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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/24/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement has been considered by the examiner.
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 13 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the back supports". Claim 12, from which claim 13 depends recites “one or more back supports”, which requires the prior art to include one back support. Thus, the limitation of claim 13 makes it unclear whether more than one back support 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)(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.
Claims 1-3 and 7-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Zermoglio et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,634,319).
For claim 1, Zermoglio et al. discloses a holder (Fig. 1) for a medicament administration device (as discussed in the abstract), comprising: a base member (2); a movable member (6) disposed on the base member such that the movable member can move relative to the base member between a first position (Col. 1, line 65- Col. 2, line 2: “a lower stand-by position”) and a second position (Col. 1, line 65- Col. 2, line 2: “an upper operational position”); and two or more clamp members (Col. 2, lines 6-8: arms 16 with vertical pegs 14) each coupled to the base member (2) and to the movable member (6), the clamp members being pivotable between a closed position corresponding with the first position of the movable member (Col. 2, line 51- Col. 3, line 3) and an open position corresponding with the second position of the movable member (Col. 3, lines 23-28), wherein when in the closed position the clamp members are configured to engage a head of a subject to restrain the subject against movement relative to the holder (Col. 3, lines 1-3).
For claim 2, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, wherein when in the closed position the clamp members (14, 16) define a channel (Fig. 1: 12) between them, the channel sized such that a subject’s neck can be disposed within the channel (Col. 3, lines 1-3).
PNG
media_image1.png
685
690
media_image1.png
Greyscale
For claim 3, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 2, wherein the channel has a first end portion and a second end portion and a width of the channel tapers from a first, greater width at the first end portion to a second, narrower width at the second end portion (as shown in the annotated Fig. 2 below).
For claim 7, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, further comprising a biasing member (Col. 2, lines 6-8: hinged) configured to bias the clamp members (14, 16) into the closed position.
For claim 8, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, wherein the base member (2) comprises an extension portion (Fig. 1 shows structure 12 attached and extending vertically from the base member 2) defining a recess (as shown in Fig. 1 at numeral 12), the recess configured to receive and orient the subject’s head when the subject is positioned within the holder (Col. 2, lines 3-5).
For claim 9, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 8, wherein the recess comprises a U-shape (Fig. 1: recess 12 is shown with a top surface and side walls to define a U-shape).
For claim 10, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, wherein the movable member (6) comprises a main body (Fig. 1: side wall of cavity 12) and a tab (Fig. 1: top of cavity 12) extending from the main body at an angle.
For claim 11, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, wherein the movable member (6) comprises a U-shaped cutout (Fig. 1: cavity 12 is shown with a top surface and side walls to define a U-shaped cutout).
For claim 12, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 1, further comprising one or more back supports (as shown in Fig. 1: 22) configured to support a back of the subject to help restrain the subject against movement relative to the holder (Col. 2, lines 21-31).
For claim 13, Zermoglio et al. discloses the holder of claim 12, wherein the back supports (22) are pivotable between an open position and a closed position (Col. 2, lines 23-27).
For claim 14, Zermoglio et al. discloses a method of using the holder of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above), comprising: positioning the subject (Col. 2, lines 64-67) such that the subject’s neck is aligned with a first end portion of a channel (12) defined by the two or more clamp members (Col. 3, lines 1-3: 14, 16); and inserting the subject’s neck into the channel such that the subject’s head is restrained by the two or more clamp members, thereby restraining the subject against movement relative to the holder (Col. 3, lines 1-3).
For claim 15, Zermoglio et al. discloses the method of claim 14, further comprising: applying a force (Col. 2, line 67-Col. 3, line 3) to the movable member (6) causing the movable member to move from the first position to the second position (Col. 3, lines 4-28), thereby pivoting the two or more clamp members (14, 16) into the open position such that the subject is released from the holder (Col. 3, lines 23-28).
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zermoglio et al., as above.
For claim 16, Zermoglio et al. discloses the method of claim 15, wherein applying a force (Col. 2, line 67-Col. 3, line 3) to the movable member (6) comprises actuating an actuator (Col. 2, lines 8-10), wherein the actuator contacts the movable member to provide the force, but fails to show actuating a pneumatic piston, wherein a head portion of the piston contacts the movable member to provide the force. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Zermoglio et al. to include actuating a pneumatic piston, wherein a head portion of the piston contacts the movable member to provide the force for the advantage of thereby pivoting the two or more clamp members, and since a simple substitution of one known element for another would obtain predictable results. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 127 S. Ct. 1727, 1739, 1740, 82 USPQ2d 1385, 1395, 1396 (2007).
Claims 17 and 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eid et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/00155289) in view of Zermoglio et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,634,319).
For claim 17, Eid et al discloses a medicament administration device (as shown in Fig. 1), comprising: a plurality of stations including, at least, a loading station configured to allow insertion of a subject into the administration device (as discussed in [0066] and [0116]: rotary movement of birds “into and out of position relative to the injection units 20”), and a release station configured to automatically release the subject from the administration device (as discussed in [0067] and [0116]); a carousel having a stationary portion (Fig. 1: 12) on which the plurality of stations is disposed (as shown in Fig. 1), and a movable portion (as discussed in [0065]: “rotating turntable”) that is movable relative to the stationary portion (as discussed in the last sentence of [0071]); and a holder (Figs. 1-5: 14) coupled to the movable portion of the carousel and configured to engage a subject and rotate the subject between the plurality of stations (as discussed in [0066] and [0067]). Eid et al. fails to show the holder comprising: two or more clamp members each coupled to a base member and to a movable member.
Zermoglio et al. teaches a holder (Fig. 1) for a medicament administration device (as discussed in the abstract), comprising: a base member (2); a movable member (6) disposed on the base member such that the movable member can move relative to the base member between a first position (Col. 1, line 65- Col. 2, line 2: “a lower stand-by position”) and a second position (Col. 1, line 65- Col. 2, line 2: “an upper operational position”); and two or more clamp members (Col. 2, lines 6-8: arms 16 with vertical pegs 14) each coupled to the base member (2) and to the movable member (6), the clamp members being pivotable between a closed position corresponding with the first position of the movable member (Col. 2, line 51- Col. 3, line 3) and an open position corresponding with the second position of the movable member (Col. 3, lines 23-28), wherein when in the closed position the clamp members are configured to engage a head of a subject to restrain the subject against movement relative to the holder (Col. 3, lines 1-3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Eid et al. to include the holder as taught by Zermoglio et al. for the advantage of easily operating the restraint and release of a subject to correspond with the plurality of stations.
For claim 19, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. discloses the administration device of claim 17, wherein the loading station comprises a sensor (Zermoglio et al. Col. 2, lines 48-49 and Col. 2, line 67-Col. 3, line 3) configured to determine whether a hand of a user is present within the loading station.
For claim 20, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. discloses the administration device of claim 17, wherein the holder further comprises one or more back supports (Zermoglio et al. as shown in Fig. 1: 22) configured to support a back of the subject to help restrain the subject against movement relative to the holder (Zermoglio et al. Col. 2, lines 21-31).
For claim 21, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. discloses the administration device of claim 17, wherein the loading station and the release station comprise an actuator (Zermoglio et al. Col. 2, lines 32-33: actuator for presser 22) configured to move a toothed linear member operatively engaged with the back support Zermoglio et al. Fig. 1: 22) in order to pivot the back support between an open position and a closed position. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Eid et al. and Zermoglio et al. to include a toothed linear member to adjustably position the back support at different angles to conform to birds of different shapes and sizes.
For claim 22, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. discloses the administration device of claim 17, wherein the one or more subjects are week-old chicks (Eid et al. as discussed in [0011]), but fails to specifically show wherein the one or more subjects are day-old chicks. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Eid et al. and Zermoglio et al. to include one-day old chicks for the advantage of mitigating the spread of disease amongst growing birds, and further since it has been held that where routine testing and general experimental conditions are present, discovering the optimum or workable ranges until the desired effect is achieved involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
Claims 18 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eid et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/00155289) in view of Zermoglio et al. (U.S. Patent No. 6,634,319, as cited by Applicant), as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Gourlandt (U.S. Patent No. 4,681,565, as cited by Applicant).
For claim 18, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. discloses the invention substantially as claimed, including an injection station (Eid et al. Figs. 1-5: 20) configured to automatically administer a medicament to one or more subjects using one or more injectors (Eid et al. as discussed in [0072]), but fails to show further comprising: a spray station configured to automatically administer a medicament to one or more subjects using one or more spray nozzles. However, Gourlandt teaches a medicament administration device (Col. 1, lines 5-13), comprising: an injection station (Figs. 19-21: 261) and a spray station (Fig. 19: 200) configured to automatically administer a medicament to one or more subjects using one or more spray nozzles (Col. 9, lines 45-48: 203). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the device of Eid et al. and Zermoglio et al. to include the spray station as taught by Gourlandt for the advantage of administering a medicament to a mouth of a subject.
For claim 23, Eid et al. as modified by Zermoglio et al. and Gourlandt disclose a method, comprising: providing an administration device according to claim 18 (as discussed in the rejection of claim 1 above); and inserting a subject into the holder by inserting the subject’s neck between a first set of the two or more clamp members (Zermoglio et al. 14, 16); rotating the subject to the injection station (Eid et al. as shown in Fig. 1 by way of arrow 11); inserting a needle coupled to a respective injector of the one or more injectors to a selected depth within the subject (Eid et al. [0094]); automatically administering a dose of medicament when the needle reaches the selected depth (Eid et al. [0094]-[0095]); rotating the subject to the spraying station (Eid et al. as shown in Fig. 1 by way of arrow 11); and automatically administering a dose of medicament to the subject via the one or more spray nozzles (Gourlandt Col. 9, lines 45-48: 203).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 5 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIELLE A CLERKLEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7611. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30AM-5PM.
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, Peter Poon can be reached at 571-272-6891. 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.
/DANIELLE A CLERKLEY/ Examiner, Art Unit 3643