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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the hydrophobic filter must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 33 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 33 recites the limitation "the at least one mounting apertures" in lines 2-3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 14-15, 20-22, 24-25 and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adie et al. (US 2013/0110058).
As to claim 1, Adie et al. (hereinafter “Adie”) discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly for treating a tissue site (abstract), comprising:
a negative pressure therapy device (104), comprising:
a housing (figure 2) defining an enclosure that is sealed, the housing including a base portion (120b) and a cover portion (120a);
at least one housing aperture (128) disposed through the base portion in fluid communication with the enclosure (figures 2A and 4A); and
a negative pressure pump (232) disposed in the enclosure and configured to expose the enclosure to a negative pressure as set forth in [0101-0106].
The difference between Adie and claim 1 is the explicit recitation that the enclosure is hermetically sealed.
Adie provides a connection between the base and the cover that provides a tight connection for improved strength as set forth in [0115].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with a hermetic seal because a hermetic seal is known for a tight connection between elements and the substitution of one type of tight connection for another is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claims 2 and 21, Adie provides the assembly with a bottom seal (121) configured to be coupled to the base portion and a top seal (123) configured to be coupled to the cover portion as discussed in [0115] and as shown in figure 4A.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with a hermetic seal because a hermetic seal is known for a tight connection between elements and the substitution of one type of tight connection for another is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
With reference to claim 3, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly further comprising a filter as set forth in [0153].
The difference between Adie and claim 3 is the provision that the filter is hydrophobic and that the filter is coupled to the bottom seal adjacent the at least one housing aperture of the base portion.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the type and/or location of the filter of Adie since it has been held that the substitution of one type of filter for another and/or the rearrangement of elements previously set forth by the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 5, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly of claim 1, wherein the housing is rigid [0111] and the base portion is substantially planar as shown in figure 4A.
Regarding claim 7, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly wherein a reduced pressure inlet (250) of the negative pressure pump is in direct fluid communication with an internal wall of the enclosure (figure 4A), and wherein an exhaust outlet of the reduced pressure pump is in fluid communication with ambient environment external to the enclosure as set forth in [0153].
With reference to claim 9, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly wherein the enclosure further comprises a valve configured to prevent overpressure in the enclosure as set forth in [0100].
As to claim 11, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly wherein the enclosure further comprises: a printed circuit board coupled to the pump and a power source coupled to the printed circuit board as set forth in [0152].
As to claim 14, Adie teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
The difference between Adie and claim 14 is the explicit recitation that the assembly comprises a first and second set of isolation mounts configured to be coupled to a top and bottom portion, respectively.
Adie discloses the assembly with components and materials to reduce noise and vibration as set forth in [0111].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to substitute the material as taught by Adie with mounts in the desired location because Adie discloses the general teaching of providing the assembly with components or materials that can damp vibration and/or attenuate noise as set forth in [0111].
Regarding claim 15, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly further comprising one or more indicator lights (132) coupled to the printed circuit board and visible from exterior to the enclosure as set forth in [0069-0071] and [0088].
As to claim 20, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly for treating a tissue site (abstract), comprising:
a negative pressure therapy device (104), comprising:
a housing (figure 2) defining an enclosure that is sealed, the housing including a base portion (120b) and a cover portion (120a);
at least one vacuum port (128) disposed through the base portion in fluid communication with the enclosure (figure 2E);
at least one sensing port disposed in the base portion [0067]; and
a negative pressure pump (232) disposed in the enclosure and configured to expose the enclosure to a negative pressure as set forth in [0101-0106].
The difference between Adie and claim 20 is the explicit recitation that the enclosure is hermetically sealed.
Adie provides a connection between the base and the cover that provides a tight connection for improved strength as set forth in [0115].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with a hermetic seal because a hermetic seal is known for a tight connection between elements and the substitution of one type of tight connection for another is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 22, see the rejection of claim 3.
As to claim 24, Adie teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claims 11 and 20.
The difference between Adie and claim 24 is the provision that the assembly multiple pressure sensors in specific configurations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with additional sensors (as Adie discloses multiple sensors in [0067] and to provide the specific desired arrangement of the sensors since it has been held that the rearrangement of elements previously set forth by the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 25, see the rejection of claim 14.
Regarding claim 27, see the rejection of claim 15.
Claims 12, 19, 26, 31-33 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adie et al. (US 2013/0110058) and further in view of Bushko et al. (US 2017/0354768).
As to claim 12, Adie teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
The difference between Adie and claim 12 is the provision that the assembly includes a communication port coupled to the printed circuit board, a communication aperture disposed through the housing and positioned to expose the communication port external to the enclosure, and a communication port seal configured to seal the communication aperture relative to the communication port.
Bushko et al. (hereinafter “Bushko”) teaches an analogous negative pressure therapy assembly having a communication port coupled to the printed circuit board, a communication aperture disposed through the housing and positioned to expose the communication port external to the enclosure, and a communication port seal configured to seal the communication aperture relative to the communication port as set forth in [0034].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with the communication port, aperture and seal as taught by Bushko in order to provide a USB access to the assembly for the transfer of information.
As to claim 19, Adie teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 1.
The difference between Adie and claim 19 is the provision that the assembly includes a mount configured to receive the negative pressure therapy device wherein the mount comprises a receptacle configured to receive at least the base portion of the housing, a mating surface coupled to the receptacle and configured create a hermetic seal relative to at least a portion of the base portion, and at least one mount aperture disposed in the mating surface, each of the at least one mount apertures configured to be positioned in fluid communication with one of the at least one housing apertures.
Bushko teaches an analogous negative pressure therapy assembly having a mount (220) configured to receive the negative pressure therapy device wherein the mount comprises a receptacle configured to receive at least the base portion of the housing (figure 2C) , a mating surface (221) coupled to the receptacle and configured create a seal relative to at least a portion of the base portion, and at least one mount aperture disposed in the mating surface (i.e., canister opening), each of the at least one mount apertures configured to be positioned in fluid communication with one of the at least one housing apertures (252) as shown in figure 2C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with the mount as taught by Bushko in order to provide the device with a canister to collect waste as taught by Bushko in [0027-0029].
Additionally, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the seal as a hermetic seal as desired in order to protect against undesirable leakage. Further, it has been held that the substitution of one type of seal for another is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 26, see the rejection of claim 12.
With reference to claim 31, see the rejection of claim 19 and [0034] where element 252 is discloses a inlet through which a vacuum pump communicates negative pressure to the canister.
As to claim 32, Adie modified teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 31.
The difference between Adie modified and claim 32 is the provision that the assembly includes multiple apertures in specific locations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie modified with additional and to provide the specific desired arrangement of the apertures since it has been held that the mere duplication and rearrangement of elements previously set forth by the prior art is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 33, Adie modified teaches the invention substantially as claimed as set forth in the rejection of claim 31.
The difference between Adie modified and claim 33 is the provision that the mount includes an aperture seal.
Bushko provides the opening with latches as discussed in the rejection of claim 31.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the opening with a seal as desired in order to protect against undesirable leakage. Further, it has been held that the substitution of one type of closure for another is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
As to claim 35, Adie discloses a negative pressure therapy assembly for treating a tissue site (abstract), comprising:
a negative pressure therapy device (104), comprising:
a housing (figure 2) defining an enclosure that is sealed, the housing including a base portion (120b) and a cover portion (120a);
at least one vacuum port (128) disposed through the base portion in fluid communication with the enclosure (figure 2E);
at least one sensing port disposed in the base portion [0067]; and
a negative pressure pump (232) disposed in the enclosure and configured to expose the enclosure to a negative pressure as set forth in [0101-0106].
Adie also provides a dressing (102) configured to function as claimed as shown in figure 1.
The difference between Adie and claim 35 is the explicit recitation that the enclosure is hermetically sealed and that the assembly includes a mount.
Adie provides a connection between the base and the cover that provides a tight connection for improved strength as set forth in [0115].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with a hermetic seal because a hermetic seal is known for a tight connection between elements and the substitution of one type of tight connection for another is considered within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Bushko teaches an analogous negative pressure therapy assembly having a mount (220) configured to receive the negative pressure therapy device wherein the mount comprises a receptacle configured to receive at least the base portion of the housing (figure 2C), a mating surface (221) coupled to the receptacle and configured create a seal relative to at least a portion of the base portion, and at least one mount aperture disposed in the mating surface (i.e., canister opening), each of the at least one mount apertures configured function as claimed as shown in figure 2C.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the assembly of Adie with the mount as taught by Bushko in order to provide the device with a canister to collect waste as taught by Bushko in [0027-0029].
Additionally, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to provide the seal as a hermetic seal as desired in order to protect against undesirable leakage. Further, it has been held that the substitution of one type of seal for another is considered to be within the level of ordinary skill in the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHELE M KIDWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-4935. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7AM-4PM EST.
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, Rebecca Eisenberg can be reached at 571-270-5879. 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.
/MICHELE KIDWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781
Prosecution Insights