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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 4-14 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on August 21, 2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species A in the reply filed on August 21, 2026, is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in Fig. 11 it is not clear what 100 is indicating, in other Figures 100 is the stopper reference number in other embodiments. 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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 recites “and an outer sidewall extending between the tail, and an outer sidewall extending between the tail and the head” it is believed the first instance of “and an outer wall extending between the tail” should be deleted. There should be a comma between “syringe” and “a head” in line 4. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pagay et al. (US 5,411,488).
With regard to claim 1, Pagay et al. teach a stopper (Fig. 2 member 30) for a syringe comprising: a body having a tail (Fig. 2 tail in the area of 38) adapted for attachment to a plunger rod of the syringe a head opposite the tail (Fig. 2 at 32), and an outer sidewall extending between the tail, and an outer sidewall extending between the tail and the head (Fig. 2), wherein the head comprises an anti-sticking feature; the anti-sticking feature comprises a convex outer surface of the head of the stopper (Col. 5 lines 40-45, Fig. 2), wherein the outer surface of the head of the stopper is curved with an apex of the curvature extending away from a plane orthogonal to the longitudinal axis (L) of the stopper and extending through an outer perimeter of the outer surface of the head wherein the convex outer surface of the head transitions to the outer sidewall of the body, the apex of the outer surface of the head being higher than the outer perimeter of the outer surface when the stopper is viewed from a side in a direction perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (L) of the stopper, and the anti-sticking feature of the stopper acts to reduce a contact area of the head of the stopper (See Reference Figure 1 below showing the radius of curvature of the apex).
With regard to claim 2, see the radius of curvature of the convex head in Reference Figure 1 below. It is greater than the maximum diameter of the head such that the ratio is between 1-20.
With regard to claim 15, Pagay et al. teaches a syringe comprising: a syringe body (Fig. 2 member 20) defining a chamber (Fig. 2 space within 21); a plunger rod (Fig. 2 member 50) at least partially received within the chamber; and a stopper according to claim 1 attached to an end of the plunger rod received within the chamber (Fig. 2 member 30, see the rejection above).
PNG
media_image1.png
582
413
media_image1.png
Greyscale
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.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pagay et al. (US 5,411,488) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rufer et al. (US 2011/0106018 A1).
With regard to claim 3, Pagay et al. teach a device substantially as claimed. Pagay et al. do not disclose the stopper to comprise a coating. However, Rufer et al. teach a stopper which may be coated on the plunger external face and seals to reduce friction. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a coating in Pagay et al. on a portion of the surface that contacts the composition in the syringe as Rufer et al. teach it is beneficial to coat this surface to reduce friction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EMILY L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-3648. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday 7:00 AM to 4:30 PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kevin Sirmons can be reached at 571-272-4965. 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.
/EMILY L SCHMIDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights