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 .
Status of Claims
Applicant’s reply filed 5/21/26 is acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are pending and are under examination.
Response to Reply
Drawings
In response to applicant’s drawing amendment and arguments, the drawing objections are maintained. Applicant’s amended drawing fig. 11 and fig. 12 appear to show the second end of the first quantification chamber in a vertical direction overlaps the at least one container. Applicant’s published specification appears to support the Office’s interpretation because paragraph 60 specifically recites the “container 620 is disposed on the second surface 602b of the main cover 602, with the container 620 disposed right below the second end 608b of the first quantification chamber 608 in a vertical direction D2 (such as the y-direction in FIG. 11).”
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, at least one container overlapped the second end of the first quantification chamber in a vertical direction” (claim 1); and “wherein one of the containers is overlapped the second end of the first quantification chamber in a vertical direction” (claim 11) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The prior rejections of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, are maintained. In light of applicant’s claim amendments, new rejections follow. See below.
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 1-20 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 is rejected because it is unclear how the claim language, “configured as fluid circulation and gas circulation” structurally further defines the claimed first fluid and gas tunnels.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected because “the flow tunnel” raises an antecedent basis issue.
The prior rejection of claims 1 and 11 are maintained because the claim language, “the at least one container overlapped the second end of the first quantification chamber in a vertical direction” (claim 1) and “wherein one of the containers is overlapped the second end of the first quantification chamber in a vertical direction” (claim 11) is unclear. See drawing objection above for further explanation.
The prior rejection of claim 11 is maintained because “froze-dry sample” is unclear. Is applicant referring to freeze-dried or freeze dry?
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see p. 14-19, filed 5/21/26, with respect to the prior art rejection has been fully considered and are persuasive. The prior art rejection has been withdrawn.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-20 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, and drawing objections set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for withdrawing the prior art rejection: the prior art of record (Sabounchi) fails to teach or fairly suggest the first gas tunnel is configured to circulate gas; a rotary valve rotably disposed on the second surface of the main cover; and the first gas tunnel rotatory connected to the flow channel of the rotary valve, in combination with the remaining features and elements of the claimed invention.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 5/21/26 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of U.S. Patent No. 11,878,301 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LORE RAMILLANO JARRETT whose telephone number is (571)272-7420. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at 571-272-1254.
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.
/LORE R JARRETT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797
8/22/2026
Prosecution Insights