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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of a device for manipulating a droplet (Group I), claims 1-13, in the reply filed on December 4, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Groups I, II, and III satisfy unity of invention. This is not found persuasive because the shared technical features are found to be present in the prior art as cited in the prior art rejection.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 14-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected surface (Group II), and biosensor (Group III), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on December 4, 2025.
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.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et. al. (US 2019366332 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches “A device for manipulating a droplet comprising water” (Para [0072], microfluidic device, including: determining a moving path of a droplet ); “the device comprising: a surface” (Para [0046] In the embodiment, the microfluidic device further includes two hydrophobic layers 16); “configured to support the droplet,” (Para [0077] and [0046] , the microcavity reach a position in the microcavity 13 which is occupied by a droplet. Actually, the microcavity 13 is composed of the two hydrophobic layers 16 and 17 and the spacers 18. ); “the surface comprising a hydrophobic region;” (Paras [0011] and [0046] In the embodiment, the microfluidic device further includes two hydrophobic layers 16) “and an ultrasound transducer array,” (Para [0061], plurality of ultrasonic sensors 151); “the ultrasound transducer array being arranged above the surface, and separated from the surface;” (Fig. 6A, 151 is above and separated from 16); “wherein the ultrasound transducer array is configured to emit ultrasound for actuating a motion of the droplet along the surface by subjecting the droplet to an acoustic radiation force by the emitted ultrasound.” (Paras [0007], [0063], [0049], and [0050], Each ultrasonic sensor in the other one of the two ultrasonic layers is configured to drive the droplets accommodated in the microcavity. at least one of the ultrasonic sensors in the ultrasonic layer 15 may simultaneously drive a same droplet. As shown in FIG. 6B, at least one of the ultrasonic sensors 141 in the lower first ultrasonic layer 14 applies a force F1 on the droplet, and at least one of the ultrasonic sensors 151 in the upper second ultrasonic layer 15 applies a force F2 on the droplet, so as to drive the droplet to roll clockwise. The way of “simultaneous drive” may provide a greater driving force, so as to move the droplet more easily. In the embodiment, the microcavity 13 is filled with a filling medium which has an acoustic impedance coefficient greater than or equal to that of the hydrophobic layers. In such a way, the filling medium may perform a function of acoustic impedance matching to decrease reflectivity of ultrasonic waves at a heterogeneous interface and increase ultrasonic transmittance, so as to make it easy for ultrasonic energy to transmit and act on surfaces of the droplets, thereby increasing acoustic emission efficiency. Moreover, each functional layer of the ultrasonic sensor in the two ultrasonic layers 14 and 15 match the lower hydrophobic layer 16 in terms of acoustic impedance, so as to increase ultrasonic transmittance.)
Regarding claim 11, Zhang teaches all of claim 1 as above. The recitation “wherein the device is configured to actuate the motion of the droplet by applying an acoustic radiation force to the droplet throughby focusing an ultrasound field from the ultrasound transducer array on the droplet.” is capability of the device however taught within (Paras [0034], [0045], and [0049], In such a way, the filling medium may perform a function of acoustic impedance matching to decrease reflectivity of ultrasonic waves at a heterogeneous interface and increase ultrasonic transmittance, so as to make it easy for ultrasonic energy to transmit and act on surfaces of the droplets, thereby increasing acoustic emission efficiency. The microfluidic device provided by the present disclosure may use sound pressure produced by enhanced ultrasonic waves as a driving force of the liquid, so as to drive the liquid to move. Specifically, in order to enable the ultrasonic sensors configured to drive the droplets to produce a sufficient driving force, ultrasonic sensors in a larger volume may be adopted. The larger the ultrasonic sensor is, the greater the transmitting power is, so that the driving force may be increased.).
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.
Claims 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et. al. (US 2019366332 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further Wilson et. al. (US 20130330247 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Zhang teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the device is configured to actuate the motion of the droplet by applying an acoustic radiation force to the droplet throughby trapping the droplet in an acoustic trapping potential that is generated by the ultrasound transducer array, and moving the acoustic trapping potential.”
Although the recitation is capability Wilson teaches an apparatus for surface acoustic wave manipulation of fluid samples in addition to “wherein the device is configured to actuate the motion of the droplet by applying an acoustic radiation force to the droplet throughby trapping the droplet in an acoustic trapping potential that is generated by the ultrasound transducer array, and moving the acoustic trapping potential.” (Para [0267], The SAW scattering elements therefore provide additional functionality, e.g. trapping or filtering (working as a membrane with a specific pore size), or may alter the hydrodynamic flow in a manner dependant upon their geometry.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein the device is configured to actuate the motion of the droplet by applying an acoustic radiation force to the droplet throughby trapping the droplet in an acoustic trapping potential that is generated by the ultrasound transducer array, and moving the acoustic trapping potential. Doing so increases the manipulation of the droplet without the interference of operator interaction.
Claims 2-10, and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et. al. (US 2019366332 A1) as applied to claim 1 above and in further Wilson et. al. (US 20130330247 A1) and Bohringer et. al. (US 9279435 B2).
Regarding claim 2, Zhang teaches all of claim 1 as above and also teaches a guiding region within, (Fig 2, number 18). However the guiding region claimed in following claims is better taught within Wilson.
Wilson teaches an apparatus for surface acoustic wave manipulation of fluid samples in addition to “wherein the surface of the device further comprises at least one guiding region,” (Para [0077], The track).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein the surface of the device further comprises at least one guiding region. Doing so would increases control within the device and allows the droplets to be placed in the desired location for subsequent processes.
Zhang does not teach “wherein the at least one guiding region has a lower hydrophobicity than the hydrophobic region such that the droplet has a greater affinity to the at least one guiding region than to the hydrophobic region,”.
Bohringer teaches vibration-driven Droplet Transport Devices in addition to “wherein the at least one guiding region has a lower hydrophobicity than the hydrophobic region such that the droplet has a greater affinity to the at least one guiding region than to the hydrophobic region, whereby the hydrophobic region and the at least one guiding region form a guiding pattern of the surface, wherein the surface is configured to guide motion of the droplet along the surface by the guiding pattern.” (Para 7, providing a surface having an elongated track comprising a plurality of transverse arcuate regions having a different degree of hydrophobicity than the surface, wherein the transverse arcuate regions are sized and spaced to induce asymmetric contact angle hysteresis when the droplet is vibrated; (90) In one embodiment, the droplet has a degree of hydrophobicity closer to the degree of hydrophobicity of the transverse arcuate regions than that of the surface.). Therefore the surface (guiding regions has a lower hydrophobicity. The regions size and space induce contact which create the guiding pattern. The recitation “wherein the surface is configured to guide motion of the droplet along the surface by the guiding pattern” is capability however taught by Bohringer by the vibration of the droplet when contacting the angles in the regions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Bohringer wherein the at least one guiding region has a lower hydrophobicity than the hydrophobic region such that the droplet has a greater affinity to the at least one guiding region than to the hydrophobic region, whereby the hydrophobic region and the at least one guiding region form a guiding pattern of the surface, wherein the surface is configured to guide motion of the droplet along the surface by the guiding pattern. Doing so allows the device to have an area that moves the droplet without external forces or energy which decreases the number of components within the device.
Regarding claim 3, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above but does not teach “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a track, the track having a width and a length, the length being substantially larger than the width, the track being one of the at least one guiding regions of the surface”.
Bohringer teaches “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a track, the track having a width and a length, the length being substantially larger than the width, the track being one of the at least one guiding regions of the surface” (Para (64) An exemplary device 660 incorporating a loop-shaped track 114 of arcuate mesas 10 is sketched in FIG. 6B.); “wherein the hydrophobic region of the surface borders the track on both sides of the track, along the length of the track” (Fig. 6B, 7A-D).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Bohringer wherein the guiding pattern comprises a track, the track having a width and a length, the length being substantially larger than the width, the track being one of the at least one guiding regions of the surface and wherein the hydrophobic region of the surface borders the track on both sides of the track, along the length of the track. Doing so increases the effectiveness of the droplet movement within the device by allowing the droplet to move along the required path that boarders the hydrophobic region.
The recitation “whereby the guiding pattern is configured to guide the motion of the droplet by favoring movement of the droplet along the track.” is capability of the guiding pattern. Modified zhang discloses the positively claimed structural elements of the guiding patterns as claimed, such guiding patterns are said to be fully capable of the recited adaption in as much as recited and required herein.
Regarding claim 4, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 3 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the track is formed by a periodical repetition of a first part of the track and a second part of the track along the length of the track, wherein, in a direction along the length of the track, the width of the track narrows, in the first part of the trac, from a maximum width to a minimum width, after which the width of the track widens, in the second part of the track, from the minimum width to the maximum width, and wherein, in the periodical repetition, the second parts of the track are shorter than the first parts of the track.” It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to, since it has been held by the courts that a change in shape or configuration, without any criticality in operation of the device, is nothing more than one of numerous shapes that one of ordinary skill in the art will find obvious to provide based on the suitability for the intended final application. See In re Dailey, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1976). It appears that the disclosed device would perform equally well shaped as disclosed by modified Zhang.
Regarding claim 5, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a first separate patch and a second separate patch, the first and second separate patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding region of the surface, the first and second separate patches being separated from each other by the hydrophobic region”.
Wilson teaches “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a first separate patch and a second separate patch, the first and second separate patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding region of the surface, the first and second separate patches being separated from each other by the hydrophobic region” (Paras [0077] and [0105], The track here defines the intended path for the droplet. The track may be straight, curved, bent, angled, forked, split or joined with another track. The track may be provided with a hydrophilic surface, typically bordered by one or more hydrophobic areas. In the case of an aqueous sample, this can assist with confining the droplet to the track. More preferably, the fluid sample pinning zone is a hydrophilic area in the form of a spot, for pinning an aqueous droplet to the manipulation surface. The hydrophilic area may be surrounded by a hydrophobic zone.) Therefore the pinning zones which can be in different locations teach the first and second separate patches.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein the guiding pattern comprises a first separate patch and a second separate patch, the first and second separate patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding region of the surface, the first and second separate patches being separated from each other by the hydrophobic region. Doing so increases the effectiveness of the droplet movement within the device by allowing the areas to act as a fence to guide the droplet to the desired location.
The recitation “and wherein the ultrasound transducer array is configured to actuate the motion of the droplet from the first separate patch, via the hydrophobic region, to the second separate patch, whereby the guiding pattern is configured to guide the droplet in motion by favoring movement of the droplet towards a location centrally over the second separate patch.” is capability of the ultrasound transducer array and the guiding pattern. Modified Zhang discloses the positively claimed structural elements of the array and the guiding patter as claimed, such features are said to be fully capable of the recited adaption in as much as recited and required herein.
Regarding claim 6, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 5 as above however does not teach “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a matrix of patches, the matrix of patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding regions of the surface, each patch of the matrix of patches being separated from other patches by the hydrophobic region, and wherein the matrix of patches comprises the first and second separate patches being comprised in the matrix of patches.”.
Wilson already teaches “wherein the guiding pattern comprises a matrix of patches, the matrix of patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding regions of the surface, each patch of the matrix of patches being separated from other patches by the hydrophobic region, and wherein the matrix of patches comprises the first and second separate patches being comprised in the matrix of patches.” within (Para [0105], Preferably the fluid sample pinning zone is provided in the form of a spot, for pinning a fluid sample droplet to the manipulation surface. Thus, the perimeter of the fluid sample pinning zone may delineate a fluid sample pinning line. More preferably, the fluid sample pinning zone is a hydrophilic area in the form of a spot, for pinning an aqueous droplet to the manipulation surface. The hydrophilic area may be surrounded by a hydrophobic zone.) Therefore the fluid sample pinning zones teaches to a matrix of patches and the first and second separate patches are taught by the different spots in the line.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein the guiding pattern comprises a matrix of patches, the matrix of patches being guiding regions of the least one guiding regions of the surface, each patch of the matrix of patches being separated from other patches by the hydrophobic region, and wherein the matrix of patches comprises the first and second separate patches being comprised in the matrix of patches. Doing so increases the effectiveness of the droplet movement and manipulation and allows multiple droplets to be controlled in movement at one time.
Regarding claim 7, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not teach “wherein the hydrophobic region is super-hydrophobic.”.
Bohringer teaches “wherein the hydrophobic region is super-hydrophobic.”. (30)- and in this embodiment the surface 20 is a superhydrophobic surface.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Bohringer wherein the hydrophobic region is super-hydrophobic. Doing so increases the speed in which the droplet transports throughout the device which increases the number of droplets that can be processed in a set amount of time.
Regarding claim 8, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above but does not teach “wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophobic.”
Wilson teaches “wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophobic.” (Para [0105], More preferably, the fluid sample pinning zone is a hydrophilic area in the form of a spot, for pinning an aqueous droplet to the manipulation surface. The hydrophilic area may be surrounded by a hydrophobic zone). Therefore the hydrophobic zone surrounded by the hydrophilic area assists in guiding the droplet and therefore at least one of the guiding regions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophobic. Doing so increases the devices ability to control the droplet within the device for increased effectiveness on small sized droplets.
Regarding claim 9, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above but does not teach “wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophilic.”.
Wilson teaches “wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophilic.” (Para [0105], More preferably, the fluid sample pinning zone is a hydrophilic area in the form of a spot, for pinning an aqueous droplet to the manipulation surface. The hydrophilic area may be surrounded by a hydrophobic zone). Therefore the hydrophilic area disclosed at least one of the guiding regions.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein at least one guiding region of the at least one guiding region is hydrophilic. Doing so increases the detailed movement of the droplet in which the friction within the device is lowered due to the hydrophilic properties.
Regarding claim 10, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above but does not explicitly teach “ wherein at least one of the hydrophobic region and the at least one guiding region comprise pillars of sub millimeter size.”.
Wilson teaches “ wherein at least one of the hydrophobic region and the at least one guiding region comprise pillars of sub millimeter size.” (Paras [0105] and [0106], The pinning zone may be formed by a wall or walls that define the perimeter of the pinning zone, which wall or walls may be formed from pillars, [0106] The fluid sample pinning zone preferably has a width or diameter of (or has a width or diameter in the range of up to) about 1 millimeter, about 2 millimeters, about 3 millimeters, about 4 millimeters, or about 5 millimeters.) Therefore the range of up to about 1 millimeter teaches to the sub millimeter size.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified Zhang to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein at least one of the hydrophobic region and the at least one guiding region comprise pillars of sub millimeter size. Doing so increases the function of the device by allowing the pillars to act as a surface which provides friction and can manipulate the droplet in the desired area.
Regarding claim 13, modified Zhang teaches all of claim 2 as above in addition to “wherein the guiding pattern of the surface comprises a plurality of alternative paths for the droplet to move along on the surface of the device,” (Para [0082], At step 103, ultrasonic sensors are controlled to emit ultrasonic waves based on the moving path, so as to drive the droplet to move from the current position A to the target position B along the moving path.).
In addition Wilson teaches “wherein the guiding pattern of the surface comprises a plurality of alternative paths for the droplet to move along on the surface of the device” (Para [0075], Mixing may be achieved by moving the droplets along corresponding tracks to a mixing zone, where the droplets meet and are mixed to form one or more mixed droplets. The mixed droplet may then be moved onwardly from the mixing zone along a further track.).
Further taught by Zhang “the device further comprising a path selector, the path selector being configured to receive an input signal indicating a chosen path of the plurality of alternative paths” (Paras [0015] and [0016], and the method includes determining a moving path of a droplet according to detection parameters obtained by detecting the droplet accommodated in the microcavity and a target position. to the target position along the moving path includes selecting at least one ultrasonic sensor to transmit an ultrasonic driving signal to the microcavity according to the detection parameters and the 15 moving path of the droplet.)
The recitation “and wherein the device is configured to modify, over time, the acoustic radiation force applied to the droplet by the ultrasound transducer array to transport the droplet along the chosen path of the plurality of alternative paths.” is capability of the device. modified Zhang teaches discloses the positively claimed structural elements of the device as claimed, such device are said to be fully capable of the recited adaption in as much as recited and required herein.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VELVET E HERON whose telephone number is (571)272-1557. The examiner can normally be reached M-F.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached on (571) 270-3638. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/V.E.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1798
/CHARLES CAPOZZI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1798