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 .
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: memorizing unit(s) in claims 1, 3, 4, 7 and 8.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 in line 5 recites “a receiver” and claim 1 recites the data management device comprises “a receiver.” Claim 3 is therefore unclear if the receiver recited in claim 3 is the same or different from the receiver recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, they are interpreted to be the same.
Claim 3 in line 5 recites “a memorizing unit” and claim 1 recites the data management device comprises “one or more memorizing units.” Claim 3 is therefore unclear if the memorizing unit recited in claim 3 is the same or different from the one or more memorizing units recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, they are interpreted to be the same.
Claim 4 in line 8 recites “a receiver” and claim 1 recites the data management device comprises “a receiver.” Claim 3 is therefore unclear if the receiver recited in claim 3 is the same or different from the receiver recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, they are interpreted to be the same.
Claim 4 in line 9 recites “a memorizing unit” and claim 1 recites the data management device comprises “one or more memorizing units.” Claim 3 is therefore unclear if the memorizing unit recited in claim 3 is the same or different from the one or more memorizing units recited in claim 1. For examination purposes, they are interpreted to be the same.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by United States Application Publication No. 2018/0320127, hereinafter Cannon.
Regarding claim 1, Cannon teaches a cell culture management system (figure 5) comprising: a data management device (items 406 and 422); an output data server (item 404) provided in a first cultural device (paragraphs [0079] and [0087]) for culturing a first kind of cells (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)); a customer server (item 402) provided in a second cultural device (paragraphs [0079] and [0087]) for culturing a second kind of cells (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)); and a cell management server (item 414) provided in a cell management compartment (figure 5) where the second kind of cells are stored (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)), wherein: the data management device (item 406) is connected to and in bidirectional communication with each of the output data server (item 404), the customer server (item 402), and the cell management server (item 414) (figure 5 and paragraphs [0091]-[0093]); the output data server (item 404) comprises: a transmitter (paragraph [0092]) for transmitting a first protocol for culturing the first kind of cells to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0092]); the customer server (item 402) comprises: one or more transmitters (paragraph [0088]) for transmitting order information for obtaining the second kind of cells and location information of the second cultural device to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and a receiver (paragraphs [0088] and [0091])for receiving a second protocol for culturing the second kind of cells from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); the data management device (item 406) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0092]) for receiving the first protocol from the output data server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0092]); and a receiver (paragraph [0091]) for receiving the order information and the location information of the second cultural device from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and one or more memorizing units (item 422) that memorize the first protocol received from the output data server, the second protocol, the order information and the location information of the second cultural device received from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0098]); and the cell management server (item 414) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0093]) for receiving the order information and the location information of the second bioreactor from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0093]).
Regarding claim 2, Cannon teaches wherein the output data server (item 404) comprises a receiver (paragraph [0092]) for receiving a third protocol for culturing a third kind of cells from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0092]).
Regarding claim 3, Cannon teaches the customer server (item 402) comprises a transmitter (paragraph [0091]) for transmitting an estimated culture data obtained from a cell sensor disposed in the second cultural device to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0091]); and the data management device (item 406) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0088]) for receiving the estimated culture data transmitted from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and a memorizing unit (item 422) that memorizes the estimated culture data received from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0098]).
Regarding claim 4, Cannon teaches the cell management server (item 414) comprises: a memorizing unit (item 420) for memorizing inventory information for cells present in the cell management compartment (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0094]); and a transmitter (paragraph [0093]) for transmitting the inventory information to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0093]); and the data management device (item 406) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0088]) for receiving the inventory information transmitted from the cell management server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and a memorizing unit (item 422) for memorizing the inventory information that has been received (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0098]).
Regarding claim 5, Cannon teaches a cell culture management system (figure 5) comprising: an output data server (item 404) provided in a first cultural device (paragraphs [0079] and [0087]) for culturing a first kind of cells (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)); a customer server (item 402) provided in a second cultural device (paragraphs [0079] and [0087]) for culturing a second kind of cells (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)); and a cell management server (item 414) provided in a cell management compartment (figure 5) where the second kind of cells are stored (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)), wherein: the output data server (item 404), the customer server (item 402), and the cell management server (item 414) are each connected to and in bidirectional communication with a data management device (figure 5 and paragraphs [0091]-[0093]); the output data server (item 404) comprises: a transmitter (paragraph [0092]) for transmitting a first protocol for culturing the first kind of cells to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0092]); the customer server (item 402) comprises: one or more transmitters (paragraph [0088]) for transmitting order information for obtaining the second kind of cells and location information of the second cultural device to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0088]); and a receiver (paragraphs [0088] and [0091]) for receiving a second protocol for culturing the second kind of cells from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and the cell management server (item 414) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0093]) for receiving the order information and the location information of the second cultural device from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0093]).
Regarding claim 6, Cannon teaches wherein the output data server (item 404) comprises a receiver (paragraph [0092]) for receiving a third protocol for culturing a third kind of cells from the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0092]).
Regarding claim 7, Cannon teaches the customer server (item 402) comprises a transmitter (paragraph [0091]) for transmitting an estimated culture data obtained from a cell sensor disposed in the second cultural device to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0091]); and the data management device (item 406) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0088]) for receiving the estimated culture data transmitted from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and a memorizing unit (item 422) that memorizes the estimated culture data received from the customer server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0098]). The examiner notes that the data management device is not positively claimed and therefore any limitation on the data management device has minimal patentable weight (MPEP § 2115).
Regarding claim 8, Cannon teaches the cell management server (item 414) comprises: a memorizing unit (item 420) for memorizing inventory information for cells present in the cell management compartment (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0094]); and a transmitter (paragraph [0093]) for transmitting the inventory information to the data management device (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0093]); and the data management device (item 406) comprises: a receiver (paragraph [0088]) for receiving the inventory information transmitted from the cell management server (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraphs [0088] and [0091]); and a memorizing unit (item 422) for memorizing the inventory information that has been received (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and is taught in paragraph [0098]). The examiner notes that the data management device is not positively claimed and therefore any limitation on the data management device has minimal patentable weight (MPEP § 2115).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW D KRCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-0386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571)270-7698. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW D KRCHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796