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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species B (Fig. 7-8 as shown), subspecies 1B, IC, B filed on 5/22/2026 with traverse is acknowledged. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 5/22/2026. The traversal is on the ground(s) that some of the non-elected species “are similar” to the elected species (page 6). This is not found persuasive because mutually exclusive alternatives are not required to have zero similarities and may have many similarities, but are indeed mutually exclusive alternatives with respect to some structure or feature. The remaining traversals are attorney assertions with no support that searching for all of the subspecies would not be burden. In response, the election of species requirement showed search burden and therefore the allegations are unpersuasive. The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL. Claims 4, 11, 16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim, since the elected species only has one chamber (see Fig. 7).
Examiner Request
The applicant is requested to provide line numbers to each claim in all future claim submissions to aide in examination and communication with the applicant about claim recitations. The applicant is thanked for aiding examination.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because elements 121, 220, 230, 280, 277 and 120 are not shown in figures 7-9 and the clarity of the presentation of the species is hindered thereby. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: element 126C’ from the drawings is not mentioned in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-15, 17-19 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
In regard to claim(s) 1, 8, 14, the recitation, “sized to receive one or more injector pens” is indefinite for improperly reintroducing one or more injector pens and it is unclear if these are the same or other injector pens as previously recited.
The recitation, “to heat or cool at least the portion of the chamber” is indefinite since the recitation fails to properly reference --to heat or cool the at least the portion of the chamber--.
The recitation, “passively absorbs heat from the chamber” is indefinite as there is no way to determine what is and is not within the scope of “passively” absorbing heat. The specification uses the term but never defines it and it is impossible to determine what features, characteristics, or actions are or are not included.
In regard to claim(s) 7, 13, 19, the recitation, “or one or more power storage elements” is indefinite since it is unclear if these are the same power storage elements previously introduced or not.
The applicant is generally reminded that all recitations should be properly introduced and referenced.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitation “power storage elements” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph and is interpreted as electrical batteries (spec. para. ).
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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(s) 1-3, 5-10, 12-15, 17-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsuno (US 2019/0242636). See the indefiniteness rejections and note that the prior art teaches the claimed features as far as can be interpreted. Further note the interpretation of the claim language as outlined in the rejection below.
In regard to claim(s) 1, 8, 14, Tsuno teaches a capsule container (see whole disclosure and all figures) for storing or transporting one or more injector pens (within 170, 151, para. 63), comprising:
a container vessel (10) having an outer wall (112) that extends between a proximal end (top) that has an opening (“opening” para. 62) and a distal end (bottom) having a base (bottom of 161), the opening (opening) selectively closed by a lid (169), the container vessel (10) having a chamber (170) sized to receive one or more injector pens (fully capable thereof, the recited pens are not limited in size), a chamber wall (cylindrical part of 161 or 150) being spaced inward of an inner wall (111) to define a gap (at least part filled by 120) between the chamber wall (cylindrical part of 161 or 150) and the inner wall (111), the gap (at least part filled by 120) filled (see gap contains 120) with a phase change material (120, para. 39-42); and
a temperature control system (see identifications below) comprising:
one or more thermoelectric elements (163; para. 66) configured to heat or cool at least a portion of the chamber (170),
a heat sink (162, 161) in thermal communication with one side (top side) of the one or more thermoelectric elements (163) and in thermal communication with the phase change material (120),
one or more power storage elements (para. 59),
one or more sensors (140, 171) configured to sense one or more parameters (temperature) of the chamber (170) and to communicate the sensed parameters to the circuitry (168; para. 69, 73, 79, 81),
circuitry (168) configured to control the one or more thermoelectric elements (163; para. 66) to heat or cool at least the portion of the chamber (170) to a predetermined temperature or temperature range (para. 73), wherein the one or more thermoelectric elements (163) are operable to heat or cool the phase change material (120; para. 82), and wherein the phase change material (120) passively absorbs heat from the chamber (170; material 120 can absorb heat from the chamber 170 for some time without power and thereby “passively”).
In regard to claim(s) 2, 9, Tsuno teaches a second heat sink (166) is in thermal communication with an opposite side (bottom) of the one or more thermoelectric elements (163).
In regard to claim 3, 10, 15, Tsuno teaches a user interface (172; para. 70) configured to display information (para. 70) indicative of a temperature in the chamber (para. 72).
In regard to claim(s) 5, Tsuno teaches that one or more fans (167) are operable to draw air through one or more air intake vents (inlets at least into spaces of fins), to flow said air over the second heat sink (166) to dissipate heat from the second heat sink (166), and to then flow said air through one or more exhaust vents (outlets of spaces of fins).
In regard to claim 6, 12, 18, Tsuno teaches that the chamber wall (cylindrical part of 161 or 150) is cylindrical (para. 16, 51).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 7, 13, 17, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsuno (US 2019/0242636) in view of Alexander (US 2017/0314851). See the indefiniteness rejections and note that the prior art teaches the claimed features as far as can be interpreted. Further note the interpretation of the claim language as outlined in the rejection below.
In regard to claims 7, 13, 19, Tsuno teaches most of the claim limitations but does not explicitly teach a power base (charging base para. 26) configured to receive the container vessel (10) thereon and to provide power to the one or more thermoelectric elements or one or more power storage elements via inductive coupling. However, such is routine and ordinary as taught by Alexander. Alexander teaches a power base (charging base para. 26) configured to receive a container vessel (100) thereon and to provide power to one or more thermoelectric elements (40) or one or more power storage elements (60) via inductive coupling (para. 26 “inductive power”). Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Tsuno with the inductive power base of Alexander for the purpose of providing power to the system conveniently in a manner that is easy for a user to locate and initiate.
In regard to claim 17, Tsuno teaches most of the claim limitations including a light (178) operable to selectively illuminate to indicate one or more operating functions (para. 81, 70, 71) of the container (10), but does not appear to explicitly state that the light (178) is an LED. However, official notice is taken that LEDs are routine and ordinary for light provision. Therefore it would have been obvious to those of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the light of Tsuno to be an LED for the purpose of providing a light that last a long time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record on the 892 form 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 JOHN F PETTITT whose telephone number is (571)272-0771. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 9-5p. 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): http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. The examiner’s supervisor, Frantz Jules can be reached on 571-272-6681. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JOHN F PETTITT, III/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights