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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 19 November 2025 has been entered.
Status of Claims
The examiner acknowledges the amendments to claims 1-4, 7-10, 12, and 15. Claims 1-10 and 12-20 remain pending in the application. Claims 11 is cancelled.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendment to the specification filed 16 March 2025 renders the drawings objection of the previous office action moot. The drawings objection is withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-10 and 12-15 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
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 1-2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ni et al. (CN 108896528 A), hereinafter Ni.
Regarding claim 1, Ni teaches a plasmonic sensor (abstract, Fig. 2, paragraphs 49 and 68) for the detection of chemical and biological specimens (abstract, paragraphs 6 and 68), said plasmonic sensor comprising:
an optical fiber (see Fig. 2, abstract, paragraph 15), the optical fiber comprising;
a core (Fig. 2 core 2-2);
a cladding (Fig. 2 cladding 2-3); and
a polished flat surface formed on a longitudinal side of the optical fiber (see Fig. 2, paragraphs 15 and 19, clm. 1 and 8); and
a regular array of nanoantennae (Fig. 2-3 nano-ring array 2-1, 3-1 coated polystyrene colloidal microsphere, 3-2 asymmetric nano-annular cavity; it is the examiner’s position that the nano-ring array represent a regular array and function as nanoantennae) formed in a pattern on the polished flat surface formed in the longitudinal side of the optical fiber (see Fig. 3 which shows nano-ring array in a pattern on the top surface of the D-shaped fiber, see also paragraphs 11 and 49).
Regarding claim 2, Ni teaches the plasmonic sensor of claim 1, as outlined above, and further teaches the regular array of nanoantennae comprises one of:
a regular array of metalized nano-discs, the regular array of metalized nano-discs being disposed in a pattern on and extending away from the polished flat surface;
a seed layer formed on the polished flat surface, the regular array of metalized nano-discs disposed in a pattern on and protruding upward from the seed layer; and
a metalized layer comprising a regular array of metalized holes formed in a pattern in the metalized layer (paragraph 49 describes the nano-ring array as being metal films in which cavities are formed into; see also Fig. 1 and paragraph 39) and extending onto the polished flat surface (see Fig. 1-3 and paragraph 49).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni (CN 108896528 A) in view of Chau et al. (US 2007/0109544 A1, of record), hereinafter Chau.
Regarding claim 3, Ni teaches the plasmonic sensor of claim 2, as outlined above, but does not teach the optical fiber is embedded in a support base such that the polished flat surface formed on the longitudinal side of the fiber is exposed and coplanar with an upper surface of the support base.
Chau, which relates to plasmonic sensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni, teaches a plasmonic sensor having an optical fiber (Chau: abstract, Fig. 3 optical fiber device 32, paragraph 0009) wherein the optical fiber is embedded in a support base (Chau: Fig. 3 micro-fluidic chip 31 acts as a support base and embeds fiber 32) such that a surface formed on the longitudinal side of the fiber is exposed and coplanar with an upper surface of the support base (Chau: see Fig. 3 showing fiber 32 surface 33 exposed and coplanar with top surface of chip 31).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor of Ni to have the optical fiber be embedded in a support base such that the polished flat surface formed on the longitudinal side of the fiber is exposed and coplanar with an upper surface of the support base, as taught by Chau, for the benefit of improving the stability of the plasmonic sensor during measurements.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni (CN 108896528 A) in view of Chau et al. (US 2010/0128275 A1, of record), hereinafter Chau II.
Regarding claim 4, Ni teaches the plasmonic sensor of claim 2, as outlined above, but does not teach the optical fiber is embedded in a sealed housing, the housing comprising a base, a top, and a plurality of side walls that define a fluid inlet, a flow channel, and one or more fluid outlets, such that the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel, and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the regular array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets.
Chau II, which relates to plasmonic sensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni, teaches a plasmonic sensor with an optical fiber and nanoantennae (Chau II: abstract, Fig. 2, paragraph 0012-0014) wherein the optical fiber is embedded in a sealed housing (Chau II: paragraph 0014 “The micro-fluidic module accommodates the optical fiber”, Fig. 3 showing fiber 32 embedded in micro-fluidic chip 31 which comprises a base and a cover that, when combined, effectively create a sealed housing), the housing comprising a base (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, paragraph 0030), a top (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, paragraph 0030), and a plurality of side walls (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, the indicated portions of the top of the micro-fluidic chip act as side walls as they enclose the flow channels on each side) that define a fluid inlet (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, paragraph 0030), a flow channel (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, paragraph 0030 “micro-fluidic chip 31 further comprises at least one fluidic channel to accommodate the sample and the optical fiber 32”), and one or more fluid outlets (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II below, paragraph 0030), such that the array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel (Chau II: paragraph 0030 “micro-fluidic chip 31 further comprises at least one fluidic channel to accommodate the sample and the optical fiber 32 and drives the sample to contact with the surface of the noble metal nano-particles 33”), and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest (Chau II: paragraph 0029-0030, and paragraph 0031 which discusses an exemplary specimen of interest in the sample solution) can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets (Chau II: paragraph 0030).
PNG
media_image1.png
582
722
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 1: Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II
Since the fiber of Ni has a flattened surface where the nanoantennae are formed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor of Ni to have the optical fiber be embedded in a sealed housing, the housing comprising a base, a top, and a plurality of side walls that define a fluid inlet, a flow channel, and one or more fluid outlets, such that the regular array of nanoantenna lay within the flow channel, and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets, as taught by Chau II, for the benefit of improving measurement sensitivity and shortening analysis time (see Chau II paragraph 0029).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni in view of Chau II as applied to claims 1 and 4 above, and further in view of Almasri et al. (US Patent No. 10,274,492 B2, of record), hereinafter Almasri.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, Ni, as modified by Chau II, teaches the plasmonic sensor of claim 4, as outlined above, but does not teach one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel; and, in addition to the limitations of claim 5, wherein the plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels.
Almasri, which relates to biosensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni and Chau II, teaches a biosensor (Almasri: Fig. 1 biosensor apparatus 100) comprising one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel (Almasri: Fig. 1 focusing region 102, Fig. 2A-C, col. 3 lines 14-20 and 52-55, col. 4 lines 12-16), such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions (Almasri: col. 4 lines 36-41, col. 5 lines 9-15), the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel (Almasri: col. 4 lines 36-41 and col. 5 lines 9-15 discuss applying a voltage focusses bacteria in the center of the flow channel); and wherein a plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels (Almasri: Fig. 1 waste outlets 114, col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59, col. 8 lines 4-10) arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions (Almasri: see Fig. 1, col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59), such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels (Almasri: col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59, col. 8 lines 4-10, col. 10 lines 33-34).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor of Ni (as modified by Chau II) to include one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel; and wherein the plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels, as taught by Almasri, for the benefit of improving detection sensitivity of specimen within the flow channel by ensuring a sufficient concentration of the specimen is focused prior to detection (Almasri: abstract, col. 1 lines 51-56) and ensuring unwanted excess fluid does not impede detection results.
Regarding claim 7, Ni, as modified by Chau II, teaches the plasmonic sensor of claim 4, as outlined above, but does not teach one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, wherein the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions, such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions, an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest.
Almasri, which relates to biosensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni and Chau II, teaches one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel (Almasri: Fig. 1 trapping electrode array 110, col. 7 lines 2-11), wherein a detection array lays within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions (Almasri: see Fig. 1, col. 7 lines 2-11), such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions (Almasri: col. 7 lines 12-30), an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest (Almasri: col. 7 lines 12-30).
Therefore, since the detection region of Ni (as modified by Chau II) comprises the regular array of nanoantennae, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor of Ni (as modified by Chau II) to have one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, wherein the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions, such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions, an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest, as taught by Almasri, for the benefit of enhancing the detection sensitivity of the biosensor by creating a greater concentration of the specimen of interest in the detection region (Almasri: col. 6 line 66-col. 7 line 2).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni (CN 108896528 A) in view of Chau II (US 2010/0128275 A1, of record) and Chau et al. (US 2015/0211993, of record), hereinafter Chau III.
Regarding claim 8, Ni teaches a plasmonic sensor system (abstract, Fig. 2, paragraphs 20, 49-50, 68) for the detection of chemical and biological specimens (abstract, paragraphs 6 and 68), said plasmonic sensor system comprising:
plasmonic sensor (Fig. 1-3, abstract, paragraphs 49 and 68), the plasmonic sensor comprising:
an optical fiber (see Fig. 2, abstract, paragraph 15), the optical fiber comprising;
a core (Fig. 2 core 2-2);
a cladding (Fig. 2 cladding 2-3); and
a polished flat surface formed on a longitudinal side of the optical fiber (see Fig. 2, paragraphs 15 and 19, clm. 1 and 8);
a regular array of nanoantennae (Fig. 2-3 nano-ring array 2-1, 3-1 coated polystyrene colloidal microsphere, 3-2 asymmetric nano-annular cavity; it is the examiner’s position that the nano-ring array represent a regular array and function as nanoantennae) formed in a pattern on the polished flat surface formed in the longitudinal side of the optical fiber (see Fig. 3 which shows nano-ring array in a pattern on the top surface of the D-shaped fiber, see also paragraphs 11 and 49);
a light source (paragraph 20 “the light source”, paragraph 50, clm. 6) structured and operable to generate and provide a light signal into the first end of the optical fiber (paragraphs 20 and 50, clm. 6; since the light source is connected to one of the ends of the fiber, the light source implicitly provides a light signal to the first end of the fiber);
an optical coupler (paragraph 20 “optical fiber connectors at both ends”, paragraph 50, clm. 6) structured and operable to guide the light signal generated by the light source into and out of the optical fiber (paragraphs 20 and 50, clm. 6; since the light source and detector are connected to both ends of the fiber, the optical fiber connectors implicitly guide light from the light source into and out of the fiber);
an optical detector (paragraph 20 “optical spectrum analyzer”, it is the examiner’s position the optical spectrum analyzer of Ni comprises an optical detector; see also paragraph 50, clm. 6) structured and operable to detect the light signal as it exits the optical fiber (paragraphs 20 and 50, clm. 6; since the optical spectrum analyzer is coupled to an end of the optical fiber, the optical spectrum analyzer implicitly detects a light signal as it exits the optical fiber).
Ni does not teach that the light source is a laser source.
Chau II, which relates to plasmonic sensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni, teaches a laser source (Chau II: Fig. 5 light source 41, paragraph 0032 “the light source 41 may be a laser”) structured and operable to generate and provide laser light signal into the first end of an optical fiber (see Chau II Fig. 5-6, paragraph 0032).
The light source of Ni and the laser of Chau II perform the same function of providing light to the input end of an optical fiber sensor. A skilled artisan would have recognized, before the effective filing date of the instant application, that the light source of Ni could be substituted for the laser of Chau II because both devices serve the purpose of providing light to an optical fiber sensor. Furthermore, a skilled artisan would have been able to carry out the substitution. Finally, since the laser of Chau II beneficially provides incident a concentrated beam of light at a single frequency, the substitution achieves the predictable result of more precise and concentrated emissions of light into the optical fiber.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to have a simple substitution of the light source of Ni with the laser of Chau II. This substitution would yield the predictable result of providing more precise and concentrated emissions of light into the optical fiber due to the emission properties that are inherent to a laser.
Yet remaining, Ni, as modified by Chau II, does not teach a computer-based processing system structured and operable to execute analysis software, via a processor, whereby characteristics of the light signal received at the optical detector is analyzed to detect various chemical or biological attributes contained in specimen that has been placed in contact with the plasmonic sensor.
Chau III, which relates to plasmonic sensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni and Chau II, teaches a computer-based processing system (Chau III: Fig. 5A computer device 840) structured and operable to execute analysis software, via a processor (implicit from recitations of paragraph 0049 of Chau III), whereby characteristics of the light signal received at the optical detector is analyzed to detect various chemical or biological attributes contained in specimen that has been placed in contact with the plasmonic sensor (see Chau III paragraph 0049; see also paragraph 0048 which discusses an experiment of detecting and analyzing the attributes of a specimen placed in contact with the plasmonic sensor).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor system of Ni (as modified by Chau II) to comprise a computer-based processing system structured and operable to execute analysis software, via a processor, whereby characteristics of the light signal received at the optical detector is analyzed to detect various chemical or biological attributes contained in specimen that has been placed in contact with the plasmonic sensor, as taught by Chau III, for the benefit of analyzing signals produced by the system of Ni (as modified by Chau II) in real time.
Claims 9-10 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni in view of Chau II and Chau III as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Chau (US 2007/0109544 A1, of record).
Regarding claim 9, Ni, as modified by Chau II and Chau III, teaches the plasmonic sensor system of claim 8 as outlined above, but does not teach a support base having an upper surface, wherein the optical fiber is embedded in the support base such that the polished flat surface having formed on the longitudinal side of the optical fiber is exposed and coplanar with the support base upper surface.
Chau, which relates to a plasmonic sensor system and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches a plasmonic sensor having an optical fiber (Chau: abstract, Fig. 3 optical fiber device 32, paragraph 0009) and a support bases having an upper surface (Chau: see Fig. 3 microfluidic chip 31 acts as a support base) wherein the optical fiber is embedded in the support base (Chau: Fig. 3 micro-fluidic chip 31 embeds fiber 32) such that a surface formed on the longitudinal side of the fiber is exposed and coplanar with the support base upper surface (Chau: see Fig. 3 showing fiber 32 surface 33 exposed and coplanar with top surface of chip 31).
Therefore, since Ni (as modified by Chau II and Chau III) teaches a flat surface formed along the longitudinal side of the fiber, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor system of Ni (as modified by Chau II and Chau III) to have a support base having an upper surface wherein the optical fiber is embedded in the support base such that the polished flat surface formed on the longitudinal side of the optical fiber is exposed and coplanar with support base upper surface, as taught by Chau, for the benefit of improving the stability of the plasmonic sensor during measurements.
Regarding claim 10, Ni, as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches the plasmonic sensor system of claim 9, as outlined above, and further teaches the regular array of nanoantennae comprises one of:
a regular array of metalized nano-discs, the regular array of metalized nano-discs being disposed in a pattern on and extending away from the polished flat surface;
a seed layer formed on the polished flat surface, the regular array of metalized nano-discs disposed in a pattern on and protruding upward from the seed layer; and
a metalized layer comprising a regular array of metalized holes formed in a pattern in the metalized layer (Ni: paragraph 49 describes the nano-ring array as being metal films in which cavities are formed into; see also Fig. 1 and paragraph 39) and extending onto the polished flat surface (see Ni Fig. 1-3 and paragraph 49).
Regarding claim 12, Ni, as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches the plasmonic sensor system of claim 10, as outlined above, but does not teach the optical fiber is embedded in a sealed housing, the housing comprising a base, a top, and a plurality of side walls that define a fluid inlet, a flow channel, and one or more fluid outlets, such that the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel, and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the regular array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets.
However, Chau II teaches a plasmonic sensor with an optical fiber and nanoantennae (Chau II: abstract, Fig. 2, paragraph 0012-0014) wherein the optical fiber is embedded in a sealed housing (Chau II: paragraph 0014 “The micro-fluidic module accommodates the optical fiber”, Fig. 3 showing fiber 32 embedded in micro-fluidic chip 31 which comprises a base and a cover that, when combined, effectively create a sealed housing), the housing comprising a base (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, paragraph 0030), a top (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, paragraph 0030), and a plurality of side walls (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, the indicated portions of the top of the micro-fluidic chip act as side walls as they enclose the flow channels on each side) that define a fluid inlet (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, paragraph 0030), a flow channel (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, paragraph 0030 “micro-fluidic chip 31 further comprises at least one fluidic channel to accommodate the sample and the optical fiber 32”), and one or more fluid outlets (Chau II: see Marked-up Fig. 3 of Chau II above, paragraph 0030), such that the array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel (Chau II: paragraph 0030 “micro-fluidic chip 31 further comprises at least one fluidic channel to accommodate the sample and the optical fiber 32 and drives the sample to contact with the surface of the noble metal nano-particles 33”), and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest (Chau II: paragraph 0029-0030, and paragraph 0031 which discusses an exemplary specimen of interest in the sample solution) can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets (Chau II: paragraph 0030).
Since the fiber of Ni (as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III) has a flattened surface where the nanoantennae are formed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor system of Ni (as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III) to have the optical fiber be embedded in a sealed housing, the housing comprising a base, a top, and a plurality of side walls that define a fluid inlet, a flow channel, and one or more fluid outlets, such that the regular array of nanoantenna lay within the flow channel, and such that a sample solution containing one or more specimens of interest can flow into the fluid inlet, through the flow channel, over the regular array of nanoantennae, and out the one or more fluid outlets, as taught by Chau II, for the benefit of improving measurement sensitivity and shortening analysis time (see Chau II paragraph 0029).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ni in view of Chau, Chau II, and Chau III as applied to claims 8-10 and 12 above, and further in view of Almasri (US Patent No. 10,274,492 B2, of record).
Regarding claims 13-14, Ni, as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches the plasmonic sensor system of claim 12, as outlined above, but does not teach one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel; and, in addition to the limitations of claim 13, wherein the plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels.
Almasri, which relates to biosensors and is thus from the same field of endeavor as Ni, Chau, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches a biosensor (Almasri: Fig. 1 biosensor apparatus 100) comprising one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel (Almasri: Fig. 1 focusing region 102, Fig. 2A-C, col. 3 lines 14-20 and 52-55, col. 4 lines 12-16), such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions (Almasri: col. 4 lines 36-41, col. 5 lines 9-15), the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel (Almasri: col. 4 lines 36-41 and col. 5 lines 9-15 discuss applying a voltage focusses bacteria in the center of the flow channel); and wherein a plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels (Almasri: Fig. 1 waste outlets 114, col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59, col. 8 lines 4-10) arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions (Almasri: see Fig. 1, col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59), such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels (Almasri: col. 3 line 64-col. 4 line 3, col. 4 lines 48-59, col. 8 lines 4-10, col. 10 lines 33-34).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor system of Ni (as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III) to include one or more pairs of focusing regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, such that, on application of a voltage across any of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, the one or more specimens of interest between the one or more pairs of focusing regions are concentrated along an interior of the flow channel; and wherein the plurality of side walls further define one or more waste channels arranged as channels branching off from the flow channel after each of the one or more pairs of focusing regions, such that a flow of excess sample solution can divert into the one or more waste channels, as taught by Almasri, for the benefit of improving detection sensitivity of specimen within the flow channel by ensuring a sufficient concentration of the specimen is focused prior to detection (Almasri: abstract, col. 1 lines 51-56) and ensuring unwanted excess fluid does not impede detection results.
Regarding claim 15, Ni, as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III, teaches the plasmonic sensor system of claim 12, as outlined above, but does not teach one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, wherein the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions, such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions, an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest.
Almasri teaches one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel (Almasri: Fig. 1 trapping electrode array 110, col. 7 lines 2-11), wherein a detection array lays within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions (Almasri: see Fig. 1, col. 7 lines 2-11), such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions (Almasri: col. 7 lines 12-30), an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest (Almasri: col. 7 lines 12-30).
Therefore, since the detection region of Ni (as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III) comprises the array of nanoantennae, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant application to modify the plasmonic sensor of Ni (as modified by Chau, Chau II, and Chau III) to have one or more pairs of trapping regions arranged on opposing sides of the flow channel, wherein the regular array of nanoantennae lay within the flow channel between one of the pairs of trapping regions, such that on application of a voltage across any pair of the one or more pairs of trapping regions, an electric field is generated that impedes flow of the one or more specimens of interest, as taught by Almasri, for the benefit of enhancing the detection sensitivity of the biosensor by creating a greater concentration of the specimen of interest in the detection region (Almasri: col. 6 line 66-col. 7 line 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-20 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 16, the prior art of record, taken alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious a method of fabricating a plasmonic sensor for the detection of chemical and biological specimens, wherein the plasmonic sensor comprises an optical fiber having a diameter, a longitudinal side and a core, said method comprising: polishing a region of the longitudinal side of the optical fiber to generate a flat exposed surface of the core; applying a layer comprising one or more sequential sublayer of material to the flat exposed surface of the core, wherein the material composition of each of the one or more sequential sublayer is at least one of an electrically conductive material and a semiconductive material, and the layer comprises an uppermost surface; applying a patternable substrate atop the uppermost surface; using lithography to pattern an array of holes in the substrate, such that the holes penetrate to the uppermost surface; and one of: electroplating the uppermost surface with a conductive or semiconductive disc material to generate an array of nanoantennae that are located and defined by the array of holes; and forming nano sized holes in the uppermost surface that are located and defined by the array of holes and that extend at most from the uppermost surface to the flat exposed surface of the core; and removing the patternable substrate (emphasis added via bolded words).
See the examiners reasons for indicating allowable subject matter in the final rejection mailed 21 August 2025 for a full discussion regarding the allowability of independent claim 16.
In addition, the examiner provides that the prior art reference Ni (CN 108896528 A) teaches a method of fabricating a plasmonic sensor (see Ni claim 8), but does not teach, among other elements, generating a flat exposed surface of the core, and applying a patternable substrate atop the uppermost surface; using lithography to pattern an array of holes in the substrate, such that the holes penetrate to the uppermost surface; and one of: electroplating the uppermost surface with a conductive or semiconductive disc material to generate an array of nanoantennae that are located and defined by the array of holes; and forming nano sized holes in the uppermost surface that are located and defined by the array of holes and that extend at most from the uppermost surface to the flat exposed surface of the core; and removing the patternable substrate.
Similarly, Zhou et al. (CN 109580578 A) and Jiang et al. (CN 211528212 U) do not teach, among other elements, the bolded limitations of claim 16 identified above.
Therefore, for the reasons outlined above and in the final rejection mailed 21 August 2025, claim 16 is allowed. Claims 17-20 depend on claim 16 and are therefore also allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOAH J HANEY whose telephone number is (571)270-1282. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm eastern time.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at (571) 270-5789. 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.
/NOAH J. HANEY/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/TARIFUR R CHOWDHURY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877