choice for a person or ordinary skill in the art to choose a known rotational amount (such as 90 or 180 degrees) in order to lock a luer connection, as is known in the art.
Regarding claim 20, the modified Burns device has wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another to form an airtight seal (Kunishige; see [0004] where the luer connection is designed to be leakproof, and thus airtight in the modified Burns device).
Regarding claim 21, the modified Burns device has wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member each comprise one of a male luer connector and a female luer connector (Kunishige; see [0004] and Figs. 11A-12B where there is a male luer 910 and a female luer 920).
Regarding claim 25, the modified Burns device has a connecting mechanism positioned between the first component and the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where a connecting mechanism comprises the connectors 30 and 32), the connecting mechanism comprising: a first connecting member attached to a second end of the first component (Burns; see connector 32 and its interfacing member of ventilator 28 in Figs. 1-2), and a second connecting member attached to a second end of the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 connector 30 and its interfacing member of connector 24), wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to releasably connect the first component to the second component and form a gas flow path within the apparatus (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 and [0016] where the connectors are used to releasably connect the two tubing portions on either end of the extension 26 and create a gas flow path therein), the gas flow path extending from the first end of the first component to the first end of the second component (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 the gas flow path through extensions 26 when the device is connected), wherein the second end of the hollow tube is attached to the first connecting member (Burns; see Figs. 1-2 where a second end of the tube of the ventilator 28 interfaces with connector 32).
The modified Burns device lacks a detailed description of the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to engage with one another to releasably connect the first component to the second component, and wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member.
However, Kunishige teaches a connection between two tube members for a medical device via an adaptor, where the first connecting member and the second connecting member are configured to engage with one another to releasably connect the first component to the second component (see Figs. 8A-8B and 11A-12B and [0004] where a connection between two tube members can be done by the interfacing connection between a male luer 910 and a female luer 920).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adaptor of the modified Burns device to be a luer connection that directly connects the first and second connecting members to one another as taught by Kunishige, as it would be a simple substitution of one type of connection between the first and second components for another type of connection, with the benefit of ensuring that the two components are held tightly together in a fluid-proof connection that can withstand high pressures (Kunishige; see [0004]).
The modified Burns device lacks a detailed description of wherein the first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member.
However, Trombley teaches a luer connection system for medical tubing, where first connecting member and the second connecting member are further configured to connect to one another using no more than 180 degrees of rotation between the first connecting member and the second connecting member (see Fig. 1 and Col. 1 lines 12-29 where a luer connector is known to be commonly designed for either a 90 degree or 180 degree rotation for full connection).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the connective rotation of the luer connection of the modified Burns device to be 180 degrees or less as taught by Trombley, as it would be a simple matter of design choice for a person or ordinary skill in the art to choose a known rotational amount (such as 90 or 180 degrees) in order to lock a luer connection, as is known in the art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Nye (US Pat. 10,758,694), Fangrow et al. (US Pat. 7,998,134), and Salter et al. (US Pat. 5,797,627) are cited to show medical devices with a luer-style connection between tube members, and/or a respiratory device with an adaptor between tube members.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D ZIEGLER whose telephone number is (571)272-3349. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10:00-6:00.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. 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.
/MATTHEW D ZIEGLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights