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 of species II (figures 2A-2B) in the reply filed on 9 October 2025 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)). Furthermore, applicant previously elected invention I, in response to the restriction requirement mailed 3 June 2025. Therefore, the pending claims are claims 1-17.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because figures 2A and 2B include shading which makes the figures unclear. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 14 and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 14 states “wherein a transverse extent of the each cavity is greater than” (line 2). It appears the claim should say “wherein a transverse extent of each cavity is greater than”.
Claim 17 states “wherein each protrusion of the one or more protrusions blocks an object, in the respective cavity of the each protrusion,” (lines 3-4). It appears the claim should say “wherein each protrusion of the one or more protrusions blocks an object, in the respective cavity of each protrusion”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the cavity" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim previously introduces “one or more cavities” and “a first cavity”. It is unclear which cavity the applicant is referring to when stating “the cavity”. For purposes of examination, the examiner will treat “the cavity” as “the first cavity”.
Dependent claims not specifically mentioned are rejected as depending from rejected base claims since they inherently contain the same deficiencies therein.
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.
Claims 1-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kampf et al. (US 20050002763).
Regarding claim 1, Kampf teaches a lid (figure 5, reference 14) for one or more cavities, including a first cavity, accessible through a top surface of a container for transporting electron microscope samples (figure 5: since the container is not positively recited, it will be treated as intended use for the lid. Furthermore, any limitation which further defines the container will also be treated as intended use since it only further defines the unclaimed container. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). Since the limitation has not been positively claimed, the system of Kampf is capable of performing the recited function), the lid comprising: a rigid member (figure 5, reference 14 and paragraphs 64 and 65: The rigid member is made from a plastic material which is rigid) having: a planar surface (figure 5, reference 14); one or more protrusions to restrict motion (figure 5, reference 1), within the first cavity, of an object contained within the first cavity (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 64: Since the container and cavity is not positively recited and the object is held within the unclaimed cavity, this limitation further defines the unclaimed container and is treated as intended use, as explained above); and one or more surfaces (figure 5, reference 15 and paragraph 65) configured to abut one or more portions of the container to constrain motion of the planar surface to sliding over the top surface (figure 5: surfaces 15 restrict motion of the planar surface 14).
Regarding claim 2, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein the object is restricted, by the one or more protrusions, from reaching a gap between the top surface of the container and the planar surface of the rigid member, or from flipping over from an initial or intended position (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 3, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein a major surface of the object is restricted, by the one or more protrusions, from making extensive contact with the planar surface of the rigid member (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 4, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein the motion of the planar surface is constrained by the abutting of the one or more surfaces with the one or more portions of the container to linear translation relative to the container (figure 5, reference 15 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 5, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the one or more surfaces are included in flanges of the lid (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below), and wherein the flanges comprise portions extending under a bottom of the container (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
PNG
media_image1.png
336
540
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the one or more protrusions extend orthogonally into the one or more cavities from the planar surface (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 7, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the one or more surfaces inhibits motion of the planar surface in a direction outwardly normal from the top surface of the container (figure 5, reference 15 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 8, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein N > 1 and M < N are non-negative integer numbers of the one or more cavities, wherein with the lid in a first sliding position, N cavities are covered by the lid, and wherein, with the lid in a second sliding position M cavities are covered by the lid (figure 5 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 9, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the one or more protrusions extend non-orthogonally into the one or more cavities from the planar surface (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 10, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein each of the one or more protrusions is a ridge (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below) having a longitudinal extent in a direction of the sliding (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below), and positioned, with the lid in a first sliding position, to occupy at least one of the one or more cavities (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
PNG
media_image2.png
333
509
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 10, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the longitudinal extent of the ridge is greater than an extent of a given cavity occupied by the ridge (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure above for claim 10 and paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 12, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches each of the one or more protrusions is a stud extending from the lid into a respective cavity of the one or more cavities (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below and paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
PNG
media_image3.png
326
548
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 13, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the rigid member is a plate (figure 5, reference 14 and paragraphs 64 and 65: the rigid member is a plate).
Regarding claim 14, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 1, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein each cavity of the one or more cavities is sized to contain a lamella carrier, wherein a transverse extent of each cavity is greater than a corresponding transverse extent of the lamella carrier by a clearance, wherein the clearance is in a range of 1% to 100% of the corresponding extent of the lamella carrier (figure 5 and paragraph 64 and 65: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 15, Kampf teaches a lid for a container (figure 5, reference 14), comprising: a rigid member (figure 5, reference 14 and paragraphs 64 and 65: The rigid member is made from a plastic material which is rigid) slidably retained over a surface of the container (figure 5: since the container is not positively recited, it will be treated as intended use for the lid. Furthermore, any limitation which further defines the container will also be treated as intended use since it only further defines the unclaimed container. It has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987). Since the limitation has not been positively claimed, the system of Kampf is capable of performing the recited function); one or more flanges affixed to the rigid member (figure 5, as shown in the annotated figure below) and engaged with the container (figure 5: this limitation has been treated as intended use, as explained above), wherein the one or more flanges restrict relative motion of the lid and the container to one sliding direction (figure 5: surfaces 15 with the flanges restrict relative motion of the lid); and one or more protrusions affixed to the rigid member and extending into respective cavities within the container (figure 5, reference 1 and paragraph 64: Since the container and cavity is not positively recited, this limitation further defines the unclaimed container and is treated as intended use, as explained above).
PNG
media_image4.png
336
540
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 15, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches the container is a lamella carrier container (figure 5 paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Regarding claim 17, Kampf teaches all of the claim limitations of claim 15, as shown above. Furthermore, Kampf teaches wherein the surface is a first surface (figure 5, paragraph 63: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations) and the rigid member comprises a second surface (figure 5, reference 14) proximate and conforming to the first surface (figure 5: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations), wherein each protrusion of the one or more protrusions blocks an object (figure 5, reference 1: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations), in the respective cavity of each protrusion, from making extensive contact with second surface (figure 5, reference 1), entering a gap between the first surface and the second surface (figure 5: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations), or from flipping over from an initial or intended position (figure 5: the claim appears to further define the unclaimed container, cavity and/or its contents. Therefore, Kampf is capable of teaching the claim limitations).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kazama (JP 2000315722) discloses a lid for a container holding wafers with the lid including a rigid member with a planar surface and surfaces for restricting motion.
Daginnus-Metzen et al. (US 11,217,467) discloses a lid for a container holding substrates with the lid including a rigid member with a planar surface, protrusion and surfaces for restricting motion.
Lin et al. (US 5,366,079) discloses a lid for a container holding substrates with the lid including a rigid member with a planar surface, protrusion and surfaces for restricting motion.
Nakazato et al. (US 5,314,068) discloses a lid for a container holding plate like articles with the lid including a rigid member with a planar surface, protrusion and surfaces for restricting motion.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAVIER A PAGAN whose telephone number is (571)270-7719. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 6:30am-4:30pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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.
/JAVIER A PAGAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735