DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 10 June 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Rejections under 35 USC § 112(a)
By amendment the rejections under 35 USC § 112(a) have been overcome.
Rejections under 35 USC § 112(b)
The amendment does not overcome the indefinite rejection. Specifically, the result of urging ions through the second region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the first region, thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the first region of the ion guide to the second region is not tied to the relative amplitudes and/or speeds of first and second ion guides. Therefore, is not clear whether the claimed result is because of the relative speeds/amplitudes of DC voltages in the first and second regions or if there is some other operation of the ion guide that allows for the result to occur.
Rejections under 35 USC § 102: Ibrahim/Garmella et al.
Ibrahim teaches a slower speed in the second region, therefore the claims have been amended to overcome the rejection in view of Ibrahim. However, Ibrahim teaches a loop therefore, interpreting the first region as the compression region and the second region as the normal region (see fig. 11), the DC voltage travels through the normal region (second region at a faster speed).
Garmella teaches a similar method and is reinterpreted in the same manner as discussed herein below.
Rejections under 35 USC § 102: DeBord
The remarks take the position that DeBord only teaches a single region. This has not been found persuasive. The instant claims provide no physical requirement of any boundary to the claimed “first region” and “second region”. Therefore, each region is interpreted as an region in space. Figure 5A clearly shows a space that may be divided into regions (i.e. region of space). Paragraph [0055] teaches “The electrodes of the first surface 103 can generate a potential waveform 502 that can travel from a first end 504 to the second end 506”. That is, the left half of the surface with electrodes is interpreted to be the first region and the right half is interpreted to be the second region. Therefore the regions are adjacent to each other. Moreover, as clear from paragraph [0057] the variation of the speed of the traveling potential occurs during the separation time or experiment time. The variation occurs when an ion packet with high mobility ions exits the LIM device 104. Specifically “before an ion packet has exited the SLIM device 104 (e.g., during a fixed speed segment of the separation time) the traveling potential can travel at a fixed speed. After the ion packet 512 exits the SLIM device 104 and is detected by the mass spectrometer 106, the controller 108 can begin varying the speed of the traveling potential waveform.”
In other words, ions 514/516 undergo the fixed speed in the first region (i.e. left side of surface electrodes 103 in figure 5a) and then as they travel (i.e. due to the fixed traveling speed) to a further downstream location (at a point in time when 512 exits SLIM), the speed is varied (i.e. in the second region).
The claim in no way precludes the transient DC voltage to initially be applied to all electrodes at a first amplitude and speed and to be applied to all electrodes at a later point the transient DC voltage applied at a second amplitude lower or a faster speed. The claim only requires that there are two adjacent regions and a lower amplitude or higher speed of the transient DC voltage to be applied to the second region.
In this case DeBord teaches ions 514/516 in a region where a transient DC voltage is applied at a fixed speed, then when higher mobility ion 512 exits the speed is varied (necessarily requiring ions 514/516 to be at a different location interpreted as the second region). The speed in the adjacent region receives the varied speed, thus meeting the claim requirements.
Therefore the remarks have been found unpersuasive and the rejection stands as reiterated herein below.
The remarks with respect to claim 4 have been found persuasive.
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 1, 3-15 and 19 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 1 is vague and indefinite for requiring “wherein the transient DC voltage is travelled along the second region…whilst having a second amplitude that is lower than said first amplitude and/or a second non zero speed that is higher than said first speed… so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said second region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the first region, thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the first region of the ion guide to the second region.”
Specifically, the claim requires the result of driving ions at a lower average speed to cause the ions to be spatially compressed merely by changing one or more of three parameters of the voltage travelling along the second region. MPEP 2173.05(g) recites “ when claims merely recite a description of a problem to be solved or a function or result achieved by the invention, the boundaries of the claim scope may be unclear. Halliburton Energy Servs., Inc. v. M-I LLC, 514 F.3d 1244, 1255, 85 USPQ2d 1654, 1663 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (noting that the Supreme Court explained that a vice of functional claiming occurs "when the inventor is painstaking when he recites what has already been seen, and then uses conveniently functional language at the exact point of novelty"”
Here it is not clear whether the claim scope covers the change of parameters achieves the claimed result or if the claim result is achieved by some other aspect of the ion guide.
Claims 3-15 and 19 are vague and indefinite by virtue of their dependencies
Additionally claim 8 requires a similar result which is vague and indefinite for the same reasons above.
Claim 19 is the apparatus of claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons discussed above.
Additionally, claim 19 requires redefines many elements defined in claim 1. It is not clear whether these are separate elements are the same as defined in claim 1. It appears that they are the same. For the purposes of examination “a first amplitude”, “a first region”, a second region, etc… are interpreted as “the” referring back to the limitations previously defined in claim 1.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, 12-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ibrahim et al. (US pgPub 20170336355)
Regarding claim 1, Ibrahim et al. teach a method of separating ions according to a physicochemical property (ion mobility, fig. 1 and paragraph [0048]), comprising:
repeatedly travelling a transient DC voltage along an ion guide (definition of traveling wave separations see paragraph [0003], electrodes discussed in paragraph [0051], wherein the electrodes are interpreted to be the ion guide for separations);
wherein the transient DC voltage has a first amplitude and first speed whilst it travels along a first region of the ion guide ([0048] teaches modifying the TW so that it stops intermittently. Figure 11 shows compression (i.e. intermittent TW) in a graph of time vs amplitude. The amplitude is separated by constant units of time, therefore the speed is constant and amplitude is constant. Figure 8C shaded compression region is interpreted as the first region) so as to urge ions having different values of said physicochemical property through said first region of the ion guide with different average speeds (initially, this is a result. Since Ibrahim teaches applying a first amplitude and first speed DC voltage to a first region of the ion guide, the result is understood to be inherent. See MPEP 2112 (II) discussed herein below. Alternatively, [0046] teaches stuttering recoups ions into fewer mobility bins, wherein the bin is defined as one of the trapping regions between two waves resulting in binning of ions of same or very similar mobilities (i.e. urging ions of different mobility values with different speeds (defined by bins of similar mobility))); and
wherein the ion guide comprises a plurality of electrodes spaced along its longitudinal axis (48 electrodes disclosed in paragraph [0051], wherein paragraph [0058] teaches variations, thus electrodes required in figure 8C) and each time the transient DC voltage is travelled along the ion guide, the transient DC voltage is successively applied to different electrodes (as illustrated in figure 1 as applied to figure 8C), along a second region of the ion guide so that the transient DC voltage moves along the second region of the ion guide with a substantially constant speed (fig. 8C, unshaded IMS separation region as indicated by paragraph [0058]1 and paragraph [0003] teaches TW moves forward depending on the speed of motion of the TW—thus first speed [0003] either ions stay within the valley (i.e. at the speed of the TW) or roll over the wave to fall back (slower speed ions), thus urge ions having different ion mobilities through IMS drift region with different average speeds. Figure 11 shows the normal mode time vs amplitude having a constant speed).
wherein the transient DC voltage is travelled along the second region (unshaded region of figure 8C is the normal region, applied with voltages such as seen in figure 11, DC voltages discussed in paragraph [0003]) in the same direction as it travels along the first region(figure 8c see annotated figure below)
PNG
media_image1.png
425
917
media_image1.png
Greyscale
(ii) at a second non-zero speed that is higher than the first speed (figure 11 shows shorter durations between application of voltage in the normal region (i.e. unshaded region of figure 3), thus a faster speed for the TW applied to normal region); so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said second region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the first region, thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the first region of the ion guide to the second region (this is a claimed result. Since Ibrahim teaches two regions, wherein the second region is applied a higher speed voltage, the result is deemed inherent. MPEP 2112 (II) recites “There is no requirement that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the inherent disclosure at the relevant time, but only that the subject matter is in fact inherent in the prior art reference. Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. Inc., 339 F.3d 1373, 1377, 67 USPQ2d 1664, 1668 (Fed. Cir. 2003)”. Here, the claim suggests that an IMS having two regions, wherein the first region is applied a slower speed transient DC voltage and the second region is applied a faster transient DC voltage the result will occur. Since Ibrahim teaches the active steps required by the claim the result is inherent even if not recognized by Ibrahim).
Regarding claim 3, Ibrahim teaches wherein the duration of time between the transient DC voltage being applied to any given one of the electrodes in the second region and the next electrode in the second region that it is applied to is substantially the same whilst the transient DC voltage moves along the second region of the ion guide (see duty cycle applied to compressor in figure 7 showing the duration of time between DC voltage applied to any give electrode in the second region and the next electrode in the second region is substantially the same while the transient DC voltage moves along the second region of the ion guide).
Regarding claim 4, Ibrahim teaches wherein the transient DC voltage having the first amplitude and the first speed is travelled along the first region of the ion guide whilst the transient DC voltage having the second speed is travelled along the second region of the ion guide (figure 8c shows first region (shaded compressor region) receiving the stutter waveform of figure 11 and figure 8c shows second region (unshaped normal region) receiving the faster voltage waveform of figure 11)
Regarding claim 12, Ibrahim teaches wherein the transient DC voltage travels along a third region of the ion guide adjacent to and downstream of said second region (fig. 13d, by reversal the upstream compressor is downstream of the first compressor applied to the compressor of figure 8b) so as to urge ions having different values of said physicochemical property through said third region with different average speeds (fig. 13 applied to figures 8b or 8c, third and fourth region seen below).
PNG
media_image2.png
685
935
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Ibrahim teaches wherein the ion guide comprises a fourth region that is adjacent to and downstream of said third region and wherein, in one mode, the transient DC voltage has an amplitude and/or non-zero speed along a fourth region that is different to its amplitude and/or non-zero speed in the third region so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said fourth region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the third region, thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the third region of the ion guide to the fourth region (same process repeated in upstream compressor and reversal of figure 13 as applied to figures 8b, see annotated figure above).
Regarding claim 14, Ibrahim teaches wherein the ion guide is a closed-loop ion guide and the ions are urged around the closed-loop ion guide by the transient DC voltage a plurality of times (as seen in figures 8b or 8c).
Regarding claim 15, Ibrahim teaches wherein ions are urged along the ion guide such that the same ions pass through the second region multiple times, and wherein the second region is operated in the first mode each of said multiple times such that the ions are spatially compressed as they pass into the second region (figs. 13a-d repeated see paragraph [0063] applied to figure 8b).
Claim 19 is the apparatus of claim 1 and is anticipated in the citations discussed above.
Claims 1, 3, 6-8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by DeBord (US pgPub 2021/0080429).
Regarding claim 1 DeBord et al. teach a method of separating ions according to a physicochemical property (ion mobility, [0002]), comprising:
repeatedly travelling a transient DC voltage along an ion guide (potential waveform 502 travels from first end to second end of electrodes on the first surface see figure 5a and paragraph [0055], wherein traveling wave can include DC voltage signals ([0050]));
wherein the transient DC voltage has a first amplitude and first speed whilst it travels along a first region of the ion guide (amplitude fixed as seen in figure 5a, paragraph [0057] which teaches an initial fixed speed before variation. First region interpreted to be the region where ion packets 514/516 reside in SLIM device before and after ion packet 512 exits and is detected) so as to urge ions having different values of said physicochemical property through said first region of the ion guide with different average speeds ([0055] ions with mobility similar to speed of travelling travel with TW, while ions of lower mobility slip and do not keep up); and
wherein the ion guide comprises a plurality of electrodes spaced along its longitudinal axis (electrodes of 103, see paragraph [0055]) and each time the transient DC voltage is travelled along the ion guide, the transient DC voltage is successively applied to different electrodes ([0055]), along a second region of the ion guide so that the transient DC voltage moves along the second region of the ion guide with a substantially constant speed (second region at the position where ions 514/516 in 103 after variation of speed [0057]. Because ions continue to travel down IMS when the speed is changed the ions 514/516 are in a second region. The speed is matched to ion mobility ([0060]), thus for each ion packet 514 and 516 there is a region where the travelling wave matches the mobility speed. Note packets have different widths due to speed of the TW. Thus, when matching the speed to ion packet 514 after 512 is detected, the TW is constant to match the speed of the ion packet 514.).
wherein the transient DC voltage is travelled along the second region in the same direction as it travels along the first region (as seen in figure 5a) (i) amplitude that is lower than said first amplitude ([0062] and fig. 8); and/or (ii) at a second non-zero speed that is higher than said first speed ([0060] teaches decreasing TW speed to match the TW speed to the lower mobility of ions. Paragraph [0055] teaches lower mobility ions slip with faster speeds (i.e. cannot keep up), thus the matched speed is a different speed than the first fixed speed of paragraph [0057]); so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said second region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the first region ([0055] teaches lower mobility ions slip when 512 is moved by TW of fixed speed ([0057]). Therefore, the decreased speed matched to mobility of ion packet urges the ions of lower mobility at a lower average speed of the TW decreased to match the mobility), thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the first region of the ion guide to the second region (figure 5C shows spatial compression (peak narrowing) as compared to ions 516/514 which are broader in figures 5A-5B. That is, all of peaks 512-516 are seen within the IMS in figure 5A after initial peak 512 passes out of IMS and is detected, the speed is decreased ([0057], [0060]). As packets 514 and 516 continue to move through IMS by varied speed of TW (i.e. to second region), they undergo peak narrowing, thus spatial compression).
Regarding claim 3, DeBord teaches wherein (i) the transient DC voltage is applied to each of said different electrodes, for substantially the same period of time (fixed speed see paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 6, DeBord teaches herein a gas is present in the ion guide with which ions collide (background gas, see paragraph [0003], wherein ions inherently collide with a gas in the IMS) when they are urged through the ion guide by the transient DC voltage (see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 7, DeBord teaches wherein the physicochemical property is ion mobility or mass to charge ratio (ion mobility see claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 8, DeBord teaches wherein the transient DC voltage is travelled along the second region whilst having the different amplitude and or second different non-zero speed in a first mode (see discussion above in claim 1); and
wherein the method further comprises switching to a second mode in which each time the transient DC voltage travels along the second region of the ion guide it has a third amplitude that is higher than the second amplitude, and/or a third non-zero speed that is lower than the second non-zero speed (progressively decreasing the traveling wave speed for each of the three peaks ([0057] and [0060])) so that the spatially compressed ions, having any given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said second region of the ion guide at a higher average speed than they are urged through the second region in the first mode (see discussion above with respect to claim 1 as applied to third peak).
Claims 1, 10-15 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Garimella et al. (“squeezing of ion populations and peaks in traveling wave ion mobility separations and structures for lossless ion manipulations using compression ratio ion mobility programming”, submitted with IDS of 15 September 2022).
Regarding claim 1, Garimella teaches method of separating ions according to a physicochemical property (title, IMS), comprising:
repeatedly travelling a transient DC voltage along an ion guide (inherent to TW-IMS);
wherein the transient DC voltage has a first amplitude and first speed whilst it travels along a first region of the ion guide (stuttering trap ST, see figure 3 ST, see figure 3, having a first amplitude of 50 V, wherein time vs amplitude shows the speed of ST to be constant) so as to urge ions having different values of said physicochemical property through said first region of the ion guide with different average speeds (2112 (II) note this is a claimed result since Garimella teaches a first amplitude and speed the result is inherent. Alternativelypage11880, right column first paragraph teaches TT speed greater than some threshold ions have a mobility-dependent probability of being passed over by a wave, leading to separation and second paragraph teaches redistributing into smaller numbers (i.e. separated by mobility groups or different average speeds));
wherein the ion guide comprises a plurality of electrodes spaced along its longitudinal axis and each time the transient DC voltage is travelled along the ion guide (fig. 3, note caption), the transient DC voltage is successively applied to different electrodes (see caption of figure 3), along a second region (TTT, see figure 3) of the ion guide that is adjacent to said first region so that the transient DC voltage moves along the second region of the ion guide with a substantially constant speed (fig. 3 shows compression having a pulsed amplitude over a time in ms, thus a constant speed);
PNG
media_image3.png
435
522
media_image3.png
Greyscale
wherein the transient DC voltage is travelled along the second region in the same direction as it travels along the first region (as seen in figure 3): (ii) at a second non-zero speed higher than the first speed (speed in compression region different from speed in normal region); so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said second region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the first region, thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as the pass from the first region (i.e. compression) of the ion guide to the second region (normal) (MPEP 2112(II) see discussion above with respect to Ibrihim).
Regarding claim 10, Graimella teaches wherein the second mode causes ions to separate according to said physicochemical property within the second region of the ion guide at a higher rate than in the first mode (in switched back to normal mode the higher frequency/speed of the TW will inherently separate at a higher rate than in the ST compression mode that has an intermittent (i.e. slower lower frequency)).
Regarding claim 11, Graimella teaches performing said first mode until a plurality of groups of ions having different respective values of said physicochemical property have entered the second region of the ion guide and have been spatially compressed, and then switching to the second mode whilst the plurality of groups of ions are still located within the second region of the ion guide (as seen in figure 3 and page 11879, right column, see citation above).
Regarding claim 12, Graimella teaches wherein the transient DC voltage travels along a third region of the ion guide adjacent to and downstream of said second region (fig. 3b, right panel, normal region adjacent to compressor region) so as to urge ions having different values of said physicochemical property through said third region with different average speeds (implicit in the return to normal operation).
Regarding claim 13, Graimella teaches wherein the ion guide comprises a fourth region that is adjacent to and downstream of said third region (page 11879, right column teaches CRIMP can involve multiple compression events during the course of multipass IM separations, thus envisioning a fourth region via multipass) and wherein, in one mode, the transient DC voltage has an amplitude and/or non-zero speed along a fourth region that is different to its amplitude and/or non-zero speed in the third region (additional compression after normal TT operation) so that ions having a given value of said physicochemical property are urged through said fourth region of the ion guide at a lower average speed than they are urged through the third region (same rational as claim 1 applied to multipass configuration), thereby causing the ions to be spatially compressed as they pass from the third region of the ion guide to the fourth region (applied to the multipass configuration).
Regarding claim 14, Ibrahim teaches wherein the ion guide is a closed-loop ion guide and the ions are urged around the closed-loop ion guide by the transient DC voltage a plurality of times (multipass is a closed loop).
Regarding claim 15, Ibrahim teaches wherein ions are urged along the ion guide such that the same ions pass through the second region multiple times, and wherein the second region is operated in the first mode each of said multiple times such that the ions are spatially compressed as they pass into the second region (figure 3b right panel and page 11879, right column suggesting multipass for multiple compression events).
Claim 19 is the apparatus of claim 1 and is anticipated in the citations discussed above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Green et al. (US pgPub 2017/0125229) teaches a cyclic IMS.
Giles (US pgPub 2019/0237319) teaches two section of an IMS and potential.
US9,063,086 to Garimella
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J LOGIE whose telephone number is (571)270-1616. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 7:00AM-3:00PM.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at (571)272-2293. 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.
/MICHAEL J LOGIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
1 [0058] teaches in figure 8a shows a compressor region is followed by a separation region. The compressor region is shaded suggesting the same convention is used for figure 8C.
Prosecution Insights