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 without traverse of Group 2, claims 31-40, in the reply filed on 12/05/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 17 and 21-29 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/05/2025.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “another plane not an oblique plane of a prism, in a P-mode, is coupled with a bottom surface of the amplifier unit, the traveling direction of the second light is a direction of the oblique surface” (claim 1); “an aperture unit between the first filter unit and the amplifier unit to adjust light
amount of the first light of which the first noise is removed” (claim 38); “an ND filter unit between the second filter unit and the measurement unit to filter collectively light amount of the second light of which the second noise is removed” (claim 39); and “wherein the amplifier further comprises a silicon additive layer (Polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS) under the dielectric layer, the silicon additive is formed in a plurality of pyramids which is formed using a material with dielectric constant between 1.35 and 1.45” (claim 40) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Paragraph [00115] discusses Fig. 1 and refers to reference numbers 400, 410, 420, 430, 440, 450, 460, 470. However Fig. 1 does not show those reference numbers. It appears those reference numbers are regarding Fig. 4.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities: In lines 10 and 12, it is suggested to recite “transmit” as “transmitted”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 32 is objected to because of the following informalities: In line 2, “2nm.,” should read “2nm,”, i.e. deletion of the extraneous period. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 33 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is suggested to recite “LED” in line 2 in an unabbreviated form to establish the acronym. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 38 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is suggested to recite “wherein further comprising” in lines 1-2 as “further comprising”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 39 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is suggested to recite “wherein further comprising” in lines 1-2 as “further comprising”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 39 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is suggested to recite “ND” in line 2 in an unabbreviated form to establish the acronym. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 40 is objected to because of the following informalities: It is suggested to recite “silicon additive” in line 3 as “silicon additive layer” for improved consistency of terminology. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“measurement unit” in claim 31.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
In this case, “measurement unit” of claim 31 is interpreted as any structure capable of receiving and measuring light (specification, paragraphs [0009],[0025],[0065],[00147]) and equivalents thereof.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 31-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 recites “a measurement unit” in line 12. The specification merely recites functions of the measurement unit (paragraphs [0009],[0025],[0065],[00147]) and is silent on what structure contributes to the particular “measurement unit”. Figs. 1 and 4 merely shows box diagrams of the measurement unit (Figs. 1, 4; elements 160,470) and does not provide any structural details to the claimed measurement unit. The written description is devoid of any structures that performs the functions in the claim, and fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Thus, the claim was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 32-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 31.
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 31-40 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.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 recites “consisted to remove a noise…” in line 11. It is unclear if “consisted” is intended to limit the scope of the claim (MPEP 2111.03(II)), or if “consisted” is intended to be interpreted as “configured”. For examination purposes, “consisted” is interpreted as “configured”, where the second filter unit is configured to remove a noise as claimed. Claims 32-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 31.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 recites “another plane not an oblique plane of a prism, in a P-mode, is coupled with a bottom surface of the amplifier unit”. It is unclear if “plane” is a physical structure or if “plane” is a reference to a 2D surface that extends indefinitely as a dimensional reference. It is unclear which part of “a prism” is coupled to the bottom surface of the amplifier unit. Does the prism comprise multiple planes including an oblique plane and another plane that is not an oblique plane, wherein the another plane that is not the oblique plane is coupled with a bottom surface of the amplifier unit? Claims 32-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 31.
Regarding claim 31, claim 31 recites “the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling antibody…with the second plated layer over two times” in the last paragraph. The phrase “over two times” is unclear. Is the coupling performed over to times? Are there over two times the antibody amount in comparison to another element? Claims 32-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 31.
Regarding claim 32, the term “in around” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “in around” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. See MPEP 2173.05(b)(III)(A). Additionally, “in around” is an unclear term, since it is unclear if the dimension is within or around the claimed number. Claims 33-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 32.
Regarding claim 34, claim 34 recites the limitation “the wavelength out of range of…" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, “to decide the wavelength out of range of …” is unclear. Is the range outside of the claimed range? Claims 35-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 34.
Regarding claim 35, claim 35 recites “the second unit” in lines 1-2. It is unclear if the second unit is referring to the second lens unit or the second filter unit established in claim 31. For examination purposes, the second unit is interrupted as the second filter unit. Claims 36-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 35.
Regarding claim 35, claim 35 recites the limitation " the wavelength out of range of…" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, “to decide the wavelength out of range of …” is unclear. Is the range outside of the claimed range? Claims 36-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 35.
Regarding claim 40, the terms within the parenthesis “(Polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS)” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations within the parenthesis are part of the claimed invention or if the limitations within the parenthesis are an example of “a silicon additive layer”. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, the silicon additive layer is interpreted as comprising Polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS.
Regarding claim 31, claim limitation “measurement unit” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The specification merely recites functions of the measurement unit (paragraphs [0009],[0025],[0065],[00147]) and is silent on what structure contributes to the particular “measurement unit”. Figs. 1 and 4 merely shows box diagrams of the measurement unit (Figs. 1, 4; elements 160,470) and does not provide any structural details to the claimed measurement unit. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Claims 32-40 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 31.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 31-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pyo et al. (KR 1020090064917; cited in the IDS filed 01/08/2023; see machine translation) in view of Abdulhalim (US 20160178516 A1), Couillard et al. (US 20110128546 A1), and Tamura et al. (US 20170016823 A1).
Regarding claim 31, Pyo teaches a light amplifier device using surface plasmon resonance (abstract; Fig. 3) comprising:
a light source (311) emitting a first light (Fig. 3);
a first lens unit (page 5, 7th paragraph teaches light providing unit 31 includes one or more lenses) to collect the first light in an opposite direction from the light source (interpreted as an intended use, see MPEP 2114; page 5, 7th paragraph teaches light providing unit 31 includes one or more lenses, therefore, the lens is structurally capable of collecting light in an opposite direction from the light source);
a first filter unit (first light filter 312) to remove a noise of the first light (interpreted as an intended use; page 5, 6th paragraph teaches the first light filter transmits absorption wavelength light of a specific phosphor, therefore is implied to remove noise since it transmits a specific wavelength);
an amplifier unit (Fig. 3, elements 321, 322, 323, 324) receiving the first light (Fig. 3) and generating surface plasmon effect to generate a second light which is amplified light (interpreted as a functional limitation, see MPEP 2114; page 5, teaches SPR sensor 32 which excites surface plasmon resonance by absorption wavelength light from the light unit to generate fluorescence signal that is amplified); and
a measurement unit (Fig. 3, second light detector 34) formed in a traveling direction of a second light to measure intensity of the second light (Fig. 3 teaches detector 34 formed in a traveling direction of a second light; page 7, last two paragraphs),
wherein the amplifier unit comprises:
a dielectric layer (Fig. 3, transparent dielectric substrate 322);
a first plated layer (323) formed on the dielectric layer (Fig. 3);
a second plated layer (324);
and
a fluorescent layer formed of a fluorescent substance (Fig. 3, layer of sensing antibody 302 comprising phosphor 303; page 5 teaches the phosphor produces a fluorescent signal) contained in a material (Fig. 3, sensing antibody 302) capable of coupling with a second plated layer (interpreted as a functional limitation, the antibody 302 is capable of coupling with a plated layer), and
wherein the amplifier unit is formed in a P-mode depending on the traveling direction of the second light (Fig. 3 shows elements 321, 322, 323, 324 formed with a non-oblique plane of prism 321 coupled to the bottom of element 322, therefore the amplifier unit is interpreted as formed in a P-mode; note that “P-mode” is interpreted as a configuration of the amplifier unit where another surface not an oblique plane of a prism is coupled to a bottom surface of the amplifier unit as discussed in the instant specification, paragraph [0027]),
another plane not an oblique plane of a prism, in a P-mode, is coupled with a bottom surface of the amplifier unit (Fig. 3 teaches the non-oblique plane of prism 321 is coupled to a bottom surface of element 322),
the traveling direction of the second light is a direction of the oblique surface (Fig. 3 shows the direction of light towards element 34 from prism 321 is a direction of the oblique surface of prism 321), and the measurement unit is formed in the direction of the oblique surface (Fig. 3),
wherein the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling an antibody (Fig. 3, antibody 302) with the second plated layer over two times (Fig. 3 shows more than two antibody 302, i.e. over two times, coupled to second plated layer 324) and coupling an antigen (304) containing the fluorescent substance (300) with a secondary antibody (301).
Pyo fails to teach: the first lens unit formed under the light source; the first filter unit formed under the first lens unit; a second lens unit formed to collect the second light in a direction; a second filter unit formed in a traveling direction of the second light which is transmit through the second lens unit, and consisted to remove a noise of the second light; the measurement unit formed in a traveling direction of the second light which is transmit through the second lens unit; the dielectric layer formed of glass; the amplifier unit comprises: the first plated layer formed of chrome on the dielectric layer; a light waveguide formed of silver on the first plated layer; the second plated layer formed of gold on the light waveguide; and the second lens unit, the second filter unit and the measurement unit are formed sequentially in the direction of the oblique surface; wherein the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling an antibody of Troponin I(Tn I) with the second plated layer over two times and coupling the Troponin I containing the fluorescent substance with a secondary antibody of the Troponin I.
Pyo teaches a filter unit (Fig. 3, second light filter 331) consisted to remove a noise of the second light (page 7, lines 1-2 teaches the second light filter receives and transmits a color wavelength light, thus is implied to remove noise of light). Pyo teaches a light detector including an optical filter to transmit desired wavelengths (page 4, paragraph starting with, “the first light detector”). Pyo teaches known SPR biosensors including glass (page 3, 5th paragraph).
Abdulhalim teaches a SPR sensor (abstract). Abdulhalim teaches an embodiment of a light source positioned above a plasmonic structure (Figs. 8, 18, 20), and alternative embodiments of light sources positioned below a plasmonic structure (Figs. 10-11). Abdulhalim teaches collection/imaging optics for the enhanced spectroscopy include lenses, spectral filters, apertures or polarizers as necessary for obtaining the signal with the best signal to noise ratio (paragraph [0166]). Abdulhalim teaches an enhanced emission is transmitted through the analyte and is collected using a lens and filter system from a second side of the multilayered structure of the sensor and is directed towards a detector, an array of detectors, a camera, or a spectrometer (paragraph [0064]). Abdulhalim teaches a waveplate includes a piece of glass (paragraph [0151]). Abdulhalim teaches a lens unit, the filter unit and the unit are formed sequentially (Fig. 18 and paragraph [0167], elements 96 and 52).
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 the device of Pyo to incorporate the teachings of positioning of a light source, collection and imaging optics having lenses and filters, and waveplate being glass of Abdulhalim (paragraphs [0064],[0151],[0166],[0167]; Figs. 8,10-11,18,20) and the teachings of filters to transmit desired wavelengths and SPR biosensors including glass of Pyo (Fig. 3; page 3, 5th paragraph; page 4, paragraph starting with, “the first light detector”; page 7, lines 1-2) to provide: the first lens unit formed under the light source; the first filter unit formed under the first lens unit; a second lens unit formed to collect the second light in a direction; a second filter unit formed in a traveling direction of the second light which is transmit through the second lens unit, and consisted to remove a noise of the second light; the measurement unit formed in a traveling direction of the second light which is transmit through the second lens unit; the dielectric layer formed of glass; and the second lens unit, the second filter unit and the measurement unit are formed sequentially in the direction of the oblique surface. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving signal to noise ratio of the light amplifier device and allow for SPR sensing (Abdulhalim, paragraph [0166]).
Furthermore, the claimed limitations are obvious because all of the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements (i.e. the claimed positioning and configuration of the first lens unit, first filter unit, second lens unit, second filter unit, and measurement unit; and dielectric layers formed of glass) by known methods with no change in their respective functions (i.e. enhanced spectroscopy by directing, focusing, and filtering light towards a measurement unit), and the combinations yielded nothing more than predictable results (i.e. providing the claimed positioning and configuration of the first lens unit, first filter unit, second lens unit, second filter unit, and measurement unit and the dielectric layer formed of glass would yield nothing more than the obvious and predictable result of improving signal to noise ratio of the light amplifier device and allow for SPR sensing as discussed by Abdulhalim, paragraph [0166]). See MPEP 2143(A).
Modified Pyo fails to teach: the amplifier unit comprises: the first plated layer formed of chrome on the dielectric layer; a light waveguide formed of silver on the first plated layer; the second plated layer formed of gold on the light waveguide; wherein the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling an antibody of Troponin I(Tn I) with the second plated layer over two times and coupling the Troponin I containing the fluorescent substance with a secondary antibody of the Troponin I.
Pyo teaches a thin metal film supporting the surface plasmon can include gold or silver, wherein gold shows excellent surface stability (page 6, fourth paragraph; page 8, 6th paragraph). Pyo teaches the use of multiple metal thin films, wherein metal thin films including gold and silver, where silver shows the sharpest SPR resonance peak and gold shows excellent surface stability are commonly used (page 8, 6th paragraph).
Couillard teaches a SPR sensor system (abstract). Couillard teaches a glass substrate (paragraph [0042]). Couillard teaches sensors based on surface plasmon resonance comprising a metal film (paragraph [0070]). Couillard teaches metals such as gold and silver can be used in combination, and an interstitial layer of chrome can be provided between a substrate and metal layer (paragraph [0086]).
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 the amplifier unit of modified Pyo to incorporate the teachings of a SPR sensor including a metal film that includes combinations of gold and silver, and chrome between the substrate and metal film of Couillard (paragraph [0046]) and the teachings of silver showing the sharpest SPR resonance peak gold showing excellent surface stability of Pyo (page 6, fourth paragraph; page 8, 6th paragraph) to provide: the amplifier unit comprises: the first plated layer formed of chrome on the dielectric layer; a light waveguide formed of silver on the first plated layer; the second plated layer formed of gold on the light waveguide. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving and optimizing surface stability and detection of SPR via the layers of metal of the amplifier unit.
Modified Pyo fails to teach: wherein the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling an antibody of Troponin I(Tn I) with the second plated layer over two times and coupling the Troponin I containing the fluorescent substance with a secondary antibody of the Troponin I.
Tamura teaches a specimen on a metal film on a measuring chip (abstract) for analysis using SPR (paragraph [0001]). Tamura teaches a troponin I antibody was fixed on a gold thin film and a cardiac troponin I in a sample and the fixed antibody reacted, and troponin I antibody labeled with a fluorescent dye is reacted between the cardiac troponin I and the label antibody to analyze fluorescence (paragraph [0085]).
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 the fluorescent layer of modified Pyo to incorporate the teachings of SPR analysis using an antibody of troponin I, fluorescent dye, and second antibody of troponin I of Tamura (paragraph [0085]) to provide: wherein the fluorescent layer is formed by coupling an antibody of Troponin I(Tn I) with the second plated layer over two times and coupling the Troponin I containing the fluorescent substance with a secondary antibody of the Troponin I. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving analysis of desired analytes, such as troponin I, thus improving sensitivity and specificity of the device.
Regarding claim 32, modified Pyo fails to teach wherein the first plated layer is formed in around 2nm, the light waveguide is formed in around 50nm and the second plated layer is formed in around 2nm.
Couillard teaches a SPR sensor system (abstract). Couillard teaches a glass substrate (paragraph [0042]). Couillard teaches sensors based on surface plasmon resonance comprising a metal film (paragraph [0070]). Couillard teaches metals such as gold and silver can be used in combination, and an interstitial layer of chrome can be provided between a substrate and metal layer (paragraph [0086]). Couillard teaches the metal coating layer can have a thickness of 20-80 nm, and an interstitial layer of chrome between the gold and silicon layer to improve film adhesion can be less than 5 nm (paragraph [0086]).
Since Couillard teaches metal layer thicknesses (paragraph [0086]) that overlaps with the claimed ranges, 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 the first plated layer, the light waveguide, and the second plated layer of modified Pyo to incorporate known thicknesses of metal layers of a SPR sensor (paragraph [0086]) to provide: wherein the first plated layer is formed in around 2nm, the light waveguide is formed in around 50nm and the second plated layer is formed in around 2nm. I.e., it would have been prima facia obvious to have selected the overlapping portion of the range from the taught ranges of 20-80 and less than 5 nm of Couillard (paragraph [0086]) (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); see MPEP 2144.05 (I)). Furthermore, doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully optimizing optical properties of the amplifier unit.
Claims 33-38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pyo in view of Abdulhalim, Couillard, and Tamura as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of Geddes et al. (US 10024794 B2).
Regarding claim 33, Pyo further teaches wherein the first light is emitted from the light source which is formed of a LED (page 5, 6th paragraph, “LED”) and the second light is emitted from the amplifier device (Fig. 3).
Modified Pyo fails to teach the first light has mean wavelength value of 470nm; and the second light has mean wavelength value of 525nm.
Couillard teaches a light source operating at different wavelengths, for example from 400-1700 nm (paragraph [0078]).
Geddes teaches surface plasmon coupled fluorescence for assays (abstract). Geddes teaches a system comprising a substrate with a thin layer of metallic material, a light emitting molecule having an emission wavelength range of 400-900 nm, and a source of electromagnetic energy for providing excitation energy to excite the energy emitting molecule (column 3, lines 1-16). Geddes teaches labeled antibodies (column 10, lines 36-50). Geddes teaches a light or laser source that transmits microwave to UV energy (column 12, lines 7-13). Geddes teaches excitation may be used at approximately 375 to 900 nm using laser diode sources, wherein a variety of pulsed laser diode sources that will be compatible with fluorophores can be used with the present invention and are commercially available (column 12, lines 22-27).
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 the device and light source of modified Pyo to incorporate Couillard’s teachings of light source operating wavelengths (paragraph [0078]) and Geddes’ teachings of emission and excitation wavelength ranges (column 3, lines 1-16; column 12, lines 7-13; column 12, lines 22-27) to provide: the first light has mean wavelength value of 470nm; and the second light has mean wavelength value of 525nm. Doing so would have been obvious through routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05 (II)), to optimize the wavelengths of the excitation and emission light to excite and detect desired fluorescent substances.
Regarding claim 34, modified Pyo fails to teach: wherein the filter unit is formed to decide the wavelength out of range of 450nm to 490nm from the first light as a first noise and removes the first noise.
Pyo teaches a first optical filter configured to transmit only monochromatic light having a wavelength matching the absorption wavelength of the specific phosphor among light generated by the light source (page 4, 4th paragraph).
Couillard teaches a light source operating at different wavelengths, for example from 400-1700 nm (paragraph [0078]).
Geddes teaches surface plasmon coupled fluorescence for assays (abstract). Geddes teaches a system comprising a substrate with a thin layer of metallic material, a light emitting molecule having an emission wavelength range of 400-900 nm, and a source of electromagnetic energy for providing excitation energy to excite the energy emitting molecule (column 3, lines 1-16). Geddes teaches labeled antibodies (column 10, lines 36-50). Geddes teaches a light or laser source that transmits microwave to UV energy (column 12, lines 7-13). Geddes teaches excitation may be used at approximately 375 to 900 nm using laser diode sources, wherein a variety of pulsed laser diode sources that will be compatible with fluorophores can be used with the present invention and are commercially available (column 12, lines 22-27).
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 the filter unit of modified Pyo to incorporate Pyo’s teachings of transmitting a desired wavelength depending on the specific phosphor (page 4, 4th paragraph), Couillard’s teachings of light source operating wavelengths (paragraph [0078]) and Geddes’ teachings of emission and excitation wavelength ranges (column 3, lines 1-16; column 12, lines 7-13; column 12, lines 22-27) to provide: wherein the filter unit is formed to decide the wavelength out of range of 450nm to 490nm from the first light as a first noise and removes the first noise. Doing so would have been obvious through routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05 (II)), to optimize the desired wavelengths of excitation from the light source and to excite and detect desired fluorescent substances.
Regarding claim 35, modified Pyo fails to teach wherein the second unit is formed to decide the wavelength out of range of 500nm to 550nm from the second light as a first noise and removes the second noise.
Pyo teaches a first optical filter configured to transmit only monochromatic light having a wavelength matching the absorption wavelength of the specific phosphor among light generated by the light source (page 4, 4th paragraph).
Couillard teaches a light source operating at different wavelengths, for example from 400-1700 nm (paragraph [0078]).
Geddes teaches surface plasmon coupled fluorescence for assays (abstract). Geddes teaches a system comprising a substrate with a thin layer of metallic material, a light emitting molecule having an emission wavelength range of 400-900 nm, and a source of electromagnetic energy for providing excitation energy to excite the energy emitting molecule (column 3, lines 1-16). Geddes teaches labeled antibodies (column 10, lines 36-50). Geddes teaches a light or laser source that transmits microwave to UV energy (column 12, lines 7-13). Geddes teaches excitation may be used at approximately 375 to 900 nm using laser diode sources, wherein a variety of pulsed laser diode sources that will be compatible with fluorophores can be used with the present invention and are commercially available (column 12, lines 22-27).
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 the filter unit of modified Pyo to incorporate Pyo’s teachings of transmitting a desired wavelength depending on the specific phosphor (page 4, 4th paragraph), Couillard’s teachings of light source operating wavelengths (paragraph [0078]) and Geddes’ teachings of emission and excitation wavelength ranges (column 3, lines 1-16; column 12, lines 7-13; column 12, lines 22-27) to provide: the second unit is formed to decide the wavelength out of range of 500nm to 550nm from the second light as a first noise and removes the second noise. Doing so would have been obvious through routine optimization (see MPEP 2144.05 (II)), to optimize the desired wavelength emitted from the amplifier unit to improve detection of desired wavelength of fluorescent substances.
Regarding claim 36, modified Pyo fails to teach: wherein the first lens unit is formed of a collimate lens of which a surface is formed in a convex surface to concentrate the first light at a focus point.
Pyo teaches an embodiment comprising a lens unit is formed of a collimate lens of which a surface is formed in a convex surface to concentrate the first light at a focus point (Fig. 2c, lens 27).
Abdulhalim teaches a collimated beam is focused to a line using a cylindrical lens (paragraph [0123]). Abdulhalim teaches collection/imaging optics for the enhanced spectroscopy include lenses, spectral filters, apertures or polarizers as necessary for obtaining the signal with the best signal to noise ratio (paragraph [0166]).
Tamura teaches a beam shaping optical system includes a collimator, wherein the collimator collimates the excitation light emitted from the light source (paragraph [0040]).
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 the first lens unit of Pyo to incorporate the teachings of a collimate lens comprising a convex surface of Pyo (Fig. 2c), the teachings of a collimated beam that is focused of Abdulhalim (paragraph [0123]), the teachings of focusing light with a collimator of Tamura (paragraph [0040]) to provide: wherein the first lens unit is formed of a collimate lens of which a surface is formed in a convex surface to concentrate the first light at a focus point. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving focusing and direction of light to a desired location.
Regarding claim 37, wherein the second lens unit is formed of a convex lens to concentrate the second light to a direction.
Pyo teaches an embodiment comprising a lens unit is formed of a convex lens to concentrate the second light to a direction (Fig. 2c shows lens 27 concentrating light onto light receiving element 26c).
Abdulhalim teaches collection/imaging optics for the enhanced spectroscopy include lenses, spectral filters, apertures or polarizers as necessary for obtaining the signal with the best signal to noise ratio (paragraph [0166]).
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 the second lens unit of Pyo to incorporate the teachings of a lens comprising a convex surface to concentrate light onto a light receiving element of Pyo (Fig. 2c) to provide: the second lens unit is formed of a convex lens to concentrate the second light to a direction. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving focusing and direction of light to the measurement unit.
Regarding claim 38, modified Pyo fails to teach: the light amplifier device of claim 37, wherein further comprising: an aperture unit between the first filter unit and the amplifier unit to adjust light amount of the first light of which the first noise is removed.
Abdulhalim teaches collection/imaging optics for the enhanced spectroscopy include lenses, spectral filters, apertures or polarizers as necessary for obtaining the signal with the best signal to noise ratio (paragraph [0166]).
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 the light amplifier device of modified Pyo to incorporate the teachings of apertures of Abdulhalim (paragraph [0166]) to provide: the light amplifier device of claim 37, wherein further comprising: an aperture unit between the first filter unit and the amplifier unit to adjust light amount of the first light of which the first noise is removed. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully improving signal to noise ratio of the device by adjusting or limiting the amount of light directed to the amplifier unit.
Claim 39 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pyo in view of Abdulhalim, Couillard, Tamura, and Geddes as applied to claim 38 above, and further in view of Schappacher (US 20140312212 A1).
Regarding claim 39, modified Pyo fails to teach: the light amplifier device of claim 38, wherein further comprising an ND filter unit between the second filter unit and the measurement unit to filter collectively light amount of the second light of which the second noise is removed.
Schappacher teaches a microplate reader including a pair of variable filters that together form a wavelength selector (abstract). Schappacher teaches an optical system includes optical elements including lenses, blocking filters, and neutral density filters that are used in single or in a variety of combinations to direct light along an optical path to particular components (paragraph [0022]).
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 the light amplifier device of modified Pyo to incorporate the teachings of optical elements including a combination of lenses, blocking filters, and neutral density filters of Schappacher (paragraph [0022]) to provide: the light amplifier device of claim 38, wherein further comprising an ND filter unit between the second filter unit and the measurement unit to filter collectively light amount of the second light of which the second noise is removed. Doing so would have a reasonable expectation of successfully utilizing known optical components for improving control and direction of desired light to the measurement unit.
Prior Art
Regarding claim 40, modified Pyo (see above rejection of claim 39 under 35 U.S.C. 103) fails to teach: the light amplifier device of claim 39, wherein the amplifier further comprises a silicon additive layer (Polydimethylsiloxane, PDMS) under the dielectric layer, the silicon additive is formed in a plurality of pyramids which is formed using a material with dielectric constant between 1.35 and 1.45.
None of the prior art teaches or fairly suggests, alone or in combination, all of the limitations of claim 40, specifically the light amplifier device of claim 39 in combination with specifically claimed silicon additive layer formed in pyramids under the dielectric layer.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Caracci et al. (US 20050099622 A1) teaches an optical interrogation system (abstract). Caracci teaches an auto-collimating optic including a plano-convex lens pair (paragraph [0053]).
Peterson et al. (US 20150168300 A1) teaches an article to perform SPR imaging (abstract). Peterson teaches Optical transformer 6 can include a first objective lens, a collimating lens, a filter, a polarizer, a tube lens, a beam splitter, or a combination thereof (paragraph [0046]; Figs. 1-5).
Fujimaki et al. (US 20140170024 A1) teaches a target substance detection chip for SPR (abstract; Fig. 3). Fujimaki teaches a light source (403) above polarizing plate (404) and an amplifier device (401). Fujimaki teaches a formation material for the surface plasmon excitation layer contains at least one of gold, silver, copper, platinum, and aluminum (paragraph [0053]). Fujimaki teaches to improve the adhesion, an adhesion layer is formed on an inner surface of the groove portion using nickel or chromium as a formation material, with the metal layer formed on the adhesion layer (paragraph [0152]).
Boem et al. (US 20030099422 A1) teaches a SPR sensor and imaging using (abstract). Boem teaches the sensor (Fig. 6) comprises an amplifier layer (110,120, 121, 122, 127, 170) including: a dielectric medium (110) formed on top of a glass substrate (121), a conductive thin film (122) that may include gold or silver (paragraph [0055]), and a dielectric thin film (170); wherein a chromium (Cr) layer having a thickness of about 2-4 nm is deposited on the glass substrate 121 before deposition of the conductive layer 122 to improve adhesion between the glass substrate 121 and the conductive thin film 122 (paragraph [0055]).
Kochergin (US 20040218249 A1) teaches an imaging system using indicator films (abstract; Figs. 4-5). Kochergin teaches a film structure including layers of Cr, Ag, and Au (paragraph [0137]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-2338. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30A-5:00P.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HENRY H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758