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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/08/2025 has been entered.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7, and 9-20 are hereby the present claims under consideration.
Claim Objections
Claims 9, 14, and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 9 it appears that “the analysis result includes” should recite “the analysis result further includes” to indicate that the listed elements are in addition to the position detection of claim 1 and not a replacement of that result.
Claim 14 it appears that “wherein to analyze the image includes” should read “wherein the analysis of the at least one image further includes”
Claims 18 and 19 recites “Measurement apparatus” and “Method” respectively. It appears these limitations should read “A measurement apparatus” and “A method” respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-2, 4-5, 7, and 9-20 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 recites “controlling the sample input system” but it is unclear what the “control” of this system entails. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation will be interpreted as controlling the position, location, and/or orientation of the sample input system. This rejection is further applied to claim 19.
Claim 1 recites “wherein the sample input system includes a sample input opening and a sample aspirator including a sample aspirator tube having a lumen” but it is unclear if “a sample input opening” is the same as, related to, or different from “a sample aspirator including a sample aspirator tube having a lumen”. In particular it is unclear if the sample input opening is the open end of the lumen or if the sample input opening is a separate and distinct opening. If the sample input opening is distinct form the open end of the lumen then it is unclear how it relates to the claimed invention as it appears the sample aspirator tube and associated lumen are used for the aspiration steps. For the purposes of this examination, the sample input opening will be interpreted as referring to the open end of the lumen.
Claim 1 recites “a measurement chamber” but it is unclear if this element is related to, a subset of, or separate from “a measurement support equipment” and/or “a sample input system”. For the purposes of this examination, the measurement chamber is considered part of the measurement support equipment.
Claims 2, 4-5, 7, and 9-20 are rejected by virtue of their dependance on claim 1.
Claim 5 recites “actuating a sample aspirator positioner” but it is unclear what this structure entails and what its “actuation” would include. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation is interpreted as an actuator that adjusts the position of the aspirator tube.
Claim 10 recites “information regarding the sample” but it is unclear what this information entails and from where it is derived. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation is being interpreted as any information related to the sample and will be interpreted as being derived from any source such as the detection system of measurement chamber.
Claim 10 recites “an error message”, “a warning message”, “a waiting message”, “an information message”, and “information regarding a state of a measurement workflow” but it is unclear what each of these messages entail, how they relate to the arrangement and the process performed thereon, and what they intend to convey. For the purposes of this examination, each of the limitans are interpreted as relating to the process carried out by the arrangement and may include any generic information related to the message type.
Claim 13 recites “wherein to actuate the sample aspirator comprises” which appears to be referring to an action of aspirating the sample aspirator but no such action has yet been recited and thus it is unclear what this limitation is intended to further define. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation will be interpreted as requiring the sample aspirator to be actuated and further defining the actuation.
Claim 13 recites “wherein to actuate the sample input ort closure comprises” but it is unclear if this “actuation” is the same as, related to, or different from the opening and closing operation recited in claim 1 in regards to the sample input port closure. For the purposes of this examination, the actuation of the sample input port closure will be interpreted as opening and closing the closure.
Claim 14 recites “wherein the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on the detected at least one label” but it is unclear what this “control” entails. For the purposes of this examination, any form of control will be considered sufficient.
Claim 17 recites “the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on at least one of a predetermined measurement configuration and a measurement workflow” but it is unclear what this “control” of the measurement support equipment entails. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation will be interpreted as moving to a predetermined configuration or following a predetermined workflow.
Claim 17 recites “to control the measurement support equipment includes at least one of to perform an action and to prohibit an action” but it is unclear what actions may be performed and/or inhibited and how or if the action relate to the claimed arrangement. If it unclear if any performed action by an individual or unrelated system would qualify as a controlling the measurement support equipment. For the purposes of this examination, the limitation is interpreted as the system itself performing or actively choosing to not perform an action.
Claim 17 recites “at least one of the following is satisfied: the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on at least one of a predetermined measurement configuration and a measurement workflow; to control the measurement support equipment includes at least one of to perform an action and to prohibit an action; the detection system further includes at least one of …” but it is unclear if the claim is intended to convey that one of “the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on at least one of a predetermined measurement configuration and a measurement workflow; to control the measurement support equipment includes at least one of to perform an action and to prohibit an action” must be satisfied and “the detection system further includes at least one of …” must also be satisfied or if the claim only requires any one of the listed actions or elements to be satisfied to anticipate the claim. For the purposes of this examination, the claim is interpreted as requiring one of the first two actions and one of the list of required elements
Claim 19 recites “analyzing at least one image of the images in order to obtain an analysis result” and “wherein analyzing the at least one image includes detecting a position of the container” but it is unclear if “the position of the container” is the same as, related to, a subset of, or different from “the analysis result”. For the purposes of this examination, the analysis result will be interpreted as the position of the container.
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 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.
Claim 1-2, 4-5, 7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ebbesen US Patent Application Publication Number US 2024/0241106 A1 hereinafter Ebbesen in view of Watson US Patent Application Publication Number US 2004/0005245 A1 hereinafter Watson and further in view of Takemoto US Patent Application Publication Number US 2018/0348243 A1 hereinafter Takemoto
Regarding claim 1, Ebbesen discloses an arrangement for supporting a measurement of a liquid sample contained in a container (Abstract), the arrangement comprising:
a measurement support equipment (Paragraph 0067: the blood gas analyzer; Fig. 1 reference 1);
a detection system adapted to acquire object information about the container arranged in a region of interest, the container being held by a user's hand in the region of interest, in order to acquire information about the container (Paragraphs 0069-0070: the sensors for detecting a presence, position, and/or orientation of the handheld sample container); and
a processor (Paragraphs 0068: a controller) adapted:
to analyze the object information, in order to obtain an analysis result (Paragraphs 0069-0070: the presence, position and/or orientation of the container); and
to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result (Paragraph 0073: display instruction to the user to push the container closer to the analyzer and instruction to adjust the angle of the container),
wherein the detection system (Paragraphs 0069-0070: the sensors) comprises:
a camera system adapted to acquire images of the region of interest as the object information (Paragraph 0023: the at least one sensor may be a camera or vision based system),
wherein the processor is adapted to analyze at least one image of the images including detecting a position of the container, in order to obtain the analysis result (Paragraphs 0023 and 0069-0070: the images may be analyzed to determine the position of the container),
wherein the measurement support equipment comprises a sample input system adapted to allow input of the sample for the measurement, which sample input system is arranged in said region of interest (Paragraph 0067: the inlet structure; Figs 1-3: references 12a-e),
wherein the sample input system includes a sample input opening and a sample aspirator including a sample aspirator tube having a lumen through which the sample can be conveyed towards a measurement chamber (Paragraphs 0067-0069 and 0071: the inlet structure and aspiration point, which is interpreted to be the tip of the tube or needle which penetrates the sample container to aspirate the sample, and the inlet through which the blood sample enters the measurement chamber Fig. 1 references 6, 12a and 12b), and
Ebbesen further depicts an input port through which the sample container and seemingly the inlet structure are traversable (Fig. 3 appears to illustrate the inlet structure 12a/b being outside of the rectangular port, Fig 4 seems to illustrate that the container is pressed into this port to achieve the desired aspiration depth as recited in paragraph 0072). Additionally Fig. 1 illustrates the inlet structure 112a/b extending beyond the wall of the device. This depiction is considered sufficient to at least suggest an input port through which the aspirator tube is traversable. Ebbesen further recites a displaceable part 12e of the inlet structure but fails to disclose how this element is displaceable. Figs 1 and 2 appear to suggest that the displaceable part 12e is configured to rotate to change the angle at which the inlet parts 12a/b are presented. This is suggested in at least Fig. 1 where inlet elements 12a and 12b are shown at two separate angles, each of the other figures refers to 12a and 12b being in the same location so their illustration at two different angles in combination with the recitation of a displaceable part and the appearance of the displaceable part 12e in Fig. 2 is considered to at least suggest that the inlet system is configured to rotate to some degree
Ebbesen fails to further disclose the arrangement configured to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result comprises controlling the sample input system, and wherein the measurement support equipment further comprises a sample input port closure configured to open and close an input port through which the sample aspirator tube is traversable to be accessible in the region of interest.
Watson teaches a pathology distribution system for automated sample container processing and distribution (Abstract). Thus Watson falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Watson teaches a system configured to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result comprises controlling the sample input system (Paragraphs 0120-0125 and 0190; Fig. 5-6C reference 86 and the arrows). Watson teaches an axially traversable aspiration system controlled by the analysis result of an image system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the input system of Ebbesen to include actuatable components which are movable in response to an analysis result and traverse into the container rather than press the container into the aspiration system as taught by Watson because configuring the system of Ebbesen to make the aspiration system traversable into the container rather than having the user press the container farther into the device would provide the benefit of reducing potential user error which could damage the system or result in invalid measurements being taken. The user may damage the system by pressing the container too far in, at the wrong angle, or with too much force and may result in invalid measurements if the user does not press the container in far enough resulting in improper aspiration. Additionally, such a configuration would improve the usability of the device as all the user has to do is hold the container still in a specific area.
Ebbesen in view of Watson fails to further disclose the arrangement wherein the measurement support equipment further comprises a sample input port closure configured to open and close an input port through which the sample aspirator tube is traversable to be accessible in the region of interest.
Takemoto teaches an analysis unit which analyzes a specimen collected from a subject (Abstract). Thus, Takemoto falls within the same field of endeavor as Applicant’s invention.
Takemoto teaches a container set unit which is openable and closable from a front surface of an apparatus body (Paragraph 0109; Figs. 2 and 3 reference 111). Fig. 3 illustrates that the internal portion of the device is accessible when the set unit is open and enclosed when the set unit is closed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to construct Ebbesen in view of Watson with an openable and closable portion in the opening through which the input mechanism is accessible as depicted in Figs. 3-10 of Ebbesen such that the aspiration tube and measurement equipment are contained within the device body in the closed position and are accessible in the open position as taught by Takemoto because such a construction would protect the internals of Ebbesen in view of Watson when not in use and prevent buildups of dust or other matter on the aspiration member which may cause clogs or inaccurate measurements.
The combination of Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto is considered to teach the limitation of a sample input port closure configured to open and close an input port through which the sample aspirator tube is traversable to be accessible in the region of interest. Ebbesen at least suggests a rotatable input system which may be external to the illustrated port (Ebbesen Figs. 1-3), Watson teaches that the input system of Ebbesen may be configured to be actuatable and may be configured to extend into the sample container rather than having the sample container pressed into the device (Watson: Paragraphs 0120-0123 and 0190; Fig. 5-6C reference 86 and the arrows), and Takemoto teaches an openable and closable door which permits input of the sample (Paragraph 0109; Figs. 2 and 3 reference 111) and may also help to protect the device. Thus the combination of Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto is considered to teach a device with an openable and closable door through which the input system may be traversable to aspirate the sample from a container.
Regarding claim 2, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein the measurement support equipment is controlled without requiring the user touching anything except the container (Paragraph 0073; Figs. 3-5: the user only touches the container and adjusts it according to the output instructions).
Regarding claim 4, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein the measurement support equipment further comprises at least one of: an optical and/or acoustical output device (Paragraphs 0027 and 0046: the output device may be a monitor to display images and/or a loudspeaker).
Modified Ebbesen further suggests a sample aspirator positioner configured to adjust the sample aspirator tube in at least one of a position and an orientation in Figs. 1 and 2 and paragraph 0072 which disclose a displaceable part which appears to be rotatable as described in the above rejection of claim 1.
Watson teaches a sample aspirator positioner configured to adjust the sample aspirator tube in at least one of a position and an orientation (Paragraphs 0120-0125 and 0190; Fig. 5-6C reference 86 and the arrows). Watson teaches an axially traversable aspiration system controlled by the analysis result of an image system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the input system of Ebbesen to include actuatable components which are movable in response to an analysis result and traverse into the container rather than press the container into the aspiration system as taught by Watson because configuring the system of modified Ebbesen to make the aspiration system traversable into the container rather than having the user press the container farther into the device would provide the benefit of reducing potential user error which could damage the system or result in invalid measurements being taken. The user may damage the system by pressing the container too far in, at the wrong angle, or with too much force and may result in invalid measurements if the user does not press the container in far enough resulting in improper aspiration. Additionally, such a configuration would improve the usability of the device as all the user has to do is hold the container still in a specific area.
Regarding claim 5, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result comprises at least one of:
indicating information on an optical and/or acoustical output device (Paragraph 0072: displaying instructions);
actuating the sample aspirator (Paragraph 0074: aspirating the sample);
Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the control of the measurement equipment comprising: actuating a sample aspirator positioner; or actuating the sample input port closure.
Watson teaches a sample aspirator positioner configured to adjust the sample aspirator tube in at least one of a position and an orientation (Paragraphs 0120-0125 and 0190; Fig. 5-6C reference 86 and the arrows). Watson teaches an axially traversable aspiration system controlled by the analysis result of an image system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the input system of Ebbesen to include actuatable components which are movable in response to an analysis result and traverse into the container rather than press the container into the aspiration system as taught by Watson because configuring the system of modified Ebbesen to make the aspiration system traversable into the container rather than having the user press the container farther into the device would provide the benefit of reducing potential user error which could damage the system or result in invalid measurements being taken. The user may damage the system by pressing the container too far in, at the wrong angle, or with too much force and may result in invalid measurements if the user does not press the container in far enough resulting in improper aspiration. Additionally, such a configuration would improve the usability of the device as all the user has to do is hold the container still in a specific area.
Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the control of the measurement equipment comprising: actuating the sample input port closure.
Takemoto teaches a container set unit which is openable and closable from a front surface of an apparatus body (Paragraph 0109; Figs. 2 and 3 reference 111). Fig. 3 illustrates that the internal portion of the device is accessible when the set unit is open and enclosed when the set unit is closed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to construct modified Ebbesen to include with an openable and closable portion such that the aspiration tube and measurement equipment are contained within the device body in the closed position and are accessible in the open position as taught by Takemoto because such a construction would protect the internals of Ebbesen in view of Watson when not in use and prevent buildups of dust or other matter on the aspiration member which may cause clogs or inaccurate measurements.
Regarding claim 7, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein to analyze the at least one image includes in real time detecting an orientation of the container (Paragraphs 0023 and 0034: the vison-based system may detect an object’s orientation).
Regarding claim 9, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein the analysis result includes: an incorrect arrangement of the container, including at least one of an incorrect positioning and an incorrect orientation of the container (Paragraphs 0023 and 0034: the sensors may detect the orientation of the container; Paragraphs 0073-0075: the sensors can detect if the user is having difficulties in advancing the handheld container and may instruct them on how to change the position or orientation).
Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the analysis including an error related to the container.
Watson teaches an analysis of a container may include a variety of error conditions (Paragraphs 0077-0082 and 0113: the image analyzer analyses the container and may output a variety of errors based on certain conditions).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to incorporate the error output of Watson into the arrangement of modified Ebbesen because the error output of Watson may allow the arrangement of modified Ebbesen to notify the user if an incompatible container is being presented, if the sample is incompatible or insufficient, and/or if the identifying information is unable to be read. Such messages may prompt the user to take corrective actions.
Regarding claim 10, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 4. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein in case that the measurement support equipment comprises the optical and/or acoustical output device (Paragraphs 0027 and 0046: the output device may be a monitor to display images and/or a loudspeaker), the information indicated by the optical and/or acoustical output device comprises at least one of:
the at least one image (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
the information about the container (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
an error message (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
information regarding the sample (Paragraph 0071: information from the analyte sensors which analyze the sample is presented);
a warning message (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
a waiting message (Fig. 6, 9, and 10: the text above the image displays a waiting time);
an information message (Fig. 6, 9, and 10: the text above the image displays a waiting time);
information regarding a state of a measurement workflow (Fig. 6, 9, and 10: the text above the image displays a waiting time and the current step of aspirating or measuring).
Regarding claim 11, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 4. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein in case that the measurement support equipment comprises the optical and/or acoustical output device (Paragraphs 0027 and 0046: the output device may be a monitor to display images and/or a loudspeaker), the information indicated by the optical and/or acoustical output device comprises a demand to the user, including at least one of:
indicating that the container should be moved to allow loading the sample into a measurement chamber (Figs. 3-5 and 7-9: the instructions display how to move the container to allow the system to aspirate the sample into the measurement chamber; Paragraph 0075: the instructions help the user obtain sufficient penetration depth to reach the aspiration point to allow the sample to be transported to the measurement chamber);
indicating that the container should by moved such that the sample aspirator tube is connected with the container (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
indicating that the container should be moved such that the sample aspirator tube is arranged in contact with the sample inside the container (Figs. 3-5 and 7-9: the instructions display how to move the container to allow the system to aspirate the sample; Paragraph 0075: the instructions help the user obtain sufficient penetration depth to reach the aspiration point); and
indicating that the container should be removed (Figs. 6 and 10: the instructions include removing the container; Paragraph 0074: the instructions to remove the container).
Regarding claim 12, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 5. Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the arrangement wherein to actuate the sample aspirator positioner comprises at least one of: controlling the sample aspirator positioner to move the sample aspirator tube to a predetermined loading position; controlling the sample aspirator positioner to move the sample aspirator tube to a parking position.
Watson teaches an arrangement wherein to actuate the sample aspirator positioner comprises at least one of: controlling the sample aspirator positioner to move the sample aspirator tube to a predetermined loading position (Paragraphs 0122; Fig. 6B: the sample aspiration and dispensing means is lowered into the sample to aspirate the sample. The position at which the aspiration is performed is considered a “predetermined loading position”); controlling the sample aspirator positioner to move the sample aspirator tube to a parking position (Paragraphs 0119-0121; Figs. 5 and 6A: the position of the sample aspiration and dispensing means above the tube prior to be lowered is considered a “parking position”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to modify the arrangement of modified Ebbesen to include a parking position and a predetermined position for the sample aspiration tube as taught by Watson because such positions may be used to indicate to the user what step in the process is occurring and/or that the arrangement is prepared to receive a sample. Placing the sample aspiration tube in the “parking position” may be a retracted state as taught by Watson and may mean that the input means of Ebbesen is retracted or otherwise positioned such that it is not accessible to the user to indicate the device is off or not ready for aspiration. Such a positioning may prevent premature container insertion which may contaminate the aspiration means. Additionally, implementing the movement to a “predetermined location” as taught by Watson may mean that the input means of modified Ebbesen is extended or otherwise presented and accessible to the user to indicate that the device is ready to receive a sample. Ebbesen appears to be well suited for such a modification as Ebbesen teaches a displaceable part as part of the input system (Ebbesen: Paragraph 0072; Fig. 2) and further appears to suggest that the inlet structure may be positioned in different orientations in Fig. 1 references 12a and b appear to suggest that the inlet structure may be rotated to change its orientation.
Regarding claim 13, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein to actuate the sample aspirator comprises controlling the sample aspirator to aspirate a part of the sample through the sample aspirator tube (Paragraphs 0073-0074: the arrangement aspirates the sample through the inlet structure).
Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the arrangement wherein to actuate the sample input port closure comprises to control the sample input port closure to close or to open the input port.
Takemoto teaches a container set unit which is openable and closable from a front surface of an apparatus body (Paragraph 0109; Figs. 2 and 3 reference 111). Fig. 3 illustrates that the internal portion of the device is accessible when the set unit is open and enclosed when the set unit is closed.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to construct modified Ebbesen with an openable and closable portion in the opening through which the input mechanism is accessible depicted in Figs. 3-10 of Ebbesen such that the aspiration tube and measurement equipment are contained within the device body in the closed position and are accessible in the open position as taught by Takemoto because such a construction would protect the internals of modified Ebbesen when not in use and prevent buildups of dust or other matter on the aspiration member which may cause clogs or inaccurate measurements.
An obvious variation of Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto would be to modify the openable and closable portion, or door, such that the door is automatically controlled by the device rather than manually controlled as taught by Takemoto. Such a variation would be obvious to try because there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, with a reasonable expectation of success for opening and closing the door of Takemoto and/or modified Ebbesen. In particular, the door may be manually actuated, actuated automatically by the device, or actuated by a separate device. Additionally, automation, to perform otherwise known methods is not an unobvious variation from the teachings of prior art wherein automation was not performed. In other words, broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace a manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art (see In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958)).
Regarding claim 14, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein to analyze the image includes at least one of detecting and decoding at least one label on at least one of the container and on a container cap (Paragraphs 0045 and 0060-0061: the sensor may read a barcode or QR code on the container), wherein the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on the detected at least one label (Paragraph 0045: the instructions are adapted to a specific characteristic of the handheld container).
Regarding claim 15, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 14. Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the arrangement wherein the label comprises information regarding at least one of: a patient; a date; a user; an information regarding the sample.
Watson teaches the arrangement wherein the label comprises information regarding at least one of: a patient; a date; a user; an information regarding the sample (Paragraphs 0034, 0084, 0113 and claim 11: the bar code is used for sample identification means and is uniquely associated with each patient).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to implement the barcode on the sample including information related to the same and patient as taught by Watson because including information related to the sample and/or patient in the barcode as taught by Watson would allow the system to automatically adjust for a particular test type based on the same and associate the produced data to a given patient. This would reduce the amount of information required to be manually input and would allow the system to synchronize with record keeping software more easily.
Regarding claim 16, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 14. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein the label being configured as at least one of: text; bar code; QR code; color coded information (Paragraphs 0045 and 0060-0061: the sensor may read a barcode or QR code on the container).
Regarding claim 17, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses the arrangement wherein at least one of the following is satisfied:
the measurement support equipment is controlled further based on at least one of a predetermined measurement configuration and a measurement workflow (Paragraph 0045: the instructions are adopted to a specific characteristic of the container. Thus the measurement support equipment is controlled based on a predetermined configuration of a sample container and a measurement workflow associated with the characteristic of the container);
to control the measurement support equipment includes at least one of to perform an action and to prohibit an action (Paragraphs 0035-0037: the system selects from at least two predetermined sets of instructions. Thus the system performs an action of selecting one set of instructions and prevents an action of displaying the other sets of instructions);
the detection system further includes at least one of:
a Laser scanning system (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
a RADAR-system (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
an infrared detection system (Not explicitly disclosed by Ebbesen but not required by the claim);
an ultrasonic system (Paragraph 0022: at least one sensor of the sensor system may be a proximity sensor including an ultrasonic sensor);
the camera system includes at least one 2D detector array sensitive for at least one of infrared and visible and ultraviolet light (Paragraph 0023: the at least one sensor of the sensor system may be a camera which detects visible light).
Regarding claim 18, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses a measurement apparatus (Abstract) comprising an arrangement according to claim 1 (Modified Ebbesen as presented in the above rejection of claim 1);
the measurement chamber (Paragraph 0067: the measurement chamber);
the measurement chamber being adapted to be filled with the sample through the lumen of the sample aspirator tube and comprising at least one sensor unit adapted to measure at least one analyte in the sample (Paragraph 0067: analyte sensors in the measurement chamber; Paragraphs 0071 and 0074: the sample is aspirated through the lumen of the inlet structure and into the measurement chamber).
Modified Ebbesen at least suggests the sample input port through which the sample aspirator tube is traversable. Ebbesen at least suggests such a port in Fig. 3 which appears to illustrate the inlet structure 12a/b being outside of the rectangular port, Fig 4 seems to illustrate that the container is pressed into this port to achieve the desired aspiration depth as recited in paragraph 0072. Additionally Fig. 1 illustrates the inlet structure 112a/b extending beyond the wall of the device. This depiction is considered sufficient to at least suggest an input port through which the aspirator tube is traversable
Regarding claim 19, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the arrangement according to claim 1. Modified Ebbesen further discloses a method of supporting a measurement of a liquid sample contained in a container (Abstract), the method using an arrangement according to claim 1 (Modified Ebbesen as presented in the above rejection of claim 1), the method comprising:
acquiring, by the camera system, images of the region of interest in which the container is arranged held by a user's hand, in order to acquire information about the container (Paragraphs 0069-0070: the sensors for detecting a presence, position, and/or orientation of the handheld sample container; Paragraph 0023: the at least one sensor may be a camera or vision based system);
analyzing at least one image of the images, in order to obtain an analysis result (Paragraphs 0023 and 0069-0070: the images may be analyzed to determine the position of the container); and
controlling the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result (Paragraph 0073: display instruction to the user to push the container closer to the analyzer and instruction to adjust the angle of the container),
wherein analyzing the at least one image includes detecting a position of the container (Paragraphs 0023 and 0069-0070: the images may be analyzed to determine the position of the container).
Modified Ebbesen fails to further disclose the method wherein to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result comprises controlling the sample input system,
Watson teaches a system configured to control the measurement support equipment based on the analysis result comprises controlling the sample input system (Paragraphs 0120-0125 and 0190; Fig. 5-6C reference 86 and the arrows). Watson teaches an axially traversable aspiration system controlled by the analysis result of an image system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the invention to configure the input system of modified Ebbesen to include actuatable components which are movable in response to an analysis result and traverse into the container rather than press the container into the aspiration system as taught by Watson because configuring the system of modified Ebbesen to make the aspiration system traversable into the container rather than having the user press the container farther into the device would provide the benefit of reducing potential user error which could damage the system or result in invalid measurements being taken. The user may damage the system by pressing the container too far in, at the wrong angle, or with too much force and may result in invalid measurements if the user does not press the container in far enough resulting in improper aspiration. Additionally, such a configuration would improve the usability of the device as all the user has to do is hold the container still in a specific area.
Regarding claim 20, Ebbesen in view of Watson further in view of Takemoto teaches the method according to claim 19. Modified Ebbesen further discloses a method wherein the measurement support equipment is controlled based on the analysis result without requiring the user touching anything except the container (Paragraph 0073; Figs. 3-5: the user only touches the container and adjusts it according to the output instructions; Paragraph 0045: the display of instructions is modified according to the type of container, or analysis result.).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW ERIC OGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-7313. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00AM - 5:30PM.
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, Jason Sims can be reached on Monday-Friday from 9:00AM – 4:00PM at (571) 272 – 7540. 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.
/MATTHEW ERIC OGLES/ Examiner, Art Unit 3791
/JASON M SIMS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791