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 .
Status
Claims(s) 1-21, is/are filed on 03/19/2026 are currently pending. Claim(s) 11-21 is/are withdrawn without traverse, 1-10 is/are rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The term ‘about’ in claim(s) 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term about is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear from the specification what degree of error is covered by about. Applicant may overcome this rejection by deleting the word about from the claim(s).
In claim 4, the phrase ‘wherein the vortex feature is and/or provides a helical structure” raises issue because it is unclear whether the "vortex feature" is a physical object (like a screw) or a fluid dynamic phenomenon (like a whirlpool). For the purpose of the interpretation, it is the latter.
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 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 pre-AIA 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Weinstein (US 5484474 A).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Venturi contraction)][AltContent: textbox (Internal ridge)]
PNG
media_image1.png
853
593
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1010
641
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Weinstein teaches a filter cap (34) for bioprocessing comprising: a conical shaped portion (14), where the conical shape is configured to distribute fluid over a surface of a filter membrane (intended use) (C4/1-25); and at least one flow conduit (12) within the conical shape portion, wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing at least one of recirculating flow, vortex flow, spiral flow, and/or cross-flow across the membrane (C1/35-50).
Regarding claim 2, Weinstein teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a vortex feature configured to provide vortex flow within the filter cap (i.e the shape of the cap is a vortex feature – claim is very broad).
Regarding claim 3, Weinstein from the figures its vortex feature comprises one or more internal ridges having an angle/angles with respect to a plane perpendicular to a central axis of the filter cap from about 5° or 10° to about 30°, and/or from about 5°, 10°, 15°, 25° to about 10°, 20°, 30°, 40°, 45° and/or from about 45° or 50° to about 75°, and/or from about 45°, 50°, 55°, 60°, 70°, 80° to about 50°, 60°, 70°, 80°, 85°, 90°.
Regarding claim 4, Weinstein teaches wherein the vortex feature is and/or provides a helical structure (the reference teaches that it forms a vortex, vortex will naturally form a helical structure).
Regarding claim 6, Weinstein teaches wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing cross-flow across the membrane, and cross-flow increases the flow across the surface of the membrane relative to flow through the membrane (intended use) (C5/15-25).
Regarding claim 7, Weinstein teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a recirculating conduit (20 – is a conduit capable of recirculation).
Regarding claim 8, Weinstein teaches wherein the recirculating conduit includes a flow restriction feature (decreased diameter) (C60-65).
Regarding claim 9, Weinstein teaches wherein the flow restriction feature is a venturi contraction (i.e. decreased diameter).
Claim(s) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Henke (US 4676771 A).
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Internal ridge)]
PNG
media_image3.png
598
363
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
360
306
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Henke teaches a filter cap (88 and 34 combined) for bioprocessing comprising: a conical shaped portion (95), where the conical shape is configured to distribute fluid over a surface of a filter membrane (intended use) (52); and at least one flow conduit (98) within the conical shape portion, wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing at least one of recirculating flow, vortex flow, spiral flow, and/or cross-flow across the membrane (intended use) (C1/50-65).
Regarding claim 2, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a vortex feature configured to provide vortex flow within the filter cap (i.e the shape of the cap is a vortex feature – claim is very broad).
Regarding claim 3, Henke from the figures teaches its vortex feature comprises one or more internal ridges having an angle/angles with respect to a plane perpendicular to a central axis of the filter cap from about 5° or 10° to about 30°, and/or from about 5°, 10°, 15°, 25° to about 10°, 20°, 30°, 40°, 45° and/or from about 45° or 50° to about 75°, and/or from about 45°, 50°, 55°, 60°, 70°, 80° to about 50°, 60°, 70°, 80°, 85°, 90°.
Regarding claim 4, Henke teaches wherein the vortex feature is and/or provides a helical structure (72).
Regarding claim 5, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a recirculating structure (80), wherein the recirculating structure comprises a channel (48) located radially outward from the helical structure.
Regarding claim 6, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing cross-flow across the membrane, and cross-flow increases the flow across the surface of the membrane relative to flow through the membrane (intended use).
Regarding claim 7, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a recirculating conduit (24).
Regarding claim 8, Henke teaches wherein the recirculating conduit includes a flow restriction feature (decreased diameter of 44).
Regarding claim 9, Henke teaches wherein the flow restriction feature is a venturi contraction (decreased diameter of 44).
Regarding claim 10, Henke teaches wherein the filter cap includes spiral-shaped guide vanes (76 forms an impeller like shape – fig. 7).
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Siposs (US 4806135 A).
PNG
media_image5.png
445
367
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Siposs teaches a filter cap (44) for bioprocessing comprising: a conical shaped portion (14), where the conical shape is configured to distribute fluid over a surface of a filter membrane (intended use) (32); and at least one flow conduit (12 or 26) within the conical shape portion, wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing cross-flow across the membrane (intended use) (C1/50-65) (C3/1-60).
Regarding claim 2, Siposs teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a vortex feature configured to provide vortex flow within the filter cap (intended use).
Regarding claim 4, Siposs teaches wherein the vortex feature is and/or provides a helical structure (34).
Regarding claim 5, Siposs teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a recirculating structure (50), wherein the recirculating structure comprises a channel (52) located radially outward from the helical structure.
Regarding claim 6, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit is capable of providing cross-flow across the membrane, and cross-flow increases the flow across the surface of the membrane relative to flow through the membrane (intended use).
Regarding claim 7, Henke teaches wherein the flow conduit includes a recirculating conduit (24).
Regarding claim 8, Henke teaches wherein the recirculating conduit includes a flow restriction feature (decreased diameter of 24).
Regarding claim 9, Henke teaches wherein the flow restriction feature is a venturi contraction (decreased diameter of 44).
***
It is noted that any citations to specific, pages, columns, lines, or figures in the prior art references and any interpretation of the reference should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. See MPEP 2123.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Waqaas Ali whose telephone number is (571) 270-0235. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5 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, Claire Wang can be reached on 571-270-1051. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/WAQAAS ALI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777
Prosecution Insights