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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I and Sub-species D in the reply filed on 02/17/2026 is acknowledged.
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.
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 “reservoir containing a hormone” in claims 1 and 9 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 Objections
Claims 1, 3, 9, and 11 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 1, “the slider” in line 7 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 1, “the slider” in line 9 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 1, “the opening” in line 9 should be recited as “the longitudinal opening”.
Regarding claim 1, “the slider” in line 13 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 1, “the opening” in line 13 should be recited as “the longitudinal opening”.
Regarding claim 3, “the flange” in line 3 should be recited as “the adjustable flange”.
Regarding claim 9, “the slider” in line 7 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 9, “the slider” in line 9 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 9, “the opening” in line 9 should be recited as “the longitudinal opening”.
Regarding claim 9, “the slider” in line 13 should be recited as “the movable slider”.
Regarding claim 9, “the opening” in line 13 should be recited as “the longitudinal opening”.
Regarding claim 11, “the flange” in line 3 should be recited as “the adjustable flange”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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
an insertion tube (12) attached to the 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 slider (R) forward towards the first end of the 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 slider (R) towards the second end of the opening, thereby releasing 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 wherein the slider reversibly locks the intrauterine system in relation to the handle via the removal string.
However, Wildemeersch teaches an analogous method of providing contraception in a patient (see Abstract), and wherein the analogous slider (9+10) reversibly locks the analogous intrauterine system (15) in relation to the handle (3) via the removal string (22) (see Figs. 1-5 and Col. 2 lines 60-67, and Col. 3 lines 8-13; thruster 9 and moving arm 10 are interpreted as an analogous slider as thruster 9/moving arm 10 slides downwardly upon application of pressure 26 as taught in Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 8-13, and further thruster 9 and moving arm 10 reversibly locks the IUCD 15 in relation to thumb piece 3 via thread 22, see Col. 3 lines 61-67 which discusses how when pressure 26 is not applied to or is released from thruster 9, projection 11 presses the pull thread 22 against opening 17, blocking pull thread 22 in a tensioned state, and thus is locked in place, and when pressure is applied as indicated via arrow 26, thruster 9+moving arm 10 is moved and causes projection 11 to disengage and releases tension on pull thread 22, thus unlocking the pull thread 22, see Col. 3 lines 8-13, and thus the thruster 9+moving arm 10 reversibly locks the IUCD 15 via the pull thread 22), 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 wherein the slider reversibly locks the intrauterine system in relation to the handle via the removal string 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
an insertion tube (12) attached to the 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 slider (R) forward towards the first end of the 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 slider (R) towards the second end of the opening, thereby releasing 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 wherein the slider reversibly locks the intrauterine system in relation to the handle via the removal string.
However, Wildemeersch teaches an analogous method of providing contraception in a patient (see Abstract), and wherein the analogous slider (9+10) reversibly locks the analogous intrauterine system (15) in relation to the handle (3) via the removal string (22) (see Figs. 1-5 and Col. 2 lines 60-67, and Col. 3 lines 8-13; thruster 9 and moving arm 10 are interpreted as an analogous slider as thruster 9/moving arm 10 slides downwardly upon application of pressure 26 as taught in Figs. 2-3 and Col. 3 lines 8-13, and further thruster 9 and moving arm 10 reversibly locks the IUCD 15 in relation to thumb piece 3 via thread 22, see Col. 3 lines 61-67 which discusses how when pressure 26 is not applied to or is released from thruster 9, projection 11 presses the pull thread 22 against opening 17, blocking pull thread 22 in a tensioned state, and thus is locked in place, and when pressure is applied as indicated via arrow 26, thruster 9+moving arm 10 is moved and causes projection 11 to disengage and releases tension on pull thread 22, thus unlocking the pull thread 22, see Col. 3 lines 8-13, and thus the thruster 9+moving arm 10 reversibly locks the IUCD 15 via the pull thread 22), 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 wherein the slider reversibly locks the intrauterine system in relation to the handle via the removal string 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 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 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 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 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 an 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
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
/ALIREZA NIA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3786