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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/6/2025 has been entered.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Any rejections and/or objections made in the previous Office action and not repeated below are hereby withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 28 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 28 refers to narrow passage/cross-sectional area expansion part being “above and below the central part”. The language at issue does not appear within the specification as originally filed with respect to an apparatus using a horizontal liquid-liquid mixed phase. The specification indicates the “central part” is the area where the two immiscible phases are formed and liquid-liquid mixed phase is developed (see for instance “5” of Figures 3 and 4). For the remaining Figures involving a horizontal liquid-liquid mixed phase, the narrow passage/cross-sectional area expansion part are within the vertical height of the central part (i.e. neither above nor below; see for instance Figure 10 or Figure 23C) or the narrow portion overlaps the vertical height of the central part and the cross-sectional area expansion part is above/below the central part (see for instance Figure 23A). Since written support is not found for an apparatus using a horizontal liquid-liquid mixed phase where both narrow passage and cross-sectional area expansion part are above and below the central part, claim 28 fails to comply with the written description requirement.
As claim 30 depends from claim 28, claim 30 is rejected for the same issue discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claim(s) 27 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Osanawa (JP2016-123907A). As the cited JP publication is in a non-English language, a machine-translated version of the publication will be cited to.
Regarding Claim 27, Osanawa describes methods of producing emulsions at interfaces comprising ejecting first liquid as droplets into the phase of second liquid by which the two liquids opposed each other at an interface, from which an aggregation of droplets progresses (Abstract; ¶ 81-84; Claim 1). Osanawa indicates at least one of heavy liquid phase and light liquid phase is jetted into the other liquid phase as fine liquid droplets (Claim 1). Osanawa describes embodiments where the liquid-liquid phase is guided through a narrow part and then cross-sectional area expansion part, whereby the channel group/droplets are extinguished at the cross-sectional area expansion part (Figures; see also specifically ¶ 82). Since Osanawa describes substantially the same protocol (ejecting droplets into liquids of opposing phase and accumulating droplets at an interface of light/heavy liquid), it stands to reason grown layers of droplets accompanied by opposing phase in turn surrounded by phase within droplet grown above and below the interface would intrinsically occur in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Thus, Osanawa is seen to describe ejecting light/heavy liquid phase as droplets into the opposing phase, where a jet of the droplets collide with the interface forming droplets growing above and below the interface forming a liquid-liquid mixed phase channel in which gaps between droplets are filled with opposing phases, guiding the liquid-liquid mixed phase channel, and extinguishing the mixed phase channel via narrow passage and cross sectional area expansion part.
With respect to the particular container being used within the claim, Osanawa describes an embodiment in Figures 5(e-2) and 7(e-2):
PNG
media_image1.png
519
644
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
241
316
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The above apparatus possesses a central part where the two phases oppose each other, a liquid-liquid mixed phase that is developed through a horizontal part, two narrow passages that are arranged vertically in a destination of the mixed phase developed horizontally, and a cross-sectional expansion part arranged beyond each narrow passage.
Regarding Claim 29, Osanawa teaches embodiments where discharge of droplets is carried out by using a nozzle with small pores (¶ 74).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10/6/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues the limitations of claim 28 can be found within Figure 10 and ¶ 56 of the specification. This is not found persuasive. The limitations at issue are not found within ¶ 56. The subject matter claimed is not illustrated within Figure 10:
PNG
media_image3.png
322
839
media_image3.png
Greyscale
As illustrated above, the narrow passages and cross-sectional area expansion parts are not “above and below” the central part. Applicant’s remarks state “the narrow passage extends above and below the central part (horizontal part 7)”, but the central and horizontal parts are clearly not the same thing as set forth within claim 27. The “central part” is where the two immiscible phases oppose each other at an interface; the “horizontal part” is where the resulting liquid-liquid mixed phase is guided. As the subject matter claimed is not set forth within the specification as originally filed, the claim fails to comply with the written description requirement.
Applicant generally argues Naganawa fails to describe a horizontal part. This is not found persuasive as Naganawa unambiguously illustrates horizontal parts through which the liquid-liquid mixed phase flows.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN E RIETH whose telephone number is (571)272-6274. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-4PM Mountain Standard Time.
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, Duane Smith can be reached at (571)272-1166. 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.
/STEPHEN E RIETH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759