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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 09/27/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The extensive number of drawings have not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the drawings.
The drawings are objected to because in many of the drawings, parts of the drawings have been labeled with multiple reference numbers, for example listed in format A (B), with A being one reference number and B being another. It is confusing to the examiner because it appears as though there are different reference numbers for the same part, but then the specification identifies the reference numbers as different parts. The examiner suggests providing only one reference number for each labeled part. 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.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claims 8 and 16 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.
The term “substantially” in claims 8 and 16 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “Substantially” is a broad term and the specification lacks some standard for measuring the degrees intended to define “a substantially semicircular shape”. It is unclear to the examiner the bounds that limit “a substantially semicircular shape” as opposed to an unsubstantially semicircular shape. For the purpose of examination, the examiner will interpret “a substantially semicircular shape” by visually ascertaining if a part appears semicircular.
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.
Claims 1, 6, 9, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Helm, JR. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2012/0197204 A1; herein, Helm).
Regarding claim 1, Helm discloses a liquid medicine administration device (dressing-catheter system 10) comprising:
a catheter (catheter 24) configured to be inserted into and left in place in a living body ([0087], catheter 24 inserted into and secured to the patient);
a catheter hub (catheter hub 26) that holds a proximal end of the catheter (FIG. 1, [0083], "the catheter hub 26 extends from the proximal end of the catheter 24");
a holder (FIG. 6A, body portion 50) that holds the catheter hub (FIG. 6D); and
an adhesive member (adhesive plate 48) configured to be affixed along a body surface of the living body ([0106], "plate 48 configured to be adhered to a patient's skin"), the adhesive member having a sheet shape (FIG. 6A-6G, adhesive plate 48 shown as a sheet) and being fixed onto a back surface of the holder (FIG. 6C, [0106], body portion 50 extends upwards from the adhesive plate 48).
Regarding claim 6, Helm discloses the adhesive member has an elliptical shape (FIG. 6E, adhesive plate 48 is elliptical in shape).
Regarding claim 9, Helm discloses a method of attaching a liquid medicine administration device to a body surface of a living body (FIG. 4A shows the dressing-catheter system 10 being moved into the body surface and [0083] "hub 26 allows for the dressing assembly 14 to be applied over, and attached in sealing engagement to, the hub 26 after the catheter 24 has been inserted"), the method comprising:
providing the liquid medicine administration device (dressing-catheter system 10), which comprises:
a catheter (catheter 24) configured to be inserted into and left in place in a living body ([0087], catheter 24 inserted into and secured to the patient);
a catheter hub (catheter hub 26) that holds a proximal end of the catheter (FIG. 1, [0083], "the catheter hub 26 extends from the proximal end of the catheter 24");
a holder (FIG. 6A, body portion 50) that holds the catheter hub (FIG. 6D); and
an adhesive member (adhesive plate 48) having a sheet shape (FIG. 6A-6G, adhesive plate 48 shown as a sheet) and being fixed onto a back surface of the holder (FIG. 6C, [0106], body portion 50 extends upwards from the adhesive plate 48); and
attaching the liquid medicine administration device to the body surface of the living body via the adhesive member ([0087], catheter 24 inserted into and secured to the patient and [0106], "plate 48 configured to be adhered to a patient's skin").
Regarding claim 14, Helm discloses the adhesive member has an elliptical shape (FIG. 6E, adhesive plate 48 is elliptical in shape).
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.
Claims 2, 5, 10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Amirana (United States Patent No. US 5,897,531 A).
Regarding claim 2, Helm discloses a catheter holding portion (catheter hub receiving channel 54) having a cylindrical shape (FIG. 6A) and having at least a distal end connected to the base portion (FIG. 6A, catheter hub receiving channel 54 is connected to body portion 50, which incorporates a base connection to adhesive plate 48), the catheter holding portion holding a distal portion of the catheter hub inserted into the catheter holding portion (FIG. 6D, [0106], "The hub receiving channel 54 can have a uniform diameter designed to receive the catheter hub 26 in a sliding fashion, leaving a minimum of dead space, and can include specific contour features designed to mate with the snap-fit catheter hub 26."); and the distal end of the catheter holding portion is inclined toward the base portion (FIG. 6A, dressing assembly 14 naturally sets catheter hub receiving channel 54 at an incline towards the insertion site).
Helm does not explicitly disclose a base portion to which the adhesive member is fixed, the base portion being flat.
However, Amirana teaches a base portion (adherent member 106) to which the adhesive member is fixed (col. 5 lines 15-17 "Base support (108) is fixed to planar field (102) using adherent member (106)."), the base portion being flat (FIG. 1, adherent member 106 is shown as flat). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the holder as disclosed by Helm to include a flat base portion fixed to the adhesive member as taught by Amirana in order to fix the catheter hub to the adhesive member (col. 5 lines 17-19) and maintain the catheter hub in a fixed but movable position (col. 6 lines 44-46).
Regarding claim 5, Helm discloses the adhesive member is wider than the base portion of the holder (FIG. 6E, adhesive plate 48 is wider than all other components of the catheter assembly).
Regarding claim 10, Helm discloses a catheter holding portion (catheter hub receiving channel 54) having a cylindrical shape (FIG. 6A) and having at least a distal end connected to the base portion (FIG. 6A, catheter hub receiving channel 54 is connected to body portion 50, which incorporates a base connection to adhesive plate 48), the catheter holding portion holding a distal portion of the catheter hub inserted into the catheter holding portion (FIG. 6D, [0106], "The hub receiving channel 54 can have a uniform diameter designed to receive the catheter hub 26 in a sliding fashion, leaving a minimum of dead space, and can include specific contour features designed to mate with the snap-fit catheter hub 26."); and the distal end of the catheter holding portion is inclined toward the base portion (FIG. 6A, dressing assembly 14 naturally sets catheter hub receiving channel 54 at an incline towards the insertion site).
Helm does not disclose a base portion to which the adhesive member is fixed, the base portion being flat.
However, Amirana teaches a base portion (adherent member 106) to which the adhesive member is fixed (col. 5 lines 15-17 "Base support (108) is fixed to planar field (102) using adherent member (106)."), the base portion being flat (FIG. 1, adherent member 106 is shown as flat). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the holder as disclosed by Helm to include a flat base portion fixed to the adhesive member as taught by Amirana in order to fix the catheter hub to the adhesive member (col. 5 lines 17-19) and maintain the catheter hub in a fixed but movable position (col. 6 lines 44-46).
Regarding claim 13, Helm discloses the adhesive member is wider than the base portion of the holder (FIG. 6E, adhesive plate 48 is wider than all other components of the catheter assembly).
Claims 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm in view of Amirana as applied to claims 2 and 10 above, and further in view of Burkholz et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2017/0120010 A1; herein, Burkholz).
Regarding claim 3, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose a tube connected to the catheter hub and configured to allow a liquid medicine to flow; wherein: the catheter hub comprises: a hub body that supports the proximal end of the catheter, and a side port to which a distal end of the tube is connected, the side port protruding from a side part of the hub body; the holder comprises a port holding portion that holds the side port; and the port holding portion has an upper wall that covers the side port from above.
However, Burkholz teaches a tube (extension tubing 106) connected to the catheter hub and configured to allow a liquid medicine to flow ([0039], "the extension tubing 106 can be fluidically coupled with the catheter adapter 102 and can be configured to convey the intravenous fluid from a supply of the intravenous fluid into the vasculature of the patient via the inserted catheter adapter 102"); wherein: the catheter hub comprises: a hub body (catheter hub body 120) that supports the proximal end of the catheter (FIG. 2A, proximal end 117 of catheter 115 is supported by catheter hub body 120 at catheter hub 114), and a side port (Y-port 128) to which a distal end of the tube is connected, the side port protruding from a side part of the hub body (FIG. 2A, [0040] "Y-port 128 that fluidically couples the catheter hub 120 with the extension tubing 106"); the holder comprises a port holding portion that holds the side port (Annotated on FIG. 2A below); and the port holding portion has an upper wall that covers the side port from above (Annotated on FIG. 1 below, Y-port 128 is completely covered with outer casing). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device disclosed by Helm to incorporate tubing, a hub body with a side port, and an upper wall covering the side port as taught by Burkholz in order to provide a stable location for the catheter to pass through ([0008]) and so that liquid can pass through the side port and into an inner diameter of the catheter ([0056]).
PNG
media_image1.png
705
1061
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
657
990
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose a tube connected to the catheter hub and configured to allow a liquid medicine to flow; wherein: the catheter hub comprises: a hub body that supports the proximal end of the catheter, and a side port to which a distal end of the tube is connected, the side port protruding from a side part of the hub body; the holder comprises a port holding portion that holds the side port; and the port holding portion has an upper wall that covers the side port from above.
However, Burkholz teaches a tube (extension tubing 106) connected to the catheter hub and configured to allow a liquid medicine to flow ([0039], "the extension tubing 106 can be fluidically coupled with the catheter adapter 102 and can be configured to convey the intravenous fluid from a supply of the intravenous fluid into the vasculature of the patient via the inserted catheter adapter 102"); wherein: the catheter hub comprises: a hub body (catheter hub body 120) that supports the proximal end of the catheter (FIG. 2A, proximal end 117 of catheter 115 is supported by catheter hub body 120 at catheter hub 114), and a side port (Y-port 128) to which a distal end of the tube is connected, the side port protruding from a side part of the hub body (FIG. 2A, [0040] "Y-port 128 that fluidically couples the catheter hub 120 with the extension tubing 106"); the holder comprises a port holding portion that holds the side port (Annotated on FIG. 2A above); and the port holding portion has an upper wall that covers the side port from above (Annotated on FIG. 1 above, Y-port 128 is completely covered with outer casing). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified device disclosed by Helm to incorporate tubing, a hub body with a side port, and an upper wall covering the side port as taught by Burkholz in order to provide a stable location for the catheter to pass through ([0008]) and so that liquid can pass through the side port and into an inner diameter of the catheter ([0056]).
Claims 4 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm in view of Amirana as applied to claims 2 and 10 above, and further in view of Friedrich (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2016/0317786 A1).
Regarding claim 4, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose the base portion has a notch penetrating the base portion; and a lower part of the distal portion of the catheter hub is located in the notch.
However, Friedrich teaches the base portion has a notch penetrating the base portion (FIG. 7D, opening 335 of shell 330); and a lower part of the distal portion of the catheter hub is located in the notch (FIG. 7 and FIG. 7E, distal portion of extension tubing is located in opening 335). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base portion taught by Amirana of the modified device disclosed by Helm to have a notch in which a distal portion of the catheter hub is located as taught by Friedrich in order to allow the distal parts of the device to pass through ([0091]) while also securing the device.
Regarding claim 12, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose the base portion has a notch penetrating the base portion; and a lower part of the distal portion of the catheter hub is located in the notch.
However, Friedrich teaches the base portion has a notch penetrating the base portion (FIG. 7D, opening 335 of shell 330); and a lower part of the distal portion of the catheter hub is located in the notch (FIG. 7 and FIG. 7E, distal portion of extension tubing is located in opening 335). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the base portion taught by Amirana of the modified device disclosed by Helm to have a notch in which a distal portion of the catheter hub is located as taught by Friedrich in order to allow the distal parts of the device to pass through ([0091]) while also securing the device.
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm as applied to claims 1 and 9 above, and further in view of Bruehwiler et al. (WO 2020/197994 A1; herein, Bruehwiler).
Regarding claim 7, Helm does not disclose the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive portion through which the catheter is inserted, and a second adhesive portion disposed at a proximal end of the first adhesive portion and to which the holder is fixed. However, Bruehwiler teaches the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive portion through which the catheter is inserted (FIG. 1, [0032], first adhesive pad 132 allows for cannula 136 to be inserted into the patient’s skin), and a second adhesive portion disposed at a proximal end of the first adhesive portion and to which the holder is fixed (FIG. 1, [0033], second adhesive pad 142 is located proximally to first adhesive pad 132 and adheres holder 140 to patient’s skin). ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adhesive member disclosed by Helm to be two portions in which the catheter is inserted through the first adhesive portion and the holder is fixed to the second adhesive portion as taught by Bruehwiler in order to secure both the catheter and catheter hub directly to the living body ([0032], [0033]).
Regarding claim 15, Helm does not disclose the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive portion through which the catheter is inserted, and a second adhesive portion disposed at a proximal end of the first adhesive portion and to which the holder is fixed. However, Bruehwiler teaches the adhesive member comprises a first adhesive portion through which the catheter is inserted (FIG. 1, [0032], first adhesive pad 132 allows for cannula 136 to be inserted into the patient’s skin), and a second adhesive portion disposed at a proximal end of the first adhesive portion and to which the holder is fixed (FIG. 1, [0033], second adhesive pad 142 is located proximally to first adhesive pad 132 and adheres holder 140 to patient’s skin). ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the adhesive member disclosed by Helm to be two portions in which the catheter is inserted through the first adhesive portion and the holder is fixed to the second adhesive portion as taught by Bruehwiler in order to secure both the catheter and catheter hub directly to the living body ([0032], [0033]).
Claims 8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Helm in view of Bruehwiler as applied to claims 7 and 15 above, and further in view of Leibowitz et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2014/0046238 A1; herein, Leibowitz).
Regarding claim 8, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose each of the first and second adhesive portions has a substantially semicircular shape. However, Liebowitz teaches each of the first and second adhesive portions has a substantially semicircular shape (FIG. 1b, fold line 50 separates adhesive dressing 30 into semicircular sections). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified adhesive member disclosed by Helm to have a semicircular shape between first and second portions as taught by Liebowitz in order that first and second adhesive portions can be placed separately, but still forming a unit after placement ([0058]-[0060]). Furthermore, the specification provides no reason and places no criticality regarding the shape of the adhesive portions, the only mention of a semicircular shape being in paragraph [0029].
Regarding claim 16, in the modified device of Helm, Helm does not disclose each of the first and second adhesive portions has a substantially semicircular shape. However, Liebowitz teaches each of the first and second adhesive portions has a substantially semicircular shape (FIG. 1b, fold line 50 separates adhesive dressing 30 into semicircular sections). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the modified adhesive member disclosed by Helm to have a semicircular shape between first and second portions as taught by Liebowitz in order that first and second adhesive portions can be placed separately, but still forming a unit after placement ([0058]-[0060]). Furthermore, the specification provides no reason and places no criticality regarding the shape of the adhesive portions, the only mention of a semicircular shape being in paragraph [0029].
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of co-pending Application No. 18/900,279 (US 2025/0018155 A1) in view of Helm, JR. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2012/0197204 A1; herein, Helm).The claims of the instant application and the claims of the co-pending application are compared in the table below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 18/900,051
Co-pending Application 18/900,279
A liquid medicine administration device comprising: a catheter configured to be inserted into and left in place in a living body; a catheter hub that holds a proximal end of the catheter; a holder that holds the catheter hub; and an adhesive member configured to be affixed along a body surface of the living body, the adhesive member having a sheet shape and being fixed onto a back surface of the holder.
A liquid medicine administration device comprising: a catheter configured to be left in place in a living body; a catheter hub that holds a proximal end of the catheter; a holder that holds the catheter hub; an adhesive member that has an adhesive surface having adhesiveness and configured to be affixed onto a body surface of the living body, the adhesive member being fused to a back surface of the holder; a release sheet that is overlaid on the adhesive surface so as to cover the adhesive member and is configured to be peeled off from the adhesive surface when the holder is fixed to the body surface; and a fusion portion that extends along an outer periphery of the holder between the holder and the adhesive member and bonds the holder and the adhesive member to each other; wherein: the fusion portion comprises a general fusion portion, and a peeling assisting portion having a smaller bonding force than the general fusion portion.
Claim 1 of the co-pending application recites all the limitations of claim 1 of the instant application except “[the] catheter configured to be inserted into…a living body” and “the adhesive member having a sheet shape”.
However, Helm teaches the catheter configured to be inserted into a living body ([0087], catheter 24 inserted into and secured to the patient) and the adhesive member having a sheet shape (FIG. 6A-6G, adhesive plate 48 shown as a sheet). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of the co-pending application to specify the catheter is configured to be inserted into a living body and the adhesive member has a sheet shape as taught by Helm in order to give a purpose to the catheter ([0007]) and to optimize the construction of the adhesive member based on the body site ([0108]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Breindel et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0094016 A1) is considered relevant prior art with regards to a catheter hub including a side port.
Clavijo et al. (United States Patent Application Publication No. US 2020/0246592 A1) is considered relevant prior art with regards to a stabilization device which includes two sections, one section securing the catheter and another section having a window of the insertion site.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Evelyn A Thoman whose telephone number is (571)272-8496. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m-4:30 p.m..
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.
/EVELYN A THOMAN/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
/MICHAEL J TSAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3783
Prosecution Insights