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 .
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Finke (US 2012/0259279).
Regarding claim 1, Finke teaches a syringe comprising a cylindrical body (30) having a smooth inner surface; an outer surface comprising an engagement feature (the curves shown in figure 2 close to reference numeral 34); a top end sealed with a first pierceable cover (118); a bottom end sealed with a second pierceable cover (38), wherein the first pierceable cover (118) comprises a thickness at least twice the thickness of the second pierceable cover (38) (refer to Figure 1); a compressible stopper (42) in a sealing configuration with the inner surface of the cylindrical body (30) disposed below and adjacent the first pierceable cover (118), wherein the compressible stopper (42) is configured to slide along the inner surface upon application of pressure on the stopper; and a buffer (refer to paragraph [0008]) disposed between the second pierceable cover and the stopper, wherein the engagement feature comprises symmetrically placed indents, a flange, or two or more protrusions positioned at approximately diametrically opposite sides of the cylindrical body (30). (Refer to Figure 1)
Regarding claim 2, the buffer comprises a lysis buffer or an elution buffer. (Refer to paragraph [0008])
Regarding claim 9, the buffer occupies 20% to 35% of the internal volume of the cylindrical body (30). (Refer to Figures 1 and 3)
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.
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Finke in view of Bearinger (US 2017/0176302).
Refer above for the teachings of Finke.
Finke fails to teach the engagement feature is placed at approximately at a mid-point between the top and bottom ends. Finke fails to explicitly teaches the pierceable covers are aluminum.
Bearinger teaches a dispenser (730) having engagement features shown as protrusions in Figures 7A placed at approximately at a mid-point between the top and bottom ends in order to ensure the dispenser is placed securely. Bearinger also teaches seals made of aluminum. (Refer to paragraph [0014])
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide engagement features as shown in Bearinger in order to ensure the cartridge is placed securely.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to provide the pierceable covers of Finke to be aluminum as disclosed in Bearinger in order to ensure the seal is pierced easily.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-15, 17-21, 23-24, 26, 28-31 and 34 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art fails to teach a sealing plate comprising a disk-shape having an upper surface opposite a lower surface, a first through-hole extending between the surfaces, the first through-hole comprising at least two diametrically opposite retaining features that extend from the lower surface and attach to the engagement feature of the buffer pack wherein the retaining features immobilize the buffer pack in absence of downward pressure on the first pierceable cover and detach from the engagement feature upon application of downward pressure on the first pierceable cover.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JYOTI NAGPAUL whose telephone number is (571)272-1273. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am to 5pm, EST.
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.
/JYOTI Mutreja/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798