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 .
Status of the Application
Applicant’s amendment was filed 12/22/2025. Claims 1,2,6-18,20,22,24, and new claims 28-30 are under examination. Claims 3-5,19,21,23,25-27 are cancelled.
Rejections withdrawn in view of amendment: 35 U.S.C. 112(b): Claim 13 and 18,19,20,22, and 35 U.S.C. 112(d): claim 18, 35 U.S.C. 102: (over Lebl) claims 1-2,4-20,22,24-25.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 1-2,6-18,20,22, 24, 28-30 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite in the recitation of (line 4) a first fluid port to the at least one fluidic channel wherein the first fluid port provides a sole inlet structure where a first fluid enters the at least one first fluidic channel, and wherein the first fluid port provides a sole outlet structure where a second fluid exists the at least one fluidic channel; a second fluid port to the at least one fluidic channel where in the second fluid port provides a sole inlet structure where the second fluid enters the at least one fluidic channel, and wherein the second fluid port provides a sole outlet structure where the first fluid exits the at least on fluidic channel; wherein the first fluid flows through the at least one fluidic channel in a first direction and the second fluid flows through the at least one fluidic channel in a second direction different from the first direction; wherein two or more independent reactions can occur on the at least one flow cell without cross-contamination.
The claim recites two ports, each of which is described as providing a sole inlet structure to the same fluidic channel. The claim does not specify whether the term “sole” is defined relative to the fluid, the port, or the channel, nor does it clarify whether additional inlet structures are excluded. The wherein clause merely identifies the fluid that enters through the port but does not resolve the ambiguity created by the repeated recitation of sole inlet structure; it does not change what the structural modifier “sole” is exclusive relative to, and the claim does not specify the reference frame of the term sole inlet structure (sole outlet structure), which is necessary in the claim.
Further, it is now unclear how one fluid flows in one direction and the second fluid flows in the same channel in a second direction, different from the first, wherein two independent reactions can occur, without contamination.
Claims 2,6-17, 24, 28,29 depend from claim 1 and are indefinite in claim 1, and rejected for the same reason.
Claim 18 is indefinite in the recitation of (line 5) “..and the common flow channel communicates with:
a first fluid port to the common flow channel wherein the first fluid port provides a sole inlet structure where a first fluid enters the common flow channel, and wherein the first fluid port provides a sole outlet structure where a second fluid exits the common flow channel; and a second fluid port to the common flow channel wherein the second fluid port provides a sole inlet structure where the second fluid enters the common flow channel, and wherein the second fluid port provides a sole outlet structure where the first fluid exits the common flow channel;
The claim recites multiple fluid ports, first and second, each providing a sole inlet (and outlet) structure to a common flow channel, which is inconsistent (more than one sole inlet to the common channel) and presents structural ambiguity. The claim does not specify whether “sole” is defined relative to the fluid, the fluid port, or the flow channel and the wherein clause merely identifies which fluid enters through which port and does not clarify the scope of the exclusivity recited by “sole inlet structure”, for which there is not a sole one. Thus, the claim is ambiguous and the scope of the claim, indefinite.
Claims 20,22, 30 depend from claim 18 and are indefinite in claim 18, and rejected for the same reason.
Response to Arguments
It is noted that Remarks were directed to rejections that have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
All claims rejected. 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 Lisa Horth whose telephone number is (703)756-4557. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-4 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, Gary Benzion can be reached at (571) 272-0782. 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.
/LISA HORTH/Examiner, Art Unit 1681
/GARY BENZION/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1681
Prosecution Insights