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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 March 30, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
All the objections and rejections in the previous Office action not reiterated herein have been withdrawn.
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.
Claim(s) 21-22, 24-30 and 32 is/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 21 recites the limitation "an associated incubator chamber" in line 5. However, it is unclear if the “associated incubation chamber” is referring to the incubation chamber recited earlier in the claim (line 1) or is additional incubation chamber. For examination purposes, the associated incubation chamber is interpreted to be referring to the incubation chamber. Claims 22, 24-30 and 32 are included in this rejection by virtue of their dependency upon a rejected base claim.
In claim 21, the claim requires elements of the split shaker to be in a specific arrangement with the associated incubation chamber. For example, claim 21 recites the limitations "the blocking boss is configured to extend to a certain height towards the associated incubation chamber" lines 11-13 and "the accommodating space and in communication with the associated incubation chamber" in lines 14-15. However, the associated incubation chamber is not positively recited in the claim, and thus unclear if the associated incubation chamber is a required element of the claimed split shaker.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 21-22, 24-25 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2010/0330663 (Baumfalk) (already of record) in view of KR 2013/0081516-A – English machine translation has been provided (hereinafter “516”) and WO 2004/047993 (Kim) (already of record).
Regarding claim 21, it is noted that while the invention contains an incubator and associated incubation chamber, the incubator and associated incubation chamber are not positively recited in the instant claims.
Regarding claim 21, Baumfalk discloses a split shaker for use with an incubator, the incubator defining an incubation chamber, the split shaker comprising: a shaking table (FIGS. 1 and 2: table 11; [0024]); and a motor assembly for driving the shaking table (FIGS. 1 and 4: motor 34; Abstract; [0028]), and a rotating arm (10) disposed inside the associated incubation chamber (FIGS. 1, 2 and 4; [0024]); wherein rotation of the rotating arm drives a shaking movement of the shaking table (Abstract; [0024]). Baumfalk is silent regarding a disk drive motor comprising a stator assembly disposed outside the incubation chamber, and a rotor assembly configured to be disposed inside the associated incubation chamber and having a central shaft and a rotor turntable mounted on the central shaft; wherein rotation of the rotor turntable drives a shaking movement of the shaking table. ‘516 discloses a shaker used in a laboratory for shaking laboratory samples comprising: a shaking table (see, e.g., FIG. 3: table 2,5 supporting flasks; [0020] of the machine translation document); a disk drive motor comprising a stator assembly (FIG. 3: stator part 12; [0022], [0025]), and a rotor assembly having a central shaft and a rotor turntable mounted on the central shaft (see FIGS. 2 and 3: rotor part 13 includes annular plate 13a mounted on central shaft 10a; [0023], [0025]); wherein rotation of the rotor turntable drives a shaking movement of the shaking table (Abstract; [0015]). Kim discloses a split shaker comprising a shaking table (FIG. 2: tube holder 6; page 4), a disk drive motor for driving the shaking table, comprising a stator assembly (FIG. 2: stator unit 24; pages 4-5), and a rotor assembly having a central shaft and a rotor turntable mounted on the central shaft (FIGS. 2 and 3: rotor unit having a central shaft (17a) and a rotor turntable (31) mounted on the central shaft; pages 4 to 5). Kim explicitly disclose wherein the stator assembly is disposed outside a chamber and the rotor assembly disposed inside the incubation chamber (see FIG. 2).
In view of ‘516 and Kim, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the drive motor assembly of Baumfalk to comprise a disk drive motor comprising a stator assembly disposed outside the incubation chamber, and a rotor assembly disposed inside the incubation chamber and having a central shaft and a rotor turntable mounted on the central shaft, as disclosed by ‘516 and Kim to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made said modification because said modification would have been the substitution of one known drive assembly for another for the predictable result of driving the shaking table arranged within a chamber. Modified Baumfalk discloses a base (FIGS. 1 and 2: base plate 8; modified Baumfalk further discloses wherein the base plate is coupled to the portion of the shaker that is disposed outside the incubation chamber; see FIGS. 2 and 3 of ‘516; and FIG. 2 of Kim), the base defining an accommodation space for communicating with the associated incubation chamber (e.g., FIG. 2 and [0023] of ‘516: bearing holder (15) includes an accommodating space for accommodating the support shaft (10a) and bearings (16)), wherein an edge of the base in the accommodating space is provided with a blocking boss, and the blocking boss is configured to extend to a certain height towards the associated incubation chamber (see FIGS. 1 and 2 of ‘516: annular ring surrounding the bearing holder 15); andwherein the central shaft is rotatably mounted in the accommodating space and in communication with the associated incubation chamber (e.g., FIG. 2 and [0023] of ‘516: bearing holder 15 includes an accommodating space for accommodating support shaft (10a) and bearings 16).
Furthermore, it is noted that the recitations of functional language "e.g., for fixing to an associated base plate of the associated incubation chamber and being disposed outside the associated incubation chamber; for communicating with the associated incubation chamber; to extend to a certain height towards the associated incubation chamber" are drawn to intended use of the claimed invention. It is noted that a recitation directed to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be used does not distinguish the claimed apparatus from the prior art, if the prior art has the capability to so perform. Apparatus claims must distinguish from the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). The prior art discloses all of the structural features of the claimed split shaker and thus since the structure is the same, the claimed functions are apparent.
Regarding claim 22, modified Baumfalk discloses wherein the stator assembly comprises electromagnetic coils (see ‘516 at [0025] and FIGS. 2 and 3: coils 12b arranged on plate 12a of the stator part 12) and first permanent magnets disposed in the rotor turntable (see ‘516 at [0026] and FIGS. 2 and 3: permanent magnets 13b arranged on plate 13a of the rotor part 13), and wherein the electromagnetic coils are axially opposite to the first permanent magnets (see ‘516 at FIGS. 2 and 3).
Regarding claim 24, modified Baumfalk discloses wherein the split shaker further comprises an eccentric structure mounted on the rotor turntable, and comprising an eccentric output shaft (see FIGS. 2,3 and [0022 of ‘516: rotating plate 11 having a shaft 11a rotatably supported at an eccentric position on the rotating body 10]); the shaking table is rotatably mounted on the eccentric output shaft (see FIGS. 1 and 2 of ‘516), and the rotation of the eccentric structure drives an shaking movement of the shaking table (see [0016]-[0017] of ‘516).
Regarding claim 25, modified Baumfalk discloses wherein the central shaft is rotatably mounted in the accommodating space via a first bearing (see FIGS. 1 and 2 of ‘516).
Regarding claim 30, modified Baumfalk discloses wherein the stator assembly further comprises a stator casing and a speed sensor for monitoring the speed of rotation of the rotor turntable (see ‘516 at [0028], and FIG. 3: casing 18).
Claim(s) 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumfalk in view of ‘516 and Kim as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of US 2019/0224692 (Beukert) (already of record).
Regarding claim 26, modified Baumfalk discloses the split shaker and incubator according to claim 23 as set forth above. Modified Baumfalk does not explicitly disclose a second set of permanent magnets is eccentrically disposed at a bottom portion of the central shaft, and a HALL sensor is embedded in the base to monitor a rotational angular position of the central shaft. However, ‘516 further discloses wherein a Hall elements is employed with the shaker in order to control the speed of the rotation of the shaker (see ‘516 at [0028]). Further, Beukert discloses a device for monitoring the rotational speed of an element comprising a drive shaft (FIG. 4: shaft 17; [0048]), a set of permanent magnets arranged on the shaft (FIG. 4: magnet 24; [0020], [0027], [0034], [0050], [0054]) and a Hall sensor arranged adjacent to the shaft (FIG. 4: sensor 26; [0058]). In view of Beukert, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the set of permanent magnets and Hall sensor as disclosed by Beukert with the shaker of modified Baumfalk to arrive at the claimed invention. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made said modification for the purpose of controlling the speed of the rotation of the shaker as disclosed by ‘516 (see ‘516 at [0028]). Modified Baumfalk does not explicitly disclose wherein the set of permanent magnets is eccentrically disposed at a bottom portion of the central shaft, and a HALL sensor is embedded in the base. However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have rearranged the Hall sensor and the set of permanent magnets of modified Baumfalk to have the claimed arrangement, since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of element without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP § 2144.04 VI. C.).
Claim(s) 27-29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumfalk in view of ‘516 and Kim as applied to claim(s) 21 above, and further in view of CN 105624644 -- English machine translation has been provided (Huang) (already of record).
Regarding claim 27, modified Baumfalk discloses the split shaker and incubator of claims 21 and 33 as set forth above. Modified Baumfalk further discloses wherein a counterweight is employed with the shaker, but does not explicitly disclose wherein the rotor turntable is provided with a counterbalance. Huang discloses a rotor module comprising a turntable (FIGS. 1 and 3: plate 120; [0011] and [0064] of the machine translation document) and a main shaft (110)coupled to the turntable ([0064]). One or more counterweight is coupled to the turntable 120 to balance the rotation of the rotor module ([0064]). In view of Huang, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the counterweight of Huang with the rotor turntable of modified Baumfalk to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success. One of ordinary skill in the art would have made said modification for the purpose of balancing the rotation of the rotor module as disclosed by Huang ([0064]).
Regarding claim 28, modified Baumfalk does not explicitly disclose wherein the counterbalance and the rotor turntable are integrally formed. However, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date to have formed the counterweight and the rotor turntable of modified Baumfalk as an integral element, since it has been held that making in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in multiple pieces involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 29, modified Baumfalk further discloses wherein the rotor turntable is further provided with an external counterbalance (see FIGS. 3-5: turntable includes a plurality of counterweight; [0064]).
Claim(s) 32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Baumfalk in view of ‘516 and Kim as applied to claim(s) 23 above, and further in view of US 3,911,836 (Brown) (already of record).
Regarding claim 32, modified Baumfalk discloses the split shaker and incubator of claims 23 and 35 as set forth above. Modified Baumfalk further discloses wherein the accommodating space is arranged below the base plate of the incubator and houses the support shaft (10a) and bearings (16) (see ‘516 at FIG. 2 and [0023]). Modified Baumfalk does not explicitly disclose wherein the accommodating space is sealed from a space outside the incubation chamber by an O-ring and a groove for mounting the O-ring, wherein the O-ring and the groove are disposed on the base, below the base plate of the incubation chamber, so that the accommodating space is sealed from the space outside the incubation chamber. Brown discloses an apparatus comprising bearings, a shaft (FIG. 5: shaft 31) and a seal between the bearings and the shaft by pairs of O-rings 72 (see col. 5, ll. 19-24). In view of Brown, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have incorporated the O-rings between the bearings and the shaft in the accommodating space of modified Baumfalk as disclosed by Brown (see col. 5, ll. 19-24). One of ordinary skill in the art would have made said modification for the purpose of sealing the accommodating space and thereby prevent leakage of fluid from the incubation chamber into the accommodating space.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 33-34, 36-38 and 40 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 21-22, 24-30, 32-34, 36-38 and 40 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 LIBAN M HASSAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7636. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached on 5712721374. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/LIBAN M HASSAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799