CTNF 18/025,354 CTNF 100554 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 08-25-01 AIA Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-13 and 19 in the reply filed on 1/12/2026 is acknowledged. 08-06 AIA Claim s 15-17, are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method of performing a droplet operation there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 1/12/2026 . Claims 1-13, and 19 are pending examination in this response. Claim status Claims 1-13 and 19 are pending. Claims 15-17 are withdrawn. Claims 14 and 20-22 are canceled. Claim 19 is amended . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 1, 5, 9, 10, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 ( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Yao teaches “A digital microfluidic device” (Page 5, PCR microfluidic chip) “comprising: (a) a bottom plate” (Page 9, first insulating layer 530) “comprising a plurality of pixel electrodes ” (Page 6, electrodes 212 of the plurality of driving units 210) “(b) a composite top plate comprising: a top plate substrate” ( Page 10, second insulating layer 550) “a first material;” (Page 10, The second insulating layer 550 is similar to the first insulating layer 530) “ a top plate common electrode” (Page 10, the common electrode layer 560) , “and a plurality of penetrations through the top plate substrate,” (Page 10, and Figs. 2 and 3, For example, the chip 100 further includes multiple temperature control components, each of which includes a heating electrode 580 and a temperature sensing electrode 590. First temperature zone 131, a second temperature zone 132, and a third temperature zone 133.) “wherein at least one of the penetrations contains a second material” (Page 10, heating electrode 580) “having at least one of: a higher thermal conductivity than the first material” (Page 12, consider the heating electrode 580 as an internal electromagnetic heat source, the thermal conductivity and heat of the first substrate 510 and each film layer on it, the second substrate 520 and each film layer on it In the case of radiation heat dissipation, the working voltage of the heating electrode 580 is positively related to the temperature of the working area), “and a higher magnetic permeability” (Page 10, The common electrode layer 560 may use transparent conductive materials, such as ITO, IZO, etc., or metal materials) “ than the first material.” (Page 9, The first insulating layer 530 functions as insulation, protection, etc., and materials such as resin and silicon nitride can be used.). Regarding claim 5, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above in addition to “wherein the second material is a metal or metal alloy.” (Page 11, The heating electrode 580 may use a transparent conductive material, such as ITO, IZO, etc., or a metal material, such as chromium, etc.). Regarding claim 9, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above in addition to “ wherein at least one penetration spans a portion smaller than the full thickness of the top plate.” (Fig. 3, 580 does not span the fill thickness of the top plate). Regarding claim 10, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above in addition to “ further comprising a temperature controller for regulating the temperature in at least one of the penetrations, wherein the temperature controller is operably connected to a plurality of thermal control elements.” (Page 10, The chip 100 further includes multiple temperature control components, each of which includes a heating electrode 580 and a temperature sensing electrode 590.). Regarding claim 19, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above in addition to “ wherein:(i) the top plate and the bottom plate are provided in a spaced relationship defining a microfluidic space there between;” (Fig 3, 550 and 530) “ and(ii) the penetrations create at least one high-resolution zone in the microfluidic space, wherein the high-resolution zone has at least one of: a higher thermal resolution than in the digital microfluidic device without the penetrations,” (Page 12, consider the heating electrode 580 as an internal electromagnetic heat source, the thermal conductivity and heat of the first substrate 510 and each film layer on it, the second substrate 520 and each film layer on it In the case of radiation heat dissipation, the working voltage of the heating electrode 580 is positively related to the temperature of the working area) “ and a higher magnetic resolution than in the digital microfluidic device without the penetrations.” (Page 10, The common electrode layer 560 may use transparent conductive materials, such as ITO, IZO, etc., or metal materials) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2, 4, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Kayyem et. al (US 20070098600 A1) . Regarding claim 2, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein a ratio k 2 : k 1 is at least 10: 1, wherein k 1 is the thermal conductivity of the first material and k 2 is the thermal conductivity of the second material.”. Yao does teach thermal conductivity and one is greater within (Page 12, consider the heating electrode 580 as an internal electromagnetic heat source, the thermal conductivity and heat of the first substrate 510 and each film layer on it, the second substrate 520 and each film layer on it In the case of radiation heat dissipation, the working voltage of the heating electrode 580 is positively related to the temperature of the working area). Kayyem teaches a biochip cartridge comprises a detection chamber with an array of electrodes. In addition to the biochip cartridge comprises one or more thermal heaters. Further taught by Kayyem teaches to maximize thermal conductivity and thermally isolate parts of the device within (Paras [0023] and [0135], In this embodiment, the reaction chamber is designed to maximize thermal conductivity between the chamber and the heater or thermocontroller. Generally, designs that minimize thermal mass (i.e., making the surface of the chamber in contact with the heat source as thin as possible), impose certain geometric constraints to ensure the complete removal of liquid from the chamber, incorporate materials that are good thermal conductors (i.e., metals), and thermally isolate the chamber from the rest of the chip are preferred. The temperature difference between the thermal zones is maintained by creating air pocket cut-outs 167 that have a lower thermally conductivity than the surrounding ceramic.). Yao nor Kayyem teach “wherein a ratio k 2 : k 1 is at least 10: 1, wherein k 1 is the thermal conductivity of the first material and k 2 is the thermal conductivity of the second material.”. However, it would have been clearly within the ordinary skills of an artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Yao to incorporate Kayyem and have a 10:1 ratio of thermal conductivity of the first material to the second material, since that would have been a matter of an obvious engineering choice, to better adjust the device to be able to isolate specific parts of the device as taught within Kayyem above. Regarding claim 4, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the first material is selected from the group consisting of glass, polymethylmethacrylate, polycarbonate, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyimide, and combinations thereof.” Kayyem teaches “wherein the first material is selected from the group consisting of glass, polymethylmethacrylate, polycarbonate, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyimide, and combinations thereof.” (Para [0078], Suitable materials include, but are not limited to, fiberglass, teflon, ceramics, glass, silicon, mica, plastic (including acrylics, polystyrene and copolymers of styrene and other materials, polypropylene, polyethylene, polybutylene, polycarbonate, polyurethanes, Teflon.TM., and derivatives thereof, etc.). 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Kayyem wherein the first material is selected from the group consisting of glass, polymethylmethacrylate, polycarbonate, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyimide, and combinations thereof. Doing so would increase the thermal operation and robustness of the device allowing for increased temperature settings. Regarding claim 6, Yao teaches all of claim 5 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the second material is selected from the group consisting of aluminum, steel, mu-metal, permalloy, and combinations thereof.”. Kayyem teaches “wherein the second material is selected from the group consisting of aluminum, steel, mu-metal, permalloy, and combinations thereof.”. (Para [0156], Preferred electrodes are known in the art and include, but are not limited to, certain metals and their oxides, including gold; platinum; palladium; silicon; aluminum; metal oxide electrodes including platinum oxide, titanium oxide, tin oxide, indium tin oxide, palladium oxide, silicon oxide, aluminum oxide, molybdenum oxide (Mo2O6), tungsten oxide (WO3) and ruthenium oxides; and carbon (including glassy carbon electrodes, graphite and carbon paste). Preferred electrodes include gold, silicon, carbon and metal oxide electrodes, with gold being particularly preferred.) 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Kayyem wherein the second material is selected from the group consisting of aluminum, steel, mu-metal, permalloy, and combinations thereof. Doing so increases the magnetic shielding in addition to increased thermal control which for a device which has both the magnetic and thermal parts would make for an optimal device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 3 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Foster et. al. (US 20200179931 A1) . Regarding claim 3, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein a ratio P 2 : P1 is at least 10 : 1, wherein p1 is the magnetic relative permeability of the first material and P 2 is the magnetic relative permeability of the second material.”. Yao does teach having a conductive material within (Page 10, The heating electrode 580 may use a transparent conductive material, such as ITO, IZO, etc., or a metal material, such as chromium, etc.). Foster teaches a device including a sorting magnet and at least one particle manipulation device, in addition to microfluidic channel and valve. Foster teaches chromium as a permeable material which has a relative permeability. (Para [0071], That is, a permeable material or material with high magnetic permeability is a material with a relative permeability (compared to air or vacuum) of at least about 100, that is, 100 times the permeability of air or vacuum which is about 1.26×10.sup.−6 H.Math.m.sup.−1. There are many examples of permeable materials, including chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni) and iron (Fe) alloys. One popular permeable material is known as Permalloy, which has a composition of between about 60% and about 90% Ni and 40% and 10% iron. The most common composition is 80% Ni and 20% Fe, which has a relative permeability of about 8,000.) Yao nor Foster teach “wherein a ratio P 2 : P1 is at least 10 : 1, wherein p1 is the magnetic relative permeability of the first material and P 2 is the magnetic relative permeability of the second material.”. However, it would have been clearly within the ordinary skills of an artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Yao to incorporate Foster and have a 10:1 ratio of magnetic relative permeability of the first material to the second material, since Yao teaches chromium and Foster teaches it has a magnetic relative permeability. In addition, having this ratio would have been a matter of an obvious engineering choice, to better adjust the device to have fluid control and thermal management. Regarding claim 11, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “further comprising a magnetic controller for actuating a magnetic field in at least one of the penetrations, wherein the magnetic controller is operably connected to a plurality of magnetic elements.”. Yao does teach the magnetic field within (Page 12, When the ambient temperature is set to 293.15K (that is, 20°C), consider the heating electrode 580 as an internal electromagnetic heat source). Foster teaches “further comprising a magnetic controller for actuating a magnetic field in at least one of the penetrations, wherein the magnetic controller is operably connected to a plurality of magnetic elements.” (Para [0082], Upon detection of the target particle, a signal is sent to the controller controlling the electromagnet 500,). 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Foster wherein the device has comprising a magnetic controller for actuating a magnetic field in at least one of the penetrations, wherein the magnetic controller is operably connected to a plurality of magnetic elements. Doing so allows for automation of the process in which the device is used . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Wilson et. al. ( US 20200101460 A1) . Regarding claim 12, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein the bottom plate comprises a thin film transistor (TFT) array.”. Wilson teaches electrowetting on dielectric (EWOD) device in addition to theelectrode array of the microfluidics device and “wherein the bottom plate comprises a thin film transistor (TFT) array.” (Para [0002], EWOD in an active matrix array incorporating transistors, for example by using thin film transistors (TFTs).). 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Wilson wherein the bottom plate comprises a thin film transistor (TFT) array. Doing so increases sensitivity and increase throughput . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Delattre et. al. (AU 2013284425 A1) . Regarding claim 7, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “wherein at least one penetration spans the full thickness of the top plate. ”. However Yao does teach the heating electrode and the sensing electrode have the same thickness within (Page 12, The electrode line width of the heating electrode 580 is 150 micrometers, and the thickness is 200 nanometers. The electrode line width of the temperature sensing electrode 590 is 50 μm, and the thickness is 200 nm. ). Delattre teaches a droplet actuator within a microfluidics system which incudes thermal control. Delattre also teaches “wherein at least one penetration spans the full thickness of the top plate. ” (Fig. 5B and Page 14, Openings are provided in top substrate 312 for fitting 20 probes 512 therethrough in a slideable fashion. Because probes 512 are fitted into top substrate 312 in a slideable fashion, the position of the tips of the probes 512 may be adjusted with respect to the droplet operations gap 314.) Therefore the penetrations which are represented by 512 are the entire span of full thickness as the substrate 312 which is the top plate. 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Delattre wherein at least one penetration spans the full thickness of the top plate. Doing so allows for components independent of the device to be connected on to and through the top plate. This increases the versatility of the device allowing not only electrodes to be connected but also other sensors. Regarding claim 13, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “ wherein at least a portion of the top plate substrate comprises 5 to 50 penetrations per square centimeter.”. Delattre teaches between 5 to 50 penetrations within (Fig. 5B and Page 14, Openings are provided in top substrate 312 for fitting 20 probes 512 therethrough in a slideable fashion. Because probes 512 are fitted into top substrate 312 in a slideable fashion, the position of the tips of the probes 512 may be adjusted with respect to the droplet operations gap 314.). Yao nor Delattre teach at least a portion of the top plate substrate comprises 5 to 50 penetrations per square centimeter . However, it would have been clearly within the ordinary skills of an artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the invention of Yao by having between 5 to 50 penetrations pre square centimeter, since Delattre teaches between 5 to 50 penetrations in addition to teaching microfluidics systems. Many microfluidic systems are the size of a square centimeter. Therefore, it would have been a matter of an obvious engineering choice, to have that many penetrations within that size on a microfluidic device. In addition, if multiple square centimeters were present with between 5 to 50 penetrations it would increase the processing ability of the device . 07-21-aia AIA Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yao et. al. (WO2020142938 A1) as applied to claim 1 and in further view of Pallas et. al. (EP 2825312 B1) . Regarding claim 8, Yao teaches all of claim 1 as above but does not explicitly teach “ wherein at least one penetration is tapered.”. Pallas teaches substrate 110 has a thickness between first surface 112 and second surface 114 of 300 micrometers in addition to “ wherein at least one penetration is tapered.” (Page. 5, the through-holes or wells may be tapered in diameter. Reduction in reaction volumes of liquid sample may allow for a higher density of reaction volumes so that more reactions can be performed within a given area. For example, an array of reaction sites comprised of 300 .Math.m diameter through-holes in a substrate may contain about 30 nL of reaction volume). 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 Yao to incorporate the teachings of Pallas wherein at least one penetration is tapered. Doing so allows for more control over either droplets or electrodes within the penetration. 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 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 2 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 3 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 4 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 5 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 6 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 7 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 8 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 9 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 10 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 11 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 12 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 13 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 14 Art Unit: 1798 Application/Control Number: 18/025,354 Page 15 Art Unit: 1798