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.
Claim(s) 16, 17, 19, 21-27, 29, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Veasey et al (WO 2011/039217 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Veasey discloses a sub-assembly for a medicament delivery device, the sub-assembly extending along a longitudinal axis in a longitudinal direction from a proximal end to a distal end, the sub-assembly comprising: a housing 30; and a plunger rod 20 arranged at least partly inside the housing (page 48, 26-30; fig. 4A); wherein the plunger rod comprises a first surface 210 facing towards the proximal end and a component of the sub-assembly other than the plunger rod comprises a second surface 300 facing towards the distal end, with the first surface and the second surface being arranged so that, when the plunger rod moves towards the proximal end relative to the component during medicament delivery device use, the first surface and the second surface engage to rotate the plunger rod relative to the component (page 48, line 30 – page 49, line 3; page 49, lines 23-24) and then disengage so that the plunger rod rotates back relative to the component (page 49, lines 5-6; page 50, lines 15-54), and wherein the sub-assembly comprises a torsion spring 80 attached at one end to the plunger rod and at the other end to the component (page 50, lines 5-11).
Regarding claim 17, Veasey discloses that the component is the housing 30.
Regarding claim 19, Veasey that at least part of at least one of the first surface and the second surface is angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (fig. 4A: engaging surfaces have a perpendicular wall and a slanted wall).
Regarding claim 21, Veasey discloses that at least part of the first surface is angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (fig.4A).
Regarding claim 22, Veasey discloses that the sub-assembly comprises a feedback surface 300 angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, wherein the feedback surface is spaced apart in a circumferential direction relative to the longitudinal axis from a distal end of the first surface (page 35, lines 21-25).
Regarding claim 23, Veasey discloses that at least part of the second surface is angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (fig. 4A).
Regarding claim 24, Veasey discloses that the sub-assembly comprises a feedback surface 300 angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, wherein the feedback surface is spaced apart in a circumferential direction relative to the longitudinal axis from a distal end of the first surface (page 35, lines 21-25).
Regarding claim 25, Veasey discloses that the plunger rod comprises the feedback surface (page 35, lines 21-25).
Regarding claim 26, Veasey discloses that the component 30 is rotationally locked relative to the housing (page 42, line 10).
Regarding claim 27, Veasey discloses that a spring is arranged between the plunger rod and the housing, and the spring is configured to move the plunger rod towards the proximal end during medicament delivery (page 20, lines 17-19).
Regarding claim 29, Veasey discloses that the torsion spring 80 is a first spring and the spring is a second spring (page 20, lines 17-19: second spring is a drive spring).
Regarding claim 30, Veasey discloses a medicament delivery device comprising the sub-assembly of claim 16 (page 1, lines 10-11; see claim 16 above).
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.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Veasey.
Claim 20 calls for the at least part of at least one of the first surface and the second surface is angled relative to a plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis at an angle of between 10 and 85 degrees. Veasey is silent as to the angle. However, Applicant has not provided criticality to the claimed angle by explaining the particular purpose it serves. The angle shown by Veasey is neither perpendicular nor parallel to a line perpendicular to the longitudinal axis and therefore it would have been obvious that the angle is within the claimed range.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18, 28 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: the subject matter of the claims listed above could not be found and was not suggested by the prior art of record.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest the housing comprising an outer housing and a rear cap, and the rear cap comprises the second surface, in combination with the features of the invention, substantially as claimed.
Regarding claim 28, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest the spring and the torsion spring being the same component, in combination with the features of the invention, substantially as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA A BOUCHELLE whose telephone number is (571)272-2125. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 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 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.
LAURA A. BOUCHELLE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3783
/LAURA A BOUCHELLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights