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 .
Drawing Objections
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because all the figures are not suitable for reproduction in a published patent document. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Per 37 CFR 1.84:
(a) Drawings.
(1) Black ink. Black and white drawings are normally required. India ink, or its equivalent that secures solid black lines, must be used for drawings;
(b) Photographs.
(1) Black and white. Photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications.
(l) Character of lines, numbers, and letters. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning;
(m) Shading. The use of shading in views is encouraged if it aids in understanding the invention and if it does not reduce legibility. Shading is used to indicate the surface or shape of spherical, cylindrical, and conical elements of an object. Flat parts may also be lightly shaded. Such shading is preferred in the case of parts shown in perspective, but not for cross sections. See paragraph (h)(3) of this section. Spaced lines for shading are preferred. These lines must be thin, as few in number as practicable, and they must contrast with the rest of the drawings. As a substitute for shading, heavy lines on the shade side of objects can be used except where they superimpose on each other or obscure reference characters. Light should come from the upper left corner at an angle of 45°. Surface delineations should preferably be shown by proper shading. Solid black shading areas are not permitted, except when used to represent bar graphs or color.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 63-66 are 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.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “energy carrier” in claim 66 is unclear and undefined. The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term. Claims 64-66 depend from claim 63 and thus inherit the deficiencies thereof.
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) 1-5, 7-15, 17, 19, 41 and 43-47 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lu, et al. (“Lu”) (U.S. Pat. 7,387,432).
Regarding claim 1, Lu discloses a dispensing system comprising:
a dispensing outlet (3, 22);
a valve element (2, 21) and
a cartridge (1, 11) having a cartridge outlet (12) with a longitudinal axis (seen in Fig. 1) extending along the cartridge outlet,
wherein the valve element is slideably arranged at an interface (seen in Fig. 3) between the cartridge outlet and the dispensing outlet in a direction (seen in Fig. 3) transverse to the longitudinal axis, with the valve element being configured to open and close the cartridge outlet to dispense material therefrom (compare Fig. 3 and Fig. 4A) , and a part of the dispensing outlet is insertable into the interface (seen in Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 2, Lu discloses that the part of the dispensing outlet is insertable into the interface (18) to slide the valve element in the direction transverse to the longitudinal axis. (Compare Fig. 3 and Fig. 4A)
Regarding claim 3, Lu discloses that the valve element is not removable from the interface. (Seen in Fig. 3)
Regarding claim 4, Lu discloses that the valve element can only slide relative to the interface (blocked by guides 314) along one axis.
Regarding claim 5, Lu discloses that at least one part (Fig. 2: guides 314) of the dispensing outlet (3) is insertable into valve element (2).
Regarding claim 7, Lu discloses that the dispensing outlet comprises a cover disc (31) covering said interface.
Regarding claim 8, Lu discloses that the dispensing outlet further comprises a collar (312, fig. 1).
Regarding claim 9, Lu discloses that the collar at least partly surrounds the interface and the cartridge outlet (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 10, Lu discloses that the collar at least partly surrounds the interface and is arranged at least partly within the cartridge outlet (313, 314, 12, fig. 2).
Regarding claim 11, Lu discloses that the valve element comprises an elongate plate (21) with one or more throughbores (22).
Regarding claim 12, Lu discloses that the one or more throughbores (22) align with the cartridge outlet to open the cartridge outlet (fig. 4A) for dispensing.
Regarding claim 13, Lu discloses that the cartridge outlet comprises one or more cartridge outlet passages (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 14, Lu discloses that the valve element is slideably arranged to align the one or more throughbores with the one or more cartridge outlet passages to open the cartridge outlet for dispensing and to misalign the one or more throughbores with the one or more cartridge outlet passages for closing the cartridge outlet (compare fig. 3 & fig. 4A).
Regarding claim 15, Lu discloses that the valve element (2) comprises a projection (23) extending in parallel to the longitudinal axis (fig. 1).
Regarding claim 17, Lu discloses that the valve element is received in one or more channels (111) in the cartridge outlet.
Regarding claim 19, Lu discloses that the projection (23) is entrainable by the dispensing outlet (3) to effect the sliding of the valve element (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 26, Lu discloses that the cartridge outlet (2) comprises one or more channels (313).
Regarding claim 41, Lu discloses that the interface comprises a frame (314).
Regarding claim 43, Lu discloses coded alignment means (314) ensuring the placement of the dispensing outlet at the cartridge outlet in one orientation only.
Regarding claim 44, Lu discloses that the cartridge is a two-component cartridge comprising first and second cartridge chambers and a respective material stored in a respective one of the first and second cartridge chambers only comes into contact with the other one of the respective materials in the dispensing outlet (fig. 4A).
Regarding claim 45, Lu discloses at least the part of or at least one other part of the dispensing outlet is insertable into valve element, the at least one part comprises first and second inlet passages, the inlet passages, the throughbores, and cartridge outlet passages are not mirror symmetrically arranged with respect to the longitudinal axis.
Regarding claim 46, Lu discloses the cartridge outlet comprising the valve element arranged slideably therein, with the valve element being arranged between a base of the cartridge outlet and arms (314) that project inwardly from an outer wall of the cartridge.
Regarding claim 47, Lu discloses the dispensing outlet comprising
an outlet (321);
a mixing element (2) arranged in a mixer housing (32) having the outlet arranged coaxially along the longitudinal axis, two inlet passages (22), with each of the two inlet passages comprising one or more wings (see annotated Fig 3, below).
PNG
media_image1.png
827
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim(s) 1 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dentsply Int Inc. (WO 00/23002).
Regarding claim 1, Dentsply discloses a dispensing system comprising:
a dispensing outlet (13, 30);
a valve element (32, 37) and
a cartridge (10) having a cartridge outlet (13) with a longitudinal axis (seen in Fig. 1) extending along the cartridge outlet,
wherein the valve element is slideably arranged at an interface (page 5, third paragraph: “In the sealing position, the slider seals the mixing and dispensing capsule in an air-tight manner, by catching the buckling-out piece of the slider in the indentation of the guide groove lying closest to the discharge opening.”) between the cartridge outlet and the dispensing outlet in a direction transverse to the longitudinal axis, with the valve element being configured to open and close the cartridge outlet to dispense material therefrom, and a part of the dispensing outlet is insertable into the interface.
Regarding claim 16, Dentsply discloses that the valve element (37) comprises one or more protrusions (34) extending along the longitudinal axis (fig. 1) towards the cartridge (10).
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) 48 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lu as applied to claim 47 above, and further in view of Brandhorst, et al. (“Brandhorst”) (U.S. Pat 5,722,830).
Regarding claim 48, Lu discloses “dispensing via the outlet (321)” (col. 3, line 30), the outlet being at an outer side of the mixer housing but does not disclose an IOR. Brandhorst discloses a dental substance dispenser with an IOR (11) rotatably attached (col. 2, lines 13-15) to the outlet (13) of the dispenser (10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to borrow the IOR of Brandhorst and attach it to the outlet of Lu to permit exact application of the container contents to small areas, such as dental cavities. (col. 3, lines 43-45)
Regarding claim 49, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR comprises an inlet (proximate 16) and one or more surface ribs (16, enlarged portion) arranged at the inlet and the mixer housing has one or more cooperating ribs (13 grooves).
Regarding claim 50, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the cooperating ribs are parallel to one another. (seen in Fig. 1 of Brandhorst)
Regarding claim 51, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the cooperating ribs mesh with each other.
Regarding claim 53, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR comprises an inlet (proximate 16).
Regarding claim 54, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR comprises an inlet (proximate 16) and one or more circumferential ribs (16, enlarged portion) arranged at the inlet.
Regarding claim 55, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR comprises an inlet (proximate 16) with an aperture.
Regarding claim 56, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the circumferential rib is arranged at the aperture (proximate 16).
Regarding claim 57, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the aperture is downstream of the circumferential rib.
Regarding claim 58, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR comprises an inlet (proximate 16) and one or more surface ribs (16, enlarged portion) arranged at the inlet.
Regarding claim 59, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, does not disclose that the IOR is non-removably attached; however, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the IOR non-removably attached to the outer side of the housing, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill it art. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)
Regarding claim 60, the combination, as modified by Brandhorst, discloses that the IOR is removably attached via snap fit connection (16 snaps into groove 13), but does not disclose that it is non-removable; however, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to make the IOR non-removably attached to the outer side of the housing, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves only routine skill it art. In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965)
Regarding claim 61, Lu discloses that the outer side of the mixer housing has a circumferentially extending lip. (Seen in annotated Fig. 3, above)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 18, 20-25, 27-40, 42, 52, 62 and 67-71 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 combination of the features of dependent claims 6, 18, 20-25, 27-40, 42 is neither known from, nor rendered obvious by, the available prior art. The reasons are as follows: when at least one part (24: 48) of the dispensing outlet (12) comprising one or more inlet passages (24) and or wings (48) is insertable into valve element (16) the components can cooperate with one another to prevent leaks of material between the cartridge outlet and the dispensing outlet to avoid contamination therebetween.
Claim 52 requires one or more outer side ribs extend in parallel to the longitudinal axis. Prior art Lu in view of Brandhorst is considered the closest prior art. Brandhorst discloses ribs that are perpendicular to the longitudinal axis and it would not have been obvious to modify Lu without improper hindsight analysis.
Claim 62 requires the static mixer comprises a positioning grid which cooperates with two ore more positioning grooves within the valve element. Prior art Lu is considered the closest prior art. Lu discloses a static mixer but does not disclose a positioning grid and it would not have been obvious to modify Lu without improper hindsight analysis.
Claim 67 requires the IOR comprises an inlet receptacle having a body to which a cannula is capable of being attached. Prior art Lu in view of Brandhorst is considered the closest prior art. Brandhorst discloses an IOR with a cannula but does not disclose a separate inlet receptacle and it would not have been obvious to modify the prior art without improper hindsight analysis. Claims 68-71 depend from claim 67.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892, attached.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J MELARAGNO whose telephone number is (571)270-7735. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8 am - 5 pm +/- flex.
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, Paul Durand can be reached at (571) 272-4459. 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.
/MICHAEL J. MELARAGNO/ Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights