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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 13/119397, filed on 03/16/2011.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendments to claims 1, 3, 9, and 11 filed 06/25/2026 is acknowledged by the examiner.
Applicant’s amendments to the Drawings is sufficient to overcome the previous objection to the drawings.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims are sufficient to overcome the previous claim objections.
Claims 1-16 are currently pending and are under examination.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/25/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: Macandrew and Wildermeersch fail to teach or suggest the amended portions of claims 1 and 9. Wildemeersch discloses in column 2 lines 63-67 that the removal string 22 is engaged between an opening 17 and projection 11. The projection 11 and the opening 17 are not equivalent to the first extension and second extension because they are not “arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking of the removal string” as recited by amended claim 1.
Examiner’s response: In light of the amendments to the claims, the office action has been updated and the interpretation of Wildemeersch has been updated, see below. Therefore, the projection 11 and opening 17 are not being interpreted as the first and second extensions, respectively. Moving arm 10 and base 16 are being interpreted as first and second extensions, respectively, and are arranged in an initial position to be in contact with each other as seen in Fig. 2 via the projection and opening.
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 1-16 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 “essentially” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “essentially” 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.
The term “essentially” in claim 9 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “essentially” 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.
Claims 2-8 and 10-16 are rejected for depending on a previously rejected 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.
Claim(s) 1 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew et al. (referred to as “Macandrew”) (US 5,785,053) in view of Wildemeersch (US 6,588,429 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Macandrew discloses a method of providing contraception in a patient (see Abstract and Figs. 3A-3D; the inserter 10 with IUD 40 provides contraception in a patient), comprising:
(a) providing an intrauterine system (40) having a reservoir containing a hormone (see Col. 5 lines 24-33 which discusses that the IUD 40 can include a jacket-like polymeric reservoir containing an active agent, such as hormones, wound around it) and a removal string (41) attached to the intrauterine system (40) (see Figs. 3A-3B which shows withdrawal string(s) 41 attached to the IUD 40);
(b) holding an inserter (10) in one hand (see Figs. 3-A3B and Col. 3 line 50 which discusses how the inserter 10 is held which would require the inserter 10 to be held by at least one hand of the user), the inserter (10) comprising:
a handle (11) comprising a movable slider (R) arranged in a longitudinal opening having a first end and a second end (see Figs. 3A-3D; see Col. 3 line 50 which states “holding the handle of the plunger,” and thus plunger 11 is handle, and further comprises stop member R which is a movable slider, and is arranged in a longitudinal opening as the stop member R is positioned in a longitudinal gap that extends between stop members R2 and R4, and thus the stop member R has a first end which is where stop member R2 is located, and has a second end which is where stop member R4 is located); and
a lock (15) arranged inside the handle (11) (see Col. 3 lines 33-34 which discusses a locking device 15 operatively attached to said plunger, said locking device adapted to lock a string attached to the IUD, and since the withdrawal string 41 is positioned within the plunger 11 as shown in Figs. 3A-3B, the locking device 15 must also be positioned within the plunger 11 in order to contact the withdrawal strings 41 to lock the withdrawal string 41 in position);
an insertion tube (12) attached to the movable slider (R) (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 44-45; the protective tube 12 is attached to stop member R via the jacket of the protective tube 12);
(c) pushing the movable slider (R) forward towards the first end of the longitudinal opening (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 50-55; stop member R is pushed forward until surface R1 abuts stop member R2, which is the first end of the longitudinal opening), thereby moving the insertion tube (12) towards the intrauterine system (40) and retracting the intrauterine system (40) into the insertion tube (12) (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 50-55; the protective tube 12 is moved towards the IUD 40 and the IUD is retracted into the protective tube 12);
(d) introducing the inserter (10) into a uterus of the patient with the one hand (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 4 lines 8-17; the inserter 10 is introduced into a uterus of the patient with the one hand, as Col. 3 line 50 teaches holding the handle of the plunger, which requires the plunger 11 to be held by at least one hand of the user); and
(e) moving the movable slider (R) towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider (R) to release the removal string (41) and intrauterine system (40) within the uterus (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 4 lines 8-17; the stop member R is moved such that the stop surface R3 abuts the stop member R4, which is the second end of the opening, and thus the IUD 40 including the string 41 is released within the uterus).
Macandrew is silent on the lock comprising a first extension and a second extension arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string; and moving the movable slider towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock so as to separate the first extension and the second extension from each other.
However, Wildemeersch teaches an analogous method of providing contraception in a patient (see Abstract), and an analogous device with the lock (moving arm 10, projection 11, base 16, opening 17) comprising a first extension (10) and a second extension (16) arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string (22) (see Figs. 1-5; moving arm 10 is a first extension and base 16 is a second extension and arranged in an initial position shown in Fig. 2 to be in contact with each other, as the projection 11 of moving arm 10 is aligned with openings 17 of base 16, to form a blocking that locks pull thread 22, see Col. 2 lines 63-67); and moving the movable slider (9) towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider (9) or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock (10, 11, 16, 17) so as to separate the first extension (10) and the second extension (16) from each other (see Figs. 1-5; thruster 9 is a movable slider as thruster 9 slides downwardly upon application of pressure 26 as shown in Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 8-13, and upon application of pressure 26, thruster 9 moves or slides downwardly toward a second end of channel 19 which is an analogous longitudinal opening, thereby causing thruster 9 to protrude into base 16 which is part of the lock so as to separate the moving arm 10 and base 16 from each other as the thruster 9 protrudes into channel 19 towards base 16, as seen in Fig. 3), providing to maintain the removal string in position to facilitate insertion of an intrauterine device, and allow easy release of the removal string without risk of breaking (see Col. 1 lines 50-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew to include the lock comprising a first extension and a second extension arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string; and moving the movable slider towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock so as to separate the first extension and the second extension from each other as taught by Wildemeersch to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that maintains the removal string in position to facilitate insertion of an intrauterine device, and allow easy release of the removal string without risk of breaking (see Col. 1 lines 50-54).
Regarding claim 9, Macandrew discloses a method of positioning an intrauterine system (40) in a patient (see Abstract and Figs. 3A-3D; a method of positioning IUD 40 via inserter 10 is disclosed), comprising:
(a) providing an intrauterine system (40) having a reservoir containing a hormone (see Col. 5 lines 24-33 which discusses that the IUD 40 can include a jacket-like polymeric reservoir containing an active agent, such as hormones, wound around it) and a removal string (41) attached to the intrauterine system (40) (see Figs. 3A-3B which shows withdrawal string(s) 41 attached to the IUD 40);
(b) holding an inserter (10) in one hand (see Figs. 3-A3B and Col. 3 line 50 which discusses how the inserter 10 is held which would require the inserter 10 to be held by at least one hand of the user), the inserter (10) comprising:
a handle (11) comprising a movable slider (R) arranged in a longitudinal opening having a first end and a second end (see Figs. 3A-3D; see Col. 3 line 50 which states “holding the handle of the plunger,” and thus plunger 11 is handle, and further comprises stop member R which is a movable slider, and is arranged in a longitudinal opening as the stop member R is positioned in a longitudinal gap that extends between stop members R2 and R4, and thus the stop member R has a first end which is where stop member R2 is located, and has a second end which is where stop member R4 is located); and
a lock (15) arranged inside the handle (11) (see Col. 3 lines 33-34 which discusses a locking device 15 operatively attached to said plunger, said locking device adapted to lock a string attached to the IUD, and since the withdrawal string 41 is positioned within the plunger 11 as shown in Figs. 3A-3B, the locking device 15 must also be positioned within the plunger 11 in order to contact the withdrawal strings 41 to lock the withdrawal string 41 in position);
an insertion tube (12) attached to the movable slider (R) (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 44-45; the protective tube 12 is attached to stop member R via the jacket of the protective tube 12);
(c) pushing the movable slider (R) forward towards the first end of the longitudinal opening (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 50-55; stop member R is pushed forward until surface R1 abuts stop member R2, which is the first end of the longitudinal opening), thereby moving the insertion tube (12) towards the intrauterine system (40) and retracting the intrauterine system (40) into the insertion tube (12) (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 3 lines 50-55; the protective tube 12 is moved towards the IUD 40 and the IUD is retracted into the protective tube 12);
(d) introducing the inserter (10) into a uterus of the patient with the one hand (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 4 lines 8-17; the inserter 10 is introduced into a uterus of the patient with the one hand, as Col. 3 line 50 teaches holding the handle of the plunger, which requires the plunger 11 to be held by at least one hand of the user); and
(e) moving the movable slider (R) towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider (R) to release the removal string (41) and intrauterine system (40) within the uterus (see Figs. 3A-3D and Col. 4 lines 8-17; the stop member R is moved such that the stop surface R3 abuts the stop member R4, which is the second end of the opening, and thus the IUD 40 including the string 41 is released within the uterus).
Macandrew is silent the lock comprising a first extension and a second extension arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string; and moving the movable slider towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock so as to separate the first extension and the second extension from each other.
However, Wildemeersch teaches an analogous method of providing contraception in a patient (see Abstract), and an analogous device with the lock (moving arm 10, projection 11, base 16, opening 17) comprising a first extension (10) and a second extension (16) arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string (22) (see Figs. 1-5; moving arm 10 is a first extension and base 16 is a second extension and arranged in an initial position shown in Fig. 2 to be in contact with each other, as the projection 11 of moving arm 10 is aligned with openings 17 of base 16, to form a blocking that locks pull thread 22, see Col. 2 lines 63-67); and moving the movable slider (9) towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider (9) or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock (10, 11, 16, 17) so as to separate the first extension (10) and the second extension (16) from each other (see Figs. 1-5; thruster 9 is a movable slider as thruster 9 slides downwardly upon application of pressure 26 as shown in Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 8-13, and upon application of pressure 26, thruster 9 moves or slides downwardly toward a second end of channel 19 which is an analogous longitudinal opening, thereby causing thruster 9 to protrude into base 16 which is part of the lock so as to separate the moving arm 10 and base 16 from each other as the thruster 9 protrudes into channel 19 towards base 16, as seen in Fig. 3), providing to maintain the removal string in position to facilitate insertion of an intrauterine device, and allow easy release of the removal string without risk of breaking (see Col. 1 lines 50-54).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew to include the lock comprising a first extension and a second extension arranged, in an initial position, to be essentially in contact with each other to form a blocking that locks the removal string; and moving the movable slider towards the second end of the longitudinal opening, thereby causing a part of the movable slider or a part of the insertion tube to protrude into the lock so as to separate the first extension and the second extension from each other as taught by Wildemeersch to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that maintains the removal string in position to facilitate insertion of an intrauterine device, and allow easy release of the removal string without risk of breaking (see Col. 1 lines 50-54).
Claim(s) 2-3 and 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes (US 4,143,656 A).
Regarding claim 2, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 1.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the inserter further comprises an adjustable flange arranged on the insertion tube.
However, Holmes teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Col. 2 lines 20-22), and wherein the analogous inserter (10) further comprises an adjustable flange (12) arranged on the insertion tube (11) (see Figs. 1-2; adjustable stop means 12 is an adjustable flange as it is arranged on the exterior of the inserter tube 11 and is slidably adjustable, see Col. 5 lines 27-31) providing to allow the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to include wherein the insert further comprises an adjustable flange (12) arranged on the insertion tube to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that allows the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Regarding claim 3, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 2.
Holmes further teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Col. 2 lines 20-22) and further comprising: sounding the uterus to predetermine a depth for placement of the intrauterine system (50) (see Col. 8 lines 24-31; the intended position or depth of insertion is determined with a uterine sound for placement of the IUD 50); and
adjusting the adjustable flange (12) to correspond to the predetermine depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31 and Col. 3 lines 31-36; the intended position or depth of insertion (predetermined depth) is determined with the uterine sound, and then the adjustable stop means 12 is adjusted to correspond to the predetermined depth), providing to determine the correct depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31), and to allow the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to further comprise sounding the uterus to predetermine a depth for placement of the intrauterine system, and adjusting the adjustable flange to correspond to the predetermined depth as taught by Holmes to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that determines the correct depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31), and allows the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Regarding claim 10, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 9.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the inserter further comprises an adjustable flange arranged on the insertion tube.
However, Holmes teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Col. 2 lines 20-22), and wherein the analogous inserter (10) further comprises an adjustable flange (12) arranged on the insertion tube (11) (see Figs. 1-2; adjustable stop means 12 is an adjustable flange as it is arranged on the exterior of the inserter tube 11 and is slidably adjustable, see Col. 5 lines 27-31) providing to allow the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to include wherein the insert further comprises an adjustable flange (12) arranged on the insertion tube to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that allows the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Regarding claim 11, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 10.
Holmes further teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Col. 2 lines 20-22) and further comprising: sounding the uterus to predetermine a depth for placement of the intrauterine system (50) (see Col. 8 lines 24-31; the intended position or depth of insertion is determined with a uterine sound for placement of the IUD 50); and
adjusting the adjustable flange (12) to correspond to the predetermine depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31 and Col. 3 lines 31-36; the intended position or depth of insertion (predetermined depth) is determined with the uterine sound, and then the adjustable stop means 12 is adjusted to correspond to the predetermined depth), providing to determine the correct depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31), and to allow the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to further comprise sounding the uterus to predetermine a depth for placement of the intrauterine system, and adjusting the adjustable flange to correspond to the predetermined depth as taught by Holmes to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that determines the correct depth (see Col. 8 lines 24-31), and allows the user to properly insert the inserter and intrauterine system to the necessary depth (see Col. 3 lines 31-36).
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux (US 4,655,204 A).
Regarding claim 4, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 1.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the removal string is contained wholly within the insertion tube and handle.
However, Basuyaux teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Figs. 1-4 and Col. 3 lines 9-12), wherein the removal string (3) is contained wholly within the insertion tube (6) and handle (8) (see Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 32-33; the entirety of threads 3 are contained within tube 6 and cannula 8, which is an analogous handle as it is capable of being grasped by a user’s hand), providing to keep the removal string protected during the insertion process such that the removal string does not get pulled accidentally.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to include wherein the removal string is contained wholly within the insertion tube and handle as taught by Basuyaux to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that keeps the removal string protected during the insertion process such that the removal string does not get pulled accidentally.
Regarding claim 12, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 9.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the removal string is contained wholly within the insertion tube and handle.
However, Basuyaux teaches an analogous method of providing contraception (see Figs. 1-4 and Col. 3 lines 9-12), wherein the removal string (3) is contained wholly within the insertion tube (6) and handle (8) (see Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 32-33; the entirety of threads 3 are contained within tube 6 and cannula 8, which is an analogous handle as it is capable of being grasped by a user’s hand), providing to keep the removal string protected during the insertion process such that the removal string does not get pulled accidentally.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the method of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to include wherein the removal string is contained wholly within the insertion tube and handle as taught by Basuyaux to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that keeps the removal string protected during the insertion process such that the removal string does not get pulled accidentally.
Claim(s) 5 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Lafont (US 2008/0095825 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 1.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Regarding claim 13, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch discloses the invention as discussed in claim 9.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Claim(s) 6-7 and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch in view of Holmes further in view of Lafont.
Regarding claim 6, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 2.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Regarding claim 7, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 3.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Regarding claim 14, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 10.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Regarding claim 15, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes discloses the invention as discussed in claim 11.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Holmes to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch in view of Basuyaux further in view of Lafont.
Regarding claim 8, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux discloses the invention as discussed in claim 4.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Regarding claim 16, Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux discloses the invention as discussed in claim 12.
Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux is silent on wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel.
However, Lafont teaches an analogous intrauterine system (1), and wherein the hormone is levonorgestrel (see Fig. 1 and [0042]; reservoir 5 is part of intrauterine device 1 and may contain levonorgestrel), providing an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hormone of Macandrew in view of Wildemeersch further in view of Basuyaux to be levonorgestrel as taught by Lafont to have provided an improved method of providing contraception that provides an effective contraceptive hormone (see [0042]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBIN HAN whose telephone number is (408)918-7579. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 9-5 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, Alireza Nia can be reached at (571)270-3076. 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.
/ROBIN HAN/Examiner, Art Unit 3786
/RACHAEL E BREDEFELD/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786
Prosecution Insights