DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This Office Action is responsive to the amendment filed on 07/07/2026. As indicated by the amendment: claims 1, 11, 14 and 15 have been amended and claims 5, 12 and 18 have been cancelled. In response to the amendment of claims 1 and 14, their rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been withdrawn. In response to the cancellation of claims 5 and 18, the objection to the drawings is rendered moot. In response to the amendment of claim 15, the objection to the drawings is withdrawn. Claims 1-4, 6-11, 13-17 and 19-20 are presently pending in the application, with claims 6-9, 11 and 19 withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-4, 10-11, 13-17 and 20 are examined below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 10, 13-14, 16-17 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollok et al. (US 2022/0192478 A1) in view of Sanchez (US 2017/0274143 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Pollock discloses a fluid container (Figs.1 and 11B) for a medical device, the fluid container comprising: a fluid chamber (1120b/1122; Fig. 11B; par. [0117] and [0121]) having a top portion and a bottom portion (Fig. 11B), wherein the fluid chamber is in fluid communication with a first fluid outlet (1145c; Fig. 11B; par. [0118] and [0121]) at the top portion (Fig. 11B) to connect with a first endoscope feed line and a second fluid outlet (1119; Fig. 11B; par. [0120]-[0121]) at the bottom portion (Fig. 11B) to connect with a second endoscope feed line; and a gas tube (1140c; Fig. 11B; par. [0121]) in contact with the
However, Pollock does not specifically disclose that the first fluid outlet is at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber, and that the fluid container is multi-chambered such that it comprises a gas chamber in mechanical contact with the fluid chamber. Sanchez teaches an analogous fluid container (Fig. 5) having a top portion and a bottom portion (Fig. 5) and comprising both a fluid chamber (202; par. [0020]; Fig. 5) and a gas chamber (204; par. [0020]; Fig. 5) in mechanical contact with the fluid chamber (par. [0021]-[0022] and [0038]). Sanchez teaches that by using the gas chamber (204; Fig. 5) with its tapered or wedge-shape consistent pressure application can be provided to the fluid chamber (202; par. [0027]). Sanchez teaches the fluid chamber (202) having a fluid outlet (212; Fig. 5) at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber to receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber (202) when pressure is applied to the fluid chamber from top to bottom by the gas chamber (204). Sanchez teaches that such top to bottom flow of fluid helps fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber (par. [0024]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the fluid container of Pollock to provide a chamber for each of the fluid and gas that are in mechanical contact with each other, as taught by Sanchez, in order to provide consistent pressure application to the fluid chamber when dispensing fluid from the selected fluid outlet. It also would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide both the first and second fluid outlets of Pollock at the bottom of the fluid chamber such that they may both receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber when pressure is applied from top to bottom by the gas chamber, thereby preventing fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber, as taught by Sanchez.
Regarding claim 2, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the fluid container of claim 1, wherein the fluid chamber (1120b/1122; Sanchez - 202) is a bag comprising a flexible material such that the bag decreases in volume as fluid flows out of the first and second fluid outlets (Sanchez - par. [0034] and [0038]; Fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 3, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the fluid container of claim 1, wherein the gas chamber (Sanchez – 204) is a bag comprising a flexible material such that the bag increases in volume as the gas chamber receives gas to apply pressure to the fluid chamber (Sanchez - par. [0034] and [0038]; Fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 4, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the fluid container of claim 1, comprising a pole mount (1171a/1171b; Fig. 11B; par. [0124]) suitable for hanging the container on a conventional pole for an intravenous fluid supply bag.
Regarding claim 10, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the fluid container of claim 1, further comprising an air pump (215; par. [0073]) in fluid communication with the gas chamber (Sanchez – 204).
Regarding claim 13, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the fluid container of claim 1, wherein the fluid chamber contains saline (Sanchez – par. [0015]).
Regarding claim 14, Pollock discloses an endoscopic surgical device (Figs. 1 and 2), comprising: an endoscopic probe (100; par. [0067]) having a lens wash feed line (245b; par. [0070]) and an irrigation feed line (255b; par. [0070]); and a fluid container (Figs.1 and 11B), comprising: a fluid chamber (1120b/1122; Fig. 11B; par. [0117] and [0121]) having a top portion and a bottom portion (Fig. 11B), wherein the fluid chamber is in fluid communication with a first fluid outlet (1145c; Fig. 11B; par. [0118] and [0121]) at the top portion (Fig. 11B) supplying fluid to the lens wash feed line (245b) and a second fluid outlet (1119; Fig. 11B; par. [0120]-[0121]) at the bottom portion (Fig. 11B) supplying fluid to the irrigation feed line (255b); and a gas tube (1140c; Fig. 11B; par. [0121]) in contact with the pressurized fluid chamber (1120B/1122; Fig. 11B), the gas tube receiving gas to apply pressure to the fluid chamber in order to maintain fluid pressure within the fluid chamber (par. [0121] and [0074]).
However, Pollock does not specifically disclose that the first fluid outlet is at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber, and that the fluid container is multi-chambered such that it comprises a gas chamber in mechanical contact with the fluid chamber. Sanchez teaches an analogous fluid container (Fig. 5) having a top portion and a bottom portion (Fig. 5) and comprising both a fluid chamber (202; par. [0020]; Fig. 5) and a gas chamber (204; par. [0020]; Fig. 5) in mechanical contact with the fluid chamber (par. [0021]-[0022] and [0038]). Sanchez teaches that by using the gas chamber (204; Fig. 5) with its tapered or wedge-shape consistent pressure application can be provided to the fluid chamber (202; par. [0027]). Sanchez teaches the fluid chamber (202) having a fluid outlet (212; Fig. 5) at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber to receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber (202) when pressure is applied to the fluid chamber from top to bottom by the gas chamber (204). Sanchez teaches that such top to bottom flow of fluid helps fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber (par. [0024]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the fluid container of Pollock to provide a chamber for each of the fluid and gas that are in mechanical contact with each other, as taught by Sanchez, in order to provide consistent pressure application to the fluid chamber when dispensing fluid from the selected fluid outlet. It also would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide both the first and second fluid outlets of Pollock at the bottom of the fluid chamber such that they may both receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber when pressure is applied from top to bottom by the gas chamber, thereby preventing fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber, as taught by Sanchez.
Regarding claim 16, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the device of claim 14, wherein the fluid chamber (1120b/1122; Sanchez - 202) is a bag comprising a flexible material such that the bag decreases in volume as fluid flows out of the first and second fluid outlets (Sanchez - par. [0034] and [0038]; Fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 17, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the device of claim 14, wherein the gas chamber (Sanchez – 204) is a bag comprising a flexible material such that the bag increases in volume as the gas chamber receives gas to apply pressure to the fluid chamber (Sanchez - par. [0034] and [0038]; Fig. 3B).
Regarding claim 20, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the device of claim 14, further comprising an air pump (215; par. [0073]) in fluid communication with the gas chamber (Sanchez – 204).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pollock in view of Sanchez as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Blitzer et al. (US 2017/0325790 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the device of claim 14, further comprising a gas/water valve (140; par. [0069] and [0072]-[0073]) actuated by a user to open the lens wash feed line (245b; par. [0069]-[0070]). Although, Pollock discloses an irrigation feed line (255b; par. [0070]), it does not specifically disclose how the irrigation feed line is opened, such that it does not specifically disclose that it is opened by a suction valve. Blitzer teaches an analogous endoscopic surgical device having a combined irrigation/suction valve (116; par. [0126]; Fig. 8) that can provide irrigation or suction to the target area. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the suction valve (145; par. [0069]) of Pollock to be a combined irrigation/suction valve, as taught by Blitzer, in order to provide a second valve on the handle of the endoscopic device that can selectively open the irrigation feed line or the suction feed line, thereby making operation of the gas and fluid functions easier for the operator as the first and second valves are both located on the handle.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/07/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant contends that Pollock in view of Sanchez does not disclose the fluid container wherein both the first and second fluid outlets are located at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber (see Remarks at page 6). The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As discussed above, Pollock teaches a fluid container having a combined fluid and gas chamber wherein a first fluid outlet at the top portion of the chamber and a second fluid outlet at the bottom portion of the chamber. Pollock does not teach the fluid container having separate liquid and gas chambers, or both fluid outlets located at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber. Sanchez teaches an analogous fluid container (Fig. 5) having a top portion and a bottom portion (Fig. 5) and comprising a fluid chamber (202; Fig. 5), and a gas chamber (204; Fig. 5) in mechanical contact with the fluid chamber (par. [0021]-[0022] and [0038]). Sanchez teaches that by using the gas chamber (204; Fig. 5) with its tapered or wedge-shape consistent pressure application can be provided to the fluid chamber (202; par. [0027]). Sanchez teaches the fluid chamber (202) having a fluid outlet (212; Fig. 5) at the bottom portion of the fluid chamber to receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber (202) when pressure is applied to the fluid chamber from top to bottom by the gas chamber (204; par. [0024]). Sanchez teaches that such top to bottom flow of fluid helps fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber (par. [0024]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the fluid container of Pollock to provide a chamber for each of the fluid and gas that are in mechanical contact with each other, as taught by Sanchez, in order to provide consistent pressure application to the fluid chamber when dispensing fluid from the selected fluid outlet. It also would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide both the first and second fluid outlets of Pollock at the bottom of the fluid chamber such that they may both receive the fluid that exits the fluid chamber when pressure is applied from top to bottom by the gas chamber, thereby preventing fluid from being trapped in the fluid chamber, as taught by Sanchez. Accordingly, Pollock in view of Sanchez disclose the claimed invention and the rejection is maintained.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYNAE E BOLER whose telephone number is (571)270-3620. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 9:00-5:00.
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, Anhtuan Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-4963. 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.
/RYNAE E BOLER/Examiner, Art Unit 3795
/ANHTUAN T NGUYEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3795
9/19/26
Prosecution Insights