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 is a FINAL REJECTION in response to applicant’s claim amendments and arguments filed December 6, 2025. Claims 1 and 11 are currently amended. Claims 2, 3, and 12 are canceled from consideration. Claims 8-10 are withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1, 4-7, and 11 are pending review in this correspondence.
Response to Amendment
Rejection of claims 1 and 4-6 as being unpatentable over DiTrolio (US 2004/0074318 A1) in view of Cromer Jr, et al (USP 5,365,026) is maintained.
Rejection of claim 11 as being unpatentable over DiTrolio (US 2004/0074318 A1) in view of Cromer Jr, et al (USP 5,365,026) is withdrawn.
Rejection of claim 7 as being unpatentable over DiTrolio (US 2004/0074318 A1) and Cromer Jr, et al (USP 5,365,026) in view of Molitor et al (US 2008/0011042 A1) is maintained.
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 and 4-7 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.
With respect to claim 1, there is a recitation of “…the medium…” in line 16. It is unclear which medium (first medium or second medium) is intended to be referenced to, or if applicant intends for a similar recitation to that of line 14, wherein there is recitation to “…the first medium and/or the second medium….” Clarification is requested.
Claims 4-7 are ultimately dependent upon claim 1 and inherit the same deficiencies.
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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly 66 owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 4-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiTrolio (US 2004/0074318 A1) in view of Cromer Jr, et al (USP 5,365,026) (hereinafter referred to as “Cromer”).
With respect to claim 1, DiTrolio discloses pipette tip-receiving metering device (a foot-operated pipette dispenser, See abstract Figs. 1-2 and Paras. 0019-0021) for at least one of receiving and discharging a first medium (liquid) in a controller manner, the metering device comprising:
A pump (diaphragm pump 60, See Para. 0024 and Fig. 6);
A manipulator (external flexible conduit 18, See Para. 0021 and Fig. 2) connected to the pump (See Fig. 6 and Para. 0024) to permit a second medium (air) to be moved by the pump at least along sections of the manipulator (See Paras. 0024-0025 for discussion of the control of a volume of air through the conduit 18); and
A controller (microcontroller 70, See Paras. 0025 and 0030-0031) including a signal input device (foot-operated control pedals 16a, 16b, See Paras. 0027-0028), the signal input device including a sensor (potentiometer 50, See Para. 0028) configured to detect a user input and to convert the user input into a measured value, the controller being configured to control the pump as a function of the measured value, and the user input being an action of a force of a pressure change caused by a user (See Paras. 0027-0028 for discussion of how depression of the foot plate 44 of the foot pedal, wherein the potentiometer allows the technician to control the rate of fluid flow through the pipette 24 by controlling the distance the foot pedal is depressed),
Wherein the pressure change caused by the user at the signal input device is a change in an air pressure (See Para. 0024 for discussion of how a remote air pressure source 14 comprises the pump 60 with positive and negative pressure ports 62a, 62b; Para. 0025 discloses how microcontroller 70 selectively opens and closes valves 64,66 to control the direction of air flow through the flexible conduit 18, and Para. 0027 discloses how foot pedals 16a, 16b are electrically connected to the air pressure source 14 by wires), and
Wherein the metering device is configured to set an to generated at least one of a base volume flow or a base volume pressure of the first medium or of the second medium in the manipulator to permit the at least one of the base volume flow or of the base volume pressure to oppose a capillary force arising at least in sections of the manipulator.
Applicant should note the italicized limitations are directed to the function of the apparatus and/or the manner of operating the apparatus. All the structural limitations of the claim have been disclosed by DiTrolio and the apparatus of DiTrolio is capable of the recitation of claim 1. As such, it is deemed that the claimed apparatus is not differentiated from the apparatus of DiTrolio (see MPEP §2114).
Although DiTrolio does disclose that the flow of air in and out of the conduit 18 is controlled by the pump (See Paras. 0024-0026), DiTrolio fails to disclose that the signal input device includes a mouthpiece, that the pressure change caused by the user at the signal input device is a change in an air pressure when blowing into and/or sucking on the mouthpiece, wherein the first medium and/or the second medium is moved in a first direction in the manipulator when sucking on the mouthpiece, and wherein the medium is moved in a second direction in the manipulator when blowing on the mouthpiece.
Cromer teaches a user interface for use by physically challenged persons that has multiple function capabilities to operate an electronic device (See abstract). Twelve switches can be actuated through operation of a single mouthpiece (12) (See Fig. 3 and Col. 4, lines 52-58). The switches can be mechanical and pneumatic, and an actuator (14) enables one or more banks of the pneumatic switches (24) by longitudinal movement of the mouthpiece in an in or out direction. Once the bank of pneumatic switches is enabled, puff and sip operations on the mouthpiece control actuation of one or more pneumatic switches within the selected bank (See Col. 4, line 67 – Col. 5, line 7). The pneumatic switches are grouped into a left bank (24a) and a right bank (24b), each consisting of three pneumatic switches connected in parallel with tubing defining associated air flow paths (38, 40; See Fig. 3). A pivot plate (48, See Fig. 6) supports a manifold (49) to which the tubing with defines the air flow paths are connected. The manifold includes a hollow inner tube (56) that is movable longitudinally, and which can be similar to a syringe needle and made from stainless steel. The tube forms an air passage (44), and the mouthpiece is air-tightly, frictionally mounted in a projecting circular mounting collar (48a) on the pivot plate that also receives a protruding portion of the manifold so that the air passage and the hollow inner tube communicates with another air passage (45) in the mouthpiece (See Fig. 9 and Col. 5, lines 23-37). The pneumatic switches can be pressure activated (positive pressure) or vacuum operated (negative pressure). For example, puffing (positive pressure) in the controller mouthpiece lightly at a first pressure will perform one control function by activating one pneumatic switch; while puffing harder at a second pressure higher than the first pressure performs a different control function by actuating a predetermined combination of switches. Similar functions can be performed by sipping (vacuum) through the mouthpiece (See Col. 6, lines 21-38).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the mouthpiece and “sip and puff “operation of the mouthpiece, as taught by Cromer, as the replacement for the pressure changing mechanism of the signal input device of DiTrolio for the purpose of providing another user friendly interface for physically challenged individuals to easily operate the electronically controlled metering device (See abstract of Cromer).
With respect to claim 4, the combination of DiTrolio and Cromer teaches that the manipulator includes a media line (internal conduit 26) and an end piece (pipette connector 22) (Fig. 3 and Para. 0021 of DiTrolio).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of DiTrolio and Cromer teaches the inclusion of a capture region configured to capture a pipette tip is formed on the end piece (See Para. 0021 of DiTrolio for discussion of how the pipette connector 22 is constructed and arranged to removably attach pipettes 24 of various lengths and diameters).
With respect to claim 6, the combination of DiTrolio and Cromer teaches a media reservoir (air pressure source 14) connected fluidically to the manipulator to permit the medium to be transported between the end piece and the media reservoir by the pump (See Figs. 2 and 6 and Paras. 0019 and 0023-0026 of DiTrolio).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DiTrolio (US 2004/00474318 A1) and Cromer Jr, et al (USP 5,365,026) in view of Molitor et al (US 2008/0011042 A1).
Refer above for the combined teachings of DiTrolio and Cromer.
With respect to claim 7, the combination of DiTrolio and Cromer teaches that the controller is assigned at least one of a parameter list and database entries containing specific, selectable operating parameters for different media.
Molitor teaches an electronic metering apparatus, wherein the apparatus has a data memory with memory locations for different calibration data concerning different pipette points and/or different liquids and/or different usage conditions (See Para. 0008). The calibration data are calibration data for pipette points of different geometry (e.g. conical, cylindrical or with conical and cylindrical portions) and/or from different materials (e.g., PE, PP or PS) and/or with different surfaces (roughness, for instances) and/or calibration data for different liquids (for instance, ethanol, propanol) and/or for different types of liquids (e.g. glycerol-, protein solutions (See Para. 0012). On account of the input or selected data, respectively, the control unit makes recourse to the assigned calibration data (See Para. 0018).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to incorporate the data memory of Molitor into the microcontroller of combined DiTrolio and Cromer for the purpose of enabling the metering device to make necessary adjustments with regard to how media is aspirated/dispensed based on the composition (i.e. viscosity, volatility, etc.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The closest cited prior art of reference fails to disclose or fairly teach the method of claim 11, specifically the step of setting and generating at least one of a base volume flow or a based volume pressure of the medium in the manipulator to permit the at least one base volume flow or the base volume pressure to oppose a capillary force arising at least in sections of the manipulator. DiTrolio utilizes air as the recited medium in connection of operation with the manipulator, and as such, would not be subject to capillary forces in the cited manipulator. Additionally, no fluid is disclosed as being received in the metering device past the pipette (24).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant has not provided any arguments with regard to the combination of references previously provided (DiTrolio, Cromer Jr, or Molitor). As such, the rejections of claims 1 and 4-7 have been maintained. Applicant should note that the newly added clause at the end of claim 1 is being treated as a capability of the metering device.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 BRITTANY I FISHER whose telephone number is (469)295-9182. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, Elizabeth Robinson can be reached at 571-272-7129. 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.
/B.I.F/Examiner, Art Unit 1796 December 18, 2025
/ELIZABETH A ROBINSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1796