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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim status
Claims 2-4, 6-10 are pending.
Claims 1,5 are canceled.
Claims 2, 3, 4 ,6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 have been amended.
Claim 11 is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2, 4, 6, and 7-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang et. al. (US20120273077) and in view of Handique et. al. (US 6911183 B1).
Regarding claim 8, Lang teaches “A device of fluidic valve type,” (Title, Flow Resistor); “comprising: a fluidic circuit comprising an inlet channel and an outlet channel;” (Para [0041] and Figs 1a and 1b, An inlet opening 34 with hose connection 36 as well as an outlet opening 38 with hose connection 40 are provided in the lower cover 26.); “a fluidic component comprising a fluidic valve mechanism ” (Para [0005], The microvalve comprises a valve chamber with an inlet conduit and an outlet conduit.); “including: a fluidtight reservoir ” (Para [0005] and Figs 1a and 1b, Furthermore, an expansion chamber 16 is provided that contains a working medium that expands upon being heated.).
The recitation “intended to be filled with a volume of gas capable of expanding,” is intended use however also taught within Lang (Para [0042] A medium 42 such as gas or a liquid is enclosed in the cavity 16.). Further taught by Lang “and a deformable membrane closing said reservoir in a fluidtight manner,” (Paras [0042] and [0043], As can be gathered from the FIG. 1a, 1b, the membrane 22 forms a wall of the cavity 16. If the enclosed medium 42 is heated, the membrane 22 deflects, as is shown in FIG. 1b. A medium 42 such as gas or a liquid is enclosed in the cavity 16. ). Therefore, the reservoir which has the membrane around it encloses a liquid which teaches to a fluidtight membrane.
Further taught in the Lang reference, “said membrane being able to deform by expansion of said volume of gas, between a first position in which the membrane forms a passage between said inlet channel and said outlet channel so as to allow a fluid to pass, and a second position in which the membrane obstructs said passage” (Figs 1a and 1b and Para [0044] The membrane 22 is also a limitation of the flow conduit 32 at the same time. The membrane 22 is bent in the direction of the arrow 44 by a pressure exerted on the membrane 22 by the temperature expansion of the medium 42 so that a cross section 46 of the flow conduit 32 is constricted. The flow resistance is consequently increased and the flow rate is reduced.); “and a heating module” (Para [0004], apparatus for heating the thermal expansion solution filled into the pressure-producing space is provided.).
Further taught “designed to heat said volume of gas contained in said reservoir and commanded to heat said volume of gas to a temperature sufficient to expand said volume of gas present in the reservoir, causing the membrane to deform from the first position toward the second position” (Paras [0004], [0005], [0020], [0031] Fig 1a and 1b, Furthermore, an expansion chamber is provided that contains a working medium that expands upon being heated. The cavity preferably receives a gas or liquid as medium. If the medium enclosed in the cavity is heated, the membrane deflects and curves against the helical recess so that the cross section of the flow conduit is reduced and the effective length of the flow conduit is enlarged. a disk for sealing the pressure-producing medium is connected to the bottom surface of the adiabatic chamber and an apparatus for heating the thermal expansion solution filled into the pressure-producing space is provided.).
Lang does not teach “wherein the fluidic circuit comprises a reaction chamber, and wherein said fluidic valve mechanism is arranged on the fluidic circuit opening into said reaction chamber, the heating module being designed to heat both: said reaction chamber in order to perform a detection reaction, and the reservoir of said fluidic valve mechanism so as to expand the volume of gas, causing the membrane to move toward the second position with a view to isolating the chamber during said reaction.”.
Handique teaches the movement and mixing of microdroplets through microchannels employing microscale devices, comprising microdroplet transport channels, reaction regions, electrophoresis modules, and radiation detectors in addition to, “wherein the fluidic circuit comprises a reaction chamber, and wherein said fluidic valve mechanism is arranged on the fluidic circuit opening into said reaction chamber,” (Column 13 lines 30-36 Column 3 lines 62-64, Sample and reagent are injected into the device through entry ports (A) and they are transported as discrete droplets through channels (B) to a reaction chamber, such as a thermally controlled reactor where mixing and reactions (e.g., restriction enzyme digestion or nucleic acid amplification) occur (C). The present invention contemplates microscale devices, comprising microdroplet transport channels having hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions, reaction chambers.) Therefore, the fluidic valve mechanism is within the channel of Lang and the channel of Handique arranged right before the reaction chamber which teaches to the fluidic valve arranged on the fluidic circuit which is open to the reaction chamber.
The recitation “the heating module being designed to heat both: said reaction chamber in order to perform a detection reaction, and the reservoir of said fluidic valve mechanism so as to expand the volume of gas, causing the membrane to move toward the second position with a view to isolating the chamber during said reaction.” is capability of the heating module. Modified Lang discloses the positively claimed structural elements of the heating element as claimed. Such heating element are fully capable of the recited adaption in as much as recited and required herein. However Handique also teaches (Column 17 lines 6-12 , For example, the integral heaters arrayed along the entire surface of the channel used for droplet motion also allow for a region of a channel to be used as a thermal reaction chamber). Therefore, the entire surface of the channel to include a thermal reaction chamber teaches to the part of the channel which has the valve in addition to part of the channel that is the reaction chamber is heated by the heater.
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 Lang to incorporate the teachings of Handique comprising a reaction chamber. Further it would have been obvious that said fluidic valve mechanism is arranged on the fluidic circuit opening into said reaction chamber with the heating module being designed to heat both said reaction chamber in order to perform a detection reaction, and the reservoir of said fluidic valve mechanism so as to expand the volume of gas, causing the membrane to move toward its closure position with a view to isolating the chamber during said reaction. Doing so allows the device to process chemical and biological processes which require a reaction. In addition, the device would then be able to heat both parts of the device with minimal power usage.
Regarding claim 2, Modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above in addition to “at least a first substrate wherein said inlet channel and said outlet channel are produced” (Para [0041] and Figs 1a and 1b, An inlet opening 34 with hose connection 36 as well as an outlet opening 38 with hose connection 40 are provided in the lower cover 26.); “and a second substrate into which there is hollowed a cavity forming said reservoir, facing the inlet channel and the outlet channel,” (Para [0039] and Fig 1a and 1b, silicon wafer 12 housing the cavity 16); and “said membrane being interposed between the first substrate and said second substrate in order to cover said cavity.” (Para [0039] and Fig. 1a and 1b, membrane 22).
Regarding claim 4, Modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above in addition to “wherein said fluidic component is produced in a form of a one-piece element incorporating said fluidic circuit and said fluidic valve mechanism.” (Figs 1a and 1b, the fluidic circuit (inlet and outlet) and the valve mechanism within the substrate 12 stacked together in layers forming a one-piece element). Per applicants specification a single one-piece element may be produced by superposing several layers.
Regarding claim 6, Modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above but Lang does not teach, “wherein said component is produced in the form of a one-piece element able to fit onto a support including said heating module.”
Handique teaches “wherein said component is produced in the form of a one-piece element able to fit onto a support including said heating module.” (Column 20 lines 16-23 , and (FIG. 8A), the device comprises a glass top (810A) bonded to a silicon substrate (810B) containing the heater (891), the contact pad (892) and the resisitive temperature detector (893). The glass side has channels and chambers etched into it. FIG. 8A shows the inlet (820) and overflow (830) ports, a gas vent (870) and an air chamber (880).).
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 Lang to incorporate the teachings of Handique wherein said component is produced in the form of a one-piece element able to fit onto a support including said heating module. Doing so allows heating element to contact the one-piece element with ease and increases the efficiency of the heating element to het the reservoir.
Regarding claim 7, Modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above in addition to “wherein said component is produced in the form of a one-piece element and wherein the heating module is incorporated into said one-piece element.” (Para [0004], Furthermore, a membrane connected to the upper circumference of the adiabatic chamber is provided, whereby the membrane forms a refrigerating agent space into which refrigerating agent is filled in, which refrigerating agent space is arranged between the cover plate and the adiabatic chamber. Furthermore, a disk for sealing the pressure-producing medium is connected to the bottom surface of the adiabatic chamber and an apparatus for heating the thermal expansion solution filled into the pressure-producing space is provided.) Therefore having the disk sealing the pressure producing medium which is connected to the bottom surface of the chamber and an apparatus for heating teaches to the heating module being within the one-piece element. Applicant’s specification teach to a one-piece element being layers put together.
Regarding claim 9, modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above, but Lang does not teach “wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in parallel, each one configured to exhibit a distinct electrical resistance, the first branch being dedicated to providing a first thermal power and the second branch dedicated to providing a second thermal power, said first thermal power being higher than the second thermal power.”.
Handique teaches “wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in parallel,” (Column 18 lines 64-66 and Column 19 lines 12-14, A series of metal heaters was inlaid 65 on the silicon substrate as two parallel lanes merging into a single lane. Some heating elements were also used as resistive temperature sensors.);
The recitation “each one configured to exhibit a distinct electrical resistance, the first branch being dedicated to providing a first thermal power and the second branch dedicated to providing a second thermal power, said first thermal power being higher than the second thermal power.”.” is capability of the two resistive branches. However Handique teaches the resistive temperature sensors which always have a thermal power. Handique also teaches several independent heating elements within (Column 28 lines 51-54, The use of several independent heating elements permits a small number to operate as highly accurate resistive temperature sensors, while the majority of elements are functioning as heaters.). Therefore, the modified device of Lang with Handique would be capable of having resistive branches in parallel with one having a higher thermal power than the other.
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 Lang to incorporate the teachings of Handique wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in parallel. Doing so allows for the device to have more than one heating element that can be controlled and have a different temperature output. This is very useful if a set temperature is needed to cause the a balloon type valve to open or close and another temperature to ensure a chemical or biological reaction is complete within a reaction chamber. The parallel heating element allows for higher current capacity of the device.
Regarding claim 10, modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above, but Lang does not teach “wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in series, each one configured to exhibit a distinct electrical resistance, the first branch being dedicated to providing a first thermal power and the second branch dedicated to providing a second thermal power distinct from the first thermal power.”
Handique teaches “wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in series” (Column 4 lines 41-47, and Column 19 lines 12-14, it comprises a series of aluminum heating elements arrayed along said transport channel and the microdroplets are conveyed by differential heating of the microdroplet by the heating elements. Some heating elements were also used as resistive temperature sensors.)
The recitation “each one configured to exhibit a distinct electrical resistance, the first branch being dedicated to providing a first thermal power and the second branch dedicated to providing a second thermal power distinct from the first thermal power” is capability of the two resistive branches. However Handique teaches the resistive temperature sensors which always have a thermal power. Handique also teaches several independent heating elements within (Column 28 lines 51-54, The use of several independent heating elements permits a small number to operate as highly accurate resistive temperature sensors, while the majority of elements are functioning as heaters.). Therefore, the modified device of Lang with Handique would be capable of having resistive branches in series with one having a higher thermal power than the other.
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 Lang to incorporate the teachings of Handique comprising a wherein the heating module comprises at least two resistive branches in series. Doing so allows for the device to have more than one heating element that can be controlled and have a different temperature output. This is very useful if a set temperature is needed to cause the a balloon type valve to open or close and another temperature to ensure a chemical or biological reaction is complete within a reaction chamber. The series branches offer a device which is uses low power easier to assemble and provides a higher voltage.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lang et. al. (US20120273077) Handique et. al. (US 6911183 B1) as applied to claim 8 in addition to Hansen et. al. (US 20030061687 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Modified Lang teaches all of claim 8 as above but does not teach “wherein the membrane is produced from a material of elastomer type.”
Hansen teaches introducing a solution of the target material into a plurality of chambers of a microfabricated fluidic device in addition to “wherein the membrane is produced from a material of elastomer type.” (Para [0009], An embodiment of a method of metering a volume of a crystallizing agent to promote crystallization in accordance with the present invention comprises providing a chamber having a volume in an elastomeric block separated from a control recess by an elastomeric membrane, and supplying a pressure to the control recess such that the membrane is deflected into the chamber and the volume is reduced by a calibrated amount, thereby excluding from the chamber a calibrated volume of a crystallization sample.).
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 Lang to incorporate the teachings of Hansen wherein the membrane is produced from a material of elastomer type. Doing so allows the membrane to have the flexibility within the membrane to act as a valve which is claimed in claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/9/2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant states that the cited references fail to disclose or provide its obvious to modify a heating module designed to heat both a reaction chamber and a reservoir to actuate the membrane, in order to isolate the chamber for the reaction.
Examiner maintains that the recitation is capability of the heating module. The cited references teach to the heating module being capable of performing such capabilities. In addition, teachings of the entire surface of the channel to include a thermal reaction chamber teaches to the part of the channel which has the valve in addition to part of the channel that is the reaction chamber is heated by the heater.
Applicant states that Claim 11 recites the subject matter within Claim 8 and should be rejoined.
Examiner maintains the restriction set forth for Claim 11.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 VELVET E HERON whose telephone number is 571-272-1557. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30am – 4:30 pm.
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