DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Regarding independent claim 1, Applicant asserts that this claim is allowable because it has been amended so as to incorporate the limitations of claims 11 and 27. In the prior Office Action, claims 11 and 27 were objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. However, neither claim 11 nor claim 27 were dependent on independent claim 1. These dependent claims were indicated as allowable based on the claim environment of the underlying base claims. The Examiner notes that the claim environment of independent claim 1 is different than that of independent claims 9 and 26, respectively. For example, claim 1 is in some respects broader as it does not require a plurality of microwells each having an actuable tissue attachment structure therein, or a controller. Therefore, incorporating the subject matter of claims 11 and 27 into independent claim 1 does not necessarily place claim 1 into condition for allowance. As will be discussed in greater detail in the modified grounds of rejection below, Flannery et al. (Development of an Automated, Uniaxial Tension System for Mechanically Active Tissue Culture) discloses each and every limitation according to claim 1 as amended. Applicant has not provided any specific arguments as why Flannery et al. would not anticipated claim 1 as amended.
Applicant’s amendments dated 03/09/2026 have overcome the previous rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jaiswal et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0253992).
Regarding independent claims 9 and 26, respectively, the amendments dated 03/09/2026 have overcome the previous rejection rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jaiswal et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0253992) in view of Akra et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0038258) and Reich et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0362560).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 4-5, and 20-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Flannery et al. (Development of an Automated, Uniaxial Tension System for Mechanically Active Tissue Culture) (already of record).
Regarding claim 1, Flannery et al. discloses a cardio tissue testing system (Abstract, p. 65 para. 2-3) (Fig. 16, p. 65) comprising:
an actuator comprising an electromagnet (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65);
a chamber operably coupled to the actuator (called Box 2; the electromagnet actuator is configured to cause a moving post to move to achieve stretching of a cardio tissue construct within Box 2 thereby fulfilling the limitation of operably coupled) (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65) and sized to receive a cardio tissue construct (Abstract, p. 65 para. 2-3) (Fig. 16, p. 65);
a stationary tissue attachment structure (comprising fixed post) disposed within the chamber at a first end of the chamber (p. 65 para. 3) (Fig. 16, p. 65); and
an actuable tissue attachment structure (comprising sliding post) disposed within the chamber at a second end of the chamber (p. 65 para. 3) (Fig. 16, p. 65), the actuable tissue attachment structure comprising an untensioned slidable piston (the prior art sliding post reads on a piston as it slides within a chamber; the reference is devoid of mention of this sliding post being tensioned in any way, see p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1, thus fulfilling the limitation of the structure being untensioned) and a magnet attached to the slidable piston (p. 65 para. 3), wherein the slidable piston is slidable along a length of the chamber (p. 65 para. 3-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Regarding claim 4, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the slidable piston comprises a piston body (Fig. 16, p. 65) and a body attachment structure (e.g., structures for attaching the sutures, see p. 65 para. 3 and p. 44 para. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the slidable piston is actuable by a magnetic field being applied to the magnet (p. 65 para. 3-p. 66 para. 1).
Regarding claim 20, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the slidable piston comprises a piston body (Fig. 16, p. 65) and a body attachment structure configured to affix a cardio tissue construct (e.g., structures for attaching the sutures, see Abstract, p. 65 para. 3 and p. 44 para. 2).
Regarding claim 21, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the body attachment structure is positioned to engage an end of the cardio tissue construct opposite the stationary tissue attachment structure (p. 65 para. 3) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Regarding claim 22, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the slidable piston is configured to move away from and toward the stationary tissue attachment structure to cyclically stretch a cardio tissue construct disposed in the chamber (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Regarding claim 23, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the slidable piston is guided for linear sliding along a longitudinal axis of the chamber (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Regarding claim 24, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the magnetic field is produced by the electromagnet (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Regarding claim 25, Flannery et al. discloses wherein the chamber is sized and shaped to maintain the cardio tissue construct aligned along an axis between the stationary tissue attachment structure and the actuable tissue attachment structure (p. 65 para. 2-p. 66 para. 1) (Fig. 16, p. 65).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9, 26, and 28-36 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding independent claim 9, Jaiswal et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0253992) in view of Akra et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0038258) and Reich et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0362560) provides the closest prior art, as discussed in the prior Office Action dated 12/09/2025. However, the prior art combination is silent as to wherein the actuator comprises an electromagnet and wherein a magnet is attached to the slidable piston. The prior art of record does not disclose, teach, or suggest the noted limitation, within the claim environment.
Regarding independent claim 26, Jaiswal et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2021/0253992) in view of Akra et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2014/0038258) and Reich et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2017/0362560) provides the closest prior art, as discussed in the prior Office Action dated 12/09/2025. However, the prior art combination is silent as to wherein the actuator comprises an electromagnet and wherein a magnet is attached to the slidable piston. The prior art of record does not disclose, teach, or suggest the noted limitation, within the claim environment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY KIPOUROS whose telephone number is (571)272-0658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30-5PM.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at 5712721374. 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.
/HOLLY KIPOUROS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799