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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed on 7/8/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-10 and 27-46 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112(a) and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the non-final Office Action mailed 4/8/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: line 11 “period” should read “periodic”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-10, 31-37 and 39-46 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Application Publication No. 2018/0260940, hereinafter Langlois.
Regarding claim 1, Langlois teaches a patterned flow cell (item 500), comprising: a substrate (item 500); a plurality of sample sites in a non-fiducial region of the substrate (paragraph [0050] and figure 7), wherein the plurality of sample sites are arranged in a periodic pattern (figure 7); a plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials (item 510) formed on the substrate separate from the plurality of sample sites (figure 7); and a plurality of linear fiducials formed on the substrate (each set of the horizontal rows as seen in the left image of figure 7 which are the rows in the box in the annotated figure below), wherein each linear fiducial comprises rows of sample sites and blanks arranged in accordance with the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure below), wherein each blank corresponds to a location in the periodic pattern where a sample site should be located but is not formed (there are missing wells where a sample site should be located but is not as seen in the figure below) and wherein the rows together form a respective linear fiducial that is optically discernable from the periodic pattern associated with the non-fiducial region (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and the sample sites where a sample site should be located but is not formed would be optically discernable from the periodic pattern), and where each linear fiducial of the plurality of linear fiducials comprise the same arrangement of sample sites and blanks (each set of the horizontal rows as seen in the left image of figure 7 have the same arrangement).
PNG
media_image1.png
737
696
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Langlois teaches wherein the periodic pattern comprises a hexagonal or a rectilinear pattern (figure 7, the pattern is hexagonal and paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 3, Langlois teaches wherein the coarse-alignment fiducials comprise bullseye patterns (figure 7 and paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 4, Langlois teaches wherein a subset of the plurality of linear fiducials are formed on the substrate between pairs of coarse-alignment fiducials (the two linear fiducials which are in the middle of the substrate in figure 7 are formed between the upper and lower coarse-alignment fiducials), and the pairs of coarse-alignment fiducials are formed on the substrate in two columns offset from the plurality of sample sites and plurality of linear fiducials (the upper and lower coarse-alignment fiducials are formed in two columns and they are offset in the vertical direction from the two linear fiducials which are in the middle of the substrate in figure 7 and the plurality of sample sites in the middle).
Regarding claim 5, Langlois teaches wherein the plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials are in a vertically offset pattern with respect to the plurality of linear fiducials (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above are vertically offset relative to the upper and lower coarse-alignment fiducials, figure 7)
Regarding claim 6, Langlois teaches wherein the linear fiducials of the plurality of linear fiducials are formed in an x-dimension (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above) corresponding to a direction in which rows of pixels are scanned when imaging the patterned flow cell (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II), the imagining is the intended use of the apparatus and the imagining is capable of occurring in the direction specified).
Regarding claim 7, Langlois teaches wherein each row of each linear fiducial comprises one or more blanks (the blanks in the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 9, Langlois teaches wherein each linear fiducial comprises three, four, or five rows of the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 31, Langlois teaches a patterned flow cell (item 500), comprising: a substrate (item 500); a plurality of sample sites in a non-fiducial region of the substrate (paragraph [0050] and figure 7), wherein the plurality of sample sites are arranged in a periodic pattern (figure 7); a plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials (item 510) formed on the substrate separate from the plurality of sample sites (figure 7); and a plurality of linear fiducials formed on the substrate (each set of the horizontal rows as seen in the left image of figure 7 which are the rows in the box in the annotated figure above), wherein each linear fiducial comprises rows of sample sites and blanks arranged in accordance with the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above), wherein each blank corresponds to a location in the periodic pattern where a sample site should be located but is not formed (there are missing wells where a sample site should be located but is not as seen in the figure below) and wherein the rows together form a respective linear fiducial that is optically discernable from the periodic pattern associated with the non-fiducial region (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and the sample sites where a sample site should be located but is not formed would be optically discernable from the periodic pattern).
Regarding claim 32, Langlois teaches wherein the periodic pattern comprises a hexagonal or a rectilinear pattern (figure 7, the pattern is hexagonal and paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 33, Langlois teaches wherein the coarse-alignment fiducials comprise bullseye patterns (figure 7 and paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 34, Langlois teaches wherein each linear fiducial comprises three, four, or five rows of the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 35, Langlois teaches wherein each row of each linear fiducial comprises one or more blanks (the blanks in the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 39, Langlois teaches a patterned flow cell (item 500), comprising: a substrate (item 500); a plurality of sample sites in a non-fiducial region of the substrate (paragraph [0050] and figure 7), wherein the plurality of sample sites are arranged in a periodic pattern (figure 7); a plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials (the upper and lower of item 510 as seen in figure 7) formed on the substrate in two columns separate from the plurality of sample sites (figure 7); and a plurality of linear fiducials formed on the substrate (each set of the horizontal rows as seen in the left image of figure 7 which are the rows in the box in the annotated figure above) between the two columns of coarse-alignment fiducials (the rows of linear fiducials are located between the upper and lower of item 510), wherein each linear fiducial comprises rows of sample sites and blanks arranged in accordance with the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above), wherein each blank corresponds to a location in the periodic pattern where a sample site should be located but is not formed (there are missing wells where a sample site should be located but is not as seen in the figure below) and wherein the rows together form a respective linear fiducial that is optically discernable from the periodic pattern associated with the non-fiducial region (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and the sample sites where a sample site should be located but is not formed would be optically discernable from the periodic pattern).
Regarding claim 40, Langlois teaches wherein the periodic pattern comprises a hexagonal or a rectilinear pattern (figure 7, the pattern is hexagonal and paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 41, Langlois teaches wherein the coarse-alignment fiducials comprise bullseye patterns (figure 7 and paragraph [0078]).
Regarding claim 42, Langlois teaches wherein each linear fiducial comprises three, four, or five rows of the periodic pattern (the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 43, Langlois teaches wherein each row of each linear fiducial comprises one or more blanks (the blanks in the rows in the box in the annotated figure above).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8, 10, 36-38 and 44-46 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art of record is Langlois which teaches a coarse-alignment fiducial and linear fiducials. However, the prior art does not disclose, teach or suggest the claimed combination of the specified patterns of how the linear fiducials are formed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 7/8/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Langlois is silent to “a plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials formed on the substrate separate from the plurality of sample sites” and that Langlois appears to disclose fiducials which are positioned amongst a plurality of spots is not found persuasive. The claim has not specified what is meant to be separate, therefore the examiner’s interpretation that they are separate are that they are not the same structure. In this case, the linear fiducials are rows which have blanks (see above) and these rows are a separate structure from the coarse-alignment fiducials. Additionally, the examiner notes that the blanks are not in the exact same spot as the circles of the coarse-alignment fiducials and therefore can also be considered to be separate spatially wise as well.
Regarding applicant’s argument that the only fiducials that Langlois describes are the coarse-alignment fiducials and the other fiducials the examiner utilizes are not fiducials described by Langlois. This argument is considered to be directed at the intended use of the blank wells of Langlois and a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. The rows with blank wells in Langlois are able to function as a linear fiducial and there is nothing about the rows with blank wells in Langlois from preventing them from being used as fiducials. The fact that Langlois doesn't disclose two different fiducials (or describe the blank wells as a fiducial), doesn't prevent the ability of the blank wells from being used as a fiducial, thereby reading on the instant claims.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Langlois is silent regarding “a plurality of coarse-alignment fiducials formed on the substrate in two columns separate from the plurality of sample sites” is not persuasive. The claims do not specify that all of the plurality of sample sites are separate from the coarse-alignment fiducials and therefore as long as a portion of the sample sites are separate from the coarse-alignment fiducials, the prior art would read on the claims and in this case, there is at least a portion which is separate from the plurality of sample sites.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D KRCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-0386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am-5pm.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571)270-7698. 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 D KRCHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796
Prosecution Insights