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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 16 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 is dependent from claim 16. Claim 17 is further dependent from claim 16. A claim cannot depend from itself. Therefore claim 16 and 17 are not treated on the merits. Appropriate correction is required.
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 limitations
“an automated medication dispensing device” as recited in claim 10 line 2;
“powered rollers” as recited in claim 10 line 4;
“one or more cutters” as recited in claim 10 line 6;
“one or more sensors” as recited in claim 10 line 8;
“non-transitory storage media” as recited in claim 10 line 11;
“one or more microprocessors” as recited in claim 10 line 12;
“an operator” as recited in claim 10 line 13;
“a dispensing module casing” as recited in claim 10 line 16;
“a medication strip reel” as recited in claim 10 line 17;
“its structure” as recited in claim 10 line 17;
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
It is suggested the Applicant review the claimed limitations and assure the structure as claimed is present in the drawings provided to expedite examination.
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 the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 11-14,15,18-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Applicant’s claims 11 recites the limitations “The system of claim 10 further comprises at least a second automated medication dispensing device for synchronized parallel dispensing in a central pharmacy.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of a system wherein the “dispensing device for synchronized parallel dispensing in a central pharmacy.” Therefore, claim 11 recites subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
Claims 11-14 include new matter thus, claims 11-14 are not treated on the merits.
Applicant’s claim 15 recites the limitations “wherein the one or more sensors comprise at least one scanner to scan encoded identifying information of the one or more medication pouches.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of a system wherein the “the one or more sensors comprise at least one scanner to scan encoded identifying information of the one or more medication pouches.” Therefore, claim 15 recites subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitations “further comprises a transport module attached to the automated medication dispensing device to store the one or more medication pouches, wherein the transport module is interchangeable, and wherein the transport module is equipped with a digital display that imparts information about distribution process and status information.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of the claimed limitations. Therefore, claim 18 recites subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
Claim 20 recites the limitations “wherein the automated medication dispensing device is overridden by an operator interacting with the automated medication dispensing device directly when there is a failure that prevents the automated medication dispensing device from receiving dispensing orders.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of the claimed limitations. Therefore, claim 20 recites subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
Claims 21 recites the limitations “assigning dispensing orders of medications to automated medication dispensing devices… and alerting an operator once the order of medications is completed.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of the claimed limitations. Therefore, claims 21-27 recite subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
Claims 28 recites the limitations “autonomously checking that a transport module is attached to the automated medication dispensing device … taking picture of the one or more medication pouches.” However, Applicant’s specifications do not disclose the specifics of the claimed limitations. Therefore, claims 28-29 recite subject matter not originally in procession of the Applicant at the time of the invention.
**It is suggested the Applicant review the claimed limitations and assure the structure as claimed is present in the provided specifications to expedite examination.
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 10 and 11 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 10 recites the limitations “one or more sensors to record data from the one or more medications pouches as they are pulled,” as recited in line 8. It is unclear as to how the one or more sensors are configured to record data. Generally, in view of the Examiner sensors detect events and the information is transmitted to processors where the data is directed to be recorded on a recording media. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 10 recites the limitations “they” in line 9. The limitations as recited are narrative and it is not clear as to what specifically “they” refers to. Appropriate clarification is required.
Claim 11 recites the limitations “dispensing in a central pharmacy” in line 2. It is unclear as to whether the automated medication dispensing device is being claimed to be specifically present in a central pharmacy. Appropriate clarification is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Bae (US 2014/0346184 A1).
Referring to claim 10. Bae discloses a system (Figure 1) comprising:
an automated medication dispensing device (Figure 3) of one or more medication pouches (10; Figure 4) comprising:
one or more powered rollers (152 and 155; Figure 6) to unfurl a held medication strip (strip of pouches 10) comprising the one or more medication pouches (10) by pulling action;
one or more cutters (252) to sever the one or more medication pouches from the held medication strip (The packet cutter 252 cuts the medication packets one by one; Para. [0077]);
one or more sensors (253) to record data from the one or more medications pouches as they are pulled (In one example, the packet detector 253 may be an optical sensor. To enable the optical sensor to detect the medication packets one by one, each medication packet may have a detectable mark printed thereon; Para. [0077]);
an electronic display (130);
non-transitory storage media (The storage component 220 is configured to include a non-volatile memory and to store a control program for medication management and relevant data used for control; Para. [0076]);
one or more microprocessors (260) to receive information of any held or dispensed medication from an operator and the one or more sensors, store any received information on the non-transitory storage media (Alternatively, the identification information may be provided as 2-dimensional code or 3-dimensional code on the delivery packet. The controller 260 may determine whether the delivery packet is correctly delivered, based on the identification information read by the reader 282. For example, the identification information read by the reader 282 is compared to identification information previously stored in a storage component 220, and when the read identification information is identical with the stored identification information, it is determined that the delivery packet is successfully delivered; Para. [0090]), and display any received information on the electronic display (The controller 121 may output biological signal information to the display component 130 so that the display component 130 can display the information on a screen thereof; Para. [0051]); and
a dispensing module casing (113), wherein the dispensing module casing comprises a medication strip reel (142; Figure 5) within its structure (111) to unfurl as medication is dispensed (see Figure 4).
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.
Claims 11 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bae (US 2014/0346184 A1) in view of Willoughby (US 7,963,201).
Referring to claim 11. (new matter present in claim) Bae does not specifically disclose further comprises at least a second automated medication dispensing device for synchronized parallel dispensing in a central pharmacy.
Willoughby discloses a medication dispensing apparatus (310; Figure 12) comprises at least a second automated medication dispensing device (second member 386) for synchronized parallel dispensing in a central pharmacy (wherein said feed mechanisms can feed separate packages at the same time; claim 9 of Willoughby).
It would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Bae to include at least a second automated medication dispensing device for synchronized parallel dispensing in a central pharmacy as taught by Willoughby because multiple medications can be dispensed by the dispensing system at the same time.
Referring to claim 19. Willoughby discloses a medication dispensing apparatus (310; Figure 12) further comprises an infrastructural software to track the
one or more medication pouches and the transport module throughout their routes and
centralize collection of data for record-keeping and troubleshooting, and wherein the
infrastructural software updates destination and schedule according to changing needs (entral control of information passing between the pharmacy 10 and the dispenser 20 permits supervision and management of data, alerts, leave of absence (LOA) notices, inventory levels, and other information; Col. 4 lines 6-11; This connection enables the dispenser 20 to communicate with the data center 14 to receive information such as updates, electronic manifests, schedules, and alerts. The dispenser 20 will also use this communication path to send out requests for replenishment or help or to communicate discrepancies in data or a change in data or schedules; Col. 7 line 39-44).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RAKESH KUMAR whose telephone number is (571)272-8314. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH from 8AM-6:30PM 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, Gene Crawford can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/RAKESH KUMAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3651
