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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claims 1-3, 7 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0253915 to Du et al. (cited by applicant)
Du et al. teaches a microdroplet generating apparatus, system and method that includes a liquid discharging nozzle (micro-pipe 1), that includes an inlet end and an outlet end and is configured to store a first liquid as shown in Fig. 1. [0094]
Du et al. also teaches a liquid driving mechanism (liquid driving device 4) connected to the inlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle and configured to discharge the first liquid stored in the liquid discharging nozzle from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle that is shown in Fig. 1. [0095]
Du et al. also teaches a motion controlling mechanism (vibrating equipment 3) configured to control the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle to move with a preset acceleration below a surface of a second liquid, so that the first liquid discharged from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle forms a microdroplet below the liquid surface of the second liquid as shown in Fig. 1. [0015]
Du et al. teaches that the motion controlling mechanism moves the outlet end of the nozzle back and forth or horizontally. [0014]
Du et al. further teaches that the outlet end of the nozzle is positioned below the surface of a second liquid so that the first liquid is discharged as microdroplets. [0015]
Du et al. teaches that volumes of the droplets can be controlled by regulating the flow rate of the first liquid, the vibration frequency, the vibration amplitude, etc. [0043] Thus, Du et al. teaches a controller (first controller) that is connected to operate the liquid driving mechanism and the motion controlling mechanism, respectively, to control the liquid driving mechanism and the motion controlling mechanism to work cooperatively.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above Du et al. teaches all the elements of claim 1.
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 1.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 2, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 1, from which claim 2 depends.
Claim 2 recites that wherein the motion controlling mechanism is configured to drive the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle to move with an instantaneous acceleration below the liquid surface of the second liquid.
The manner in which Du et al. vibrates the outlet end of the nozzle back and forth reads on moving the outlet end of the nozzle with instantaneous acceleration below the surface of the second liquid. [0116]
Therefore Du et al. anticipates claim 2.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 3, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 2, from which claim 3 depends.
Claim 3 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured to drive the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle make a periodic motion including an instantaneous accelerated motion below the liquid surface of the second liquid.
The manner in which Du et al. vibrates the outlet end of the nozzle back and forth reads on driving the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle in a periodic motion including an
instantaneous acceleration motion below the surface of the second liquid. [0116]
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 3.
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 7, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 2, from which claim 7 depends.
Claim 7 recites that outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle is configured to move below the liquid surface of the second liquid in a direction perpendicular to, parallel to, or having an arbitrarily angle relative to an extension direction of the liquid discharging nozzle.
The manner in which Du et al. vibrates the outlet end of the nozzle beneath the surface of the second liquid reads on moving the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle in a direction perpendicular to an extension direction of the liquid discharging nozzle as shown in Fig. 1.
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 7.
V.) Regarding applicant’s claim 14, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 2, from which claim 14 depends.
Claim 14 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that the first liquid is continuously, at a constant flow rate, or at a varied flow rate discharged from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle.
Du et al. teaches that volumes of the droplets can be controlled by regulating the flow rate of the first liquid. [0043]
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 14.
VI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 15, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 2, from which claim 15 depends.
Claim 15 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that a moving trajectory of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid comprises one of or a combination of a straight-line segment, an arc-shaped line segment, or a polygon.
Du et al.’s manner of moving (vibrating) the outlet end of the nozzle back and forth reads on moving the outlet end in a combination of straight-line segments.
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 15.
VII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 16, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 2, from which claim 16 depends.
Claim 16 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that frequency of the periodic motion of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid is between 0.1 Hz and 200 Hz.
Du et al. teaches that the vibration frequency of the micro-pipe 1 is 50 Hz. [0096]
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 16.
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.
2. claims 4-6, 8-10, 13 and 21-23 are rejected under 35 USC as being unpatentable over Du et al.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 3 from which claim 4 depends.
Claim 4 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that during the periodic motion of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle below the liquid surface of the second liquid, a speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle varies in a form of a rectangular wave.
Du et al. teaches that the volumes of the droplets can be controlled by regulating….the vibration frequency, the vibration amplitude, etc. [0043]
Du et al. further teaches that the input voltage of the vibrating equipment 3 can be regulated by….a stepping motor.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to regulate the speed of the outlet end of the nozzle as it moves back and forth with a stepping motor which would provide a stepped input voltage to the vibrating equipment and move the outlet end at a speed in the form of a rectangular wave.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 4 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 5, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 4 obvious from which claim 5 depends.
Claim 5 recites that the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle is configured to vary in a form of a square wave.
As noted above Du et al. teaches that the speed of the movement of the nozzle is dependent on the vibrating equipment which, as noted above can be controlled by a stepping motor input voltage which means that the nozzle is configured to vary the movement of the nozzle in a form of a square wave.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 5 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 6, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 5 obvious from which claim 6 depends.
Claim 6 recites that the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle in a first half motion period and that in a second half motion period are configured to be identical but in opposite directions.
In Du et al. it would have been obvious to keep the speed of the nozzle the same in each reverse direction once the flow rate of the first liquid is set to provide a desired droplet volume.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 6 obvious.
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 8, as noted above Du et al. anticipates claim 1 from which claim 8 depends.
Claim 8 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured to move the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle at a periodically changed speed blow the liquid surface of the second liquid and the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle changes monotonously in both a first half and a second half of a period.
Du et al. teaches that volumes of the droplets can be controlled by regulating….the vibration frequency, the vibration amplitude, etc. [0042].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to move the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle at a periodically changed speed of the outlet end of the nozzle below the liquid surface of the second liquid by adjusting the vibration frequency and amplitude in Du et al. when adjusting the volumes of the droplets and then, after setting the vibration frequency and amplitude, the outlet end of the liquid would change monotonously in both a first half and a second half of a period in which the output end would reverse directions.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 8 obvious.
V.) Regarding applicant’s claim 9, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 9 depends
Claim 8 recites in one alternative that the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle is configured to move with a uniform acceleration in both the first half period and the second half period of one speed variation period.
In Du et al. it would have been obvious to move the outlet end of the nozzle in a uniform acceleration in the reverse directions when the vibration frequency and amplitude of the vibrations are set for a desired droplet volume.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 9 obvious.
VI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 10, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 9 obvious from which claim 10 depends.
Claim 10 recites that an acceleration and a moving trajectory of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid are configured to be periodically changed.
In Du et al. the moving trajectory of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid are configured to be periodically changed when the outlet end reverses directions.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 10 obvious.
VII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 13, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 9 obvious from which claim 13 depends.
Claim 13 recites that that magnitudes of the accelerations of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle in the first half period and in the second half period are identical.
In Du et al. it would have been obvious to move the outlet end of the nozzle in a uniform/identical accelerations in the reverse directions when the vibration frequency and amplitude of the vibrations are set for a desired droplet volume.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 13 obvious.
VIII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 21, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 21 depends.
Claim 21 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that the first liquid is continuously, at a constant flow rate, or at a varied flow rate discharged from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle.
Du et al. teaches that volumes of the droplets can be controlled by regulating the flow rate of the first liquid. [0043]
Using a constant flow rate would be obvious to maintain a constant droplet volume.
Therefore, Du et al. anticipates claim 14.
IX.) Regarding applicant’s claim 22, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 22 depends.
Claim 22 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that a moving trajectory of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid comprises one of or a combination of a straight-line segment, an arc-shaped line segment, or a polygon.
Du et al.’s manner of moving (vibrating) the outlet end of the nozzle back and forth reads on moving the outlet end in a combination of straight-line segments.
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 22 obvious.
X.) Regarding applicant’s claim 23, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 23 depends.
Claim 23 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that frequency of the periodic motion of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid is between 0.1 Hz and 200 Hz.
Du et al. teaches that the vibration frequency of the micro-pipe 1 is 50 Hz. [0096]
Therefore, Du et al. renders claim 23 obvious.
3. Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Du et al. as applied to claim 10 above and further in view of Chinese Patent Publication No. CN208378891U to Sheng. (cited by applicant)
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 11, as noted above Du et al. renders claim 10 obvious from which claim 11 depends.
Claim 11 recites that the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid is configured to vary in a form of a cosine curve.
Du et al. does not teach that the speed of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle moving below the liquid surface of the second liquid is configured to vary in a form of a cosine curve.
Sheng teaches a nozzle having an outlet that dispenses droplets of a first liquid under the surface of a second liquid while moving the outlet end can have a change in displacement over a time period that has a cosine curve shape as shown in Fig. 9. (see page 8, second paragraph of applicant’s English translation submitted in parent application 16/964,599)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Du et al. to move the outlet of the nozzle at a speed below the liquid surface that is configured to vary in a form of a cosine curve as taught by Sheng for purposes of dispensing droplets of the first liquid into the second liquid.
Therefore, Du et al. in view of Sheng renders claim 11 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 12, as noted above Du et al. in view of Sheng renders claim 11 obvious from which claim 12 depends.
Claim 12 recites that the motion controlling mechanism is configured such that one droplet is detached from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle and forms the microdroplet in each of an accelerating stage of the first half period and an accelerating stage of the second half period of the speed variation of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle.
In Du et al. in view of Sheng one droplet would be detached from the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle and forms the microdroplet in each of an accelerating stage of the first half period and an accelerating stage of the second half period of the speed variation of the outlet end of the liquid discharging nozzle as the outlet end of the nozzle reverses directions.
Therefore, Du et al. in view of Sheng renders claim 12 obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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 at 571-272-3638. 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.
/MICHAEL STANLEY GZYBOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights