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 .
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 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.
1, Claims 1, 5, 8-16 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Korean Patent No. KR101857887 to Byeon (cited by applicant) in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. (“Fast monitoring of indoor bioaerosol concentrations with ATP bioluminescence assay using an electrostatic rod-type sampler,” (PLoS Onedoi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125251, May 7 2015)) (cited by applicant), and C.W. Park et al. (“Real-time monitoring of bioaerosols via cell-lysis by air ion and ATP bioluminescence detection,” Biosensors and Bioelectronics Volume 52, 15 February 2014, Pages 379-383).
Byeon is directed to an apparatus for measuring airborne bioaerosol and particulate matter which includes a sampler shown in Figs. 1 and 2.
A swab 100 is inserted into the sampler onto which swab material within a predetermined particle size is attached.
The sampler include a main body 200 that has an internal space into which the swab can be inserted. The main body includes a first inlet port 210 and a first outlet port 220 to allow outside air to be introduced into and discharged from the sampler.
At least one separation unit 300 is detachably installed on the first inlet port side of the main body and provided to supply airborne bioaerosol which falls within a predetermined size range in the air introduced through the first inlet port.
The sampler further includes an air flow device 400 installed on the first outlet port side of the main body to guide outside air to flow into the first inlet port and through the internal space and toward and out the first outlet port.
Byeon teaches an adenosine triphosphate (ATP) measurement unit to measure ATP in the airborne bioaerosol that becomes attached to the swab.
Byeon does not teach a particulate matter measurement unit provided to measure a concentration of particulate matter that falls within a predetermined size range or a control unit to receive first data output from the ATP measurement unit and a second data output from a particulate matter measuring unit and generate a third data.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches combining both an ATP measurement unit (page 2 under Design of the Sampler) and a particulate matter measuring unit (aerodynamic particle sizer and aerodynamic particle sizer) (page 6 under Fig. 2A description) in a bioaerosol measuring system.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches determining the efficiency of system (equation 8) that produces a third data based on the ATP measurement first data and the particular matter measurement second data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon to include a particulate matter measuring unit for purposes of determining both ATP (first data) concentration of the particulate matter (second data) as taught by Ji-Woon Park et al. and provided the combined information as a third data.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. does not teach a humidification unit provided to supply an aqueous solution containing a cell lysing agent toward the air flowing into the main body.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches controlling temperature and humidity during an ATP assay. (page 2, third full paragraph)
C.W. Park et al. teaches controlling temperature and humidity during ATP assaying and prior commercial produces that used cell-lysis buffer solution to extract ATP from cells. (page 380, left-hand column first full paragraph)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. to control humidity using a humidifier and supply a commercial cell-lysis buffer solution (lysing agent) toward the air flowing into the main body to assist in the measurement of ATP as taught by C.W. Park et al. during ATP to release ATP from cells.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders all the limitations of claim 1 obvious.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 5, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 5 depends.
Claim 5 recites that at least one of the separation unit and the swab is replaced and installed when the airborne bioaerosols falling within different size ranges are separately collected using the sampler. Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. do not specifically teach this feature.
In Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to replace and install a swab when the airborne bioaerosols falling within different size ranges are separately collected using the sampler.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 5 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 8, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 8 depends.
Claim 8 recites that the particulate matter measurement unit measures each of fine particulate matter (PM 10) and ultrafine particulate matter (PM 2.5) to output a mass concentration value of the particulate matter per unit air volume.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach that the particulate matter measurement unit measures each of fine particulate matter (PM 10) and ultrafine particulate matter (PM 2.5) to output a mass concentration value of the particulate matter per unit air volume.
In Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al, it would have been obvious to measure particulate matter of any size of interest including of fine particulate matter (PM 10) and ultrafine particulate matter (PM 2.5) and determine the mass concentration of the particulate matter.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 8 obvious
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 9, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 9 depends.
Claim 9 recites that the ATP measurement unit further comprises an ATP monitor configured to output each of the measured ATP values as a relative luminescence unit (RLU) value per unit air volume.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach that the ATP measurement unit further comprises an ATP monitor configured to output each of the measured ATP values as a relative luminescence unit (RLU) value per unit air volume.
Byeon and Ji-Woon Park et al, each teach measuring ATP and relative luminescence units (RLU) based on airborne particles collected on swabs. Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches “the swab holder is placed into the measuring chamber of the ATP measuring device, where the relative light unit (RLU) value is displayed.” (page 2 under Design of the Sampler).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to configure the ATP measurement unit with an ATP monitor configured to output each of the measured ATP values as a relative luminescence unit (RLU) value per unit air volume for purposes of providing a standardized measurement unit.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 9 obvious.
V.) Regarding applicant’s claim 10, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 10 depends.
Claim 10 recites a user terminal capable of outputting a user interface, wherein the controller is provided to receive each of the first and second data to generate third data, and the controller provides the generated third data to the user terminal.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach a user terminal capable of outputting a user interface, wherein the control unit is provided to receive each of the first and second data to generate third data, and the control unit provides the generated third data to the user terminal for purposes of providing the overall results of airborne analysis.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches displaying RLU values (page 2 under Desing of the Sampler).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park and C.W. Park et al. to include a user terminal capable of outputting a user interface, wherein the control unit is provided to receive each of the first and second data to generate third data, and the control unit provides the generated third data to the user terminal.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 10 obvious.
VI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 11, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 10 obvious from which claim 11 depends.
Claim 11 recites the apparatus of claim 10, wherein the user terminal is provided to input user input values, and the user input values comprise at least one selected from a volume flow rate of sampling air, a sampling time, a colony forming unit (CFU) conversion formula, a reference value for the airborne bioaerosol according to the measurement unit for each measurement place, and reference values for fine particulate matter and ultrafine particulate matter for each place.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach that the user terminal is provided to input user input values, and the user input values comprise at least one selected from a volume flow rate of sampling air, a sampling time, a colony forming unit (CFU) conversion formula, a reference value for the airborne bioaerosol according to the measurement unit for each measurement place, and reference values for fine particulate matter and ultrafine particulate matter for each place for purposes of providing airborne analysis results on the basis of user input.
It would have been obvious to provide a user terminal for imputing at least sampling time for purposes of correlating the same with the airborne bioaerosol analysis results.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 11 obvious.
VII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 12, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 11 obvious from which claim 12 depends.
Claim 12 recites that the controller generates a plurality of pieces of third data based on at least one of the first data, the second data, and the user input values.
As noted above, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach the control unit generates first, second and third data.
It would have been obvious to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to further generate user input values such as sampling time for referencing analysis results based on user input values.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 12 obvious.
VIII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 13, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 10 obvious from which claim 13 depends.
Claim 13 recites that the user interface further comprises a user input window configured to input at least one of the user input values, a third data output window configured to output each of pieces of the generated third data, and a third data schematization output window configured to provide each of the pieces of the third data in a schematized form.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach a user interface further comprises a user input window configured to input at least one of the user input values, a third data output window configured to output each of pieces of the generated third data, and a third data schematization output window configured to provide each of the pieces of the third data in a schematized form.
As noted above, it would have been obvious to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to have a user input terminal. Providing such input terminal as a user input window would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art for purposes of convenience of data input.
As noted above, Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches a display.
It would have been obvious to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to includes a third data schematization output window configured to provide each of the pieces of the third data in a schematized form.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 13 obvious.
IX.) Regarding applicant’s claim 14, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 12 obvious from which claim 14 depends.
Claim 14 recites that the third data comprises at least one selected from an RLU value (RLU/ g [PM10]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 m or less in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter, an RLU value (RLU/ g [PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m or less in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter, an RLU value (RLU/ g [PM10- PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m to 10 m in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/g [PM10]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 m or less per unit mass of the particulate matter, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/ g [PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m or less in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/ g [PM10-PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m to 10 m in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/m3[PM10]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 m or less in the air per unit air volume, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/m3[PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m or less in the air per unit air volume, a colony forming unit (CFU) value (CFU/m3[PM10-PM2.5]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m to 10 m in the air per unit air volume, and a mass concentration value ( g/m3) of the particulate matter having a particle size of greater than 2.5 m and less than 10 m per unit air volume.
As noted above, Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches displaying RLU values.
In Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. it would have been obvious to provide the third data as at least an RLU value (RLU/ g [PM10]) of the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of interest, including a size range of 10 m or less in the air per unit mass of the particulate matter for purposes of providing analysis results.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 14 obvious.
X.) Regarding applicant’s claim 15, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 13 obvious from which claim 15 depends.
Claim 15 recites that the third data schematization output window displays, in the form of a horizontal straight line, each of reference lines representing a reference value for the airborne bioaerosol and/or reference values for fine particulate matter and ultrafine particulate matter for each measurement place based on the user input values.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach a third data schematization output window displays, in the form of a horizontal straight line, each of reference lines representing a reference value for the airborne bioaerosol and/or reference values for fine particulate matter and ultrafine particulate matter for each measurement place based on the user input values.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to display a reference value for the airborne bioaerosol and/or reference values for fine particulate matter and ultrafine particulate matter for each measurement place based on the user input values I any information conveying format, including as horizontal straight lines.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 15 obvious.
XI) Claim 16 recites a method of measuring an airborne bioaerosol and particulate matter using the apparatus for measuring an airborne bioaerosol and particulate matter as defined in claim 1, the method comprising: a bioaerosol concentration measurement step of measuring ATP in the airborne bioaerosol attached to a swab; a particulate matter concentration measurement step of measuring a concentration of the particulate matter; and a data generation step of receiving first data output from the ATP measurement unit and second data output from the particulate matter measurement unit to generate third data in the controller.
As noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders the apparatus of claim 1 obvious.
As further noted above Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches measuring ATP in the airborne bioaerosol attached to a swab, measuring concentration of the particulate matter and a data generation step of receiving first data output from the ATP measurement unit and second data output from the particulate matter measurement unit to generate third data in the control unit.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 16 obvious.
XII.) Claim 19 recites an apparatus for measuring an airborne bioaerosol and particulate matter, comprising: a sampler comprising first and second swabs provided to attach an airborne bioaerosol thereto; first and second main bodies, each of which has an internal space, wherein each of the first and second swabs is installed in the internal space, and having a first inlet port and a first outlet port provided, respectively, to allow outside air to be introduced and discharged; a first separation unit installed in the first main body and provided to supply the airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a first size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port of the first main body; a second separation unit installed in the second main body and provided to supply the airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a second size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port of the second main body; and an air flow device configured to guide the outside air to flow toward the first outlet port through the first inlet port and the internal space in which the swab is installed by forming a pressure difference in order to allow the air to flow into the internal space of the at least one main body; a humidification unit provided to supply an aqueous solution containing a cell lysing agent toward the air flowing in the maim body; an ATP measurement unit provided to measure ATP in the airborne bioaerosol attached to the first and second swabs; a particulate matter measurement unit provided to measure a concentration of the particulate matter, which falls within a predetermined size range, included in the air; and a controller provided to receive first data output from the ATP measurement unit and second data output from the particulate matter measurement unit to generate third data.
As noted above, Byeon (cited by applicant) is directed to an apparatus for measuring airborne bioaerosol and particulate matter which includes a sampler as shown in Figs. and 2.
A swab 100 is interested into the sampler onto which swab material within a predetermined particle size is attached.
The sampler include a main body 200 that has an internal space into which the swab can be inserted. The main body includes a first inlet port 210 and a first outlet port 220 to allow outside air to be introduced into and discharged from the sampler.
At least one separation unit 300 is detachably installed on the first inlet port side of the main body and provided to supply airborne bioaerosol which falls within a predetermined size range in the air introduced through the first inlet port.
The sampler further includes an air flow device 400 installed on the first outlet port side of the main body to guide outside air to flow into the first inlet port and through the internal space and toward and out the first outlet port.
Byeon teaches an adenosine triphosphate (ATP) measurement unit to measure ATP in the airborne bioaerosol that becomes attached to the swab.
Byeon does not teach a particulate matter measurement unit provided to measure a concentration of particulate matter that falls within a predetermined size range or a control unit to receive first data output from the ATP measurement unit and a second data output from a particulate matter measuring unit and generate a third data.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches combining both an ATP measurement unit and a particulate matter measuring unit (aerodynamic particle sizer and aerodynamic particle sizer) in a bioaerosol measuring system.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches determining the efficiency of system (equation 8) that produces a third data based on the ATP measurement first data and the particular matter measurement second data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon to include a particulate matter measuring unit for purposes of determining both ATP (first data) concentration of the particulate matter (second data) as taught by Ji-Woon Park et al. and provided the combined information as a third data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. to use two parallel systems since duplication of parts is obvious unless a new an unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04(VI)B)). It would have further been obvious to provide a valve arrangement to directed outside air flow into either of the separate parallel systems and provide inertial impactors in which system as taught by Olin et al. for purposes of separately analyzing airborne bioaerosol samples having different size ranges in each parallel system.
Outputting first data from the ATP measurement, second data from the particulate matter measurement and generated third data of the over analysis would have been obvious.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. does not teach a humidification unit provided to supply an aqueous solution containing a cell lysing agent toward the air flowing into the main body.
Ji-Woon Park et al. teaches controlling temperature and humidity during an ATP assay. (page 2, third full paragraph)
C.W. Park et al. teaches controlling temperature and humidity during ATP assaying and prior commercial produces that used cell-lysis buffer solution to extract ATP from cells. (page 380, left-hand column first full paragraph)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. to control humidity using a humidifier and supply a commercial cell-lysis buffer solution (lysing agent) toward the air flowing into the main body to assist in the measurement of ATP as taught by C.W. Park et al. during ATP to release ATP from cells.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 19 obvious.
2. Claims 2, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 9,976,944 to Olin et al.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 2, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 2 depends.
Claim 2 recites valve provided on the first inlet port side and provided to fluidically connect the first inlet port to the first flow path or fluidically connect the first inlet port to the second flow path and that separation unit comprise a first separation unit detachably installed on the first inlet port flow path side of the main body and provided to supply the airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a predetermined selected size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port; and a second separation unit installed on the first outlet port second flow path side of and provided to supply the main body airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a second size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. does not teach a valve provided on the first inlet port side and provided to fluidically connect the first inlet port to the first flow path or fluidically connect the first inlet port to the second flow path and that separation unit comprise a first separation unit detachably installed on the first inlet port flow path side of the main body and provided to supply the airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a predetermined selected size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port; and a second separation unit installed on the first outlet port second flow path side of and provided to supply the main body airborne bioaerosol, which falls within a second size range, in the air introduced through the first inlet port.
Olin et al. teaches an inertial impactor in Fig. 1 that provides for sorting particles by size in a flow stream controlling the size of particles that pass through stages of the inertial impactor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to use two parallel systems since duplication of parts is obvious unless a new an unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04(VI)B)). It would have further been obvious to provide a valve arrangement to directed outside air flow into either of the separate parallel systems and provide inertial impactors in which system as taught by Olin et al. for purposes of separately analyzing airborne bioaerosol samples having different size ranges in each parallel system.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. and Olin et al. renders claim 2 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 6, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 6 depends.
Claim 6 recites that the separation unit comprises a first separation unit configured to supply the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m or less in the air through the first inlet port and a second separation unit configured to supply the airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 m or less in the air through the first inlet port, and at least one of the first and second separation units is optionally installed.
As noted above, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and C.W. Park et al. to use two parallel systems since duplication of parts is obvious unless a new an unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04(VI)B)). It would have further been obvious to provide a valve arrangement to directed outside air flow into either of the separate parallel systems and provide inertial impactors as taught by Olin et al. for purposes of separately analyzing airborne bioaerosol samples having different size ranges in each parallel system.
It would have further been obvious to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al. and Olin et al. and supply airborne bioaerosol of any desired size of interest for analysis to each parallel system in including airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 m or less to one parallel system and airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 m or to the other parallel system.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. and Olin et al. renders claim 6 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 7, as noted above Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. Olin et al. renders claim 2 obvious from which claim 7 depends.
Clam 7 recites that the airborne bioaerosol falling within the first size range has a size range of 2.5 µm or less in the air, and the airborne bioaerosol falling within the second size range has a size range of 10 µm or less in the air.
Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. and Olin et al. does not teach that the airborne bioaerosol falling within the first size range has a size range of 2.5 µm or less in the air, and the airborne bioaerosol falling within the second size range has a size range of 10 µm or less in the air.
It would have further been obvious to modify Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. and Olin et al. and supply airborne bioaerosol of any desired size of interest for analysis to each parallel system in including airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 2.5 µm or less to one parallel system and airborne bioaerosol having a size range of 10 µm or to the other parallel system.
Therefore, Byeon in view of Ji-Woon Park et al., C.W. Park et al. and Olin et al. renders claim 7 obvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 2, 5-16 and 19 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection that relies upon C.W. Park et al. as necessitated by applicant’s amendments to the claims.
C.W. Park et al. teaches the prior art use of a cell-lysis buffer solution to extract ATP from cells.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Jill Warden can be reached at 571-272-1267. 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.
/M.S.G./Examiner, Art Unit 1798
/JILL A WARDEN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1798