FINAL 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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 6-21, filed 27 January 2026, with respect to claims 57 and 58 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art does not teach or suggest the annular strip-shaped circuit board, the first transceiver unit, transceiver antenna are positioned within an annular chamber for protecting the annular strip-shaped circuit board, transceiver unit and transceiver antenna from mechanical damage. In particular, Akihiro’s conducting through hole 11e is not an annular chamber that includes a U-shaped section. The rejections of claims 57-60 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments with respect to claim 29 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Asakura “teaches a wall portion 3b coupled to the bottom of the chamber 3 for supporting a base portion of the connection terminal 50. The wall portion 3b is not designed nor intended to protect the connection terminal 50 nor the adapter 40, adapter body 41, data holding device 42, electrode 43 since the wall portion 3b does not extend to cover these elements” (page 5, Remarks). This argument is not persuasive. Asakura states that “a base portion is supported by a wall portion 3b erected from the bottom of the chamber 3,” and Fig. 5 and 6 show that wall portion 3b extends around at least the lower portion of adapter 40 and most of connection terminals 50. Claim 29 does not require that the protective housing completely cover or seal the transceiver/support structure. Therefore, Asakura’s chamber wall structure meets the claimed protective housing that surrounds the transceiver/support structure.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 9 February 2022. These drawings are acceptable.
Specification
The specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant's cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware of in the specification.
The abstract of the disclosure is acceptable.
The title of the invention is acceptable.
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.
Claims 29-34, 36-39, 41, 48 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE 102004002110 (Hermle) in view of DE 102018101457 (Beukert et al., hereinafter Beukert), further in view of Chen (U.S. Patent Application Pub. No. 2011/0259776), and further in view of JP 2015020123 (Asakura).
Regarding claim 29, Hermle discloses a centrifuge, comprising: a rotor (1, Figure) is arranged for receiving a sample that is to be centrifuged, which rotor sits detachably on a drive shaft (rotary shaft 4, Figure), which is connected to a drive (11, Figure), which rotor is driven by the drive shaft during operation of the centrifuge and rotates about a rotation axis (Figure; Abstract), which rotor has a first, rotor-side transceiver unit (transponder 10, Figure), which is excited by an electric field, thus inducing voltage in the first transceiver unit (page 3 lines 5-7 of machine translation), the first transceiver unit is associated with a second, housing-side transceiver unit (antenna 14 in connection with a read/write unit 17, Figure), which is connected to a voltage source (via the controller 16, Figure), the two transceiver units are connected to a transceiver antenna each (antenna 14; transponder 10 inherently includes an antenna since “[t]he transponder according to the invention is a receiving transmitter”, page 2 line 23 of machine translation), and the transceiver units and the transceiver antennas are in each case arranged on an annular support (groove 9 and motor flange 13, Figure) concentrically with the rotation axis, characterized in that the support of one transceiver unit (groove 9, Figure) has a smaller diameter than the support of the other transceiver unit (motor flange 13, Figure), but does not disclose a housing, the transceiver antenna of one transceiver unit overlaps in part with the transceiver antenna of the other transceiver unit in a direction parallel to the rotation axis; and each annular support comprises a flexible strip-shaped circuit board material on which the transceiver unit and the transceiver antenna are mounted; and the support of the first transceiver unit and/or the support of the second transceiver unit with transceiver antenna is surrounded by a protective housing for protecting the transceiver unit and transceiver antenna from mechanical damage.
Beukert discloses analogous art related to a centrifuge (Fig. 1), comprising a housing (12, Fig. 1), a first, rotor-side transceiver unit (RFID transponder 28, Fig. 4), which is excited by an electric field, thus inducing voltage in the first transceiver unit, the first transceiver unit is associated with a second, housing- side transceiver unit (RFID receiver 30, Fig. 4) which is connected to a voltage source, the two transceiver units are connected to a transceiver antenna each (page 5 lines 40-42 of machine translation; elements 28 and 30 can be RFID transponder and RFID receiver, which include antennas), and the transceiver antenna of one transceiver unit overlaps in part with the transceiver antenna of the other transceiver unit in a direction parallel to the rotation axis (RFID transponder 28 and RFID receiver 30, Fig. 4, page 5 lines 40-42 of machine translation). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge of Hermle with the arrangement of the first and second transceiver unit and antennas as taught by Beukert for the purpose of providing predetermined rotational speed that is fixed coded on the element and/or the driven element and is read (page 4 lines 4-8 of machine translation, Beukert).
The combination of Hermle and Beukert does not disclose each annular support comprises a flexible strip-shaped circuit board material on which the transceiver unit and the transceiver antenna are mounted.
Chen discloses analogous art related to transceivers, where the support comprises a flexible strip-shaped circuit board material (substrate 13, Fig. 1) on which the transceiver unit (RFID tag 10, Fig. 1) and the transceiver antenna (transceiver antenna 11, Fig. 1) are mounted (Fig. 1). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the annular support of the centrifuge of the combination of Hermle and Beukert with the flexible strip-shaped circuit board material taught by Chen for the purpose of attaching the RFID tag onto a non-conductive object to maintain its normal signal transmission effect to exchange information with a reader within a predetermined range (or distance) (para. [0018]-[0019], Chen).
The combination of Hermle, Beukert, and Chen does not disclose that the support of the first transceiver unit and/or the support of the second transceiver unit with transceiver antenna is surrounded by a protective housing for protecting the transceiver unit and transceiver antenna from mechanical damage.
Asakura discloses that the support of the first transceiver unit (adapter 40, Fig. 6) and the support of the second transceiver unit (connection terminals 50, Fig. 6) are disposed within chamber 3, and that “a base portion is supported by a wall portion 3b erected from the bottom of the chamber”, with the connection terminal 50 extending from that base portion toward the adapter 40. As shown in Fig. 5 and 6, wall portion 3b extends around at least the lower portion of adapter 40 and around most of connection terminals 50, thereby surrounding those components. Claim 29 does not require that the protective housing completely cover or fully enclose the support, transceiver unit, or antenna, but only that the support with transceiver and antenna be “surrounded by a protective housing”. Thus, under broadest reasonable interpretation, Asakura’s wall portion 3b and chamber structure teach or at least suggest the recited protective housing. It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the support and transceiver arrangement of the centrifuge of the combination of Hermle, Beukert, and Chen with the surrounding wall/protective housing structure taught by Asakura in order to physically bound and support the base portion of the connection terminals (page 4 lines 1-6 of machine translation, Asakura).
Regarding claim 30, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the bottom surface of one or both supports (rotor 1) does not rest against metal (Figure, Hermle).
Regarding claim 31, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the transceiver antennas (antennas of the first and second RFID transceiver units 28, 30, Beukert) overlap by 100% in the direction parallel to the axis of rotation (Fig. 4, Beukert).
Regarding claim 32, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the rotor (centrifuge rotor 20, Fig. 1 and 4, Beukert) comprises a first support for the first transceiver unit and magnets (permanent magnet or RFID transponder 28, Fig. 4, Beukert) as identifiers for the rotor (identification information being predetermined rotational speeds specific to the rotor, page 4 lines 4-8, page 5 lines 40-43 of machine translation, Beukert).
Regarding claim 33, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the second support for the second transceiver unit comprises at least one Hall sensor (fixed Hall sensor 30, Fig. 4, Beukert) for determining the rotor identification information of the first support as specified by the magnets (identification information being predetermined rotational speeds specific to the rotor, page 4 lines 4-8, page 5 lines 40-43 of machine translation, Beukert).
Regarding claim 34, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the supports are strip-shaped (substrate 13, Fig. 1, Chen).
Regarding claim 36, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the flexible circuit board material comprises polyimide (para. [0018], Chen).
Regarding claim 37, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the first transceiver unit (transponder 10, Figure, Hermle) has a memory in which the data of the rotor is stored, the memory comprises both a non-volatile memory and a read-write memory (page 2 lines 23-32 of machine translation, Hermle).
Regarding claim 38, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the second transceiver unit is connected to an evaluation unit (controller 16, Figure, Hermle).
Regarding claim 39, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the transceiver antenna (11, Fig. 1, Chen) in each case substantially comprises the annular support (substrate 13, Fig. 1, Chen; “antenna can be designed annular”, page 3 line 2 of machine translation, Hermle).
Regarding claim 41, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses the first transceiver unit comprises a transponder (RFID transponder 28, Fig. 4, Beukert) and the second transceiver unit comprises an associated reader (RFID receiver 30, Fig. 4, Beukert).
Regarding claim 48, the process (via bonding) with which the supports is connected to the protective housing is noted. The patentability of a product or apparatus, however, does not depend on its method of production. In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698, 227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Brown, 459 F.2d 531, 535, 173 USPQ 685, 688 (CCPA 1972); In re Pilkington, 411 F.2d 1345, 1348, 162 USPQ 145, (CCPA 1969). MPEP 2113. As held in In re Thorpe, supra, “even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process.” See MPEP 2113. The combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen, and Asakura discloses a support (connection terminals 50, Fig. 6, Asakura) that is connected to the protective housing (wall portion 3b, page 4 lines 1-6 of machine translation, Fig. 5, Asakura), and thus disclose all of the recited structure irrespective of the process by which the support is connected to the protective housing.
Regarding claim 49, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen and Asakura discloses a set of different rotors is provided (page 1 lines 12-15 of machine translation, Hermle).
Claims 40 and 42 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hermle in view of Beukert, further in view of Chen, and further in view of Asakura as applied to claim 29 above, and further in view of DE 202018101760 (Hoeche et al., hereinafter Hoeche).
Regarding claim 40, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen, and Asakura does not disclose the first support is used to transmit further data from sensors located on the rotor.
Hoeche discloses the first support (rotor carrying RFID device) is used to transmit further data from sensors located on the rotor (page 2 line 34 – page 3 line 15). It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the centrifuge in the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen, and Asakura with the data transmission configuration as taught by Hoeche the purpose of transferring process information and storing for documentation (page 2 line 34 – page 3 line 15, Hoeche).
Regarding claim 42, the combination of Hermle, Beukert, Chen, Asakura and Hoeche discloses the transceiver units are based on the NFC standard (page 3 lines 16-21 of machine translation, Hoeche).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 57 is allowable because the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the other claimed structural elements, the flexible strip-shaped circuit board material defining an annular strip-shaped circuit board; and the annular strip-shaped circuit board, the first transceiver unit, transceiver antenna positioned within an annular chamber for protecting the annular strip-shaped circuit board, transceiver unit and transceiver antenna from mechanical damage.
Claim 58-60 are allowable because the prior art does not teach or suggest, in combination with the other claimed structural elements, that the protective housing is formed as an annular chamber which is U-shaped in section for protecting the transceiver unit and transceiver antenna from mechanical damage.
Claims 61 and 62 are allowable because the prior art does not teach or suggest a set of different rotors is provided; and characterized in that each first transceiver antenna of the rotors is arranged at the same height relative to the rotation axis; or characterized in that each rotor has a cylindrical projection facing downwardly onto the drive motor and arranged concentrically to the rotation axis of the drive shaft, with the distance between a rotor seat on which the rotor sits on the drive shaft, and the free end of the projection being the same in each case.
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 SHUYI S LIU whose telephone number is (571)272-0496. The examiner can normally be reached MON - FRI 9:30AM - 2:30PM EST.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/Shuyi S. Liu/Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights