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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 30 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The examiner understands the claimed invention to be as follows;
A reaction vessel is seated on a thermal block. The thermal block is attached to a moving platform. The thermal block is located below a stationary heated lid and a light detection module. The moving platform presses the thermal block upwards to create a contact with the lid and light detection module.
Regarding the embodiments disclosed in the prior art, Holmes et al discloses a variety of components, methods, and engineering techniques that one of ordinary skill in the art could use to design a laboratory apparatus. The closest embodiment to the claimed invention is disclosed in [0421] to [0427], shown in figures 85 to 88. This embodiment involves a reaction vessel which is received in a location. A thermal block then lifts upward to contact the bottom of the reaction vessel. The movement of the thermal element is used to control the amount of heating, and to allow access to the sample cartridge. Holmes clearly teaches both the use and manufacture of movable parts in a thermal conditioning and detection apparatus.
The prior art of Kordunsky et al teaches a thermal block which has the sample vessel seated on it. A lid is lifted via a handle and placed upon the thermal block and sample vessel, with the lid further containing a light detection module.
The primary difference between the claimed invention and the prior art of Holmes et al is the inclusion of a heated lid, and the sample vessel resting on the thermal block as it moves. The primary difference between the claimed invention and Kordunsky et al is that the heated lid is manually moved, rather than the thermal block moving. The examiner believes that one of ordinary skill in the art, given the teachings of Holmes et al and the embodiments of Kordunsky et al, would arrive at the movable platform of a heating element as taught by Holmes et al, alongside the movable lid and detection module as taught by Kordunsky et al.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Holmes et al only teaches the function of a movable component, the examiner points to the embodiment with a movable thermal element as taught in [0421] to [0427].
Regarding applicant’s argument that Kordunsky et al does not accommodate a vertical path, the embodiment of Kordunsky et al teaches a vertical lifting of the lid (see [0026]). Automation of a manual activity may be prima facie obvious (see MPEP 2144.04(III).
Regarding applicant’s argument that the lid assembly of Kordunsky et al is not liftable, the examiner disagrees. Please see [0026], which teaches a handle for lifting and positioning the lid.
Accordingly, the prior art rejections are maintained over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al, and further in view of Eberhart et al. The latter reference was previously used to teach the technique of compliant bumpers on devices which involve vertical translation.
In the interest of compact prosecution, an additional grounds of rejection is provided over Kordunsky et al in view Guo et al and further in view of Eberhart et al. The examiner believes this rejection is in line with the invention claimed in the amendments of 30 March 2026, which describe a device where the reaction vessel is seated upon the thermal block at all points during the operation of the device.
Status of Claims
Applicant’s amendments to the claims filed 30 March 2026 have been entered. Applicant’s remarks filed 30 March 2026 are acknowledged.
Claims 1 – 6 and 10 are in status “Currently amended.” Claims 7, 8, and 11 – 15 are in status “Original” or “Previously presented.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 – 5, 7, 8, 10 – 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holmes et al (US 20160320381 A1) in view of Kordunsky et al (US 20040224317 A1) and further in view of Eberhart et al (US 20150024436 A1).
With regards to claim 1, Holmes et al teaches;
The claimed “an apparatus for detecting a target analyte” has been read on the taught (Abstract, “A device may be provided, capable of receiving the sample, and performing one or more of a sample preparation, sample assay, and detection step.”);
The claimed “a light detection module that irradiates light to a reaction vessel and detects signals” has been read on the taught ([0490], “A module may include one or more detection stations. A detection station may include one or more sensors that may detect visual/optical signals… A detection station may contain one or more detection units… In some embodiments, a detection station may contain a light source and optical sensor.”; [1164], “An assay unit may be shaped and/or sized to permit detection by a detection unit.”; A module with a detection station including a light source and an optical sensor reads on a light detection module that irradiates light to a reaction vessel and detects signals. An assay unit reads on a reaction vessel.);
The claimed “a thermal module comprising a thermal block on which the reaction vessel is seated for heating and cooling the reaction vessel” has been read on the taught ([0424], “It should be understood that the thermal device 9850 can use various thermal elements to heat or cool the portions that engage features of the cartridge or cartridge components.”; [1141], “Assay units may be provided in a cartridge...”; The thermal device reads on a thermal module. The assay unit provided in a cartridge reads on the reaction vessel.);
The claimed “a lifting device for vertically moving the thermal module […] while the reaction vessel is seated on the thermal block” has been read on the taught ([0590], “…Robots, such as a robotic arm, may be provided within a device housing… The robots may move one or more component, including but not limited to a […] thermal control unit…”; [0597], “The robots may be capable of moving in any direction. The robots may be capable of moving in a lateral direction (e.g., horizontal direction) and/or a vertical direction.”; Robots which move a thermal control unit and which may be capable of moving in a vertical direction read on a lifting device for vertically moving the thermal module.);
The claimed “wherein the lifting device comprises a height adjusting device configured to support the thermal module, the height adjusting device having a platform” has been read on the taught ([0586], “Each arm may include a sample manipulation device… The sample manipulation device may or may not include a platform, […] or any other mechanism that may be useful for the transport.”; The platform on an arm reads on a platform configuring an upper surface of the height adjusting device.).
Holmes et al additionally teaches that the thermal device can be moved by a lifting device ([0424], “Referring now to FIG. 88, this illustration shows that the thermal device 9850 can be moved from the first location to a second location to more directly contact the areas and/or components of the cartridge 9820 to be thermally conditioned.”; [0425], “After thermally conditioning is completed […] the thermal device 9850 optionally returns to a location…”; Figure 87 and 88 illustrates thermal module moving upward, resulting in the reaction vessel moving closer to the heating plate.).
However, Holmes et al does not explicitly disclose wherein the lifting device is for moving the thermal module towards the light detection module while the reaction vessel is seated on the thermal block, wherein a heating plate used as a heated lid is provided on a lower portion of the light detection module, the heated lid having holes that allow optical communication between the reaction vessel and the light detection module, and wherein the lifting device is used to level the thermal module against the heated lid, causing the reaction vessel seated on the thermal block to be pressed against the heated lid.
In the analogous art of thermal cycling devices, Kordunsky et al teaches;
The claimed “a light detection module that irradiates light to a reaction vessel and detects signal” has been read on the taught ([0013], “… the thermal cycler instrument having a detection module movably mounted therein, the detection module including an excitation/detection channel, the excitation/detection channel including an excitation light generator disposed within the detection module and an emission light detector disposed within the detection module.”);
The claimed “a thermal module comprising a thermal block on which the reaction vessel is seated for heating and cooling the reaction vessel” has been read on the taught ([0027], “Sample unit 202 contains a number of sample wells 210… each sample well 210 holds a removable reaction vessel…”; [0028], “Sample unit 202 also includes heating elements…”);
The claimed “wherein a heating plate used as a heated lid is provided on a lower portion of the light detection module” has been read on the taught ([0029], “Lid heater 204 is used to control the temperature of the sample caps (or other sealants) of reaction vessels sample wells 210…”; [0032], “Fluorometer assembly 206 includes a support frame or platform 230 fixedly mounted inside lid 122. […] Support frame 230 and supports 224 are advantageously dimensioned such that when lid 122 is positioned in base unit 110 and closed, detection module 234 is held in close proximity to lid heater 204…” See also figure 2, which shows detection module 234 positioned above heating place 204.);
The claimed “the heated lid having holes that allow optical communication between the reaction vessel and the light detection module” has been read on the taught ([0029], “Lid heater 204 has holes 220 therethrough, matching the size and spacing of the sample wells 210, and electronically controlled heating elements (not shown).”);
“Wherein the thermal module is leveled against the heated lid” has been read on the taught ([0029], “Lower portions 226 of supports 224 are advantageously designed to compress lid heater 204 toward sample unit 202…”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device including a thermal module and lifting device as taught by Holmes et al with the heated lid positioned below a light detection module as taught by Kordunsky et al, for the benefit of preventing condensation from forming on the caps during heating ([0029], “Lid heater 204 is used to control the temperature of the sample caps (or other sealants) of reaction vessels sample wells 210, in order to prevent condensation from forming on the caps during thermal cycling operation.”).
However, Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al does not explicitly disclose a plurality of compliant bumpers mounted on the platform.
In the analogous art of analytical sample processing devices, Eberhart et al teaches;
The claimed “a plurality of compliant bumpers” has been read on the taught ([0434], “The disclosure provides devices for reducing motion […] and shock that an instrument […] or components thereof […] may experience… Furthermore, other elements (e.g., bumpers) can be employed to limit the range of vertical translational motion that the instrument may experience.”).
Eberhart et al additionally teaches that bumpers may be mounted to surfaces, as read on the taught ([0451], “…bumpers are attached (e.g., screwed) along the edges and/or at the corners of the bottom plate.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al with the compliant bumpers as taught by Eberhart et al. According to MPEP 2143(A), combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may be prima facie obvious. In the case of the instant invention, the prior art of Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al teaches an optical device, a heater, a height adjusting device, and a platform attached to a height adjusting device. The prior art of Eberhart et al teaches the existence of bumpers, as well as their use as a means of limiting the range of vertical translational motion experienced by a component of a laboratory instrument. A person of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (such a screws, as taught by Eberhart et al) and found that each element would merely perform the same function as it does separately. Combining the elements would achieve the predictable result of a device with a movable platform with shock-reducing features that limit the range of vertical translation motion an instrument may experience during use.
With regards to claim 2, the apparatus of claim 1 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “a motor for providing a driving force to the height adjusting device” has been read on the taught ([0591], “The robots may move using one or more different actuation mechanism… For example, the actuation mechanisms may use a motor (e.g., linear motor, stepper motor)…”).
With regards to claim 3, the apparatus of claim 2 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the platform forms an upper surface of the height adjusting device” has been read on the taught ([0586], “Each arm may include a sample manipulation device… The sample manipulation device may or may not include a platform, […] or any other mechanism that may be useful for the transport.”; The platform on an arm reads on a platform configuring an upper surface of the height adjusting device.).
With regards to claim 4, the apparatus of claim 1 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunksy et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al does not explicitly disclose wherein the compliant bumpers each comprise a conical portion with a curved sidewall, and the conical portion is at least partially formed of an elastic material.
Eberhart et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the compliant bumpers each comprise a conical portion with a curved sidewall” has been read on the taught ([0452], “The bumpers can have any suitable shape. In certain embodiments, the bumpers are substantially cylindrical.”; Bumpers with a cylindrical shape read on a conical portion with a curved sidewall.);
The claimed wherein “the conical portion is at least partially formed of an elastic material” has been read on the taught ([0450], “the upper portion of the bumper can be composed of a softer polymeric material that is able to absorb shock (e.g., a natural or synthetic rubber).”; Natural or synthetic rubber reads on an elastic material.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device including a height adjusting device comprising a platform with bumpers, as taught by Holmes et al in view of Eberhart et al, with the elastic bumpers comprising a conical portion with a curved sidewall as taught by Eberhart et al, in order to absorb shock in the event that the bumpers are contacted, as taught by Eberhart et al ([0450], “The material along the whole length of a bumper, or the material of the upper portion of a bumper, is selected to be not too hard so that the bumper is able to absorb shock in the event the top plate contacts the bumper.”).
With regards to claim 5, the apparatus of claim 1 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
While Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al in view of Eberhart et al does not explicitly disclose wherein the compliant bumpers are each mounted and disposed to be spaced apart from each of one or more corners of the platform by a predetermined distance, mere rearrangement of parts is not sufficient to distinguish an instant invention over the prior art provided that the instant invention does not perform differently than the prior art devices (See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)).
The instant specification does not disclose any unexpected results occurring from the bumpers being mounted and disposed to be spaced apart from each of one or more corners of the platform by a predetermined distance. Accordingly, claim 5 does not define over the teachings of Holmes et al in view Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
With regards to claim 7, the apparatus of claim 2 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the height adjusting device comprises a rotating shaft, and the rotating shaft is coupled to the motor and rotated by the motor” has been read on the taught ([0591], “The robots may move using one or more different actuation mechanism... For example, the actuation mechanisms may use a […] lead screw...”; The lead screw reads on a rotating shaft which is coupled to the motor and rotated by the motor.).
With regards to claim 8, the apparatus of claim 2 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “a motor frame that encloses at least a portion of the motor” has been read on the taught ([0498], “A housing of the module may enclose the module therein.”; The module reads on a motor. The housing reads on the motor frame.);
The claimed “a motor mount to which the motor frame is vertically slidably coupled” has been read on the taught ([0515], “The mounting members may be connecting interfaces between modules... Other connecting interfaces may be employed, which may include […] sliding features…”).
With regards to claim 10, the apparatus of claim 1 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the reaction vessel is seated on the thermal module” has been read on the taught ([0424], “As seen in FIG. 88, the thermal device 9850 can have shapes such as but not limited to cavities, openings, or the like that are contoured to engage surfaces of the areas and/or components of the cartridge 9820 to be thermally conditioned.”; Shapes which engage surfaces of the cartridge read on the reaction vessel being seated on the thermal module. See also figures 87 and 88);
Holmes et al additionally teach a device which is capable of performing the recited “when the thermal module is moved upward by the lifting device, the reaction vessel moves closer to the heating plate, and when the thermal module is moved downward by the lifting device, the reaction vessel moves away from the heating plate” as read on the taught ([0424], “Referring now to FIG. 88, this illustration shows that the thermal device 9850 can be moved from the first location to a second location to more directly contact the areas and/or components of the cartridge 9820 to be thermally conditioned.”; [0425], “After thermally conditioning is completed […] the thermal device 9850 optionally returns to a location…”; Figure 87 and 88 illustrates thermal module moving upward, resulting in the reaction vessel moving closer to the heating plate. The thermal module returning to a location thus reads on the module moving downward, resulting in the reaction vessel moving away from the heating plate. See also [1343], “One or more samples may be brought to and/or removed from the thermal control unit… The samples may be brought to and/or removed from the thermal control unit using any other automated process.” ).
However, the claim language of “when the thermal module is moved upward by the lifting device, the reaction vessel moves closer to the heating plate, and when the thermal module is moved downward by the lifting device, the reaction vessel moves away from the heating plate” is functional language, and has been given the appropriate weight. Please see MPEP 2114(II), and Hewlett-Packard Co.v.Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990). As Holmes et al teaches all of the structural limitations of the apparatus as defined in claim 10, the additional limitations do not define the instant application over the prior art.
With regards to claim 11, the apparatus of claim 10 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein when the thermal module moves downward, the light detection module and the thermal module are movable away from each other in a horizontal direction” has been read on the taught ([0590], “…robots, such as a robotic arm, may be provided within a device housing... They may permit movement of components within a device, between tracks, between modules, or within modules. The robots may move one or more component, including but not limited to a […] cartridge, […] detection unit, thermal control unit […] or any other component described elsewhere herein.”; [0597], “The robots may be capable of moving in any direction.”; Robots which can move one or more component in any direction read on the light detection module and the thermal module are movable away from each other in a horizontal direction.).
With regards to claim 12, the apparatus of claim 10 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the light detection module is mounted in a slidable manner on an upper frame” has been read on the taught ([0087], “In some embodiments, a system […] includes a supporting structure.”; [0515], “In another embodiment, the support structure is disposed below a first module and successive modules are mountable on one another with or without the aid of mounting members disposed on each module. The mounting members may be connecting interfaces between modules... Other connecting interfaces may be employed, which may include […] sliding features...”; [0512], “The modules may have a vertical arrangement where they are positioned over one another.”).
With regards to claim 13, the apparatus of claim 12 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the light detection module is coupled to a linear motor, and the light detection module slides horizontally using the linear motor” has been read on the taught ([0590], “The robots may move one or more component, including but not limited to a […] detection unit…”; [0597], “The robots may be capable of moving in any direction.”; [0591], “The robots may move using one or more different actuation mechanism… For example, the actuation mechanisms may use a motor (e.g., linear motor…”; A detection unit reads on the light detection module. A robot capable of moving in any direction which moves a detection unit using a linear motor reads on a light detection module capable of sliding horizontally using a linear motor.).
With regards to claim 14, the apparatus of claim 1 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the light detection module comprises a filter wheel to which a plurality of optical fibers is coupled” has been read on the taught ([1359], “Furthermore, an emissions filter may be placed between the sample and the optical detector…”; [1374], “…a detection assembly could include a plurality of fiber optic cables connected as a bundle to a CCD detector or to a PMT array. The fiber optic bundle could be constructed of discrete fibers...”; [1374], “…a detection unit may be a spectrophotometer.”; [1718], “A spectrophotometer may direct light of different wavelengths to a sample by, for example, by containing contain a monochromator and adjustable filter…”; The adjustable filter reads on a filter wheel. A filter placed between the sample and the optical detector, with a fiber optic bundle connected to a detection assembly reads on a filter wheel to which a plurality of optical fixers is coupled. See also [1727].).
With regards to claim 15, the apparatus of claim 14 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches;
The claimed “wherein the plurality of optical fibers is used to transmit light and signals between the light detection module and the reaction vessel” has been read on the taught ([1381], “The detector can also comprise optics to deliver the light source to the assay, such as […] fiber optics... The detector can also comprise optics to deliver light from an assay to a detection unit.”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Holmes et al (US 20160320381 A1) in view of Kordunsky et al (US 20040224317 A1) in view of Eberhart et al (US 20150024436 A1), as applied to claim 3, and further in view of Shehab et al (US 20200355316 A1).
With regards to claim 6, the apparatus of claim 3 is obvious over Holmes et al in view of Kordunksy et al and further in view of Eberhart et al.
Holmes et al additionally teaches that the device may include an actuator for moving modules within a device, including mechanical components and motors ([0590], “In some embodiments, robots, such as a robotic arm, may be provided within a device housing... They may permit movement of components within a device, between tracks, between modules, or within modules.”; [0591] The robots may move using one or more different actuation mechanism. Such actuation mechanisms may use mechanical components, electromagnetic, magnetism, thermal properties, piezoelectric properties, optics, or any other properties or combinations thereof.”).
However, Holmes et al does not explicitly disclose wherein the height adjusting device uses a scissor lift mechanism to vertically move the platform.
In the analogous art of lifting device, Shehab et al teaches that scissor-lift mechanisms can be used to lift components ([0057], “…while the present aspects illustrate and describe use of a drive mechanism in the form of a screw drive mechanism, other drive mechanisms can be included […] such as […] a scissor-lift mechanism…”).
According to MPEP 2143(A), combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may support a prima facie case of obviousness. In the case of claim 6, the prior art of Holmes et al in view of Kordunsky et al and further in view of Eberhart et al teaches the apparatus of claim 3, including a height adjusting device with an actuator. The prior art of Shehab et al teaches the existence of scissor lifts. A person of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (as evidenced by actuation mechanisms using “mechanical components” as taught by Holmes et al) and found that each element would merely perform the same function as it does separately. Combining the elements would achieve the predictable result of an apparatus with a height adjusting device that can move up and down. Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus including a height adjusting device as taught by Holmes et al with the scissor lift as taught by Shehab et al, in order to arrive at the device of claim 6.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kordunsky et al (US 20040224317 A1) in view of Guo et al (CN 115074241 A).
With regards to claim 1, Kordunsky et al teaches;
The claimed “a light detection module that irradiates light to a reaction vessel and detects signals” has been read on the taught has been read on the taught ([0012], “…the detection module may include two or more excitation light generators and two or more emission light detectors arranged to form two or more excitation/detection pairs.”);
The claimed “a thermal module comprising a thermal block on which the reaction vessel is seated for heating and cooling the reaction vessel” has been read on the taught ([0027], “Sample unit 202 contains a number of sample wells 210… each sample well 210 holds a removable reaction vessel…”; [0028], “Sample unit 202 also includes heating elements…”);
“A heating plate used as a heated lid” has been read on the taught ([0029], “Lid heater 204 is coupled to lid 122.”);
The claimed “wherein a heating plate used as a heated lid is provided on a lower portion of the light detection module” has been read on the taught (See annotated Figure 2, below);
PNG
media_image1.png
658
711
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The claimed “the heated lid having holes that allow optical communication between the reaction vessel and the light detection module” has been read on the taught ([0029], “Lid heater 204 has holes 220 therethrough, matching the size and spacing of the sample wells 210…”);
Kordunsky et al further teaches that the heated lid may move to come into engagement with the reaction vessels, thus “level the thermal module against the heated lid, causing the reaction vessel seated on the thermal block to be pressed against the heated lid” as read on the taught ([0026], “Lid 122 has a handle 124 to aid in its placement on and removal from base unit 110…”; [0029], “Lower portions 226 of supports 224 are advantageously designed to compress lid heater 204 toward sample unit 202…”).
However, Kordunsky et al does not explicitly disclose a lifting device for vertically moving the thermal module towards the light detection module, while the reaction vessel is seated on the thermal block; wherein the lifting device comprises a height adjusting device configured to support the thermal module; and the height adjusting device having a platform and a plurality of compliant bumpers mounted on the platform.
In the analogous art of PCR devices, Guo et al teaches;
An apparatus for detecting a target analyte including an optical detector, as read on the taught ([0006], “The amplification device includes: a support portion […] an optical fiber fixing assembly disposed on top of the sample holding unit for fixing the ends of multiple optical fibers, the optical fibers being adapted to conduct excitation and emission light between the amplification and detection devices of the PCR instrument…”);
The claimed “a lifting device for vertically moving the thermal module towards the light detection module, while the reaction vessel is seated on the thermal block” and “wherein the lifting device comprises a height adjusting device configured to support the thermal module” has been read on the taught ([0006], “…a lifting drive assembly coupled to the amplification unit […] the lifting drive part driving the amplification unit vertically between a raised position and a lowered position via the transmission linkage assemblies. In the raised position, the amplification unit pushes against and supports the sample to be tested towards the fiber fixing assembly and adjusts the temperature of the sample to be tested.”);
The claimed “the height adjusting device having a platform” has been read on the taught ([0006], “The amplification device includes: a support portion…”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device as taught by Kordunsky et al with the lifting mechanism as taught by Guo et al, for the predictable benefit of creating an automated instrument with simplified assembly (Guo et al, [0007], “This approach simplifies the structure of the PCR instrument and reduces assembly difficulty, thereby improving assembly efficiency).
MPEP 2144.04(III) teaches that automating a manual activity may be prima facie obvious. In the case of the instant invention, Kordunsky et al teaches a lid with a handle that can be manually moved into contact with a sample block. Guo et al teaches an automated method of moving a sample block in contact with a lid and optical assembly. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the independently movable lid and sample block as taught by Kordunsky et al with the automated lifting mechanism as taught by Guo et al.
The embodiments taught by Kordunsky et al explicitly discloses that the lid is brought into contact with the sample block, rather than the sample block being lifted to contact the lid. However, MPEP 2144.04(VI)(A) teaches that reversal of parts may be prima facie obvious; please see In re Gazda, 219 F.2d 449, 104 USPQ 400 (CCPA 1955), which addresses changing movable vs fixed components in a system. As such, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sample block as taught by Kordunsky et al with the sample block lifting mechanism as taught by Guo et al as an obvious reversal of parts.
However, Kordunsky et al in view of Guo et al does not explicitly disclose the height adjusting device having a platform and a plurality of compliant bumpers mounted on the platform.
In the analogous art of analytical sample processing devices, Eberhart et al teaches;
The claimed “a plurality of compliant bumpers” has been read on the taught ([0434], “The disclosure provides devices for reducing motion […] and shock that an instrument […] or components thereof […] may experience… Furthermore, other elements (e.g., bumpers) can be employed to limit the range of vertical translational motion that the instrument may experience.”).
Eberhart et al additionally teaches that bumpers may be mounted to surfaces, as read on the taught ([0451], “…bumpers are attached (e.g., screwed) along the edges and/or at the corners of the bottom plate.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Kordunsky et al in view of Guo et al with the compliant bumpers as taught by Eberhart et al. According to MPEP 2143(A), combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results may be prima facie obvious. In the case of the instant invention, the prior art of Kordunsky et al in view of Guo et al teaches an optical device, a heater, a height adjusting device, and a platform attached to a height adjusting device. The prior art of Eberhart et al teaches the existence of bumpers, as well as their use as a means of limiting the range of vertical translational motion experienced by a component of a laboratory instrument. A person of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods (such a screws, as taught by Eberhart et al) and found that each element would merely perform the same function as it does separately. Combining the elements would achieve the predictable result of a device with a movable platform with shock-reducing features that limit the range of vertical translation motion an instrument may experience during use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALISON CLAIRE GERHARD whose telephone number is (571)270-0945. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9:00 - 5:30pm EST.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
/ALISON CLAIRE GERHARD/Examiner, Art Unit 1797 /LYLE ALEXANDER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1797
Prosecution Insights