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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 12/20/2024, 01/15/2025 and 06/16/2026 are acknowledged. The submission is in compliance with the provision of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because the abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 12-17 and 20 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.
Claim 1 recites “the pocket” in lines 14, 16; and claim 2 recites “the pocket” in line 2, while claim 1 recites “at least one integral pocket” in line 13. It is unclear which pocket the Applicant wants to refer to. For the benefit of applying art, “the pocket” is interpreted as the at least one pocket.
Claim 12 recites “the rotary pull mechanisms optionally employ multi-part winding spools…” in line 5; “… and at least part of the second plurality of cable loops optionally terminate with elements…” in line 8; “…optionally offset from one another…” in line 10. It is unclear limitations following the term “optionally” are required by the claim or not.
Claim 12 recites “(e.g…, beads)” in line 8. It is unclear whether the limitation(s) “(e.g…, beads)” are part of the claimed invention.
Claim 12 recites “certain scoop features” in line 10. It is unclear “certain scoop features” in line 10 is the same or different from “scoop features” in line 9.
Claim 17 recites “preferably” in lines 6 and 13. It is unclear limitations following the term “preferably” are required by the claim or not.
Claim 17 recites “the continuous channels” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 7. It is unclear “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 7 is the same or different from “the interlocking bead-like structures” in line 2.
Claim 17 recites “the continuous channels” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 14. It is unclear “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 14 is the same or different from “the interlocking bead-like structures” in line 9.
Claim 20 recites “preferably” in lines 6 and 13. It is unclear limitations following the term “preferably” are required by the claim or not.
Claim 20 recites “the continuous channels” in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 7. It is unclear “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 7 is the same or different from “the interlocking bead-like structures” in line 2.
Claim 20 recites “the continuous channels” in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 14. It is unclear “interlocking bead-like structures” in line 14 is the same or different from “the interlocking bead-like structures” in line 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 19 and 21 are allowed over the prior art.
Claims 1-2, 5-7, 12-17 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Regarding claim 1, none of the cited prior art of record, alone or in combination, and in conjunction with other cited limitations, discloses a breast milk expression apparatus, wherein the housing of the unit is further configured to enclose first and second massage actuators driven by the electric motor, the first massage actuator being configured to releasably couple to the first plurality of cable loops to apply compression-expansion cycles to the first pad, and the second massage actuator being configured to releasably couple to the second plurality of cable loops to apply compression-expansion cycles to the second pad.
Regarding claim 19, none of the cited prior art of record, alone or in combination, and in conjunction with other cited limitations, discloses a breast milk expression apparatus wherein the first pad comprises a first set of interlocking bead-like structures and the second pad comprises a second set of interlocking bead-like structures.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to UYEN THI THAO NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-8370. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9 AM-6 PM 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, Khoa Huynh can be reached at 571-272-4888. 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.
/UYEN T NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3732
Prosecution Insights