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 § 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 5 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2018/0218893 A1 [Shiohama] in view of US 2007/0096021 A1 [LeBlanc].
Regarding Claim 1:
Shiohama teaches a method for mass spectrometry performed by a mass spectrometer capable of an MS/MS analysis (para 1), the method comprising:
determining n collision-energy values to be used in the MS/MS analysis, according to given conditions including a range of collision- energy values and a number of collision-energy values, where n is an integer equal to or greater than three (paras 53-54, Fig. 2a: -10, -20, -30),
sequentially setting the collision energy at the n collision-energy values determined (see Fig. 2a);
dissociating an ion at each of the n collision energy values (see Fig. 2b);
acquiring and accumulating a mass spectrum obtained at each of the n collision energy values (Fig. 2b);
generating a cumulative mass spectrum based on the mass obtained at each of the collision energy values (Fig. 2c).
Shiohama fails to teach comparing the cumulative mass spectrum with a reference cumulative mass spectrum prepared in advance, the reference cumulative mass spectrum being obtained by accumulating a mass spectrum obtained at each of m collision energy values where m is an integer, wherein the n collision energy values include m collision energy values when when n is larger than m.
LeBlanc teaches a mass spectrometry technique (abstract) comparing a cumulative mass spectrum with a reference cumulative mass spectrum (para 26 – generating a differential spectrum is such a comparison) prepared in advance (para 25- the reference spectrum is generated first), the reference cumulative mass spectrum being obtained by accumulating a mass spectrum obtained at each of m collision energies (the reference spectrum is an accumulated mass spectrum at 0 collisional energies).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to generate a parent mass spectrum in Shiohama and compare it with the fragment spectrum of Shiohama in the fashion taught by LeBlanc. One would have been motivated to do so in order to emphasize mass peaks of fragment ions.
Regarding Claim 5:
Shiohama discloses a mass spectrometer capable of an MS/MS analysis (para 1), the mass spectrometer comprising:
a collision cell configured to dissociate an ion (Fig. 1 (3)),
a mass separator configured to perform a mass spectrometric analysis of product ions resulting from dissociation (Fig. 1 (4-5)),
at least one memory configured to store at least one program (Fig. 1 control unit (7)); and
at least one processor configured to operate as instructed by the at least one program (Fig. 1 control unit (7)), the at least one program being configured to cause the at least one processor to:
determine n collision-energy values to be used in the MS/MS, according to given conditions including a range of collision- energy values and a number of collision-energy values, where n is an integer equal to or greater than three (paras 13, 53-54, Fig. 2a: -10, -20, -30),
sequentially setting the collision energy at to the n collision-energy values determined and execute the MS/MS analysis under each collision-energy value (as shown in Figs. 2a, 2b); and
obtain a cumulative mass spectrum by accumulating mass spectra each of which is obtained under each of the n different collision-energy values (Fig. 2c).
Shiohama fails to teach comparing the cumulative mass spectrum with a reference cumulative mass spectrum prepared in advance, the reference cumulative mass spectrum being obtained by accumulating a mass spectrum obtained at each of m collision energy values where m is an integer, wherein the n collision energy values include m collision energy values when when n is larger than m.
LeBlanc teaches a mass spectrometry technique (abstract) comparing a cumulative mass spectrum with a reference cumulative mass spectrum (para 26 – generating a differential spectrum is such a comparison) prepared in advance (para 25- the reference spectrum is generated first), the reference cumulative mass spectrum being obtained by accumulating a mass spectrum obtained at each of m collision energies (the reference spectrum is an accumulated mass spectrum at 0 collisional energies).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to generate a parent mass spectrum in Shiohama and compare it with the fragment spectrum of Shiohama in the fashion taught by LeBlanc. One would have been motivated to do so in order to emphasize mass peaks of fragment ions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims 1-8 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
The grounds of rejection presented in the previous office action are withdrawn in light of applicant’s amendments.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-4 and 6-8 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT A STOFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0700-1600 EST.
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, ROBERT KIM can be reached at 571 272 2293. 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.
WYATT STOFFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881