DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 with traverse of group I (claims 12-26) in the reply filed on 1/19/26 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no evidence or reference to a serious search and/or examination burden. This is not found persuasive.
First, applicants are citing to MPEP 818, which does not apply to a 371 Unity of Invention restriction. Rather, MPEP 823 emphasizes that “the analysis used to determine whether the Office may require restriction differs in national stage applications submitted under 35 U.S.C. 371 (unity of invention analysis) as compared to national applications filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) (independent and distinct analysis). See MPEP Chapter 1800, in particular MPEP § 1850, § 1875, and § 1893.03(d), for a detailed discussion of unity of invention under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)”. Unity of invention is determined based on whether the claims share one or more special technical features, which is a different requirement than the independent and distinct inventions.
Second, there would be a serious search and/or examination burden if restriction were not required because one or more of the following reasons apply:
a. The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; and/or
b. The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; and/or
c. The inventions require a different field of search (for example, searching different class/subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries); and/or
d. The prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention; and/or
e. The inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/or 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph.
Claims 27-37 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 6/1/23, 7/25/24 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
Claims 12-37 are pending with claims 12-26 being examined and claims 27-37 deemed withdrawn.
Drawing Objections
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 151, 152, 153, 163, 143. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) 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. 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.
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, the “tissue processing chamber”, “at least one reagent chamber”, “first histologic substance chamber”, “second histologic substance chamber” 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.
Specification Objections
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the drawings include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 151, 152, 153, 163, 143.
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: the “tissue processing chamber”, “at least one reagent chamber”, “first histologic substance chamber”, “second histologic substance chamber” are not described in the specification and do not have antecedent support in the specification.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 12-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 12-26 have been amended from the originally filed PCT to include limitations that are not supported by the originally filed PCT application. Support for the newly added limitation of the instant claims was not found by the examiner in the original disclosure, as no mention of the “tissue processing chamber”, “at least one reagent chamber”, “first histologic substance chamber”, “second histologic substance chamber” exists in the disclosure. The specification does discuss a microwave processing over 100, paraffin containers 115/116, clearing reagent contain 113, dehydrating reagent container 111/112, and fixative reagent container 110. However, these are much more specific structures where the originally filed disclosure does not have support for the broader “tissue processing chamber”, “at least one reagent chamber”, “first histologic substance chamber”, “second histologic substance chamber”. Thus, the limitations are considered new matter. With respect to claim 12, there is not support for the first and second histologic substance containers to send histologic substance to a singular processing chamber and back while also sending reagents to the same processing chamber. The specification and figure 1 show paraffin containers 115/116 that send paraffin to and from microwave 200 (see [34] of the instant PGPub). The application, as filed, discloses treating with detergents in an oven 100 and then moving the tissue sample basket to a different oven 200 where paraffin is then sent to/from oven 200. However, the disclosure as filed, does not support sending reagents and paraffin to/from the same chamber as disclosed in claim 12 and 14. All of the dependent claims are rejected based on further claim dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giovanni et al (US 20120129169; hereinafter “Giovanni”; already of record) in view of Morales, A (US 20050090017; hereinafter “Morales”) in view of Birkner et al (US 7273720; hereinafter “Birkner”).
As to claim 12, Giovanni teaches a fat-insensitive and size-insensitive rapid tissue processor (Giovanni; title, abstract, Fig. 2, 3, [33, 38, 84]) comprising: at least one tissue processing chamber configured to receive tissue samples (Giovanni teaches chamber 1/2; [33, 40, 92], Fig. 2, 3); at least one reagent chamber comprising a clearing reagent chamber fluidly coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that a clearing reagent is circulated into contact with at least one pre-dehydrated tissue sample in the at least one tissue processing chamber, the clearing reagent comprising a polar solvent and a non-polar solvent (Giovanni teaches chambers 12, which include fixation solution, pbs solution, alcohol, and paraffin; Fig. 3, [86-90, 30-31, 70, 74-78, 81-82]. Giovanni teaches fixation media moved from respective container to the chamber 2 [91], and then ethanol [92], and then isopropanol as a clearing agent [94]. What defines the reagents is a matter of intended use because the solvent/reagent is not positively recited); a microwave operably coupled to emit power into the at least one tissue processing chamber (Giovanni teaches chamber 1 with a microwave; [33, 40, 45, 92], Fig. 2, 3); a flow-circulating cooling system operably coupled to control a temperature of fluid being circulated in the at least one tissue processing chamber (Giovanni teaches a flow circulating cooling system 11; [27-29, 70-73, 76, 85]); a first histologic substance chamber containing a first histologic substance (Giovanni teaches paraffin transferred to the processing chamber, where the container holding the paraffin for transfer would be the first chamber; [90, 95]); wherein at least the microwave and the flow- circulating cooling system are configured such that, during a clearing process: a total maximum emission from the microwave into the at least one tissue processing chamber is 700 Watts x duration of the clearing process (The microwave of Giovanni is capable of this as it includes a microwave, and a cooling system, and also can control the duration of the cooling process); and a temperature of the clearing reagent does not exceed a predetermined set value, such that, in the presence of existing dehydrating agent and existing fatty substances in the tissue sample, the clearing reagent removes the existing dehydrating agent and the existing fatty substances (The clearing agent is not positively recited and does not further define the system beyond that of a capability. Giovanni teaches controlling the temperature using the microwave and then cooling using the cooling system where the cooling system would prevent the solution from achieving A temperature.), and the first histologic substance chamber is operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that, after the clearing process is performed: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time (Giovanni teaches paraffin transferred to the processing chamber, where the container holding the paraffin for transfer would be the first chamber; [90, 95]).
Note: The instant Claims contain a large amount of functional language (ex: “configured to…”). Specifically, limitations directed towards what the chambers include, or what the reagents are defined by, or how the microwave is operated, or how the temperature is controlled, or how the fluidics are moved are all related to intended use of the device. However, functional language does not add any further structure to an apparatus beyond a capability. Apparatus claims must distinguish over the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Therefore, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the function, then the prior art meets the limitation in the claims.
Giovanni does not teach that the microwave is a variable power microwave. However, Morales teaches the analogous art of a microwave for tissue processing in a chamber where reagents for fixing, dehydrating, clearing are sent to the chamber (Morales; Fig. 1a, 1b, [21, 97, 98]) and where paraffin is sent to the chamber (Morales; [35, 37]) where the microwave is a variable power microwave (Morales; [58]. The microwave of Morales is capable of total maximum emission from the microwave into the at least one tissue processing chamber is 700 Watts x duration of the clearing process because it is variable powered). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified or substituted the microwave of Giovanni to be a variable power microwave as in Morales because Morales teaches that variable power helps prevent burning and reduce power output (Morales; [58]), and would of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the substitution of equivalent structures for performing the same function.
Although Giovanni teaches that paraffin is provided in the first histologic substance chamber (Giovanni teaches infiltration; [95]) and then can be additionally provided with paraffin in a separate process (Giovanni; [96]), Giovanni does not specifically teach a second histologic substance chamber containing a second histologic substance isolated from the first histologic substance chamber, and the first and second histologic substance chamber are operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time before transferring the first histologic substance back into the first histologic substance chamber, and subsequently, the second histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the second histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample. However, Birkner teaches the analogous art of a tissue processing device where there is a chamber 18 through which processing reagents are sent to from various bottles 16 (Birkner; Fig. 2, col. 7 line 10-30) and a first histologic substance chamber and a second histologic substance chamber containing a second histologic substance isolated from the first histologic substance chamber, and the first and second histologic substance chamber are operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time before transferring the first histologic substance back into the first histologic substance chamber, and subsequently, the second histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the second histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample (Birkner teaches chambers 30a and 30b for holding paraffin through which the substance can be moved to the processing chamber 18 and then back to the chambers 30a/b when done (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10, col. 8 line 21-37). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to have modified the automated device which sends paraffin to the processing chamber from a first histological substance chamber of Giovanni to have included a second histological substance chamber as in Birkner because Birkner teaches that using two separate chambers enables the infiltration and then separate embedding process (Birkner; col. 8 line 21-37) and also that two separate paraffin chambers are well known (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10) and allows the reusing of the solutions (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10).
Claims 13, 20-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giovanni et al (US 20120129169; hereinafter “Giovanni”; already of record) in view of Morales, A (US 20050090017; hereinafter “Morales”).
As to claim 13, Giovanni teaches a tissue processor (Giovanni; title, abstract, Fig. 2, 3, [33, 38, 84]) comprising: at least one tissue processing chamber configured to receive tissue samples (Giovanni teaches chamber 1/2; [33, 40, 92], Fig. 2, 3); at least one reagent chamber comprising a clearing reagent chamber fluidly coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that clearing reagent is circulated into contact with at least one pre-dehydrated tissue sample in the at least one tissue processing chamber, the clearing reagent comprising a polar solvent and a non-polar solvent (Giovanni teaches chambers 12, which include fixation solution, pbs solution, alcohol, and paraffin; Fig. 3, [86-90, 30-31, 70, 74-78, 81-82]. Giovanni teaches fixation media moved from respective container to the chamber 2 [91], and then ethanol [92], and then isopropanol as a clearing agent [94]. What defines the reagents is a matter of intended use because the solvent/reagent is not positively recited); a microwave operably coupled to emit power into the at least one tissue processing chamber (Giovanni teaches chamber 1 with a microwave; [33, 40, 45, 92], Fig. 2, 3); and, a flow-circulating cooling system operably coupled to control a temperature of fluid being circulated in the at least one tissue processing chamber (Giovanni teaches a flow circulating cooling system 11; [27-29, 70-73, 76, 85]), wherein at least the microwave and the flow- circulating cooling system are configured such that, during a clearing process: a total maximum emission from the microwave into the at least one tissue processing chamber is 700 Watts x duration of the clearing process (The microwave of Giovanni is capable of this as it includes a microwave, and a cooling system, and also can control the duration of the cooling process), and a temperature of the clearing reagent does not exceed a predetermined set value, such that, in the presence of existing dehydrating agent and existing fatty substances in the tissue sample, the clearing reagent removes the existing dehydrating agent and the existing fatty substances (The clearing agent is not positively recited and does not further define the system beyond that of a capability. Giovanni teaches controlling the temperature using the microwave and then cooling using the cooling system where the cooling system would prevent the solution from achieving A temperature).
Giovanni does not teach that the microwave is a variable power microwave. However, Morales teaches the analogous art of a microwave for tissue processing in a chamber where reagents for fixing, dehydrating, clearing are sent to the chamber (Morales; Fig. 1a, 1b, [21, 97, 98]) and where paraffin is sent to the chamber (Morales; [35, 37]) where the microwave is a variable power microwave (Morales; [58]. The microwave of Morales is capable of total maximum emission from the microwave into the at least one tissue processing chamber is 700 Watts x duration of the clearing process because it is variable powered). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified or substituted the microwave of Giovanni to be a variable power microwave as in Morales because Morales teaches that variable power helps prevent burning and reduce power output (Morales; [58]), and would of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the substitution of equivalent structures for performing the same function.
As to claim 20, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 13, wherein the clearing reagent is xylene free and formalin free (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches isopropanol; [94]).
As to claim 21, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 13, the at least one reagent chamber further comprising a dehydration reagent chamber operably coupled to be selectively operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that dehydrating reagent is circulated into contact with the tissue sample (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches ethanol; [93]).
As to claim 22, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 21, wherein the dehydrating reagent is formalin free and xylene free (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches ethanol; [93]).
As to claim 23, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 13, the at least one reagent chamber further comprising a fixative reagent chamber operably coupled to be selectively operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that fixative reagent is circulated into contact with the tissue sample (Giovanni teaches chambers 12, which include fixation solution, pbs solution, alcohol, and paraffin; Fig. 3, [86-90, 30-31, 70, 74-78, 81-82]. Giovanni teaches fixation solution can include ethanol; [10, 100, 101]).
As to claim 24, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 23, wherein the fixative reagent is xylene free and comprises a maximum of 1% formalin (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches fixation solution can include ethanol; [10, 100, 101]).
As to claim 25, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 23, wherein the fixative reagent comprises at least one of: ethyl alcohol, and isopropyl alcohol (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches fixation solution can include ethanol; [10, 100, 101]).
As to claim 26, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 13, wherein the at least one reagent chamber is coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber in a flow-through manner such that corresponding reagents may be selectively operated into contact with the tissue sample (Giovanni teaches that the reagents flow through the processing chamber; Fig. 3, and see citations above).
Claims 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giovanni et al (US 20120129169; hereinafter “Giovanni”; already of record) in view of Morales, A (US 20050090017; hereinafter “Morales”) in view of Birkner et al (US 7273720; hereinafter “Birkner”).
As to claim 14, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 13, the at least one reagent chamber further comprising: a first histologic substance chamber containing a first histologic substance (Giovanni teaches paraffin transferred to the processing chamber, where the container holding the paraffin for transfer would be the first chamber; [90, 94]);, and the first histologic substance chamber is operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that, after the clearing process is performed: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time (Giovanni teaches paraffin transferred to the processing chamber, where the container holding the paraffin for transfer would be the first chamber; [90, 94]).
Although Giovanni teaches that paraffin is provided in the first histologic substance chamber (Giovanni teaches infiltration; [95]) and then can be additionally provided with paraffin in a separate process (Giovanni; [96]), Giovanni does not specifically teach a second histologic substance chamber containing a second histologic substance isolated from the first histologic substance chamber, and the first and second histologic substance chamber are operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time before transferring the first histologic substance back into the first histologic substance chamber, and subsequently, the second histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the second histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample. However, Birkner teaches the analogous art of a tissue processing device where there is a chamber 18 through which processing reagents are sent to from various bottles 16 (Birkner; Fig. 2, col. 7 line 10-30) and a first histologic substance chamber and a second histologic substance chamber containing a second histologic substance isolated from the first histologic substance chamber, and the first and second histologic substance chamber are operably coupled to the at least one tissue processing chamber such that: the first histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample for a period of time before transferring the first histologic substance back into the first histologic substance chamber, and subsequently, the second histologic substance chamber is operated into fluid communication with the at least one tissue processing chamber such that the second histologic substance is brought into contact with the tissue sample (Birkner teaches chambers 30a and 30b for holding paraffin through which the substance can be moved to the processing chamber 18 and then back to the chambers 30a/b when done (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10, col. 8 line 21-37). It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art to have modified the automated device which sends paraffin to the processing chamber from a first histological substance chamber of Giovanni to have included a second histological substance chamber as in Birkner because Birkner teaches that using two separate chambers enables the infiltration and then separate embedding process (Birkner; col. 8 line 21-37) and also that two separate paraffin chambers are well known (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10) and allows the reusing of the solutions (Birkner; col. 6 line 51-col. 7 line 10).
As to claim 15, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 14, wherein: the at least one tissue processing chamber comprises a first tissue processing chamber, and where the clearing reagent is provided to the first tissue processing chamber such that the clearing process is performed on the tissue sample in the first tissue processing chamber (Giovanni; see above), and also where there is a first histologic substance chamber and second histologic substance chamber coupled to the tissue processing chamber such that the first histologic substance and the second histologic substance are each brought into contact with the tissue sample in the processing chamber (see the modification in claim 14 above). Giovanni teaches a singular chamber 1 and then potential additional processing in a second tissue chamber 16 [96].
Modified Giovanni does not specifically teach that the tissue processing chamber is separated into one chamber for reagents and another chamber for paraffin. However, Morales teaches the analogous art of a microwave for tissue processing in a chamber where reagents for fixing, dehydrating, clearing are sent to the chamber (Morales; Fig. 1a, 1b, [21, 97, 98]) and where paraffin is sent to the chamber (Morales; [35, 37]) where there are reagent and paraffin containers connected to the same chamber or as an alternative where there are reagent containers connected to a respective processing chamber and paraffin containers connected to another processing chamber (Morales; Fig. 1a, 1b, [20, 21, 107]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the microwave that is connected to both the paraffin and reagents of Giovanni to have used two separate chambers that are each respectively connected to reagents and paraffin, respectively, as in Morales because Morales teaches that these configurations are obvious variants (Morales; Fig. 1a, 1b, [20, 21, 107]), and would of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized the substitution of equivalent structures for performing the same function.
As to claim 16, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 14, wherein the first histologic substance and the second histologic substance each comprise paraffin (The histologic substance(s) are not positively recited and what defines the substances does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches paraffin; see citations above and also modification of Giovanni above).
As to claim 17, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 14, wherein the polar solvent comprises an alkanol, and the non-polar solvent comprises an alkane (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches isopropanol; [94]).
As to claim 18, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 17, wherein the alkanol comprises isopropyl alcohol (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure. Giovanni teaches isopropanol; [94]).
As to claim 19, Giovanni teaches the tissue processor of claim 17, wherein the alkane comprises at least one of: heptane, and hexane (The reagent is not positively recited and what defines the reagent does not further limit the device structure).
Other References Cited
The prior art of made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include;
Gilberson et al (US 20030197008; hereinafter “Gilberson”) teaches a variable power microwave (claim 11, [16, 56]), with low wattage [1, 4, 87], and discusses optimizing the microwave power to help improve processing time and also decrease wattages where the wattage is a result effective variable [8, 9, 88].
Gilberson et al (US 20020177183; hereinafter “Gilberson II”) teaches that changing power output is a critical variable [52].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R WHATLEY whose telephone number is (571) 272-9892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 8am-5pm.
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.
/Benjamin R Whatley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights