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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 4/5/2023, 4/21/2024, 6/13/2024, 10/28/2025, and 6/8/2026 have been considered by the Examiner.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) is acknowledged. Priority of US application 63/090676 filed 10/12/2020 is acknowledged.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-18 are under examination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claims 1-5, 8-14 and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sidhom et al. (Journal of Visual Experiments, vol. 143 (2019) pgs. 1-9) in view of Hiromoto et al. (JP 2020056593; IDS filed 4/5/2023).
Sidhom et al. teach a graphical user interface for analysis of cytometry data (Title). Sidhom et al. teach the graphical user interface that allows from a streamline work flow from lift to right (Figure 2 and caption)(i.e. processing condition setting screen for accepting input of operation control data pertaining to a sorting process of a bioparticle containing sample), as in claims 1 and 18.
Sidhom et al. teach (Figure 2) a multi-window display with multiple areas (i.e. a first and second display) with a selection of type of cytometry (Figure 2, item 1 and Table 1, No. 1)(i.e. for displaying an operation flow for setting a sorting process condition for the sample) and windows for data (i.e. for display measurement data pertaining to the sample), as in claims 1 and 18.
Sidhom et al. do not specifically teach that the first display area is disposed in an end section of the processing condition setting screen, as in claims 1 and 18.
However, Hiromoto et al. also teach a multi-window display software interface with a “first” display area on the far right end of the screen (Figure 9, item BA10). Hiromoto et al. the software as part of a particle analyzer that includes a control unit and client terminal (Figure 2, items 100 and 300 and Fig. 2 and translation page 3, par. 3), as in claims 1 and 18.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have combined the teachings of Sidhom et al. for a multi-window user interface that includes buttons for commanding data operations and display, with the teachings of Hiromoto et al. for multiple windows where at least one display area is on the far right end of the screen (i.e. end section of the setting screen). One of ordinary skill would be motivated to place a display on an end section of the display so as to maximize the access and visibility of the main display. Furthermore, graphics interface software technology is well known and one of ordinary skill would design the layout of display windows and command buttons as most convenient or based on preference. Such is a combination of known elements that would yield a predictable result.
Regarding dependent claims 2-5, 8-14 and 16-17
Sidhom et al. teach touch icons (i.e. buttons) for processing data including selecting files (Figure 2, item 3), Clustering (Figure 2, items 16-20), creating a heat may (Figure 2, items 24-26)(i.e. a procedure button area with multiple process buttons included in the operation flow arranged following an order for processing), as in claim 2.
Sidhom et al. teach a display window area that displays the clusters (Figure 2, item 9), a in claim 2.
Sidhom et al. teach data display area on the lower left, a cluster name display on the right (Figure 2, items 21 and 39) and buttons on the top and top right (Figure 2, items 32, 33, 38) wherein it is known to one of ordinary skill that a graphic user interface may be designed to position windows and touch screen buttons based on common sense accessibility. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill to arrange a display window on either the left or right side and button area to either the right or left of the display windows, as in claims 3-4.
Sidhom et al. teach the ability to apply gates directly on the t-SNE plots (Abstract) wherein the tSNE plots are shown in Figure 2, item 9 (i.e. second display area is configured to accept input of gate information for identifying bioparticles to be sorted in the process), as in claim 5.
Sidhom et al. teach a window for displaying cluster data (Figure 2) and which can also display heat maps (Figure 1 and caption)(i.e. second display area configured to display one or more plots). The graphic interface of Sidhom et al. teach buttons for controlling the display including selecting clusters, clearing clusters (Figure 2, items 19, 20) filtering clusters and creating heatmaps (Figure 2, items 24, 27)(i.e. second display area causes one or more operation buttons for displaying data associated with the plots to be displayed), as in claim 8
In another embodiment, Tatsuya et al. also teach multiple windows with multiple plots (Figures 20, 21 and 22)(i.e. second display area configured to display one or more plots) and graphic interface buttons BA1, BA2, BA3 above the window for operations (i.e. second display area causes one or more operation buttons for displaying data associated with the plots to be displayed), as in claim 8.
Sidhom et al. teach a graphic user interface configured to display, clear and redisplay clusters (Figure 2)(i.e. back data used to generate the plot), as in claim 9.
Sidhom et al. teach selecting populations of cells of interest and entering percentage of events down stream analysis (page 2, par. 8, item 4. “Gate Population”); Sidnom et al. also teach gated data (page 4, par. 1)(i.e. back data includes statistic information for each gate), as in claim 10.
Sidhom et al. teach calculating the compensation matrix (i.e. fluorescence correction matrix) from select data (page 1, Abstract), as in claim 11.
Sidhom et al. teach selecting areas of interest on the t-SNE plots for further downstream analysis (i.e. back data) using the Gate t-SNE button (page 2, section “3. t-SNE Analysis”) and applying clustering analysis (page 3, items 2-8) and cluster filtering (page 3, section “5. Cluster Filtration”)(i.e. wherein it is possible to change the plot in response to operation with back data), as in claim 12.
Sidhom et al. teach plotting clusters and using a slide-bar (page 3, section “5. Cluster Filtration” item 2.); furthermore, graphing software for displaying data with slide bars on the axis are well known, as in claims 13-14.
Sidhom et al. buttons including a button for a heat map of clusters (Figure 2, item 27)(i.e. plot button for performing an operation on a plot displayed within the area), as in claim 16.
Hiromoto et al. teach a particle analyzer (Fig. 2 and translation page 3, par. 1) including screens (translation page 3, last par.) wherein a control unit (i.e. computer)(Figure 2, item 100) may be integrated. It would therefore be obvious to one of ordinary skill to integrate or place a display on the surface housing of the particle analyzer, as in claim 17.
Claims 6, 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sidhom et al. (Journal of Visual Experiments, vol. 143 (2019) pgs. 1-9) in view of Hiromoto et al. (JP 2020056593; IDS filed 4/5/2023), as applied to claims 1-5, 7-14 and 16-18 set forth above, in further view of Johnson et al. (Health Information Science and Systems, vol. 1 (2012) pgs. 1-15).
Sidhom et al. in view of Hiromoto et al. teach claims 1-5, 7-14 and 16-18 as set forth above.
Sidhom et al. teach operation tool selection buttons (Figure 2), as in claim 7.
Sidhom et al. in view of Hiromoto et al. do not teach an operation panel for performing an operation on the plot is displayed in response to a plot being touched, as in claim 6.
Sidhom et al. in view of Hiromoto et al. do not teach an enlarged image in response to a data display portion of a plot being touched, as in claim 15.
Johnson et al. teach visualization interface software for metabolic pathways including a “popover” that appears in response to a tap (page 4, col. 2, par. 3) wherein the popover contains activate and deactivate features and can appear over a graphic (page 5, col. 2, lines 3 lines and Figure 7)(i.e. an operation panel for performing an operation on the plot is caused to be displayed near the touched portion), as in claim 6.
Johnson et al. teach a touch screen that allows zooming (page 2, col. 2, par. 3) and scroll views that contains another larger view of an image (page 4, col. 2) and which can be applied to a graph (page 5, col. 2)(i.e. in response to a data display portion being touched, an enlarged image of the touched portion is displayed), as in claim 15.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have combined the teachings of Sidhom et al. in view of Hiromoto et al. for a multi display screen with processing button, with the teachings of Johnson et al. who teach a user interface with zoom-in functionality and popover that allows for display of additional command/input interfaces. Johnson et al. provide motivation by teaching their interactive visualization functionalities allow users to interact with the data in multiple ways (Abstract). One of ordinary skill would know that popovers relieve an interface from crowding. One of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success at combining Sidhom et al. in view of Hiromoto et al. with Johnson et al. because all teach a user interface to display and interact with data.
E-mail communication Authorization
Per updated USPTO Internet usage policies, Applicant and/or applicant’s representative is encouraged to authorize the USPTO examiner to discuss any subject matter concerning the above application via Internet e-mail communications. See MPEP 502.03. To approve such communications, Applicant must provide written authorization for e-mail communication by submitting the following statement via EFS Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300):
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
Written authorizations submitted to the Examiner via e-mail are NOT proper. Written authorizations must be submitted via EFS-Web (using PTO/SB/439) or Central Fax (571-273-8300). A paper copy of e-mail correspondence will be placed in the patent application when appropriate. E-mails from the USPTO are for the sole use of the intended recipient, and may contain information subject to the confidentiality requirement set forth in 35 USC § 122. See also MPEP 502.03.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna Skibinsky whose telephone number is (571) 272-4373. The examiner can normally be reached on 12 pm - 8:30 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Ram Shukla can be reached on (571) 272-7035. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Anna Skibinsky/
Primary Examiner, AU 1635
Prosecution Insights