DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is responsive to the set of claims received on 20 July 2025. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings received on 20 July 2025 are accepted by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 7, 9-10 and 12 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 11-14 and 16-17 of U.S. Patent No. 12,383,128 (see Claim Mapping Table below). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the difference between the application claims and the patent claims lies in the fact that the patent claims include more elements and are thus much specific. Thus the invention of the patent claims are in effect a "species" of the "generic" invention of the application claims. It has been held that the generic invention is "anticipated" by the "species". See In re Goodman, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Since the application claims are anticipated by the patent claims, they are not patentably distinct from the patent claims.
Claim Mapping Table
Current Application – 19/274,581
U.S. Patent No. 12,383,128
Claim 1: a gas dispensing laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade; a left side and a right side of the handle and the blade are bonded together at a seam; a blade front facing portion in view of a handle front facing portion; a gas passageway extending along the seam at the blade and the handle front facing portions from an entry port at the head to an exhaust port on the blade front facing portion between a blade distal end and the handle.
Claim 11: a gas dispensing laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade, the gas dispensing laryngoscope defining a left side and a right side bonded together at a seam; the gas dispensing laryngoscope defining a blade front facing portion of the blade and a handle front facing portion of the handle, wherein the blade front facing portion is in view of the handle front facing portion; a gas carrying passageway extending inside of the gas dispensing laryngoscope along the seam at the handle front facing portion and the blade front facing portion; and the gas carrying passageway extending from an entry port located at the head to an exhaust port located at the blade, wherein the exhaust port is located on the blade front facing portion between a blade distal end and the handle.
Claim 3: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein the handle is solid.
Claim 12: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 11, wherein the handle is solid.
Claim 4: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 1 further comprising an exhaust port hood that partially covers the exhaust port.
Claim 14: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 11 further comprising an exhaust port hood that partially covers the exhaust port.
Claim 7: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein the gas passageway is located along the seam at the handle front facing portion and the handle is hollow.
Claim 11: a gas dispensing laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade, the gas dispensing laryngoscope defining a left side and a right side bonded together at a seam; the gas dispensing laryngoscope defining a blade front facing portion of the blade and a handle front facing portion of the handle, wherein the blade front facing portion is in view of the handle front facing portion; a gas carrying passageway extending inside of the gas dispensing laryngoscope along the seam at the handle front facing portion and the blade front facing portion; and the gas carrying passageway extending from an entry port located at the head to an exhaust port located at the blade, wherein the exhaust port is located on the blade front facing portion between a blade distal end and the handle.
Claim 16: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 11, wherein the handle is hollow.
Claim 9: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 1, wherein the left side is bonded to the right side by a sonic weld or heat stake process.
Claim 13: the gas dispensing laryngoscope of claim 11, wherein the left side of the laryngoscope is bonded to the right side of the laryngoscope via either a sonic weld or heat stake process.
Claim 10: a laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade; a left side and a right side of the handle and the blade meeting along a centerline rear seam that is opposite a centerline front seam, the centerline front seam is at front facing portions of the handle and the blade; a gas passageway extending along the front seam without contacting the rear seam; and the gas passageway extending from an entry port at the head to an exhaust port at the front facing portion of the blade.
Claim 17: a laryngoscope that channels gas, the laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade, the laryngoscope defining a blade front facing portion of the blade and a handle front facing portion of the handle, wherein the blade front facing portion is in view of the handle front facing portion; the laryngoscope defining a left side and a right side that at least in part meet along a rear seam that is obverse to a front seam defined at the handle front facing portion and the blade front facing portion; a gas carrying passageway extending inside of the gas channeling laryngoscope along the front seam but not in contact with the rear seam of the handle; and the gas carrying passageway extending from an entry port located at the head to an exhaust port located at the blade.
Claim 12: the laryngoscope of claim 10, wherein the front facing portion of the blade is in view of the handle.
Claim 17: a laryngoscope that channels gas, the laryngoscope comprising: a handle extending between a head and a blade, the laryngoscope defining a blade front facing portion of the blade and a handle front facing portion of the handle, wherein the blade front facing portion is in view of the handle front facing portion; the laryngoscope defining a left side and a right side that at least in part meet along a rear seam that is obverse to a front seam defined at the handle front facing portion and the blade front facing portion; a gas carrying passageway extending inside of the gas channeling laryngoscope along the front seam but not in contact with the rear seam of the handle; and the gas carrying passageway extending from an entry port located at the head to an exhaust port located at the blade.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 5-6, 8, 11 and 13-14 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.
Claims 15-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claims 2, 5-6, 8, 11 and 13-14 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, the following:
Regarding claim 2, in combination with the limitations required by claim 1, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the gas passageway is formed within a casing defined by a first portion in the left side and a second portion in the right side, wherein bonding the left side to the right side completes the casing.
Regarding claim 5, in combination with the limitations required by claim 1, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the gas passageway is within ¼ inch of an outer surface of the handle.
Regarding claim 6, in combination with the limitations required by claim 1, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the entry port is positioned at a free end of a connecting tube extending from the head.
Regarding claim 8, in combination with the limitations required by claim 1, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the gas passageway is configured to direct oxygen-rich gas during use.
Regarding claim 11, in combination with the limitations required by claim 10, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the gas passageway is formed within a casing defined by a first casing portion in the left side and a second casing portion in the right side, bonded together at the front seam.
Regarding claim 13, in combination with the limitations required by claim 10, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the gas passageway is integrated as a molded feature along the front seam of the handle and the blade.
Regarding claim 14, in combination with the limitations required by claim 10, no prior art reference could be found disclosing or making obvious wherein the left side of the handle and the blade are monolithic.
Claims 15-20 in the instant application have not been rejected using prior art because no references, or reasonable combination thereof, could be found which disclose, or suggest, in combination with the underlined limitations below, a laryngoscope comprising a handle extending between a head and a blade; a left side and a right side of the handle and the blade meet along a centerline rear seam that is obverse to a centerline front seam defined at a handle front facing portion of the handle and a blade front facing portion of the blade; a continuous gas carrying passageway integrated within a casing formed along the front seam, the casing defined by a first portion formed in the left side and a second portion formed in the right side; the gas carrying passageway extending from an entry port located at the head to an exhaust port located at the blade.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LARRY E WAGGLE, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-7110. The examiner can normally be reached TEAP: Monday - Friday (7:45am - 3:45pm).
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, Kevin Truong can be reached at 571-272-4705. 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.
/LARRY E WAGGLE, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3775
Prosecution Insights