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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-21 are pending with claims 10-18 being examined and claims 1-9 and 19-21 are deemed withdrawn.
Response to Amendment
As to the claim amendments and remarks filed on 04/15/2026, Examiner has found applicants arguments not persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejection has been modified to address the claim amendments.
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.
Claims 10-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kozlenko et al. (US 20180345271 A1; hereinafter “Kozlenko” already of record) in view of Spudich et al (US 20170010154 A1; hereinafter “Spudich” already of record) further in view of Reichmuth et al. (US 20140051182 A1 hereinafter “Reichmuth”).
Regarding claim 10, Kozlenko a pipetting aid (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 2) for receiving a pipette (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 1) for dispensing a liquid, comprising
a receiver for securing the pipette in the pipetting aid (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 2),
a control device for receiving or discharging the liquid (Kozlenko; fig. 1B. 10),
a handle for holding the pipetting aid (Kozlenko; fig. 1A illustrates a hand gripping the pipette aid from what appears to be a handle),
at least one control element for controlling the receiving and discharging of the liquid (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 15),
a control unit that is connected to the control element and the control device (Kozlenko; fig. 1B. 34 and [0032]),
wherein the pipetting aid comprises a data storage device (Kozlenko; fig. 4. 31 illustrates a microprocessor which are well known in the art to include a memory) in which a database with reference data is stored. Kozlenko teaches a pipetting aid with data storage and what the data storage is used for is a matter of intended use.
Kozlenko fails to teach the pipetting aid has two radiation sources and a radiation detector, wherein the two radiation sources emit electromagnetic radiation with different wavelengths, and the radiation detector detects the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation it receives, wherein the two radiation sources and the radiation detector are placed in relation to each other such that they are aligned with the pipette when the pipette is placed in the receiver.
However, Spudich teaches the analogous art of a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”).
Examiner notes that Spudich’s miniaturized spectrometer (Spudich; fig. 8. 50 and [0075]) includes a receiver (Spudich; fig. 10. 104) for attaching a pipette (Spudich; fig. 10. 106). Examiner will interpret Spudich’s miniaturized spectrometer that includes a receiver for attaching a pipette as a pipetting aid,
wherein the pipetting aid has two radiation sources (Spudich; fig. 16. 64) and a radiation detector (Spudich; fig. 15. 66), wherein the two radiation sources emit electromagnetic radiation (Spudich; [0015] “light source disposed and operable to emit light”) with different wavelengths (Spudich; claim 24), and the radiation detector detects the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation it receives (Spudich; [0015] “light detector disposed along the light path to receive the light beam”), wherein the two radiation sources (Spudich; fig. 16. 64) and the radiation detector (Spudich; fug. 15. 66) are placed in relation to each other such that they are aligned with the pipette when the pipette is placed in the receiver (Spudich; fig. 15, 16. 64, 66).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kozlenko’s pipetting aid to include two radiation sources and a radiation detector, wherein the two radiation sources emit electromagnetic radiation with different wavelengths, and the radiation detector detects the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation it receives as taught by Spudich because Spudich teaches a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the pipetting aid has two radiation sources (Spudich; fig. 16. 64) and a radiation detector (Spudich; fig. 15. 66), wherein the two radiation sources emit electromagnetic radiation (Spudich; [0015] “light source disposed and operable to emit light”) with different wavelengths (Spudich; claim 24), and the radiation detector detects the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation it receives (Spudich; [0015] “light detector disposed along the light path to receive the light beam”), wherein the two radiation sources (Spudich; fig. 16. 64) and the radiation detector (Spudich; fug. 15. 66) are placed in relation to each other such that they are aligned with the pipette when the pipette is placed in the receiver (Spudich; fig. 15, 16. 64, 66).
This would allow to test analytes in a certain sample to be used (Spudich; [0029]).
Kozlenko fails to teach the pipetting aid is configured to identify the pipette on the basis of the reference data and the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation received by the radiation detector.
However, Reichmuth teaches the analogous art of a pipetting apparatus (pipetting aid) that includes a control device (Reichmuth; fig. 3. 23), an electric information reading device and (two radiation sources) (Reichmuth; fig. 7C. 73c’ illustrates two or more radiation sources, and [0141]) which are embodied as transmitter elements radiation sources (Reichmuth; [0141]), wherein the pipetting aid is configured to identify the pipette on the basis of the reference data and the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation received by the radiation detector (Reichmuth; [0108] “the dispenser is configured to read out information contained on the information carrying device of the dispenser tip. From this information the dispenser determines the type of dispenser tip“).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kozlenko’s pipetting aid to be configured to identify the pipette on the basis of the reference data and the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation received by the radiation detector as taught by Reichmuth because Reichmuth teaches a pipetting apparatus that includes a control device (Reichmuth; fig. 3. 23), wherein the pipetting aid is configured to identify the pipette on the basis of the reference data and the wavelengths of the electromagnetic radiation received by the radiation detector (Reichmuth; [0108] “pipetting apparatus comprises an optical display that displays information with respect to the identified pipetting container such as sample volume or other information. The dispenser is configured to read out information contained on the information carrying device of the dispenser tip. From this information the dispenser determines the type of dispenser tip“).
The modification allows the pipetting aid to identify the inserted pipette, and determine the maximum volume thereof and calculate the required plunger stroke 9Reichmuth; [0108]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above) to include a first and second radiation source (see above).
Modified Kozlenko fails to teach the first radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 380 nm to 780 nm, and the second radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 10 nm to 410 nm, or 750 nm to 3,000 nm.
However, Spudich teaches the analogous art of a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the first radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 380 nm to 780 nm (Spudich; [0087] “LED emitting light at 600nm”), and the second radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 10 nm to 410 nm, or 750 nm to 3,000 nm (Spudich; [0087] “alternate light source to emit at 750nm”).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kozlenko’s first radiation source to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 380 nm to 780 nm, and the second radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 10 nm to 410 nm, or 750 nm to 3,000 nm as taught by Spudich because Spudich teaches a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the first radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 380 nm to 780 nm (Spudich; [0087] “LED emitting light at 600nm”), and the second radiation source is designed to emit electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength of 10 nm to 410 nm, or 750 nm to 3,000 nm (Spudich; [0087] “alternate light source to emit at 750nm”).
This allows detecting multiple microorganisms in a sample (Spudich; [0087]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above) to include two radiation sources and a detector (see above).
Modified Kozlenko fails to teach the two radiation sources and the radiation detector in the pipetting aid are aimed at the receiver.
However, Spudich teaches the analogous art of a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the two radiation sources (Spudich; fig. 16. 64) and the radiation detector (Spudich; fig. 16. 66) in the pipetting aid are aimed at the receiver (Spudich; fig. 16. 56, 58).
To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kozlenko’s two radiation sources and detector to aim at the receiver as taught by Spudich because Spudich teaches a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the two radiation sources and the radiation detector in the pipetting aid are aimed at the receiver (Spudich; fig. 16. 56, 58).
This would allow to test the sample in the that is in the sampling tip.
Regarding claim 13, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above) to include a radiation detector (see above).
Modified Kozlenko fails to teach the radiation detector is a color sensor.
However, Spudich teaches the analogous art of a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the radiation detector is a color sensor (Spudich; [0088] “the light sensor can be a broad spectrum photodiode for colorimetric analysis to enable detection of any one of the LED’s”).
Spudich also teaches wavelengths of 600 to 750 (Spudich; [0087]) where the detector will perceive color from yellow to orange and orange to red).
To one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the invention it would have been obvious to modify Kozlenko’s radiation detector to be a color sensor as taught by Spudich because Spudich teaches a pipetting aid (Spudich; Fig. 16. 56, 58, 84, 86, 106 and [0077] “enclosure 84 with internal cavity 86 that includes sample holder 56, 58 that hoods the sampling tip (pipette) 106”), wherein the radiation detector is a color sensor (Spudich; [0088] “the light sensor can be a broad spectrum photodiode for colorimetric analysis to enable detection of any one of the LED’s”).
This would allow to detect a broad range of wavelengths.
Regarding claim 14, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above) wherein the control device comprises a pump with which a pressure is generated in the pipetting aid for receiving and discharging the liquid (Kozlenko; fig. 1B. 8, 10 and [0033] “pressurized tank may be pressurized by pump”).
Regarding claim 15, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the pipetting aid has a flow rate sensor that measures the flow rate of the air in and out of the pipette (Kozlenko; [0046] teaches pressure sensors 4, 5, 6 and 7).
Kozlenko does not explicitly teach the pipetting aid has a flow rate sensor however, pressure sensors are well known in the art that pressure sensors can act as flow rate sensors, and sends this value to the control unit (Kozlenko; [0011] “pressure sensor”, and [0013] “electronic controller”.
Regarding claim 16, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the pipetting aid has a pressure sensor for measuring the hydrostatic pressure in the pipette (Kozlenko; fig. 2B. 7 and [0046] “pressure sensor 7 may be an atmospheric pressure sensor”).
Regarding claim 17, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the control element has a first and second button (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 13, 17), wherein pushing the first button (Kozlenko; fig. 1. 13) generates a vacuum in the pipetting aid (Kozlenko; [0034] “button 13 controls aspirate valve (Vacuum)) and pushing the second button (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 17) releases this vacuum or generates a pressure in the pipetting aid (Kozlenko; fig. 1A. 13 and, [0032] “button 17 enables dispensing”).
Regarding claim 18, modified Kozlenko teaches the pipetting aid according to claim 10 (see above), wherein the pipetting aid has an acceleration sensor for determining the angle of inclination of the longitudinal axis of the pipetting aid in relation to the direction of the force of gravity (Kozlenko; fig. 2A. 37, and [0048] “orientation sensor
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 04/15/2026 over Kozlenko (US 20180345271) in view of Spudich (US 20170010154) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues Kozlenko does not teach automatic detection of an inserted pipette or the use of two different radiation sources to identify the pipette in the pipetting aid.
Examiner disagrees. Reichmuth teaches automatic detection of an inserted pipette or the use of two different radiation sources to identify the pipette in the pipetting aid.
Examiner notes that Applicant does not claim automatic detection of an inserted pipette or the use of two different radiation sources to identify the pipette in the pipetting aid.
Applicant also argues Spudich does not disclose a pipetting aid configured to identify a pipette mounted in the pipetting aid.
Examiner disagrees. Spudich teaches a pipetting aid (as discussed in claim 1 above).
Reichmuth teaches automatic detection of an inserted pipette or the use of two different radiation sources to identify the pipette in the pipetting aid.
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 ALEX RAMIREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9756. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at (571) 270-3638. 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.
/A.R./Examiner, Art Unit 1798
/P. Kathryn Wright/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights