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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/14/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-21 are currently pending.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0331429 (Lofstrom hereinafter) in view of US 2012/0085422 (Gilligan hereinafter) and further in view of US 9967664 (Quek hereinafter).
Regarding claim 1, Lofstrom teaches fluid flow instrument handling system that discloses a control fluid in a control fluid volume of a flow regulator (Flow regulator 150 per Figures 1-2), from a control fluid system (Fluid area of 152 per ¶ 38-40 with Figure 1); receiving, a liquid working fluid in a working fluid volume of the flow regulator from a pump (Working fluid within 154 per ¶ 36 disclosing the ability of the working fluid to be liquid or gas), wherein the working fluid has a first pulse peak-to-peak value (Inherent of the pump being a peristaltic pump to have peak-to-peak values); a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and the working fluid barrier (Barrier 155).
Lofstrom is silent with respect to emitting photons, from a light source, toward a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume; sensing, via at least one sensor, one or more of the photons reflected from the flexible barrier; determining a position of the flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume, based at least in part on the detection of the one or more photons reflected from the flexible barrier; and controlling a discharge of a volume of the liquid working fluid into the fluid flow instrument from the working fluid volume, in response to the at least one sensor sending a control signal to a controller to control a parameter of the pump.
However, Gilligan teaches a fluid flow measurement system that discloses emitting photons, from a light source, toward a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume (¶ 72 details the use of a light-emitting diode distance measurement as a substitute for the hall effect sensor used to measure the distance between a wall and the equivalent flexible barrier 68); sensing, via at least one sensor, one or more of the photons reflected from the flexible barrier (Inherent of a light-emitting diode distance measurement sensor disclosed); determining a position of the flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume, based at least in part on the detection of the one or more photons reflected from the flexible barrier (Inherent of a light-emitting diode distance measurement sensor); and controlling a discharge of a volume of the liquid working fluid into the fluid flow instrument from the working fluid volume, in response to the at least one sensor sending a control signal to a controller to control a parameter of the pump (¶ 69 and 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the flexible barrier, sensing, and control of Lofstrom with the light emitting diode sensor of Gilligan to accurately calculate the flexible barrier’s deflection.
Lofstrom, per Gilligan, is silent with respect to the use of an IR light and the measurement of an intensity of photons.
However, Quek teaches a sensor assembly for the measurement of a diaphragm displacement that discloses the use of an IR light and the measurement of an intensity of photons (Column 9 Line 48 through Column 10 Line 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the light source and detector of Lofstrom/Gilligan with the IR source of Quek via simple substitution to obtain the well-known and predictable outcome of providing a sensed light source to detect movement.
Regarding claim 2, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the parameter of the pump is a flow rate to pump speed ratio, and the speed of a drive shaft of the pump is associated with a control of the flow rate of the liquid working fluid (¶ 41 of Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 3, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on at least one value corresponding to at least one parameter associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 69 Gilligan).
Regarding claim 4, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on a variation in at least one parameter associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 69 of Gilligan).
Regarding claim 5, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 4 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the at least one parameter corresponds to a pressure, volume, flow rate, or temperature associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 68-70 of Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 6, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the pump comprises a plurality of rollers and a rotor, and the plurality of rollers are adjacent to the rotor and are located along the circumference of the rotor (Peristaltic pump of Lofstrom in Figure 3).
Regarding claim 7, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the pump further comprises a tube between the rotor and a wall of a casing of the pump (Tube 134d of Lofstrom), and the tube is compressed when a roller of the plurality of rollers is on top of a portion of the tube (inherent of the peristaltic pump shown in Figure 3 of Lofstrom), and the tube is decompressed when the roller is not on top of the portion of the tube (Inherent of a peristaltic pump).
Regarding claim 8, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the liquid working fluid is received in the tube of the pump (Evident of Lofstrom), and output to the flow regulator as the rotor rotates (Evident from Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 9, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the volume of the liquid working fluid has a second pulse peak-to-peak value that is less than the first pulse peak-to-peak value (¶ 69 of Gilligan).
Regarding claim 10, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 1 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on the sensed position of the flexible barrier and a nominal position of the flexible barrier (¶ 67 and 85 of Gilligan).
Regarding claim 11, Lofstrom teaches fluid flow instrument handling system that discloses a flow regulator configured to receive a control fluid in a control fluid volume of the flow regulator (Regulator 150 per Figures 1-2), from a control fluid system; a pump configured to pump a working fluid into a liquid working fluid volume of the flow regulator (Working fluid entered into 154 via flow generator [pump] 134 and per ¶ 36 disclosing the ability of the working fluid to be liquid or gas), wherein the working fluid has a first pulse peak-to-peak value (Inherent of the peristaltic pump 134); a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and liquid working fluid volume (Flexible barrier 68).
Lofstrom is silent with respect to a light source configured to emit photons, toward a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume; at least one sensor configured to sense one or more of the photons reflected from the flexible barrier; a controller, configured to: determine a position of the flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and liquid working fluid volume, based at least in part on the detection of the one or more photons reflected from the flexible barrier, and control a discharge of a volume of the working fluid into the fluid flow instrument from the working fluid volume, in response to the at least one sensor sending a control signal to a controller to control a parameter of the pump.
However, Gilligan teaches a fluid flow measurement system that discloses a light source configured to emit photons, toward a flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and working fluid volume (¶ 72 details the use of a light-emitting diode distance measurement as a substitute for the hall effect sensor used to measure the distance between a wall and the equivalent flexible barrier 68); at least one sensor configured to sense one or more of the photons reflected from the flexible barrier (Inherent of a light-emitting diode distance measurement sensor); a controller, configured to: determine a position of the flexible barrier between the control fluid volume and liquid working fluid volume, based at least in part on the detection of the one or more photons reflected from the flexible barrier (Controller 19 hooked up with the light-emitting diode distance measurement sensor), and control a discharge of a volume of the liquid working fluid into the fluid flow instrument from the working fluid volume, in response to the at least one sensor sending a control signal to a controller to control a parameter of the pump (¶ 69 and 72).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the flexible barrier, sensing, and control of Lofstrom with the light emitting diode sensor of Gilligan to accurately calculate the flexible barrier’s deflection.
Lofstrom, per Gilligan, is silent with respect to the use of an IR light and the measurement of an intensity of photons.
However, Quek teaches a sensor assembly for the measurement of a diaphragm displacement that discloses the use of an IR light and the measurement of an intensity of photons (Column 9 Line 48 through Column 10 Line 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the light source and detector of Lofstrom/Gilligan with the IR source of Quek via simple substitution to obtain the well-known and predictable outcome of providing a sensed light source to detect movement.
Regarding claim 12, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the parameter of the pump is a flow rate to pump speed ratio, and the speed of a drive shaft of the pump is associated with a control of the flow rate of the liquid working fluid (¶ 41 of Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 13, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on at least one value corresponding to at least one parameter associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 69 Gilligan).
Regarding claim 14, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on a variation in at least one parameter associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 69 of Gilligan).
Regarding claim 15, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 13 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the at least one parameter corresponds to a pressure, volume, flow rate, or temperature associated with the liquid working fluid (¶ 68-70 of Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 16, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the pump comprises a plurality of rollers and a rotor, and the plurality of rollers are adjacent to the rotor and are located along the circumference of the rotor (Peristaltic pump of Lofstrom in Figure 3).
Regarding claim 17, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 16 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the pump further comprises a tube between the rotor and a wall of a casing of the pump (Tube 134d of Lofstrom), and the tube is compressed when a roller of the plurality of rollers is on top of a portion of the tube, and the tube is decompressed when the roller is not on top of the portion of the tube (Inherent of a peristaltic pump).
Regarding claim 18, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 16 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the liquid working fluid is received in the tube of the pump (Evident of Lofstrom), and output to the flow regulator as the rotor rotates (Evident of Lofstrom).
Regarding claim 19, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the volume of the liquid working fluid has a second pulse peak-to-peak value that is less than the first pulse peak-to-peak value (¶ 69 of Gilligan).
Regarding claim 20, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described in claim 11 where the combination of Lofstrom and Gilligan would further disclose that the control signal is based at least in part on the sensed position of the flexible barrier and a nominal position of the flexible barrier (¶ 67 and 85 of Gilligan).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2015/0331429 (Lofstrom) in view of US 2012/0085422 (Gilligan) in view of US 9967664 (Quek) and further in view of US 2016/0187484 (Bloomfield hereinafter).
Regarding claim 21, Lofstrom’s modified teachings are described above in claim 1 but are silent with respect that the IR light source is an IR VCSEL.
However, Bloomfield teaches an IR light measurement sensor that discloses the use of an IR VCSEL (¶ 22-25 and Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sensing structure of Lofstrom/Gilligan/Quek with the VCSEL of Bloomfield to minimize the size of the sensing unit.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/14/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that Quek (US 9967664) is nonanalogous art, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, both prongs of being analogous art are met by Quek. The claimed invention is directed towards a fluid handling system involving a movable diaphragm between two chambers of fluids and measuring an associated fluid parameter with the diaphragm. The Quek reference is directed towards a movable diaphragm with a sensor to directly detect the movement of the diaphragm. The use of a movable diaphragm and the sensing of the parameters of the diaphragm by Quek is seen by the Examiner to be in the same field as the inventor’s endeavor. Furthermore, the second prong of “the reference is reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention)” is also met by the Quek reference. The Applicant does disclose the particular fluid system being a flow cytometer however the problem identified in the instant application by the Examiner involves sensing a displacement of a movable diaphragm and reporting that displacement back to a sensor. One of ordinary skill in the art would therefore search for prior art that taught sensing a displacement of a diaphragm and the Quek reference is found to be analogous under this analysis. For at least these reasons, Applicant’s arguments regarding the Quek reference being non-analogous are not found to be persuasive.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 2015/0314058 (O’Mahony) discloses a diaphragm pump and IR position sensor in ¶ 96-97.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J. TREMARCHE whose telephone number is (571)272-2175. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 0700-1700 Eastern.
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 HOANG can be reached at (571) 272-6460. 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.
/CONNOR J TREMARCHE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762