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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/26/2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claim 1-2 and 6-15 are pending and under examination.
Claims 3-5 have been canceled.
Response to Amendment
The 101 rejection(s) have been modified to address the claim amendments.
Based on the amended claims and remarks received on 12/26/2025, the previous prior art rejection over Hren has been modified to address the amended claims (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 1-2 and 6-15 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. Claim 13 is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable medium. Claim 15 is directed towards a method.
Step 2A, Prong One: Identify the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract ideas.
Claims 1, 13, and 15 recite the abstract ideas, “storing, in the memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples”, “receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory, a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory”, “receiving, via a web software platform, one or more configuration of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration”, “receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory”, “identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device”, “providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device”, “receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications”, “transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration”, and “receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful; wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful” are mental processes that could be performed by a human person by pen and paper or by a black box computer. The processing circuitry to perform the recited steps/processes is simply a general-purpose computer 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)(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.
The abstract ideas are performed by processing circuitry of one or more servers and a memory storing instructions which are just a general-purpose computer. However, use of conventional computer functions to apply the judicial exception does not qualify as a particular machine (MPEP § 2106(b)(I), MPEP § 2106(b)(II) and MPEP § 2106(b)(III)).
If the “storing” and “receiving” are deemed not to be abstract ideas, then they do not integrate the exception into a particular practical application.
Storing, in the memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples is interpreted as mere instructions to apply an exception, and generally linking the 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. The memory to store information does 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, MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory, a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Receiving, via a web software platform, one or more configuration of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful; wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Further, the steps of “providing”, “transmitting”, and “running” are not enough to integrate the judicial exception into a particular practical application.
Providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Running the second part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch at a second scientific device, wherein the second scientific device is selected, by the user, from the one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory and the second scientific device is different from the first scientific device is interpreted as generally linking the 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), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment)
Step 2B: Does the claim recite any elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea?
Claims 1, 13, and 15 recite the additional elements of processing circuity of one or more servers, a memory, batches of samples, a first lab administrator client device, a first scientific devices and a second scientific device in a laboratory for performing processing on the batch of samples. These additional elements do not amount to significantly more as they are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art as evidenced by Hren et al. (US 2015/0100155 – hereinafter “Hren”) and Fava et al. (US 2002/0147515 – hereinafter “Fava”). Hren and Fava teach processing circuitry of one or more servers (Hren; Hren; processor 808 for server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058] & Fara; workcell system comprising process controller and laboratory information system; fig 1, [0015]), a memory (Hren; computer readable medium 806 and database 812 of server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058] & Fava; protocols stored in the protocol database; [0044]), batches of samples (Hren; [0024] & Fava; [0031]), a first lab administrator client device, a first scientific device and a second scientific device in a laboratory for performing processing on the batch of samples (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106/700 and one or more liquid handlers 104/200/600 configured to interface through network 108; figs. 1 & 7, [0021, 0037, 0042, 0045-0047] & Fava; figs. 1-2, Resources R1, R1, … RN, [0015, 0017]).
Claims 2 & 14 recites the abstract idea of receiving an operator configuration from a lab operator client device (step 2A prong 1) which is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment), but does not integrate the additional element “a lab operator client device” under 2A prong 2 because the lab operator client device does not amount to significantly more as this is well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art in view of Hren (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025]).
Claim 6 recites the abstract idea of receiving a selection of a second subset of the selected laboratory applications from a second lab administrator client device associated with a second laboratory (step 2A prong 1), which is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor, and also as extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment), but does not integrate the additional element “a second lab administrator client device and a second laboratory” under 2A prong 2 because the lab operator client device does not amount to significantly more as this is well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art in view of Hren (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025] and one or more liquid handlers 104; [0021]).
Claim 7 recites the abstract ideas of receiving a result, determining whether the result is within a range, and providing the result to a lab operator client device (step 2A prong 1), which is interpreted as receiving and transmitting data over a network and has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function. Further, determining a result is interpreted as a machine that contributes only nominally or insignificantly to the execution of the claimed method, 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 would not integrate a judicial exception or provide significantly more as performing repetitive calculations does not impose meaningful limits on the scope of the claims (see MPEP § 2106.05(b)(I), MPEP § 2106.05(b)(II), MPEP § 2106.05(b)(III), MPEP § 2106.05(c), Particular Transformation and MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment). The claim recites the additional element of “a lab operator client device”, but does not integrate the additional element under 2A prong 2 because the lab operator client device does not amount to significantly more as this is well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art in view of Hren (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025]).
Claim 8 recites elements directed towards receiving the result from the user while the first scientific device is offline (step 2A prong 1), which is interpreted as generally linking the abstract idea to the field of endeavor and extra-solution activity incidental to the primary process as mere data gathering which is not considered significantly more than the abstract idea. Receiving and transmitting data over a network, and storing and retrieving information in memory, have been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Claim 9 recites the abstract idea of determining whether the first scientific device is connected via a network (step 2A prong 1), which is interpreted as applying the abstract idea on a computer and is not considered sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application. Receiving or transmitting data over a network, and storing and retrieving information in memory, have been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner or as insignificant extra-solution activity (see MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment).
Claim 10 recites the abstract idea “setting a production status of at least one laboratory application” (step 2A prong 1), which is interpreted as merely implementing the abstract idea on a computer and is not considered sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application (MPEP §2106.04(d) Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception).
Claim 11 recites the abstract idea “at least a scan of a container of a sample … identifying the sample based on the scan”. Scanning a sample container and identifying the sample are well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner or as insignificant extra-solution activity. Electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document has been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (MPEP §2106.04(d) Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception)
Claim 12 recites the abstract idea “applying optical character recognition (OCR) to at least a portion of the scan”. Scanning a sample container and identifying the sample are well-understood, routine, and conventional functions when they are claimed in a merely generic manner or as insignificant extra-solution activity. Electronically scanning or extracting data from a physical document has been recognized as well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (MPEP §2106.04(d) Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception)
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 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) 1-2, 6, 9-10 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hren et al. (US 2015/0100155; already of record – hereinafter “Hren”).
Regarding claim 1, Hren disclose a system (Hren disclose a liquid handling system 100; fig. 1, [0021]) comprising:
processing circuitry of one or more servers (Hren; processor 808 for server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058]); and
a memory in communication with the processing circuitry (Hren; computer readable medium 806 and database 812 of server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058]), the memory storing instructions which, when executed by the processing circuitry, cause the processing circuitry to perform operations comprising:
storing, in the memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples (Hren; database 812 may save, access, and retrieve protocol creation applications 712/810; figs. 7-8, [0063]);
receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106/700 and one or more liquid handlers 104/200/600 configured to interface through network 108; figs. 1 & 7, [0021, 0042, 0047]), a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. When a user selects button 1008 “Create new qPCR experiment” or save button 2308 shown in fig. 23 after creating a new analysis, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 26 that allows the user to select batches of samples using button 2816 or button 2820 to be processed according to the selected protocol; figs. 26-36; [0119-0170]) and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory (Hren disclose different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, via a web software platform (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712 implemented as a Web application; [0055]), one or more configurations of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. Different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0024, 0037, 0045-0046]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations) and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device (Hren disclose selection of “Manage qPCR button” 1006 on the protocol creation application 712/810 prompts a user with a manage qPCR analysis window 1500; figs. 10 & 15, [0079]. Selecting the tab 1520 “Expand” allows editing an existing analysis using buttons 1600 “Edit” or 1604 “Copy”, and selection of button 1518 “Create new qPCR analysis” allows a user to create of a new analysis; fig. 16; [0082-0084]. Selection of buttons 1518/1600/1604 prompt a user with window 1700 which identifies the first scientific device in dropdown selectors 1718, 1720, 1722 for the laboratory application; [0083-0084, 0086]. Specifically, Hren disclose “In an illustrative embodiment, each analysis name may automatically receive an additional tag composed of an identifier for the selected qPCR cycler manufacturer and a plate size indicator for the selected qPCR manufacturer in the form: “MyFirstAnalysis_ABI7900_384”. This naming structure makes a particular analysis easier to find when assigning an analysis to samples in an experiment workflow especially if a laboratory has different qPCR cyclers”; [0086]. Further, advancing to the second qPCR analysis interface 1800 allows a user to add an assay to the analysis using buttons 1812 “Add New” or 1814 “Add Existing”; fig. 18, [0093]. Upon selecting either button 1812 or 1814, a user is prompted with an Assay Selector interface 1900; [0093]. The Assay Selector interface 1900 comprises an assay name column 1904 and an analysis name column 1906; fig. 19, [0094]. The assay name column 1904 identifies one or more laboratory applications and the analysis name columns 1906 shows compatibility with the first scientific device using the naming structure defined above; fig. 19, [0094]. See for example “CAB” and “COX1” in 1904 corresponding to “NIB-test_ABI7900_384” in 1906, which refers to the qPCR Cycler Manufacture 1718, Model 1720, and Plate size 1724 defined in the first qPCR window 1700; figs. 17 & 19, [0086, 0094]);
providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device (Hren disclose execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104 and assigning analysis depends on compatible qPCR cycler manufacturer, model, and software version; [0021, 0134]);
receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration (Hren disclose the protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]); and
receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful (Hren disclose the liquid handlers 104/200 send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from server 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handlers 104/200 send results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 through controller output interface 602; [0041-0042]);
wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful (Hren disclose controller 600 sends results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]), the operations further comprising:
running the second part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch at a second scientific device, wherein the second scientific device is selected, by the user, from the one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory and the second scientific device is different from the first scientific device (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104; [0024]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077], and an assign analysis button 3022 for adding analyses to samples; figs. 30-31; [0133-0134]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations).
Regarding claim 2, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, the operations further comprising: receiving, from a lab operator client device (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025]), an operator configuration for the selected laboratory application (Hren disclose the one or more protocol creation devices 106 allow an operator to edit, view, copy, or delete a selected analysis protocol using expand tab 1520; fig. 16, [0082, 0117]), wherein the control signal is for executing the at least the first part of the selected laboratory application in accordance with the admin configuration and the operator configuration (Hren disclose edited analysis applications are saved with a timestamp and the status is set to “Ready” and the analysis is ready for use in creating an experiment; [0117]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]).
Regarding claim 6, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, wherein the set of laboratory applications comprises applications for multiple different laboratories (Hren disclose the components of liquid handling system 100 may be distributed geographically from one another and comprise one or more liquid handlers 104 and one or more protocol creation devices 106; [0021]), the operations further comprising: receiving, from a second lab administrator client device associated with a second laboratory (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025] and one or more liquid handlers 104; [0021]), a selection of a second subset of the selected laboratory applications and a second admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the second subset for use in the second laboratory (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. When a user selects button 1008 “Create new qPCR experiment” or save button 2308 shown in fig. 23 after creating a new analysis, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 26 that allows the user to select batches of samples using button 2816 or button 2820 to be processed according to the selected protocol; figs. 26-36; [0119-0170]. Hren disclose different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]), wherein the second subset is different from the first subset (Hren disclose creating protocols using button 1518 and/or editing protocols using button 1600, thereby resulting in a different subset; fig. 16, [0081, 0083-0084]), and wherein the second admin configuration is different from the admin configuration received from the first lab administrator client device (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104 and assigning analysis depends on compatible qPCR cycler manufacturer, model, and software version; [0021, 0134]).
Regarding claim 9, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, wherein the first scientific device is configured to: determine, upon completing executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch, whether the first scientific device is connected to the one or more servers via a network (Hren disclose the components of the liquid handling system 100 may be directly connected or connected through network 108 which can be wired and/or public or private network including a cellular network, a local area network, a wide area network such as internet, etc.; [0021-0022]. The Server 102 may send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more liquid handlers 104 and/or to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106; [0023]. The one or more liquid handlers104 may send and receive signals through network 108 to/from one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from sever 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handler 104/200 may send results obtained from a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]. The examiner notes that whether the first scientific device is connected to the one or more servers via the network would be determined upon completion of executing the first part of the selected laboratory application when the control 600 attempts to send results); if the first scientific device is connected to the one or more servers: transmit the result signal to the one or more servers (Hren disclose controller 600 of liquid handler 104/200 may send results obtained from a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]); and if the first scientific device is not connected to the one or more servers: periodically ping the one or more servers to determine whether the first scientific device has reestablished connectivity with the one or more servers; and upon reestablishing connectivity: transmit the result signal to the one or more servers (Hren disclose controller 600 of liquid handler 104/200 may send results obtained from a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]).
Note: “if the first scientific device is connected to the one or more servers: transmit the result signal to the one or more servers” and “if the first scientific device is not connected to the one or more servers: periodically ping the one or more servers to determine whether the first scientific device has reestablished connectivity with the one or more servers; and upon reestablishing connectivity: transmit the result signal to the one or more servers” are contingent limitations. The broadest reasonable interpretation of method having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent is not met. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a system (or apparatus or product) claim having structure that performs a function, which only needs to occur if a condition precedent is met, requires structure for performing the function should the condition occur (see MPEP 2111.04)).
Regarding claim 10, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, the operations further comprising: setting a production status of at least one laboratory application to in-production (Hren; fig. 16, #1512, “Ready”, [0080]), wherein laboratory applications that are in-production are accessible to both the lab administrator and lab operators (Hren; [0080]), and wherein laboratory applications that are not in-production are accessible to the lab administrator and not accessible to lab operators (Hren; fig. 16, #1512, “In editing”, [0080]).
Regarding claim 13, Hren disclose a non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions (Hren disclose a liquid handling system 100 comprising computer readable medium 806 and database 812 of server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0021, 0058]) which, when executed by processing circuitry of one or more servers (Hren; processor 808 for server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058]), cause the processing circuitry to perform operations comprising:
storing, in a memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples (Hren; database 812 may save, access, and retrieve protocol creation applications 712/810; figs. 7-8, [0063]);
receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106/700 and one or more liquid handlers 104/200/600 configured to interface through network 108; figs. 1 & 7, [0021, 0042, 0047]), a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. When a user selects button 1008 “Create new qPCR experiment” or save button 2308 shown in fig. 23 after creating a new analysis, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 26 that allows the user to select batches of samples using button 2816 or button 2820 to be processed according to the selected protocol; figs. 26-36; [0119-0170]) and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory (Hren disclose different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, via a web software platform (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712 implemented as a Web application; [0055]), one or more configurations of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. Different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0024, 0037, 0045-0046]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations) and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device (Hren disclose selection of “Manage qPCR button” 1006 on the protocol creation application 712/810 prompts a user with a manage qPCR analysis window 1500; figs. 10 & 15, [0079]. Selecting the tab 1520 “Expand” allows editing an existing analysis using buttons 1600 “Edit” or 1604 “Copy”, and selection of button 1518 “Create new qPCR analysis” allows a user to create of a new analysis; fig. 16; [0082-0084]. Selection of buttons 1518/1600/1604 prompt a user with window 1700 which identifies the first scientific device in dropdown selectors 1718, 1720, 1722 for the laboratory application; [0083-0084, 0086]. Specifically, Hren disclose “In an illustrative embodiment, each analysis name may automatically receive an additional tag composed of an identifier for the selected qPCR cycler manufacturer and a plate size indicator for the selected qPCR manufacturer in the form: “MyFirstAnalysis_ABI7900_384”. This naming structure makes a particular analysis easier to find when assigning an analysis to samples in an experiment workflow especially if a laboratory has different qPCR cyclers”; [0086]. Further, advancing to the second qPCR analysis interface 1800 allows a user to add an assay to the analysis using buttons 1812 “Add New” or 1814 “Add Existing”; fig. 18, [0093]. Upon selecting either button 1812 or 1814, a user is prompted with an Assay Selector interface 1900; [0093]. The Assay Selector interface 1900 comprises an assay name column 1904 and an analysis name column 1906; fig. 19, [0094]. The assay name column 1904 identifies one or more laboratory applications and the analysis name columns 1906 shows compatibility with the first scientific device using the naming structure defined above; fig. 19, [0094]. See for example “CAB” and “COX1” in 1904 corresponding to “NIB-test_ABI7900_384” in 1906, which refers to the qPCR Cycler Manufacture 1718, Model 1720, and Plate size 1724 defined in the first qPCR window 1700; figs. 17 & 19, [0086, 0094]);
providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device (Hren disclose execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104 and assigning analysis depends on compatible qPCR cycler manufacturer, model, and software version; [0021, 0134]);
receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration (Hren disclose the protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]); and
receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful (Hren disclose the liquid handlers 104/200 send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from server 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handlers 104/200 send results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 through controller output interface 602; [0041-0042]);
wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful (Hren disclose controller 600 sends results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]), the operations further comprising:
running the second part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch at a second scientific device, wherein the second scientific device is selected, by the user, from the one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory and the second scientific device is different from the first scientific device (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104; [0024]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077], and an assign analysis button 3022 for adding analyses to samples; figs. 30-31; [0133-0134]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations).
Regarding claim 14, Hren disclose the non-transitory machine-readable medium of claim 13 above, the operations further comprising: receiving, from a lab operator client device (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106 having any form factor such as a laptop, desktop, a smart phone, a personal digital assistant, an integrated messaging device, a tablet computer, etc.; [0025]), an operator configuration for the selected laboratory application (Hren disclose the one or more protocol creation devices 106 allow an operator to edit, view, copy, or delete a selected analysis protocol using expand tab 1520; fig. 16, [0082, 0117]), wherein the control signal is for executing the at least the first part of the selected laboratory application in accordance with the admin configuration and the operator configuration (Hren disclose edited analysis applications are saved with a timestamp and the status is set to “Ready” and the analysis is ready for use in creating an experiment; [0117]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]).
Regarding claim 15, Hren disclose a method implemented at one or more servers (Hren disclose a liquid handling system 100; fig. 1, [0021] for implementing methods of figs. 9, 12, 14, 27 via server 102; [0016-0019]), the method comprising:
storing, in a memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples (Hren; database 812 may save, access, and retrieve protocol creation applications 712/810; figs. 7-8, [0063]);
receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106/700 and one or more liquid handlers 104/200/600 configured to interface through network 108; figs. 1 & 7, [0021, 0042, 0047]), a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. When a user selects button 1008 “Create new qPCR experiment” or save button 2308 shown in fig. 23 after creating a new analysis, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 26 that allows the user to select batches of samples using button 2816 or button 2820 to be processed according to the selected protocol; figs. 26-36; [0119-0170]) and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory (Hren disclose different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, via a web software platform (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712 implemented as a Web application; [0055]), one or more configurations of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration (Hren disclose protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067]. When a user selects button 1006 “Manage qPCR analyses”, the user is presented with an interface window shown in fig. 15 that allows the user to search, edit, or create files containing information for analyzing samples according to a protocol; figs. 14-26, [0078-0118]. Different users may access and edit one or more of the qPCR analyses listed in the qPCR analysis table 1502 using a computing device of protocol creation system 104. As a result, another user may not be able to edit a qPCR analysis for which the statis is “In editing”; fig. 16, [0080]);
receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0024, 0037, 0045-0046]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations) and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device (Hren disclose selection of “Manage qPCR button” 1006 on the protocol creation application 712/810 prompts a user with a manage qPCR analysis window 1500; figs. 10 & 15, [0079]. Selecting the tab 1520 “Expand” allows editing an existing analysis using buttons 1600 “Edit” or 1604 “Copy”, and selection of button 1518 “Create new qPCR analysis” allows a user to create of a new analysis; fig. 16; [0082-0084]. Selection of buttons 1518/1600/1604 prompt a user with window 1700 which identifies the first scientific device in dropdown selectors 1718, 1720, 1722 for the laboratory application; [0083-0084, 0086]. Specifically, Hren disclose “In an illustrative embodiment, each analysis name may automatically receive an additional tag composed of an identifier for the selected qPCR cycler manufacturer and a plate size indicator for the selected qPCR manufacturer in the form: “MyFirstAnalysis_ABI7900_384”. This naming structure makes a particular analysis easier to find when assigning an analysis to samples in an experiment workflow especially if a laboratory has different qPCR cyclers”; [0086]. Further, advancing to the second qPCR analysis interface 1800 allows a user to add an assay to the analysis using buttons 1812 “Add New” or 1814 “Add Existing”; fig. 18, [0093]. Upon selecting either button 1812 or 1814, a user is prompted with an Assay Selector interface 1900; [0093]. The Assay Selector interface 1900 comprises an assay name column 1904 and an analysis name column 1906; fig. 19, [0094]. The assay name column 1904 identifies one or more laboratory applications and the analysis name columns 1906 shows compatibility with the first scientific device using the naming structure defined above; fig. 19, [0094]. See for example “CAB” and “COX1” in 1904 corresponding to “NIB-test_ABI7900_384” in 1906, which refers to the qPCR Cycler Manufacture 1718, Model 1720, and Plate size 1724 defined in the first qPCR window 1700; figs. 17 & 19, [0086, 0094]);
providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device (Hren disclose execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104 and assigning analysis depends on compatible qPCR cycler manufacturer, model, and software version; [0021, 0134]);
receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]);
transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing a first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration (Hren disclose the protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]); and
receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful (Hren disclose the liquid handlers 104/200 send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from server 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handlers 104/200 send results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 through controller output interface 602; [0041-0042]);
wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful (Hren disclose controller 600 sends results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102; [0042]), the operations further comprising:
running the second part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch at a second scientific device, wherein the second scientific device is selected, by the user, from the one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory and the second scientific device is different from the first scientific device (Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104; [0024]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077]. The protocol includes a sequence of commands configured to control operation of one or more components of liquid handler 200; [0042]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Batches of samples are added by a user using the add sample button 2816; fig. 28, [0126]. Analysis are assigned to samples using an assign analysis button 3022; fig. 30, [0133]. The protocol creation application 712/810 comprises user interface window 1000; fig. 10, [0067], that allows a user to manage labware using button 1002 and to manage qPCR cyclers using button 1004; figs. 9-13, [0064-0077], and an assign analysis button 3022 for adding analyses to samples; figs. 30-31; [0133-0134]. Accordingly, the system is configurable to perform the claimed operations).
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.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hren and further in view of Haas et al. (US 2009/0247417; already of record – hereinafter “Haas”).
Regarding claim 7, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, the operations further comprising: receiving, upon completion of the selected laboratory application to process the batch, a result of the selected laboratory application to process the batch (Hren disclose the liquid handlers 104/200 send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from server 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handlers 104/200 send results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 through controller output interface 602; [0041-0042]); and providing, to a lab operator client device, the result of the selected laboratory application to process the batch (Hren disclose the liquid handlers 104/200 send and receive signals through network 108 to/from the one or more protocol creation devices 106 and/or to/from server 102; [0024]. Controller 600 of liquid handlers 104/200 send results obtained for a sample for storage on protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 through controller output interface 602; [0041-0042])
Hren does not teach determining whether the result falls within a predefined range or and an indication whether the result falls within the predefined range.
However, Haas teach the analogous art of a system (Haas; fig. 1, #100, [0047]) to perform a laboratory application with a first scientific device (Haas teach an ADME-Tox workcell 110 for conducting experiments and an analyzer station 112 for analyzing and collecting data; fig. 1, [0048]), and determining whether the result falls within a predefined range and an indication whether the result falls within the predefined range (Haas teach a user may define acceptance criteria for an assay result that is above a threshold value, below a threshold value, or within an acceptance window; fig. 7, [0086]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the system of Hren to comprise determining whether the result falls within a predefined range, as in Haas, because Haas teach the acceptance criteria is used to determine if a compound will advance to the next assay; fig. 7. One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success since Hren and Haas both teach systems for performing an assay on a sample.
Regarding claim 8, modified Hren disclose the system of claim 7 above, wherein the result is received from the user via the lab operator client device while the first scientific device is offline (Hren disclose the components of the liquid handling system 100 may be directly connected or connected through network 108 which can be wired and/or public or private network including a cellular network, a local area network, a wide area network such as internet, etc.; [0021-0022]. Accordingly, the network being configured to receive results from the user while the first scientific device is offline).
Claims 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hren and further in view of Dockrill et al. (US 2015/0300931; already of record – hereinafter “Dockrill”).
Regarding claim 11, Hren disclose the system of claim 1 above, comprising the request to run the laboratory application to process the batch.
Hren does not teach wherein the request to run the laboratory application to process the batch comprises at least a scan of a container of a sample, the operations further comprising: identifying the sample based on the scan.
However, Dockrill teach the analogous art of a system (Dockrill; fig. 1, #12, [0052]) comprising one or more scientific devices (Dockrill; fig. 1, #10, [0052]) configured to run a laboratory application to process samples (Dockrill disclose instructions for a controller to treat samples; [0067]) wherein the system is configured to run the laboratory application to process the sample comprises at least a scan of a container of a sample, the operations further comprising: identifying the sample based on the scan (Dockrill disclose an indicia reader 44 which is disposed on the scientific device 10 and configured to read labels disposed on the sample container to receive information indicative of instructions for the controller to treat the sample; fig. 7, [0067]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the sample container and system of Hren to comprise a label and indicia reader, as in Dockrill, because Dockrill teach the label and indicia reader allow the scientific device to perform the laboratory application to process the sample based on instructions received from the label (Dockrill; [0067]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have expected this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success since Hren and Dockrill both teach scientific devices configured to process a batch of samples.
Regarding claim 12, modified Hren teach the system of claim 11 above, wherein identifying the sample comprises applying optical character recognition (OCR) to at least a portion of the scan (The modification of the sample container and system of Hren to comprise a label and indicia reader, as in Dockrill, has previously been discussed in claim 11 above. Dockrill teach the indicia reader applies optical character recognition; [0068]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments filed on 12/26/2025 have been fully considered.
Applicant argue, see pages 7-10 of their remarks, that claim 1 is patentable under Step 2A Prong One of the 101 rejection because the claimed system as a whole is outside the categories of (1) observations, (2) evaluations, (3) judgements, and (4) opinions. Applicant argues the claims are suited to solve a specific technological problem which includes identifying applications that are incompatible with the current lab configuration and either hide those applications or suggest how to address that problems. Applicant argues the claims recite a concrete technological solution that includes specialized hardware and interrelated operations for managing laboratory sample process workflows which simply cannot reasonably be performed in the human mind using pen and paper or by a black box computer. Applicant argues the system’s operation includes the ability to store, transmit, and process data between scientific devices, which cannot be performed in the human mind or with pen and paper.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Step 2A prong One is directed toward identifying the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract idea in the claims. Independent claim 1 recites the abstract idea(s) “storing, in the memory, a set of laboratory applications to process batches of samples”, “receiving, from a first lab administrator client device associated with a first laboratory, a selection of a first subset of the laboratory applications to process the batches of samples in the first laboratory and an admin configuration for at least one laboratory application in the first subset for use in the first laboratory”, “receiving, via a web software platform, one or more configuration of one or more batches to be used for running at least a portion of the first subset of laboratory applications configured according to the admin configuration”, “receiving, from a first scientific device in the first laboratory, a request to run a laboratory application from the first subset to process a batch, wherein the laboratory application includes a first part and a second part and the first scientific device is selected, by a user, from one or more scientific devices in the first laboratory”, “identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device”, “providing, in response to the request, the compatible one or more laboratory applications from the first subset that are capable of being executed using the first scientific device”, “receiving, from the first scientific device, a selected laboratory application from the compatible one or more laboratory applications”, “transmitting, to the first scientific device, a control signal for executing the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch in accordance with the admin configuration”, and “receiving, from the first scientific device, a result signal indicating whether executing at least the first part of the selected laboratory application to process the batch was successful; wherein the result signal indicates that the first part of the selected batch was successful”. The abstract idea(s) is/are of the type that is in the grouping of “mental process” (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2) subsection (III)) because storing, receiving, and identifying information could be performed in the mind while transmitting information could be performed with pen and paper, or with a general-purpose computer. Specifically, a user or laboratory technician could easily, in their mind or with pen and paper, observe a set/subset of laboratory applications associated with samples and equipment, observe an admin configuration, observe a request to run an application, judge compatibility between an application and a scientific device, provide an evaluation of the compatibility, request processing of an order, and observe a result and evaluate whether the result was successful. MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)III is clear that using a computer/controller to perform the abstract idea does not preclude the steps from being considered an abstract idea.
Applicant argues on pages 10-14 of their remarks that claim 1 is patentable under Step 2A Prong Two of the 101 rejection because claim 1 integrates the alleged exception into a practical application. Specifically, applicant argues the system (i) identifies applications that are incompatible with the current lab configuration and either hide those applications or suggest how to address the problem and (ii) stores the protocols on the cloud server simplifying the administration and control of the protocols since a lab admin need only define and maintain single copy of any particular protocol, thus improving the efficiency of the system as there are fewer applications for the scientific device to select from, and the risk of a scientific device attempting to run an incompatible application is reduced.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The additional elements recited in the claims are interpreted as mere instructions to apply an exception, 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. The memory to store information does 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. Receiving and transmitting data over a network has been recognized as a generic computer function that is well-understood, routine, and conventional function. Further, identifying compatibility 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. (see MPEP § 2106.05(c), Particular Transformation, MPEP § 2106.05(d), Well-Understood, Routine, Conventional Activity, MPEP § 2106.05(f), Mere Instruction To Apply An Exception, MPEP § 2106.05(g), Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity, and MPEP § 2106.05(h), Field of Use and Technological Environment). In summary, outside of the abstract idea, the claim is generally a network of laboratory equipment configured to access a server to process samples where many conventional automatic analyzers would perform these processes. Additionally, identifying compatibility with a device alone does not lead to an alleged improvement because all systems comprising scientific devices would aim to ensure compatibility, and the abstract idea (identifying/transmitting/receiving/storing) itself cannot be the alleged improvement in a particular technology. See MPEP 2106.05(a) paragraphs 4-7. Further, the general purpose computer is not transformed in any way and is being used in its normal capacity.
Applicant argues on pages 14-16 of their remarks that claim 1 is patentable under Step 2B of the 101 rejection(s) because claim 1 amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Step 2B examines the additional elements (aside from the abstract idea) be considered as to whether they are well-understood routine and conventional in the art. In this case, the additional elements of processing circuity of one or more servers, a memory, batches of samples, a first lab administrator client device, a first scientific devices and a second scientific device in a laboratory for performing processing on the batch of samples. These additional elements do not amount to significantly more as they are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art as evidenced by Hren et al. (US 2015/0100155 – hereinafter “Hren”) and Fava et al. (US 2002/0147515 – hereinafter “Fava”). Hren and Fava teach processing circuitry of one or more servers (Hren; Hren; processor 808 for server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058] & Fara; workcell system comprising process controller and laboratory information system; fig 1, [0015]), a memory (Hren; computer readable medium 806 and database 812 of server 102; figs. 1 & 8, [0058] & Fava; protocols stored in the protocol database; [0044]), batches of samples (Hren; [0024] & Fava; [0031]), a first lab administrator client device, a first scientific device and a second scientific device in a laboratory for performing processing on the batch of samples (Hren disclose one or more protocol creation devices 106/700 and one or more liquid handlers 104/200/600 configured to interface through network 108; figs. 1 & 7, [0021, 0037, 0042, 0045-0047] & Fava; figs. 1-2, Resources R1, R1, … RN, [0015, 0017]). Therefore, the additional elements in the claims do not amount to significantly more than well-understood, routine, and conventional activities in the art.
Applicant argues on pages 17-20 towards the prior art rejection that Hren does not teach or suggest (1) the amended limitations recited in claim 1 including “identifying one or more laboratory applications compatible with the first scientific device”, and that, (2) in Hren, the protocol creation process occurs on the protocol creation device, and a user interacts with the protocol creation application through user interface windows on a separate computing device. The user then manually selects samples and analysis through various interface windows. The completed protocol is transmitted to the liquid handler for execution and thus, the liquid handler in Hren receives a protocol for execution not applications from which to select.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Regarding (1), Hren disclose selection of “Manage qPCR button” 1006 on the protocol creation application 712/810 prompts a user with a manage qPCR analysis window 1500; figs. 10 & 15, [0079]. Selecting the tab 1520 “Expand” allows editing an existing analysis using buttons 1600 “Edit” or 1604 “Copy”, and selection of button 1518 “Create new qPCR analysis” allows a user to create of a new analysis; fig. 16; [0082-0084]. Selection of buttons 1518/1600/1604 prompt a user with window 1700 which identifies the first scientific device in dropdown selectors 1718, 1720, 1722 for the laboratory application; [0083-0084, 0086]. Specifically, Hren disclose “In an illustrative embodiment, each analysis name may automatically receive an additional tag composed of an identifier for the selected qPCR cycler manufacturer and a plate size indicator for the selected qPCR manufacturer in the form: “MyFirstAnalysis_ABI7900_384”. This naming structure makes a particular analysis easier to find when assigning an analysis to samples in an experiment workflow especially if a laboratory has different qPCR cyclers”; [0086]. Further, advancing to the second qPCR analysis interface 1800 allows a user to add an assay to the analysis using buttons 1812 “Add New” or 1814 “Add Existing”; fig. 18, [0093]. Upon selecting either button 1812 or 1814, a user is prompted with an Assay Selector interface 1900; [0093]. The Assay Selector interface 1900 comprises an assay name column 1904 and an analysis name column 1906; fig. 19, [0094]. The assay name column 1904 identifies one or more laboratory applications and the analysis name columns 1906 shows compatibility with the first scientific device using the naming structure defined above; fig. 19, [0094]. See for example “CAB” and “COX1” in 1904 corresponding to “NIB-test_ABI7900_384” in 1906, which refers to the qPCR Cycler Manufacture 1718, Model 1720, and Plate size 1724 defined in the first qPCR window 1700; figs. 17 & 19, [0086, 0094].
Regarding (2), Hren disclose one or more liquid handlers 104/200 that comprise control 600 having a control application 610; figs. 1 & 6, [0021, 0037, 0045-0046]. The control application 610 and protocol creation application 712/810 are the same application supporting all of the same types of functionalities; [0062]. Execution of a protocol received from protocol creation system 104 and/or server 102 may be controlled by control application 610 either automatically when the protocol is received or under control of a user through an interface provided to allow the user to select the protocol for execution; [0046]. Accordingly, Hren disclose receiving, from a first scientific device, a request to run a laboratory application form the first subset to process a batch.
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 a system comprising one or more laboratory devices networked together to process batches of samples, and storage medium with preconfigured process routes to generate instructions.
Yano (US 2012/0179405) disclose a system comprising multiple laboratory devices networked together and configured to transmit/receive data to provide information on compatibility with a particular laboratory application.
Akutsu (US 2016/0244269) disclose a system comprising one or more laboratory devices networked together to process batches of samples and configured to transmit/receive information.
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