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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 11 November 2025 is acknowledged.
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.
Claims 1-4, 6, 8, 10 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2013/0048498 A1 to Dasgupta et al. (Dasgupta).
As to claims 1, 6, 8 and 10, Dasgupta teaches an electrolytic eluent generator system (10) comprising a flow through eluent generating zone (12) with an inlet (12a) in fluid communication with a source of deionized water, an outlet (12b) and a first platinum electrode (28), a first reservoir (22) comprising a second electrode (30) in fluid communication with a source of cation electrolyte as a first ion source (cation source), a second reservoir (26) comprising a third electrode (32) in fluid commination with a source of anion electrolyte as a second ion source (anion source), a first ion exchange connector (cation exchange membrane) (14) disposed between the first reservoir (22) and the eluent zone (12), the first connector substantially preventing liquid flow through the first connector and transporting the first ions (cations), a second ion exchange connector (anion exchange membrane) (16) disposed between the second reservoir (26) and the eluent zone (12), the second connector substantially preventing liquid flow through the second connector and transporting the second ions (anions), the first and second connectors in communication with the eluent generator channel allowing ions to pass through to mix and form a salt containing solution for use as an eluent for liquid chromatography, a first current source connected to the first and second electrodes and a second current source connected to the first and third electrode (Paragraphs 0008, 0009, 0030, 0031, 0032, 0038; Figure 1).
As to claim 2, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the first electrode (28) is grounded (Paragraph 0038).
As to claim 3, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the first reservoir (22) and the second reservoir (26) are formed in a stack forming a single cartridge (Figure 1).
As to claim 4, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the apparatus comprises a degasser (Paragraph 0010).
As to claim 17, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 8. Dasgupta fails to specifically teach the anion electrolyte and cation electrolyte as claimed; however, these limitations are merely narrowing optional limitations of the claim as presented in claim 6, as Dasgupta teaches the option of deionized water, Dasgupta teaches all required limitations of claim 17.
Claims 1-4, 6, 7, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dasgupta under a second interpretation.
As to claims 1, 6, 7 and 10, Dasgupta teaches an electrolytic eluent generator system (10) comprising a flow through eluent generating zone (12) with an inlet (12a) in fluid communication with a source of deionized water, an outlet (12b) and a first platinum electrode (28), a first reservoir (26) comprising a second electrode (32) in fluid communication with a source of anion electrolyte as a first ion source (anion source), a second reservoir (22) comprising a third electrode (30) in fluid commination with a source of cation electrolyte as a second ion source (cation source), a first ion exchange connector (anion exchange membrane) (16) disposed between the first reservoir (26) and the eluent zone (12), the first connector substantially preventing liquid flow through the first connector and transporting the first ions (anion), a second ion exchange connector (cation exchange membrane) (14) disposed between the second reservoir (22) and the eluent zone (12), the second connector substantially preventing liquid flow through the second connector and transporting the second ions (cation), the first and second connectors in communication with the eluent generator channel allowing ions to pass through to mix and form a salt containing solution for use as an eluent for liquid chromatography, a first current source connected to the first and second electrodes and a second current source connected to the first and third electrode (Paragraphs 0008, 0009, 0030, 0031, 0032, 0038; Figure 1).
As to claim 2, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the first electrode (28) is grounded (Paragraph 0038).
As to claim 3, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the first reservoir (26) and the second reservoir (22) are formed in a stack forming a single cartridge (Figure 1).
As to claim 4, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. Dasgupta further teaches that the apparatus comprises a degasser (Paragraph 0010).
As to claim 9, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 8. Dasgupta fails to specifically teach the anion electrolyte and cation electrolyte as claimed; however, these limitations are merely narrowing optional limitations of the claim as presented in claim 6, as Dasgupta teaches the option of deionized water, Dasgupta teaches all required limitations of claim 9.
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.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dasgupta as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2010/0307919 A1 to Liu et al. (Liu).
As to claim 5, Dasgupta teaches the apparatus of claim 1. However, Dasgupta fails to further teach that the apparatus comprises an electrolytic pH modifier. However, Liu also discusses electrolytic eluent generators and teaches that the apparatus should further comprise a pH modifier in fluid communication with the outlet of the eluent in order to allow for the modification of the eluent pH (Paragraph 0069). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the apparatus of Dasgupta with a pH modifier in fluid communication with the output of the eluent generation zone in order to allow for modification of the eluent pH as taught by Liu. Liu further teaches that the pH modifier comprises a pH modifier flow channel (340), a pH modifier barrier (344/362) adjacent to said pH modifier flow channel (340) substantially preventing liquid flow and transporting ions of one charge only, and first (348) and second (364) spaced electrodes disposed on opposite sides of the pH modifier barrier (344/362) (Paragraphs 0074-0076; Figure 22).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CIEL P Contreras whose telephone number is (571)270-7946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM to 4 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/CIEL P CONTRERAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794