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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5-10, 12-14, 16-18, 20 and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sharon et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2012/0077260).
Regarding claim 1, Sharon et al. discloses a microfluidic mixing platform (title; figures 3A and 3B) comprising:
at least a first input port (figure 3A and 3B, connection to VI1) and a second input port (figures 3A and 3B, connection to VI2);
at least a first output port (figures 3A and 3B, connection out of VE1);
a flow path interconnecting the first input port, the second input port, and the first output port (see figures 3A and 3B);
at least a first switch valve downstream of the first input port and upstream of the first output port (figures 3A and 3B, reference VI1; [0036]-[0037]), and at least a second switch valve downstream of the second input port and upstream of the first output port (figures 3A and 3B, reference VI2; [0036]-[0037]); and
at least a first mixing feature downstream of the first and second switch valves and upstream of the first output port (figures 3A and 3B, “mixer”; [0036]-[0037]);
wherein the first switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the first switch valve allows the first input port to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the first mixing feature, and wherein in the second state the first switch valve prevents the first input port from being fluidly connected to the first mixing feature (figures 3A and 3B, reference VI1; [0036]-[0037]), and
wherein the second switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the second switch valve allows the second input port to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the first mixing feature, and wherein in the second state the second switch valve prevents the second input port from being fluidly connected to the first mixing feature (figures 3A and 3B, reference VI2; [0036]-[0037]).
Regarding claim 5, Sharon et al. discloses a third switch valve downstream of the first mixing feature and upstream of the first output port, wherein the third switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the third switch valve allows the first mixing feature to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the first output port, and wherein in the second state the third switch valve prevents the first mixing feature from being fluidly connected to the first output port (figures 3A and 3B, VE1; [0036]-[0037]).
Regarding claim 6, Sharon et al. discloses a waste output port downstream of the first mixing feature (figure 3A, connection out of VE2; figure 3B, connection out of VE2, “waste”).
Regarding claim 7, Sharon et al. discloses a third switch valve downstream of the first mixing feature and upstream of the waste output port, wherein the third switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the third switch valve allows the first mixing feature to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the waste output port, and wherein in the second state the third switch valve prevents the first mixing feature from being fluidly connected to the waste output port (figures 3A and 3B, reference VE2; [0036]-[0037]).
Regarding claim 8, Sharon et al. discloses a third input port interconnected to the first output port by the flow path (figure 5A, reference #80).
Regarding claim 9, Sharon et al. discloses wherein the third input port is upstream of the first mixing feature (figure 5A, reference #80 upstream reference #30).
Regarding claim 10, Sharon et al. discloses a third switch valve downstream of the third input port and upstream of the first output port, wherein the third switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the third switch valve allows the third input port to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the first mixing feature, and wherein in the second state the third switch valve prevents the third input port from being fluidly connected to the first mixing feature (figures 5A and 5C, reference #80).
Regarding claim 12, Sharon et al. discloses wherein the first and third input ports are capable for the introduction of materials, and wherein the second input port is capable for the introduction of clearing buffer (figures 3A and 3B, connection to VI1 and VI2; figures 5A and 5C, reference #10, 20 and 80). The limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon which does not further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” Any of the input ports are capable to introduce any of the materials.
Regarding claim 13, Sharon et al. discloses wherein the first and second input ports are for the introduction of materials (figures 3A and 3B, connection to VI1 and VI2; figures 5A and 5C, reference #10 and 20), and wherein the third input port is for the introduction of clearing buffer (figures 5A and 5C, reference #80, “elution buffer”). The limitation is directed to the material or article worked upon which does not further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2115. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”
Regarding claim 14, Sharon et al. discloses wherein the output port is for the exit of materials having been mixed in the first mixing feature (figures 3A and 3B, connection out of VE1 and its connection to mixed materials from mixer and VI1 and VI2; figure 3C; [0036]-[0038]).
Regarding claim 16, Sharon et al. discloses wherein at least one of the first and second switch valves comprises a valve selected from a group consisting of: a socket valve; a rocker valve; a flipper valve; a plunger valve; a capillary valve; and a ball valve ([0119]-[0120]).
Regarding claim 17, Sharon et al. discloses wherein at least one of the first and second switch valves is switchable between the first state and the second state in response to volumetric pressure ([0117]-[0120]).
Regarding claim 18, Sharon et al. discloses wherein at least one of the first and second switch valves is switchable between the first state and the second state in response to pneumatic pressure ([0117]-[0120]).
Regarding claim 20, Sharon et al. discloses
a third switch valve downstream of the first input port and upstream of the output port (figure 5A and 5C, reference #80);
a fourth switch valve downstream of the second input port and upstream of the output port (figures 5A and 5C, reference #90); and
a second mixing feature downstream of the third and fourth switch valves and upstream of the output port (figures 5A and 5C, reference #110),
wherein the third switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the third switch valve allows the first input port to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the second mixing feature, and wherein in the second state the third switch valve prevents the first input port from being fluidly connected to the second mixing feature (figure 5A and 5C, reference #80), and
wherein the fourth switch valve is switchable between at least a first state and a second state, wherein in the first state the fourth switch valve allows the second input port to be fluidly connected via the flow path to the second mixing feature, and wherein in the second state the fourth switch valve prevents the second input port from being fluidly connected to the second mixing feature (figure 5A and 5C, reference #80).
The terms “downstream” and “upstream” are directed to a manner of operating disclosed platform because they depend on the flow of material through the mixing platform which may be directed in many different directions based on the control of the valves throughout the flow paths, and it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.” The various valves may be considered upstream or downstream depending on the closing and opening of the valves in many different arrangements and depending relative to which fluid flow or mixture of fluid flows.
Regarding claim 22, Sharon et al. discloses wherein the first mixing feature comprises one or both of a Dean's Vortex mixer and a herringbone mixer ([0072]).
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.
Claim(s) 15 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharon et al. in view of Tan (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2011/0120562).
Regarding claim 15, Sharon et al. discloses all the limitations as set forth above. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose the specific type of valve to be a compression/diaphragm pump. As there are many types of pumps known in the art before the time of filing, including a diaphragm pump, as evidenced by Tan ([0032]), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the valve to be a diaphragm valve, as taught by Tan, because selecting one of known designs for a valve would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing and because said valve being a diaphragm valve would operate equally well as the one disclosed by Sharon et al.
Regarding claim 19, Sharon et al. discloses all the limitations as set forth above. However, the reference does not explicitly disclose wherein at least one of the first and second switch valves is switchable between the first state and the second state by a solenoid. Sharon et al. teaches the valves can be actuated by various means including manually, mechanically, electronically, pneumatically, magnetically, fluidically or by chemical means ([0117]). Since the prior art of Sharon et al. and Tan recognizes the equivalency of various valve actuation, including by a solenoid ([0032]) in the field of microfluidic systems, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the time of filing to replace the pneumatic valve actuation of Sharon et al. with the solenoid valve actuation of Tan as it is merely the selection of functionally equivalent valve actuators recognized in the art and one of ordinary skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in doing so.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues Sharon fails to disclose at least a first switch valve downstream of the first input port and upstream of the first output port, and at least a second switch valve downstream of the second input port and upstream of the first output port as required by claim 1 because valves VI1 and VI2 are located outside of the microfluidic chip upstream of (before) the inlet. Examiner finds this argument unpersuasive. Claim 1 does not require the first and second switch valves and the first and second inlets be part of the chip. Clam 1 recites a platform only which includes elements outside of the chip, and the chip is not even recited in claim 1. Sharon discloses tanks each with an input port that feeds each material to the first and second switch valves (see figure 1 and paragraph [0033]) and Sharon shows in figures 3A and 3B an input port (where the arrows are) before each first and second valve VI1/VI2 (see marked up figure 3A below showing the input ports before the switch valves). It doesn’t matter where the interface for the chip is in relation to the input ports and/or valves because that is not part of the claim limitations. Therefore, Sharon continues to read on the limitations of the claims as detailed in the rejection above.
PNG
media_image1.png
502
626
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
