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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “249” has been used to designate both “screw threads” ([0096] of the Pre-Grant Publication) and “a diaphragm” ([0105]). Further the reference character 249, while being described as designating a diaphragm in Figures 7 and 8, does not appear in any Figures besides Figure 2, and it is unclear which element is being labeled with 249 in Figure 2 but it does not appear to be labeling screw threads. Additionally, reference character 351 has been used to designate a diaphragm ([0098]) and is present in Figures 7 and 8. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 5-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 5-6 and 8-12 recite “claim1”, this should include a space to recite “claim 1”.
Claims 7 and 10 recite “the member”, this should instead recite “the securing member”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “mounting means” in claims 9 and 14; and “locating means” in claims 10 and 21.
“Mounting means” in interpreted to be “a projection or protrusion on an outer wall of the tube portion” using [0046] of the specification.
“Locating means” is interpreted to be “a recess” using [0058] and “visual guides or physical guides such as depressions in the surface proximal to the fluid port, or ribs or protrusions extending from the surface” using [0102] of the specification.
The examiner notes the additional structure defining the “mounting means” in claim 15 and the “locating means” in claim 22 avoids this interpretation, as outlined further below.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “mounting means” in claim 15 and “locating means” in claim 22.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
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 4 is 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.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Additionally, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 4 recites the broad recitation “a range of from 1 mm to 3 mm”, and the claim also recites “the range of from 1.2 mm to 2.0 mm” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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 (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 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) 1-3, 5-7, 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grenci et al. (US 5,406,753 A).
Regarding claim 1, Grenci et al. discloses a connector (Fig 3A) suitable for securing to a breast pump element (the breast pump element is not positively recited, the connector of Grenci et al. is fully capable of being secured to a breast pump element), the connector comprising: a tube portion (4 Fig 3A) with a first opening (See the opening of the tube 4 on the left side of Fig 4B); and a securing member (9 Fig 4A), mounted to the first opening (As shown in Fig 4B the seal 9 is mounted directly to the opening), and configured to be engageable with a breast pump element having a fluid port (As shown in Figs 7B-8B, the securing member 9 is configured to engage a female socket having a fluid port 26 Fig 7B, the securing member is equally capable of being engageable with a breast pump element having a fluid port) so as to enclose the fluid port and form a fluid flow path between the first opening and the breast pump element (As shown in Fig 8A); and wherein the securing member is configured to resiliently deform (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”, Elastomers resiliently deform by definition) to be urged into a sealing abutment with the breast pump element when negative pressure is applied within the tube portion (Col 3 line 68- Col 4 line 2, “When vacuum is applied to the assembly, the male component is drawn into the female socket actuating the seal”).
Regarding claim 2, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 1, wherein the securing member comprises an annular flange extending from the first opening (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”, a circumferential seal is annular and forms a flange as shown in Fig 4B).
Regarding claim 3, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 2. Grenci et al. further discloses wherein the annular flange is frustoconical (in the uncompressed state as shown in Fig 4B the annular flange is frustoconical, see the angled surface 10 in Fig 4B).
Regarding claim 5, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 1. Grenci et al. further discloses wherein the connector comprises an elastomer (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”).
Regarding claim 6, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 1. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the sealing abutment provides an area of contact with the breast pump element (surfaces 22 and 24 Fig 7B contact the securing member, the breast pump element is functionally recited and the connector is equally capable of contacting a breast pump element), and wherein the area of contact increases as the securing member is resiliently deformed (as shown in Figs 7B-8B, the area of contact between seal face 10 and female socket base surface 24 increases as the securing member is resiliently deformed).
Regarding claim 7, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 2. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the annular flange is configured so that a perimeter portion (10 Fig 7A) of the annular flange deforms outwardly as the member is resiliently deformed (As shown in Fig 7B-8B, surface 10 deforms outwardly).
Regarding claim 10, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 1, wherein the member is configured to engage with a locating means (See the interpretation under 112f as outlined above, Abstract “The male components are then inserted into the female sockets”, 22, 24 Fig 7B) provided on a breast pump element (the breast pump element is functionally recited and the securing member is equally capable of engaging a locating means provided on breast pump element).
Regarding claim 11, Grenci et al. discloses a connector according to claim 1, wherein the tube portion is configured to be fluidly connected to a negative pressure source (Col 5 lines 7-8 “the entire structure is then evacuated using a conventional roughing pump”) of a breast pump assembly (the breast pump assembly is functionally recited and the tube portion is equally capable of being fluidly connected to a negative pressure source of a breast pump assembly).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-16, 18, and 20-22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rollin (US 2004/0059307 A1) in view of Grenci et al. (US 5,406,753 A).
Regarding claim 1, Rollin discloses a connector (50 Fig 8) suitable for securing to a breast pump element (34 Fig 7), the connector comprising: a tube portion (84 Fig 9) with a first opening (See the opening at 84 Fig 9); and a securing member (88 Fig 8), mounted to the first opening (88 is mounted to the tubing that opens at 84 Fig 9 and as such is indirectly mounted to the opening), and configured to be engageable with a breast pump element having a fluid port (42 Fig 5) so as to enclose the fluid port ([0052] “The sealing portion 88 also has a sealing surface 90 that includes at least one circumferential sealing ring 92 thereon, which engages the upper surface 68 of the upper well 66 to form a substantially airtight seal such that ambient air is prevented from entering the female coupling component 42.”) and form a fluid flow path between the first opening and the breast pump element ([0043] “This arrangement serves to provide an easily manipulated secure connection of the tubes 44 to the ports 54 in the female coupling components 42.”, [0044] “a port 54 therein, through which air, or any fluid, can pass from the lower well 67 to the vacuum chamber 52, or vice versa”).
However, Rollin is silent to wherein the securing member is configured to resiliently deform to be urged into a sealing abutment with the breast pump element when negative pressure is applied within the tube portion.
Grenci et al. teaches a securing member (9 Fig 4A) is configured to resiliently deform (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”, Elastomers resiliently deform by definition) to be urged into a sealing abutment with the element it is sealed to when negative pressure is applied within the tube portion (Col 3 line 68- Col 4 line 2, “When vacuum is applied to the assembly, the male component is drawn into the female socket actuating the seal”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the sealing ring of the securing member of Rollin to be configured to resiliently deform to be urged into a sealing abutment with the breast pump element when negative pressure is applied within the tube portion as taught by Grenci et al. to minimize “the potential for contamination entrapment voids between the female socket inside diameter and the inserted male component outside diameter.” (Col 1 lines 22-25)
Regarding claim 2, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the securing member comprises an annular flange extending from the first opening (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”, a circumferential seal is annular and forms a flange as shown in Fig 4B).
Regarding claim 3, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 2. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the annular flange is frustoconical (in the uncompressed state as shown in Fig 4B the annular flange is frustoconical, see the angled surface 10 in Fig 4B).
Regarding claim 4, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 2. However, modified Rollin fails to teach wherein the annular flange has a thickness in a range of from 1 mm to 3 mm, preferably in the range of from 1.2 mm to 2.0 mm.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing to modify the annular flange of modified Rollin to have a thickness in the claimed range since it has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the device of modified Rollin would not operate differently with a thickness in the claimed range. Further, it appears that applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating the thickness “may” be in a range and providing a preferable range ([0025]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the connector comprises an elastomer (Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”).
Regarding claim 6, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the sealing abutment provides an area of contact with the breast pump element (Rollin-[0052] “The sealing portion 88 also has a sealing surface 90 that includes at least one circumferential sealing ring 92 thereon, which engages the upper surface 68 of the upper well 66 to form a substantially airtight seal such that ambient air is prevented from entering the female coupling component 42.”), and wherein the area of contact increases as the securing member is resiliently deformed (the modification in view of Grenci et al. results in a vacuum actuated seal deforming as shown in Figs 7B-8B, the area of contact between seal face 10 and female socket base surface 24 increases as the securing member is resiliently deformed).
Regarding claim 7, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 2. Grenci et al. further teaches wherein the annular flange is configured so that a perimeter portion (10 Fig 7A) of the annular flange deforms outwardly as the member is resiliently deformed (As shown in Fig 7B-8B, surface 10 deforms outwardly).
Regarding claim 8, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. However, modified Rollin fails to teach wherein the tube portion and the securing member are integrally formed.
An alternate embodiment of Rollin discloses wherein the tube portion (284 Fig 13) and the securing member (288 Fig 13) are integrally formed (Fig 13, [0054] “the connector 250 includes a radially outwardly extending sealing portion 288 formed on the male coupling component 250”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the tube portion and securing member of modified Rollin to be integrally formed as taught by the alternate embodiment of Rollin as this is a known alternative and it would reduce the number of steps to manufacture the part.
Regarding claim 9, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the connector comprises a mounting means (See the interpretation under 112f above, 90 Fig 8, the triangular projection around the tubing) to mount the connector within a breast pump assembly ([0014] “The upper well is sized and shaped to match the size and shape of the radially outwardly extending sealing portion”).
Regarding claim 10, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1, wherein the member is configured to engage with a locating means (See the interpretation under 112f as outlined above, upper well 66 Fig 5) provided on a breast pump element ([0014] “The upper well is sized and shaped to match the size and shape of the radially outwardly extending sealing portion”).
Regarding claim 11, modified Rollin teaches a connector according to claim 1. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the tube portion is configured to be fluidly connected to a negative pressure source of a breast pump assembly ([0043] “This arrangement serves to provide an easily manipulated secure connection of the tubes 44 to the ports 54 in the female coupling components 42.”, [0044] “a port 54 therein, through which air, or any fluid, can pass from the lower well 67 to the vacuum chamber 52, or vice versa”).
Regarding claim 12, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly (20 Fig 1) comprising a negative pressure source (24 Fig 1) and a connector (50 Fig 8) of claim 1 (See the rejection of claim 1) mounted to the breast pump assembly and fluidly connected to the negative pressure source ([0043] “This arrangement serves to provide an easily manipulated secure connection of the tubes 44 to the ports 54 in the female coupling components 42.”, [0044] “a port 54 therein, through which air, or any fluid, can pass from the lower well 67 to the vacuum chamber 52, or vice versa”).
Regarding claim 13, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 12. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the connector (50 Fig 8) is mounted so as to engage a breast pump element (34 Fig 3B) releasably secured to the breast pump assembly ([0042] “Further, the adapter 34 includes a post 56 that is removably received within a post hole (not shown) in the casing 36 to mount the adapter 34 to the motor drive unit 24.”).
Regarding claim 14, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 12. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the connector comprises a mounting means (See the interpretation under 112f above, 90 Fig 8, the triangular projection around the tubing) to mount the tube portion in a fixed position relative to the breast pump assembly ([0014] “The upper well is sized and shaped to match the size and shape of the radially outwardly extending sealing portion”, the matching triangular shape would prevent relative rotation).
Regarding claim 15, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 14. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the mounting means comprises a projection on an outer wall of the tube portion (90 Fig 8, the triangular projection around the tubing), configured to locate with a retainer provided in the breast pump assembly ([0014] “The upper well is sized and shaped to match the size and shape of the radially outwardly extending sealing portion”).
Regarding claim 16, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 12. Modified Rollin further teaches configured to be releasably secured to a breast pump element (34 Fig 3B) by relative rotation of the breast pump assembly ([0042] “The flange 51 slides into an enlarged slot (also not shown) when the post 56 is inserted in the post hole and the adapter 34 rotated into place”).
Regarding claim 18, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 12. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the securing member (the securing member 88 Fig 8 of Rollin in view of Grenci et al.) is engaged with a breast pump element (member 88 is engaged with port 42 of element 34 Fig 2) so as to enclose a fluid port (42 Fig 5) provided thereon and form a fluid flow path between the first opening and the breast pump element ([0043] “This arrangement serves to provide an easily manipulated secure connection of the tubes 44 to the ports 54 in the female coupling components 42.”).
Regarding claim 20, Rollin discloses a method of securing a tube portion (50 Fig 8) to a breast pump element (34 Fig 7), the method comprising: mounting a securing member (88 Fig 8) to a first opening of a tube portion (88 is mounted to the tubing that opens at 84 Fig 9 and as such is indirectly mounted to the opening); engaging the securing member with a breast pump element (34 Fig 3B) having a fluid port (42 Fig 5) provided thereon such that the securing member encloses the fluid port ([0052] “The sealing portion 88 also has a sealing surface 90 that includes at least one circumferential sealing ring 92 thereon, which engages the upper surface 68 of the upper well 66 to form a substantially airtight seal such that ambient air is prevented from entering the female coupling component 42.”) to form a fluid flow path between the first opening and the fluid port ([0043] “This arrangement serves to provide an easily manipulated secure connection of the tubes 44 to the ports 54 in the female coupling components 42.”, [0044] “a port 54 therein, through which air, or any fluid, can pass from the lower well 67 to the vacuum chamber 52, or vice versa”).
However, Rollin is silent to applying a negative fluid pressure within the tube portion so as to resiliently deform the securing member and urge the securing member into a sealing abutment with the breast pump element.
Grenci et al. teaches applying a negative fluid pressure within the tube portion so as to resiliently deform the securing member (9 Fig 4A, Col 4 lines 15-16 “Dual Face/Circumferential Elastomer Seal 9”, Elastomers resiliently deform by definition) and urge the securing member into a sealing abutment with the element it is sealed to (Col 3 line 68- Col 4 line 2, “When vacuum is applied to the assembly, the male component is drawn into the female socket actuating the seal”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the method of Rollin to include applying a negative fluid pressure within the tube portion so as to resiliently deform the sealing ring of the securing member and urge the securing member into a sealing abutment with the breast pump element as taught by Grenci et al. to minimize “the potential for contamination entrapment voids between the female socket inside diameter and the inserted male component outside diameter.” (Col 1 lines 22-25)
Regarding claim 21, modified Rollin teaches a method according to claim 20. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the step of engaging the securing member with a breast pump element further comprises engaging the securing member with a locating means (See the interpretation under 112f as outlined above, upper well 66 Fig 5) provided on a breast pump element ([0014] “The upper well is sized and shaped to match the size and shape of the radially outwardly extending sealing portion”).
Regarding claim 22, modified Rollin teaches a method according to claim 21. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the locating means comprises a recess (upper well 66 Fig 5 is a recess).
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rollin (US 2004/0059307 A1) in view of Grenci et al. (US 5,406,753 A) and Zhang (US 2020/0222285 A1).
Regarding claim 17, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 16. Modified Rollin further teaches wherein the breast pump assembly is releasably secured to a breast pump element ([0042] “Further, the adapter 34 includes a post 56 that is removably received within a post hole (not shown) in the casing 36 to mount the adapter 34 to the motor drive unit 24.”).
However, modified Rollin is silent to using a bayonet fitting.
Zhang teaches a breast pump assembly (1 Fig 2) is releasably secured to a breast pump element (27 Fig 2) using a bayonet fitting ([0055] “the breast pump may comprise a ring member which connects to the body 4 of the container 1 in another manner, such as by way of a friction fit, flange-groove connection, releasable snap-fit, bayonet fitting and the like.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the breast pump assembly of modified Rollin to be releasably secured to a breast pump element using a bayonet fitting as taught by Zhang as such a modification is the result of a simple substitution of one known element (tab and slot of Rollin) for another (bayonet fitting of Zhang) to achieve a predictable result (releasably connect the components).
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rollin (US 2004/0059307 A1) in view of Grenci et al. (US 5,406,753 A) and Caffee (US 5516122 A).
Regarding claim 19, modified Rollin teaches a breast pump assembly according to claim 18. However, modified Rollin is silent to wherein the breast pump element comprises a polished surface for engaging the securing member.
Caffee teaches a surface for engaging a sealing member is polished (Col 3 line 35 “The groove surfaces 41, 42 are preferably highly polished.”). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of effective filing for the breast pump element to comprise a polished surface for engaging the sealing member so “the elastomer 7 can contact the surface with close to 100% efficiency” (Col 3 lines 38-39).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna Vargas whose telephone number is (571)270-3873. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 4:00 PM-9:00 PM 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, Bhisma Mehta can be reached at 571-272-3383. 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.
/A.E.V./Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/COURTNEY FREDRICKSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights