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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 18, the claimed, “the bottom of the cap of the fluid transfer device and the first and second nubs of the fluid transfer device” lacks antecedent basis in the claims. Notably, it appears as though claim 18 should depend from claim 17, which would remedy the improper antecedent basis issue, and place claims 18–21 in condition for allowance (see below), based on their dependency upon allowable claim 17.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 5–7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirkpatrick et al. (US Pub. # 2022032295), hereinafter referred to as Kirkpatrick.
Regarding claim 1, Kirkpatrick teaches, “A fluid transfer device comprising: an actuating mechanism (Fig. 1, 12, 14a, 14b), the actuating mechanism comprising: a first actuator member (Fig. 1, 12, 14a, 14b; ref. # 115, 1200, 1400) connected to a lower portion of a housing (120, 125) at a first actuator hinge (1205, 1405); a second actuator member (115, 1200, 1400) connected to the lower portion of the housing at a second actuator hinge (other 1205, 1405), the first actuator hinge being located at an opposing end of the housing from the second actuator hinge; a squeeze bulb (110, 1215, 1415) located within the housing; and a pipette tube (100, 130, 1230, 1235, 1425) coupled to the squeeze bulb; wherein the first actuator member and the second actuator member are configured to compress the squeeze bulb by pivoting into the housing at the first actuator hinge and the second actuator hinge (see para. [0124, 0126, 0129, 0156, 0157, 0160]).”
Regarding claim 2, Kirkpatrick teaches, “wherein the first actuator hinge and the second actuator hinge are located at the bottom of the housing (see position of 1205’s, 1405’s).”
Regarding claim 5, Kirkpatrick teaches, “wherein the squeeze bulb is constructed of polypropylene (see para. [0152, 0161]; ref. # 110, 1215, 1415).”
Regarding claim 6, Kirkpatrick teaches, “wherein the squeeze bulb and the pipette tube are formed in a unibody configuration (110, 1215, 1415 w/ 100, 130, 1230, 1235, 1425, formed “unibodily”).”
Regarding claim 7, Kirkpatrick teaches, “wherein the squeeze bulb is elliptical in shape (see 110, 1215, 1415).”
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) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirkpatrick (US Pub. # 2022032295) in view of St. Amand (US Pat. # 4779768).
Regarding claim 8, Kirkpatrick doesn’t appear to teach, “wherein the pipette tube is coupled to the squeeze bulb through an overflow channel; and the overflow channel is coupled to the squeeze bulb at a location above an excess liquid reservoir.” However, St. Amand teaches the deficiencies of Kirkpatrick (see Fig. 6–9). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Kirkpatrick’s invention to include wherein the pipette tube is coupled to the squeeze bulb through an overflow channel; and the overflow channel is coupled to the squeeze bulb at a location above an excess liquid reservoir.
The ordinary artisan would have been motivated to modify Kirkpatrick’s invention for at least the purpose of ensuring prevention of accidental dispensing of the fluid beyond the desired amount.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 17 is allowed.
Regarding claim 17 (and claims 18–21 if objection above corrected), the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “a cap covering a portion of the housing, wherein the cap has a bottom width at least equal to the greatest width of the housing; wherein the first actuator member and the second actuator member are configured to compress the squeeze bulb by pivoting into the housing at the first actuator hinge and the second actuator hinge.”
Claims 3, 4, and 9–16 are 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.
Regarding claims 3 and 4, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “wherein the housing, the first actuator member, the first actuator hinge, the second actuator member and the second actuator hinge are comprised of a single piece of material.”
Regarding claims 9–16, the prior art does not teach or suggest the claimed, “a cap covering a portion of the housing, wherein the cap has a bottom width at least equal to the greatest width of the housing”, in combination with the previously claimed language.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO–892 form. The references cited herewith teach fluid transfer devices with configurations similar to the present application, but do not teach or suggest the allowable claim language as indicated above.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN D WALSH whose telephone number is (571)272-2726. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30am-6:30pm.
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, Walter Lindsay can be reached at 571-272-1674. 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.
/RYAN D WALSH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
Prosecution Insights