Patent Application 17771703 - APPLICATOR DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE - Rejection

Patent Application 17771703 - APPLICATOR DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE

Title: APPLICATOR DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE

Application Information

• Invention Title: APPLICATOR DEVICE AND METHODS OF USE
• Application Number: 17771703
• Submission Date: 2025-04-10T00:00:00.000Z
• Effective Filing Date: 2022-04-25T00:00:00.000Z
• Filing Date: 2022-04-25T00:00:00.000Z
• National Class: 604
• National Sub-Class: 173000
• Examiner Employee Number: 81760
• Art Unit: 3783
• Tech Center: 3700

Rejection Summary

• 102 Rejections: 1
• 103 Rejections: 1

Cited Patents

No patents were cited in this rejection.

Office Action Text

    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 .

This office action is in response to applicant’s communication of 10/10/2022.   Currently claims 1-2, 4, 7-11, 18-20, 25, 27, 30, 35, 37-39, 43-44 are rejected below.

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  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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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(s) 1-2, 4, 7-11, 19, 25,  27, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Palmer (US 6,537,242 B1).
Palmer discloses a device (as in figures 1-10) for controlled application of a therapeutic solution to a tissue of a subject in need thereof, comprising: an applicator (10 or 36) that further comprises at least one micropore (40), wherein the at least one micropore comprises an opening that is substantially flush with a bottom surface of the applicator (see figure 4 and 3 for example); and a means (28/32) for reversibly attaching the applicator to a dispensing device.

Concerning claim 2 and a plurality of micropores, wherein each of the micropores is substantially identical in size (note 40 and 43 multiples).
Concerning claim 4 and the device is configured for use with a cosmetic procedure, a medical procedure, or a combination thereof (see abstract).
Concerning claim 7 and the dispensing device comprises a syringe, container or tube (see 30).
Concerning claim 8 and the means for attaching the applicator to the dispensing device, syringe comprises a Luer fitting (see 28 and 34).
Concerning claim 9 and the dispensing device comprises a container of commercially available topical therapeutic agent, and the therapeutic solution comprises the contents of the container of commercially available topical therapeutic agent (note disclosure of the substance in container 30).
Concerning claim 10 and the means for reversibly attaching the applicator to the container of commercially available topical therapeutic agent comprises a first threaded surface disposed on a neck of the applicator, wherein the first threaded surface comprises threads that are complementary to a second threaded surface that is disposed near an opening of the container of commercially available topical therapeutic agent (see luer attaching structures on 28 and 34).
Concerning claim 11 and the therapeutic solution comprises a therapeutic agent (see paragraph at column 2 lines 39-44).
Concerning claim 19 and a sufficient siameter to permit the therapeutic solution to flow therethrough (see paragraph at column 2 lines 39-44).
Concerning claim 25 and the bottom surface of the applicator is substantially circular, substantially oval, or substantially polygonal in shape (see figure 4).
Concerning claim 27 and the applicator comprises a medical-grade material (note disclosure of material of 10 suitable for medical procedure).
Concerning claim 30 and the tissue comprises skin, muscle, connective tissue, or a combination thereof (note intended use of device 10 disclosure).


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.

Claim(s) 18, 20, 35, 37-39, 43-44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmer (US 6,537,242 B1).
Concerning claim 18 and the diameter of the micropore is at least the size of the inner diameter of a 33-gauge needle; Palmer discloses the claimed invention except for the explicit disclosure of the micropore is at least the size of the inner diameter of a 33-gauge needle.  It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to the micropore is at least the size of the inner diameter of a 33-gauge needle, since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component.  A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.  In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955).  33 Gauge needles are well known sizes to size medical dispensing and delivery devices in order to effectively transfer fluids in a controlled manner.
Concerning claim 20 and the micropore comprises a diameter that is as large as an inner diameter of a 15-qauge needle.
Palmer discloses the claimed invention except for a diameter that is as large as an inner diameter of a 15-qauge needleless than about 0.5 mm.  It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have a diameter that is as large as an inner diameter of a 15-qauge needle since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the size of a component.  A change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art.  In re Rose, 105 USPQ 237 (CCPA 1955). Crafting micropores comprising a diameter that is as large as an inner diameter of a 15-qauge needle are well known sizes to size medical dispensing and delivery devices in order to effectively transfer fluids in a controlled manner.
Concerning claim 35 and a device (note disclosure discussion in rejections above) for controlled application of a product during a cosmetic resurfacing procedure, the device comprising: a disc-shaped applicator 10 further comprising at least 12 micropores (40/43), wherein each of the micropores comprise a diameter of 1 mm or less; each of the micropores comprises an opening that is substantially flush with a bottom surface of the applicator (see figure 4 and 3 for example); and a Luer fitting (28/34).
	Concerning claim 37 and a method of administering one or more therapeutic products to a tissue of a subject in need thereof, the method comprising: obtaining a volume of the therapeutic product; and expressing the volume of the therapeutic product through the device of claim1 and onto the tissue of the subject (note description of the device of claim 1 in the rejection above and see paragraph at column 2 lines 39-44). 
Concerning claim 38 obtaining the volume of the therapeutic product comprises drawing the biological fluid into a syringe (see paragraph column 5 lines 28-44).
Concerning claim 39 and further comprising attaching an applicator to the syringe (see paragraph column 5 lines 45-62).
Concerning claim 43 and a method of reducing contamination during application of a topical solution to a subject in need thereof, the method comprising: obtaining a volume of topical solution; and expressing the volume of topical solution through the device of claim 1 and onto the tissue of the subject (see previous disclosure of claim 1 above and paragraph column 5 lines 28-44).
Concerning claim 44 and a kit for applying a therapeutic solution comprising the device of claim1 and a dispensing device (see previous disclosure of claim 1 above and dispensing device 30).

Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP A GRAY whose telephone number is (571)272-7180. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5 EST (FLEX).
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, Michael Tsai can be reached on (571)270-5246. 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.

PHILLIP A. GRAY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3783



/PHILLIP A GRAY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3783