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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 03/16/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1 and 3-8 are pending and under examination.
Claim 2 has been canceled.
Response to Amendment
New 101 rejection(s) have been set forth.
Based on the amended claims and remarks, the previous prior art rejection over Ren has been withdrawn and a new prior art rejection set froth (see below).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 and 3-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claim 1 is directed toward a system.
Step 2A, Prong One: Identify the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract idea.
Claim 1 recites the abstract ideas, “detect a situation of various positions in each of the transport units”, “calculates which positions to be used for a route by each of the carriers”, and “corrects the route definition information” which are mental processes and/or mathematical concepts that could be performed by a human person by pen and paper or by a black box computer. The control driver to detect the situation in each transport unit, control sections that calculates positions to be used, and management section that corrects route definition information are simply general-purpose computer(s) for which to apply the abstract ideas, but does not preclude the steps from being considered an abstract idea. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) subsections (I) and (III).
Step 2A, Prong Two: Has the abstract idea been integrated into a particular practical application?
No. These judicial exceptions are not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements recited in the claims do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas. After the correction of the route, then no action is taken and therefore there is no particular practical application.
The claim recites the additional elements of a plurality of transport units, control sections managing actions of the transport units, a control driver to drive the transport units, a management section managing the transport system, a preprocessing module, a post processing module, and an analysis module, (a) the control sections are connected between the management sections and the control drivers, (b) moving the carriers on the transport units with the control driver based on a command signal generated by the control sections, (c) notifying the management unit of the situation detected by the control driving using the control sections, (d) generating route information for each transport unit using the management section to define a purpose of each position on the transport units and outputting the route information to the control sections based on the situation detected by the control drivers, (e) generate a transport route and control signal by the control sections in consideration of the situation and based on the route information, and adding and decreasing a number of rows towards or from the processing module, preprocessing module, or post processing module by the management section based on the situation.
The control sections managing actions of the transport units, control driver to drive the transport units, and management section managing the transport system to manage the transport system are just general-purpose computer(s). However, use of conventional computer functions to apply the judicial exception(s) does not qualify as a particular machine (MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I), MPEP § 2106.05(b)(II) and MPEP § 2106.05(b)(III)). The control section being connected between the management sections and the control drivers in step (a) is not considered a meaningful limitation that limits the judicial exception beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment (MPEP § 2106.05(e)).
The transport units, carriers, preprocessing module, post processing module, and analysis module amount to generally link the judicial exception to a field of use in which the abstract idea is performed (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claim element (b) moving the carriers on the transport units with the control driver based on a command signal generated by the control sections provides nothing more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea to the field of use (MPEP § 2106.05(f) and MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Elements (c) notifying the management unit of the situation detected by the control driving using the control sections, (d) generating route information for each transport unit using the management section to define a purpose of each position on the transport units and outputting the route information to the control sections based on the situation detected by the control drivers, and (e) generate a transport route and control signal by the control sections in consideration of the situation and based on the route information, and adding and decreasing a number of rows towards or from the processing module, preprocessing module, or post processing module by the management section based on the situation are interpreted as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea, and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception, but does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. Further, generating information based on the abstract idea provides nothing more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea to the field of use (see MPEP § 2106.05(f), MPEP § 2106.05(g), and MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Step 2B: Does the claim recite any elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea?
The claims recite the additional elements of a plurality of transport units, control sections managing actions of the transport units, a control driver to drive the transport units, a management section managing the transport system, a preprocessing module, a post processing module, and an analysis module, (a) the control sections are connected between the management sections and the control drivers, (b) moving the carriers on the transport units with the control driver based on a command signal generated by the control sections, (c) notifying the management unit of the situation detected by the control driving using the control sections, (d) generating route information for each transport unit using the management section to define a purpose of each position on the transport units and outputting the route information to the control sections based on the situation detected by the control drivers, (e) generate a transport route and control signal by the control sections in consideration of the situation and based on the route information, and adding and decreasing a number of rows towards or from the processing module, preprocessing module, or post processing module by the management section based on the situation. These additional elements do not effectively transform or reduce the system to a different state or thing beyond such that the claims recite significantly more than well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known to the industry (See MPEP § 2106.05(c), Particular Transformation and MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity) as evidenced by Ren (US 2018/0348244; already of record – hereinafter “Ren”), Mellars et al. (US 2015/0010437; already of record – hereinafter “Mellars”), Heise et al. (US 2013/0034410; already of record – hereinafter “Heise”), and Sinz et al. (US 2016/0341750 – hereinafter “Sinz”). Ren, Mellars, Heise, and Sinz disclose a plurality of transport units (Ren; figs. 1 & 3-15, #130a, 130b, 130c, “transport plane module”, [0032, 0056-0057] and Heise; fig. 1, #51, [0027]), control sections managing actions of the transport units (Ren; “logical fields”, [0057, 0066-0067] and Heise; “regions”, [0025-0026, 0032]), a control driver to drive the transport units (Ren; fig. 1, #140, [0057] and Heise; fig. 3, #60-64, [0028]), a management section managing the transport system Ren; fig. 1, #170, [0058], Heise; fig. 3, #40, [0027], and Mellars; fig. 6, #440, [0037, 0067, 0112]), a preprocessing module, a post processing module, and an analysis module (Ren; figs. 1 & 15, #20, [0029, 0032, 0051-0054, 0118, 0123-0125] and Heise; fig. 1, #20, #21, #22, #23, [0024-0025, 0032]), (a) the control sections are connected between the management sections and the control drivers (Ren; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126] and Heise; fig. 1, [0025, 0027]), (b) moving the carriers on the transport units with the control driver based on a command signal generated by the control sections (Ren; [0057, 0066-0067, 0074, 0094, 0099, 0113] and Heise; [0027-0028]), (c) notifying the management unit of the situation detected by the control driving using the control sections (Ren; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126] and Mellars; [0073]), (d) generating route information for each transport unit using the management section to define a purpose of each position on the transport units and outputting the route information to the control sections based on the situation detected by the control drivers (Ren; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126], Heise; [0027], and Mellars; [0037, 0112, 0114-0115]), (e) generate a transport route and control signal by the control sections in consideration of the situation and based on the route information (Ren; figs. 12-14, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126], Mellars; [0073], and Sinz; [0045-0049]), and adding and decreasing a number of rows towards or from the processing module, preprocessing module, or post processing module by the management section based on the situation (Heise; [0025, 0027], Mellars; [0073], Sinz; figs. 1-4, [0045-0049]).
Claim 3 recites “the management section treats a destination of the route definition information as a module group into which modules of identical specification are made, and not as individual modules” in a case where any of the modules are identical in specification-configuration. These additional elements are interpreted as generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception and provide nothing more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer (see MPEP § 2106.05(f) and MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claim 4 recites “the control sections maintains the transport route before correction in a case where the carriers are present on the route before being corrected and corrects the transport route after transport of all the carriers is finished” when the route information is corrected by the management section. However, these additional elements are interpreted as generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception and provide nothing more than mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a generic computer (see MPEP § 2106.05(f) and MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claim 5 recites the abstract idea “an update cycle of a situation of the carriers which is managed by the management section is determined depending upon a transporting capability of the sample transport system”, but does not integrate the judicial exception under step 2A prong 2 because determining an update cycle of a situation is interpreted as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea, and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception, but does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Claim 6 recites the route information that is exchanged between the management section and each control section to a low speed or stop for performing process, carrying in, and carry out sample tubes of the modules. These additional elements are interpreted as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea, and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception, but does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Claim 7 further limits the transport units as having a plurality of electromagnetic coils capable of moving the carrier. However, these additional elements are interpreted amount to generally link the judicial exception to a field of use in which the abstract idea is performed (MPEP § 2106.05(h)).
Claim 8 recites the situation in each transport unit detected by the control drivers indicates at least one of whether or not one of the carriers is present, whether or not processing by the modules is in progress, or whether or not there is an error. However, these additional elements are interpreted as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea, and generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use in which to apply the judicial exception, but does not amount to significantly more than the exception itself and cannot integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g) and MPEP 2106.05(h)).
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1 and 3-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ren (US 2018/0348244; already of record – hereinafter “Ren”), in view of Mellars et al. (US 2015/0010437; already of record – hereinafter “Mellars”), and/or alternatively over Ren in view of Mellars and Sinz et al. (US 2016/0341750 – hereinafter “Sinz”).
Regarding claim 1, Ren disclose a sample transport system (Ren; fig. 1, #10, [0053-0054]) transporting carriers (Ren; figs. 1-2, #110, [0054]) equipped with sample tubes in which specimens are contained (Ren; figs. 1-2, #120, [0031, 0054]), the sample transport system comprising:
a plurality of transport units capable of moving the carriers in a two-dimensional direction in a plane (Ren; figs. 1 & 3-15, #130a, 130b, 130c, “transport plane module”, [0032, 0056-0057]), each of the transport units having a plurality of rows of carriers (Ren disclose the sample transport system 10 can comprise a number (e.g., 2 to 2000) of transporting carriers and can comprise a number (e.g., 2 to 2000) of transport units; [0029]. Further, Ren disclose each transport unit 130 having at least two traffic lanes 200, 201 of rows configured for transporting carriers in a defined direction; figs. 3, 5, 7, 9-10 and 12-14, [0063]. Accordingly, Ren teach a system capable of performing the intended use of each of the transport units having a plurality of rows of carriers);
a plurality of control sections managing action of the transport units (Ren disclose each transport unit 130 comprises a plurality of control drivers 140 configured with routing information arranged in rows 150 and columns 160; fig. 1, [0057]. Each control driver 140 can form a logical field on the transport unit 130 to define routing information including a traffic lane 200/201, buffer lane 230, change area 210, disabled area (black/filled in), or enter area 220, and detect a situation of various positions in each transport unit, such as erroneous fields “E”, to reform routes and logic fields of the transport units 130 in the sample transport system 10; figs. 1 & 3-15, #200, #201, #210, #220, #230, “E”, [0057, 0063, 0066-0067, 0074, 0094, 0099, 0113]. See the example configurations of 130a and 130b in figures 3-15 and corresponding paragraphs [0066-0126]. The plurality of logic fields corresponding to each control driver 140 on each transport unit 130 can be configured to manage actions of the transport unit 130 to transport the sample carriers 110 based on a layout or situation of the sample transport system 10; fig. 15, [0122-0126]. In particular, one or more transport units may have an erroneous control driver denoted “E” which creates a congestion situation of various positions in each of the transport units, which requires reforming or rearranging of the logic fields assigned to each control driver 140 in each of the transport units 130; figs. 12-14, [0045-0046, 0112-0116]. Accordingly, each transport module comprises a programmable control section that reprograms route definition information to manage action of the transport unit, and a control driver to drive the carriers and detect a situation of various positions in each of the transport units);
a control driver provided for each of the transport units to drive the transport units and detect a situation of various positions in each of the transport units (Ren disclose each transport unit 130 comprises a plurality of control drivers 140 configured with routing information arranged in rows 150 and columns 160; fig. 1, [0057]. Each control driver 140 can form a logical field on the transport unit 130 to define routing information including a traffic lane 200/201, buffer lane 230, change area 210, disabled area (black/filled in), or enter area 220, and detect a situation of various positions in each transport unit, such as erroneous fields “E”, to reform routes and logic fields of the transport units 130 in the sample transport system 10; figs. 1 & 3-15, #200, #201, #210, #220, #230, “E”, [0057, 0063, 0066-0067, 0074, 0094, 0099, 0113]. See the example configurations of 130a and 130b in figures 3-15 and corresponding paragraphs [0066-0126]. The plurality of logic fields corresponding to each control driver 140 on each transport unit 130 can be configured to manage actions of the transport unit 130 to transport the sample carriers 110 based on a layout or situation of the sample transport system 10; fig. 15, [0122-0126]. In particular, one or more transport units may have an erroneous control driver denoted “E” which creates a congestion situation of various positions in each of the transport units, which requires reforming or rearranging of the logic fields assigned to each control driver 140 in each of the transport units 130; figs. 12-14, [0045-0046, 0112-0116]. Accordingly, each transport module comprises a programmable control section that reprograms route definition information to manage action of the transport unit, and a control driver to drive the carriers and detect a situation of various positions in each of the transport units); and
a management section integrally managing the sample transport system (Ren; fig. 1, #170, [0058]), wherein
the sample transport system is configurated to plurally combine the transport units and to be connectable to a preprocessing module performing preprocessing before analysis for the specimens, a postprocessing module performing postprocessing for the specimens, or an analysis module performing analysis of the specimens (Ren disclose the transport unit are interconnected and can be arranged according to various layout configurations to add/remove/rearrange modules as needed; figs. 1 & 15, #20, [0029, 0032, 0051-0054, 0118, 0123-0125]),
(a) each of the control sections is connected between the management section and a plurality of the control drivers (Ren disclose each transport module 130 as a programmable unit configured with route definition information for each position detected by the control driver 140, and a management section 170 for controlling routing and rerouting by assigning transport modules. See figs. 13a-b and corresponding disclosure in [0115] which describe two transport modules having an erroneous control driver “E” and reprogramming the logical fields of each control driver in all three transport modules to update the transport route information. Further, fig. 15 and corresponding paragraphs disclose assigning routing information by the management section 170 specifying which transport modules are used to transport a carrier to a target destination; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126]),
(b) each of the transport units is a tile, and the control driver is capable of moving the carriers in two-dimensional directions between a plurality of positions in a plan on the tile (Ren; figs. 1 & 3-15, [0057, 0061]), based on a command signal generated by each of the control sections (Ren disclose logical fields programmed to control the route information associated with each control driver, or detect an erroneous situation of various positions in each of the transport units; [0057, 0066-0067, 0074, 0094, 0099, 0113]),
(c) each of the control sections notifies the management unit of the situation at each position detected by the control driver using each of the transport units as a unit (Ren disclose each transport module 130 as a programmable unit configured with route definition information for each position detected by the control driver 140, and a management section 170 for controlling routing and rerouting by assigning transport modules. See figs. 13a-b and corresponding disclosure in [0115] which describe two transport modules having an erroneous control driver “E” and reprogramming the logical fields of each control driver in all three transport modules to update the transport route information. Further, fig. 15 and corresponding paragraphs disclose assigning routing information by the management section 170 specifying which transport modules are used to transport a carrier to a target destination; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126]),
(d) the management section generates route definition information defining for each position on each of the transport units the purpose of use of the position (Ren disclose each transport module 130 as a programmable unit configured with route definition information for each position detected by the control driver 140, and a management section 170 for controlling routing and rerouting by assigning transport modules. See figs. 13a-b and corresponding disclosure in [0115] which describe two transport modules having an erroneous control driver “E” and reprogramming the logical fields of each control driver in all three transport modules to update the transport route information. Further, fig. 15 and corresponding paragraphs disclose assigning routing information by the management section 170 specifying which transport modules are used to transport a carrier to a target destination; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126]) for a buffer (Ren; figs. 3-14, #230, [0067]), processing sections (Ren; fig. 15, #130c, [0118]) or a transport path defined by direction of carrier movement (Ren; figs. 3-14, #200, #201, [0063]), using each of the transport units as a unit (Ren; figs. 3-15; [0066-0126]), based on a congestion situation of various positions in each of the transport units that has been detected by the control drivers, and output the generated route definition information to each of the control sections (Ren disclose each transport module 130 as a programmable unit configured with route definition information for each position detected by the control driver 140, and a management section 170 for controlling routing and rerouting by assigning transport modules. See figs. 13a-b and corresponding disclosure in [0115] which describe two transport modules having an erroneous control driver “E”, resulting in a congestion situations with traffic lanes 200/201 having a disabled control driver, and reprogramming the logical fields of each control driver in all three transport modules to update the transport route information. Further, fig. 15 and corresponding paragraphs disclose assigning routing information by the management section 170 specifying which transport modules are used to transport a carrier to a target destination; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126]), and
(e) each of the control sections calculates which position to be used for a route by each of the carriers (Ren disclose each transport modules uses logical fields corresponding to the control driver to calculate a position to be used for a route by each of the carriers; [0057, 0066-0067, 0074, 0094, 0099, 0113]) and generates a transport route of the carriers in consideration of the situation in the transport units managed by the control driver connected, based on the route definition information and generates the command signal for the control driver connected to output the command signal to the control driver connected (Ren disclose each transport module 130 as a programmable unit configured with route definition information for each position detected by the control driver 140, and a management section 170 for controlling routing and rerouting by assigning transport modules. See figs. 13a-b and corresponding disclosure in [0115] which describe two transport modules having an erroneous control driver “E”, resulting in a congestion situations with traffic lanes 200/201 having a disabled control driver, and reprogramming the logical fields of each control driver in all three transport modules to update the transport route information. Further, fig. 15 and corresponding paragraphs disclose assigning routing information by the management section 170 specifying which transport modules are used to transport a carrier to a target destination. For example, if a target station 20 is offline then the management section specifies another laboratory station 20 and which transport modules a carrier should take; figs. 13a-b, & 15, [0046, 0062-0064, 0115, 0117-0126]), and
wherein the management section corrects the route definition information based on the congestion situation of the transport units for a particular transport unit (Ren; figs. 12-14, [0046, 0117-0126]).
Ren does not disclose the transport path defined by speed, or the management section corrects the route definition information by increasing a number of rows of carriers moving in a first direction towards at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module, and decreasing the number of rows of carriers moving in a second direction away from the at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module.
However, Mellars discloses the analogous art of a sample transport system transporting carriers equipped with sample tubes in which specimens are contained (Mellars; fig. 1, #100, [0055]), wherein the sample transport system comprises a transport path defined by speed (Mellar; fig. 11A, [0144]), and a management section (Mellars disclose a central controller configured to facilitate traffic direction, scheduling, and task management for carriers; [0037, 0067]) that corrects the route definition information by increasing a number of rows of carriers moving in a first direction towards at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module, and decreasing the number of rows of carriers moving in a second direction away from the at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module (Mellars disclose the sample track designed to be bidirectional where a stat sample at segment 204 can enter path 210B via decision point 214 and proceed into path 210B to be immediately placed at the head of any queue; fig. 3, [0073]. Accordingly, the row 210B having carriers moving from decision point 216 in a first direction is decreased while the row 210B of carriers moving from decision point 214 in a second direction is increased).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the transport path and management section of Ren to additionally be defined by speed and direction of the transport path, as taught by Mellars, because Mellars teaches the management section configured to control the transport path speed and direction of a carrier allows the carrier to traverse the entire length of the track in one operation cycle while preventing acceleration and jerk experienced by the sample in the sample container from experiencing a threshold value that could result in the sample spilling and contaminating the track (Mellars; [0086]), and the bidirectional pathway allows STAT samples to be processed ahead of any queue (Mellars; [0073]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success since Ren and Mellars both teach transport systems for transporting specimen containers to a plurality of analysis modules.
Alternatively, if it is deemed that modified Ren does not explicitly teach the management section corrects the route definition information by increasing a number of rows of carriers moving in a first direction towards at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module, and decreasing the number of rows of carriers moving in a second direction away from the at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module, Sinz teach the analogous art of a sample transport system (Sinz; fig. 5, #10, [0035]), comprising a plurality of transport units capable of moving carriers in a two-dimensional direction in a plane (Sinz; fig. 5, #110, 0037]), a control driver provided for each of the transport units to drive the transport units (Sinz; fig. 5, #120, [0037]), and a management section integrally managing the sample transport system (Sinz; fig. 5, #150, [0040]), wherein the management section corrects route definition information by increasing a number of rows of carriers moving in a first direction towards at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module, and decreasing the number of rows of carriers moving in a second direction away from the at least one of the preprocessing module, the post processing module and the analysis module (Sinz disclose the control unit 150 controls each drive of the plurality of drives and assigns each respective drive an area configured with a driving force associate with transporting container carrier 140. The control determines a volume of traffic in a region of the transport plane 110 and re-configures the logical fields to increase or decrease a number of traffic lanes in the congested area; figs. 1-4, [0045, 0047-0049]. The examiner notes that sample carriers flow into and out of the buffer area and therefore would require an increase in rows in a first direction and decrease in a second direction when flowing into the buffer or a decrease in rows in the first direction and increase in rows in the second direction to remove a carrier from the buffer).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the management section of modified Ren to be configured to increase a number of rows of carriers moving in a first direction towards a pre/post/analysis unit and decrease the number of rows of carriers moving in a second direction away from the pre/post/analysis unit, as taught by Sinz, because Sinz teach configuring the logical fields to increase or decrease a traffic row provides a larger track area in critical regions with high volume of traffic. One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success since modified Ren and Sinz both teach transport planes with programmable control drivers to control the direction of flow for transport carriers.
Regarding claim 3, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein in a case where at least any of the preprocessing module, the postprocessing module and the analysis module is provided with a plurality of modules of identical specification-configuration, the management section treats a destination of the route definition information as a module group into which modules of identical specification are made, and not as individual modules (Ren; [0046, 0117-0126]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein when the route definition information from the management section is corrected, each of the control sections maintains the transport route before correction in a case where the carriers are present on the route before being corrected and corrects the transport route after transport of all the carriers is finished (Ren disclose a carrier will finish its route to a destination waypoint specified by the management section when a correction is made while the carrier is between destination waypoints [0124]. Further, Sinz disclose the increase/decrease of traffic rows requires re-initialization of the laboratory automation station; [0048]).
Regarding claim 5, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein an update cycle of a situation of the carriers which is managed by the management section is determined depending upon a transporting capability of the sample transport system (Ren; [0046, 0117-0126]. Further, Sinz disclose when high traffic volumes are detected the control unit initiates re-initialization of the laboratory automation system to increase/decrease the number of transport rows).
Regarding claim 6, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein the route definition information that is exchanged between the management section and each of the control sections comprises route information on low speed or stop for performing processing with respect to the sample tubes by at least any of the preprocessing module, the postprocessing module, and the analysis module, in addition to route information on carrying-into and carrying-out of at least any of the preprocessing module, the postprocessing module, and the analysis module (Ren disclose exchanging the transport route information between the management section 170 and transport modules 130 to perform analysis by the specified laboratory stations 20, where transport modules 130c allow handling of the sample containers; fig. 15, 0117-0126. Furthermore, the modification of the transport path of Ren to additionally be defined by speed, as taught by Mellars, has previously been discussed in claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein the transport units each have a plurality of electromagnetic coils capable of moving the carrier in the two-dimensional direction in the plane (Ren; [0029]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Ren disclose the sample transport system according to claim 1 above, wherein
the situation of various positions in each of the transport units that has been detected by the control drivers indicates at least one of:
whether or not one of the carriers is present (Ren disclose the transport modules are configured with change areas 210 that receive a sample container carrier and allow another sample container carrier to pass; [0036-0038, 0042, 0074, 0075, 0078, 0083-0085, 0087, 0099]. Accordingly, the positions detect whether or not one of the carriers is present);
whether or not processing by the preprocessing module, the postprocessing module or the analysis module for analyzing the specimens is in progress (Ren disclose whether a laboratory station is offline or being maintained; [0046, 0123-0124]); and
whether or not there is an error (Ren disclose detecting an erroneous control driver; [0045-0046, 0113-0116]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/16/2026, have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, see pages 7-12 of their remarks, that the prior art does not teach or disclose increasing and decreasing the number of rows in opposite directions. The examiner respectfully disagrees. Mellars disclose the sample track designed to be bidirectional where a stat sample at segment 204 can enter path 210B via decision point 214 and proceed into path 210B to be immediately placed at the head of any queue; fig. 3, [0073]. Accordingly, the row 210B having carriers moving from decision point 216 in a first direction is decreased while the row 210B of carriers moving from decision point 214 in a second direction is increased. Furthermore, in an effort to advance prosecution, the examiner has withdrawn the previous art rejection over Ren in view of Heise and set forth an alternative rejection over Ren in view of Sinz. Sinz teach a control unit 150 that controls each drive of the plurality of drives and assigns each respective drive an area configured with a driving force associate with transporting container carrier 140. The control determines a volume of traffic in a region of the transport plane 110 and re-configures the logical fields to increase or decrease a number of traffic lanes in the congested area; figs. 1-4, [0045, 0047-0049]. The examiner notes that sample carriers flow into and out of the buffer area and therefore would require an increase in rows in a first direction and decrease in a second direction when flowing into the buffer and a decrease in rows in the first direction and increase in rows in the second direction when carriers are removed from the buffer.
Citations to art
In the above citations to documents in the art, an effort has been made to specifically cite representative passages, however rejections are in reference to the entirety of each document relied upon. Other passages, not specifically cited, may apply as well.
Other References Cited
The prior art of made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant’s disclosure include:
Knafel et al. (US 2012/0109531) disclose an analysis system comprising a workflow manger and an instrument manager which provide preconfigured processing route information in accordance with a process status.
Denninger et al. (US 2014/0231217) disclose a control section connected between a management section and a plurality of control drivers.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CURTIS A THOMPSON whose telephone number is (571) 272-0648. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F: 7:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..
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.
E-mail communication Authorization
Per updated USPTO Internet usage policies, Applicant and/or applicant’s representative is encouraged to authorize the USPTO examiner to discuss any subject matter concerning the above application via Internet e-mail communications. See MPEP 502.03. To approve such communications, Applicant must provide written authorization for e-mail communication by submitting the following statement via EFS Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300):
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
Written authorizations submitted to the Examiner via e-mail are NOT proper. Written authorizations must be submitted via EFS-Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300). A paper copy of e-mail correspondence will be placed in the patent application when appropriate. E-mails from the USPTO are for the sole use of the intended recipient, and may contain information subject to the confidentiality requirement set forth in 35 USC § 122. See also MPEP 502.03.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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.
/C.A.T./Examiner, Art Unit 1798
/BENJAMIN R WHATLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights