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 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 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Patent No. 3858615 to Weigl (Weigl).
With regard to claim 1, Weigl discloses a kink-resistant medical tubing (Weigl, title, abstract “A kink-resistant hose construction…”) comprising:
a tubular member (24, fig. 1, column 3, lines 5-7) defining a lumen (46, fig. 5) therethrough, the tubular member including a first end (shown in fig. 1 the end proximate the automatic respiration apparatus 10), a second end (shown in fig. 1 the end opposite the first end), and a middle portion (the portion shown in partial section of fig. 4 but as applied to the embodiment of fig. 3 in the system of fig. 1) positioned therebetween, the first end operable to couple to secondary member (10, fig. 1, as attached at air flow ports 22); and
a kink-resistant member (42/42, fig. 3) positioned along the tubular member proximate the first end, the kink-resistant member operable to limit bending of the tubular member such that a bend (shown in fig. 1 downstream of air flow ports 22) of the tubular member has a predefined minimum bending radius (44, fig. 1, described at column 4, lines 7-20), wherein the kink-resistant member includes a first spacer (the first wedge shaped concentric ring 42 in fig. 3) and a second spacer (the next concentric ring 42 in fig. 3) operable to contact the first spacer to define the predefined minimum bending radius (as described at column 4, lines 7-20 and shown in the cutaway portion of fig. 4 where adjacent spacers are in contact and defining a minimum bending radius).
With regard to claim 2, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 1 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the kink-resistant member includes a plurality of spacers including the first spacer and the second spacer, wherein each of the plurality of spacers are operable to contact adjacent spacers of the plurality of spacers (as shown in the figures).
With regard to claim 3, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 2 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the plurality of spacers includes beading (as shown in the figures).
With regard to claim 4, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 3 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the beading is integrally formed on the tubular member (as shown in the cross section view of figs. 2 and 3, the spacers are formed as beads).
With regard to claim 5, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 3 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the beading is coupled to the tubular member (as shown in the figures).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 6-11, 13-14 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent No. 3858615 to Weigl (Weigl).
With regard to claim 6, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 3 as set forth above, but does not disclose wherein each bead of the beading has a diameter of about 0.6 cm. The dimensions of the tube of Weigl are intended for use with an infant and thus are sized accordingly smaller than the amount claimed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Weigl in different and larger diameters with correspondingly sized beads such as a quarter inch diameter bead (0.6 cm) in order to test the suitability of the device for use with larger children and adults.
With regard to claim 7, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 6 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein each bead extends from an outer diameter of the tubular member about 0.2 cm (fig. 2, 0.08 inches).
With regard to claim 8, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 3 as set forth above, but does not further disclose wherein each bead of the beading has a sloped side, wherein the sloped side is angled at about 60 degrees relative to an outer surface of the tubular member. Weigl discloses sloped sides but does not disclose the angle of the sloped sides. It appears to be approximately 60-75 degrees, but it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Weigl in various configurations of sloped side beads 42 including about 60 degrees as part of a process of determining the functionality of hose to be bent through 180 degrees without significant flow restriction in the lumen of the device.
With regard to claim 9, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 8 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the beading includes six beads (6 beads shown in fig. 4), wherein the six beads are operable to facilitate a maximum of a 180 degree turn in the tubular member along a longitudinal position covered by the six beads (as shown in fig. 4 the beads function to allow the hose to be bent back on itself when in use such as that shown in fig. 1).
With regard to claim 10, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 3 as set forth above, but does not further disclose wherein each bead is about 0.8 cm long along a length of the tubular member. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Weigl with different spacings (including 0.8 cm) between beads along a length of the hose in order to test the amount of restriction created when the hose is bent 180 degrees.
With regard to claim 11, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant medical tubing of claim 1 as set forth above, but does not further disclose wherein the predefined minimum bending radius is about 0.8 cm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the hose of Weigl in various configurations that create a range of minimum bending radii, including 0.8 cm, in order to test the hose in various configurations to determine suitability for its intended use.
With regard to claim 13, Weigl discloses a kink-resistant member for resisting kinking of a tubular member (Weigl, title, abstract), the kink-resistant member configured to be coupled to the tubular member, the kink-resistant member comprising:
a plurality of beads (42/42, fig. 3) operable to be coupled to a tubular member (shown in fig. 3), each bead of the plurality of beads including a sloped side (the beads 42 have opposing sloped sides), wherein adjacent sloped sides of each of the plurality of beads define an angle therebetween (when the hose bends and the two beads are brought into contact an angle is defined therebetween), wherein the angle is about 60 degrees (not disclosed).
Weigl discloses sloped sides but does not disclose the angle of the sloped sides. It appears to be approximately 60-75 degrees, but it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Weigl in various configurations of sloped side beads 42 including about 60 degrees as part of a process of determining the functionality of hose to be bent through 180 degrees without significant flow restriction in the lumen of the device.
With regard to claim 14, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant member of claim 13 as set forth above, but fails to further disclose wherein each bead of the plurality of beads has a diameter of about 0.6 cm.
The dimensions of the tube of Weigl are intended for use with an infant and thus are sized accordingly smaller than the amount claimed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to provide the device of Weigl in different and larger diameters with correspondingly sized beads such as a quarter inch diameter bead (0.6 cm) in order to test the suitability of the device for use with larger children and adults.
With regard to claim 19, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant member of claim 13 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein each bead of the plurality of beads is configured to extend from an outer diameter of the tubular member about 0.2 cm (fig. 2, 0.08 inches).
With regard to claim 20, Weigl discloses the kink-resistant member of claim 13 as set forth above, and further discloses wherein the plurality of beads includes six beads (six beads shown in fig. 4) to facilitate a maximum of a 180 degree turn in a longitudinal line extending through each of the six beads. the tubular member along a longitudinal position covered by the six beads (shown in the figures).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12 and 15-18 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: With regard to claim 12, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a kink resistant medical tubing having slip-resistant members positioned longitudinally spaced from the first and second spacers along the length of the tubular member, together in combination with the other elements. With regard to claim 15, the prior art of record fails to teach or suggest a kink resistant member having the plurality of beads is positioned on a sleeve, the sleeve configured to be positioned about the tubular member, together in combination with the other elements. The remaining claims depend from one of these claims and are allowable for at least the same reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references contain similar bend limiting structures: USPNs 3122171, 6039081, 2005/0165366, 2012/0048415, 2012/0304447, 2015/0020910, 2016/0018029 and 2024/0001099.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID R DEAL whose telephone number is (469)295-9216. The examiner can normally be reached M-F generally 8-4 pm CST.
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 supervisors can be reached at: Craig M Schneider (571) 272-3607 and Ken Rinehart (571) 272-4881. 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.
/DAVID R DEAL/ Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights