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 § 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 7 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 7 requires the movable member to be formed integrally with and as part of the device by injection molding, yet the movable member is the only claimed structure of the device and it is unclear with what else the movable members in supposed to be formed integrally with and as part of.
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)(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) 1-8 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Roberts et al (US 10,799,679).
Regarding claim 1, Roberts discloses a single-piece device (fig 3) for securing a portion of tubing, the tubing for use in connection with medical treatment of a patient (fig 13), the device comprising: a section 96 configured to receive the portion of the tubing; a member 44/45 configured to move when at least a portion of the portion of the tubing received by the section is pressed against the member (flexible – Col.3 ll 28-36; move part for insertion of catheter, also capable of accepting and gripping catheters which are larger than the relaxed state shown in fig 3); and a cover 34 configured to apply pressure to keep the portion of the tubing within the section when the cover is closed (Cover 34 engages recessed portions 94 which assist in keeping members 44 and 45 in place and applying pressure to the tubing).
Regarding claim 2 wherein the tubing is a catheter 12 (fig 13).
Regarding claim 3, wherein the device is formed by injection molding (Col.3 ll 43-45).
Regarding claim 4, wherein the member moves by being deflected from a first position to a second position as a result of the pressure applied to the portion of the tubing within the section when the cover is closed (capable of operating as such due to the cover pressing upon members 44/45).
Regarding claim 5, further comprising a male clip 66 and a female tab (tab in which openings 130 are formed) that are configured to be connected mechanically to hold the cover closed (fig 12).
Regarding claim 6, Roberts discloses a catheter stabilization device comprising a movable member 44/45 configured to accommodate separately a first catheter of a first outer diameter and a second catheter of a second outer diameter that is different from the first outer diameter (due to resiliency of movable member; alternatively, capable of accommodating catheters of different sizes if at least some portions of the catheters are compressible).
Regarding claim 7, wherein the movable member is formed integrally with and as part of the device by injection molding (Col.3 ll 43-45; fig 3).
Regarding claim 8, further comprising a support structure 162 configured to be attached directly to skin of the patient (fig 12).
Regarding claim 10, Roberts discloses a method of securing tubing that is used in connection with medical treatment of a patient (fig 12), the method comprising: attaching a tubing securement device to skin of the patient (fig 12), the device comprising a support structure 162 configured to be attached directly to the skin of the patient, a section 96 configured to receive the portion of the tubing; a member 44/45 configured to move when at least a portion of the portion of the tubing received by the section is pressed against the member (flexible – Col.3 ll 28-36; move part for insertion of catheter, also capable of accepting and gripping catheters which are larger than the relaxed state shown in fig 3); and a cover 34 configured to apply pressure to keep the portion of the tubing within the section when the cover is closed (Cover 34 engages recessed portions 94 which assist in keeping members 44 and 45 in place and applying pressure to the tubing); placing the portion of the tubing in the section of the device (fig 13); and closing the cover of the device to keep the portion of the tubing within the section of the device (fig 12).
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(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Roberts et al (US 10,799,679) in view of Bierman et al (US 6,572,588).
Regarding claim 9, while Roberts substantially discloses the invention as claimed, it does not disclose wherein the support structure is ultrasonically welded to at least one part of the device.
Bierman discloses ultrasonic welding is a known alternative to adhesive bonding of the support structure to the device (Col.19 ll 40-42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of filing, to modify Roberts such that the support structure is ultrasonically welded to at least one part of the device as taught by Bierman as it is a known, alternative means with every expectation of success by which to attach the two parts together.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADLEY JAMES OSINSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3640. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday 9AM to 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, Michael Tsai can be reached at (571)270-5246. 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.
/BRADLEY J OSINSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights