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 statements (IDS) submitted are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description:
Reference numbers (2), (7), (14) and (5) mentioned in the specification are not in the drawings.
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.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract is not in narrative form within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claims 1-3, 9-11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kent et al (US 20040122358 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kent et al disclose a breast milk distribution system (1, fig 3), comprising: a manifold (3+14) configured to be in fluidic communication with a breast cup (10), wherein the manifold comprises an inlet (see annotated figure below) and an outlet (see annotated figure below); a plurality of reservoirs (2', 2', 2"'), each having a reservoir inlet (see annotated figure below); and a moveable member (14) for placing the outlet in fluidic communication with each reservoir inlet (para 0033).
PNG
media_image1.png
286
510
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, wherein the moveable member includes a drive unit (14) configured to move the outlet between at least two reservoirs of the plurality of reservoirs (para 0033 and 0036).
Regarding claim 3, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 2, wherein the drive unit is an integral drive unit of the manifold (fig 3 and 0033).
Regarding claim 9, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, further comprising a pressure source (11/12) in fluidic communication with the manifold and/or at least one of the plurality of reservoirs (para 0030).
Regarding claim 10, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, further comprising the breast cup (10) in fluidic communication with the inlet of the manifold (fig 3, para 0030, and annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 11, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, further comprising a fluid conduit (13) configured to provide fluidic communication between the breast cup and the inlet of the manifold (fig 3, para 0033).
Regarding claim 14, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, wherein the moveable member (13+14) is configured to place the outlet in fluidic communication with each reservoir inlet in sequence (see annotated figure above and fig 3, para 0033).
Regarding claim 15, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of reservoirs is from 2 to 12 reservoirs (fig 3).
Regarding claim 16, Kent et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 1, wherein the manifold comprises a straight manifold, a right-angle manifold, a round manifold, a block manifold, a square manifold, a hex manifold, a wye manifold, or a rotating joint manifold (element 14 is a block manifold).
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.
Claims 4, 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent et al (US 20040122358 A1) in view of Jones et al (US 20210369566 A1).
Regarding claim 4, Kent et al disclose the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above but fail to teach said system further comprising a reservoir enclosure for housing the plurality of reservoirs.
Kent et al disclose a balance (3) with a bearing surface (30) on which said plurality of reservoirs are arranged (fig 3 and para 0027).
However, Jones et al disclose a medical unit (100) comprising a plurality of reservoirs (110A-B) and a reservoir enclosure (120A-B) for housing the plurality of reservoirs (fig 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify said balance of Kent et al to be in a form of enclosure to house the plurality of said reservoirs as taught by Jones et al. This modification would provide the benefit of securely holding said reservoirs in place (para 0065).
Regarding claim 5, Kent et al in view of Jones et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 4,
Jones et al further disclose wherein the reservoir enclosure comprises a lid (150).
Regarding claim 7, Kent et al in view of Jones et al disclose the breast milk distribution system of claim 4,
Kent et al further disclose wherein the reservoir enclosure further comprises a weight sensor (3) configured to measure a weight of one or more of the plurality of reservoirs (para 0027, modified enclosure of Jones et al would comprise measuring means 3 to weight said reservoirs).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent et al (US 20040122358 A1) in view of Jones et al (US 20210369566 A1) and further in view of Myers et al (US 20200155418 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Kent et al in view of Jones et al disclose the limitations of claims 4 as discussed above fail to teach wherein the reservoir enclosure comprises insulation.
However, Myers et al disclose a breast milk collection (abstract) comprising a reservoir enclosure (14) wherein the reservoir enclosure comprises insulation (para 0047 and 0051).
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 modified device of Kent et al to have a reservoir enclosure comprises insulation as taught by Myers et al. This would provide the benefit of preventing condensation and heat exchange with environmental temperatures surrounding said reservoirs (para 0051).
Claims 8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent et al (US 20040122358 A1) in view of Schlienger et al (US 20120316493 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Kent et al disclose the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above but fail to teach wherein the moveable member rotates.
However, Schlienger et al disclose a breast pump (fig 7) comprising a manifold (10) with a movable member (11) wherein the moveable member rotates (para 0079).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify said moveable member of Kent et al to be movable to allow connecting means such as said outlet of said manifold to be in communication with said reservoirs (para 0079).
Regarding claim 13, Kent et al disclose the limitations of claim 1 as discussed above but fail to teach wherein the outlet comprises a valve.
However, Schlienger et al disclose a breast pump (fig 7) comprising a manifold (10) comprising an outlet (131) wherein the outlet comprises a valve (5, para 0084).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify said outlet to have a valve as taught by Schlienger et al. This would provide the benefit of having a valve that preferably opens only when there is sufficient pressure to allow milk to flow into said reservoirs (para 0087).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kent et al (US 20040122358 A1) in view of Miller et al (US 20190365971 A1) and further in view of Issacson (US 20200246603 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kent et al disclose the limitations of claims 1 and 12 as discussed above but fail to teach wherein the fluid conduit comprises a first one-directional valve and an intersecting flush line having a second one-directional valve, wherein the first one-directional valve prevents backflow from the intersecting flush line and the second one-directional valve prevents backflow from the fluid conduit.
However, Miller et al disclose a breast pump system (100, fig 3) comprising a fluid conduit (230) wherein the fluid conduit comprises a first one-directional valve (216) and wherein the first one-directional valve prevents backflow from an intersecting line (200, para 0037).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify said fluid conduit of Kent al to have a first one-directional valve as taught by Miller et al to prevent milk from backflowing from the said fluid conduit to said breast shield (para 0037).
Kent et al in view of Miller et al fail to teach said fluid conduit comprises an intersecting flush line having a second one-directional valve and wherein the second one-directional valve prevents backflow from the fluid conduit.
Miller et al disclose an intersecting line but fail to teach said intersecting line is a flush line.
Issacson discloses a flushing system (10, fig 2A) comprising a fluid conduit (26) and an intersecting flush line (28) having one-directional valve (32) wherein the one-directional valve prevents backflow from the fluid conduit (para 0043).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify said fluid conduit to an intersecting flush line having a second one-directional valve and wherein the second one-directional valve prevents backflow from the fluid conduit. This would provide the benefit of having a flush line to facilitate prevention of occlusion of said fluid conduit and having a second one-directional valve prevents milk from flowing in to said flush line during pumping (para 0036 and 0043).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FATIMATA S DIOP whose telephone number is (571)272-3299. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday, 9am to 6pm 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, 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.
/FATIMATA SAHRA DIOP/Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/JASON E FLICK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783 09/09/2026
Prosecution Insights