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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. 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).
2. With respect to applicant’s remarks filed on 08/10/26 regarding rejected claims on pages 8-10, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant argues “The narrow-band filter described in Tao is merely a filter configured to selectively transmit the 650 nm laser light. The statement that "the spectrum center wavelength of the filter should match the wavelength of the laser" simply means that the filter is designed to correspond to the wavelength of the laser. Tao does not teach or suggest irradiating or utilizing multiple different wavelengths as recited … Claims 1 and 14 explicitly require the use of two or more different wavelengths selected from ultraviolet (UV), blue, green, orange, red, far-red, infrared, and white light. This limitation requires the intentional selection and use of multiple light beams having different center wavelengths.”
Current claims disclose new added limitation “a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths … wherein the plurality of light beams are two or more light beams selected from among ultraviolet (UV) light, blue light, green light, orange light, red light, far-red light, infrared light, and white light”. New reference of Jiang (CN 210528936) discloses this limitation (page 6, lines 4-5; Page 9, lines 4-15).
3. With respect to Applicant’s remarks filed on 08/10/26 regarding rejected claims on pages 11-12, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant argues “There is no motivation to modify Tao in view of Kim. Kim's multi-wavelength system operates within an absorbance-measurement framework that relies on a transmitted light system and photodiodes for analyzing serum components. (Kim, Abstract.) In contrast, Tao is directed to magnetic-bead detection using a scattered-light system. (Tao, Abstract.) Therefore, Kim's wavelength arrangement is described in the context of a transmitted- light absorbance measurement architecture that is directed to a different measurement objective than Tao's magnetic-bead scattered-light detection system. Further, the Office relies on Kim for its disclosure of multiple wavelengths and multiple sample wells. However, those features are described in Kim as part of a transmitted-light absorbance measurement system utilizing photodiodes to measure serum components …” Tao’s reference discloses a detection system and method for bio-magnetic bead concentration, detecting units are respectively transmission detecting unit, left scattering detection unit and right scattering detection unit. Kim’s reference discloses a device and method of measuring concentration of a component in a biochemical sample. Both are in the same field. Therefore, the combination is adequate. In the other words, Kim’s reference has already disclosed the limitation irradiating a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells, which Tao’s reference does not teach.
4. Similarly, on pages 11-13, the examiner respectfully disagrees. Applicant argues “None of these references suggests incorporating such features into Tao and Kim for magnetic-bead concentration analysis. Papazoglou uses a monochrome CCD camera merely as an image-acquisition device. Swab and Kobayashi use monochrome imaging techniques to emphasize or isolate particular colors.” Although Tao and Kim do not disclose a monochrome CCD camera, Kobayashi does. The limitations that Tao and Kim have already disclosed, Kobayashi do not need to disclose again. Moreover, Kobayashi disclosed monochrome cameras for sensing a single color, for imaging reflected light of light of a particular hue (column 4, lines 41-46, 63-65). This is similarly to the current Application, that is monochrome camera is for capturing images of reflected light beams at the different wavelengths, and for sensing a single color (Applicant Pub. No. 2024/0255407, [0081, 0097]).
5. For above reason, the claims could not be in condition for allowance. In the other words, the claims should be amended to overcome the prior art.
Grounds for the rejection of claims are provided below as necessitated by amendment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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 of this title, 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.
7. Claim(s) 1-5, 11-15, 18, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tao et al. (CN 105806812) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2010/0174491), further in view of Jiang et al. (CN 210528936), further in view of Kobayashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,039,868). Hereafter “Tao”, “Kim”, “Jiang”, “Kobayashi”. (Please see attached files for Jiang’s reference and attached files for in previous Office Action for Tao’s reference).
Regarding Claim(s) 1, 14, 18, Tao teaches a method for determining a magnetic bead concentration in a suspension (abstract, lines 1-3), the method comprising:
irradiating light beam having wavelength to a well containing a suspension in which magnetic beads are suspended (figure 1, sample cell 2 is not different from a well; Page 3, lines 38-40; Page 6, lines 2-4. It is inherent that a spectrum includes different wavelengths);
sensing reflected light beams using a detector including a light sensor (figure 1, elements 3, 4, 6); and
determining concentrations of the magnetic beads in the well by analyzing light data of the sensed per-wavelength reflected light beams, (Page 2, lines 44-48; Page 3, lines 1-2; Page 6, lines 39-42. Note: scattered light obtained from magnetic bead is not different from reflected light beam. Further, figure 1, it is inherent that the left scattering detection unit 3 and the right scattering detection unit 6 can also detect the reflected light beam from the sample cell 2).
However, Tao does not teach a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells. Kim also teaches a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells ([0011], lines 6-11; [0034]; Claim 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao by having a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells in order to sense intensity of the light beams in the plurality of different sample cells, (Kim, ([0011], lines 6-11; [0034]; Claim 1).
Tao in view of Kim do not teach the plurality of light beams are two or more light beams selected from among ultraviolet (UV) light, blue light, green light, orange light, red light, far-red light, infrared light, and white light, and sensing at the different wavelengths from the plurality of wells. Jiang discloses these limitations (page 6, lines 4-5; Page 9, lines 4-15). Jiang also teaches irradiating a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells (figure 1). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao by having a plurality of light beams having different wavelengths to each of a plurality of wells, two or more light beams selected from among ultraviolet (UV) light, blue light, green light, orange light, red light, far-red light, infrared light, and white light in order to sense a specific light beam of different sample cells, (page 6, lines 4-5; Page 9, lines 4-15).
Tao in view of Kim and Jiang do not teach the limitations monochrome camera, providing an image for the sensed reflected light beam per wavelength. Kobayashi teaches monochrome camera, providing an image for the sensed reflected light beam per wavelength (column 4, lines 41-44, 63-65; Column 5, lines 18-25), providing an image for the sensed reflected light beam per wavelength (column 1, lines 31-40, 64-68; Column 2, lines 24-30). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao by having a monochrome camera and providing an image for the sensed reflected light beam in order to image reflected light of a particular hue, and for sensing a single color (Kobayashi, column 1, lines 31-40, 64-68; Column 2, lines 24-30, column 4, lines 41-44, 63-65; Column 5, lines 18-25).
Regarding Claim(s) 2, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi disclose the claimed invention according to claims 1, or 14, as stated above except for sensing the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes measuring intensities of the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths. Tao further teaches sensing the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes measuring intensities of the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths (Abstract, lines 8-11; Page 2, lines 42-48; Page 3, lines 7-17).
Regarding Claim(s) 3, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi disclose the claimed invention according to claims 1, or 14, as stated above except for the plurality of light beams are selected from among light beams reflectable by the magnetic beads. Tao further teaches the plurality of light beams are selected from among light beams reflectable by the magnetic beads (Page 2, lines 44-48; Page 3, lines 1-2; Page 6, [0005]. Note: scattered light obtained from magnetic bead is not different from reflected light beam).
Regarding Claim(s) 4, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, teach all the limitations of claim 1 as stated above except for the plurality of light beams are sequentially irradiated. Kim further teaches the plurality of light beams are sequentially irradiated ([0034, 0046]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, by having the plurality of light beams are sequentially irradiated in order to implement inspection system more efficiently, (Kim, [0034, 0046]).
Regarding Claim(s) 5, 15, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi disclose the claimed invention according to claims 1, or 14, as stated above except for determining the concentrations of the magnetic beads includes (i) calculating a certain concentration value or a concentration range of the magnetic beads in the wells or (ii) identifying whether the concentrations of the magnetic beads in the wells fall within a predetermined range, using the light data of the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths. Tao further teaches determining the concentrations of the magnetic beads includes (i) calculating a certain concentration value or a concentration range of the magnetic beads in the wells or (ii) identifying whether the concentrations of the magnetic beads in the wells fall within a predetermined range, using the light data of the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths (page 1, abstract; Page 2, Technology field, lines 30-48; Page 3, lines 1-2).
Regarding to claims 11-13, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi disclose the claimed invention according to claims 1, or 14, as stated above except for the magnetic beads include iron oxide, ed-brown iron oxide particles, the magnetic beads have a size of 0.1 pm to 6 pm. Tao further discloses the claimed invention except magnetic beads include iron oxide, ed-brown iron oxide particles, and the magnetic beads have a size of 0.1 m to 6 µm. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify method or device of Tao reference with magnetic beads include iron oxide, ed-brown iron oxide particles, and the magnetic beads have a size of 0.1 m to 6 µm, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. in re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
8. Claim(s) 6, 16, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tao et al. (CN 105806812), in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2010/0174491), further in view of in view of Jiang et al. (CN 210528936), further in view of Kobayashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,039,868), and further in view of Weidemaier et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2015/0118688). Hereafter “Tao”, “Kim”, “Jiang”, “Kobayashi”, “Weidemaier”. (Please see attached files for Jiang’s reference and attached files for in previous Office Action for Tao’s reference).
Regarding Claim(s) 6, 16, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, teach all the limitations of claims 1, 14, 15 as stated above except for analyzing the light data of the sensed reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes determining the concentration of the magnetic beads in the plurality of wells, using a standard curve of per-wavelength reflected light intensities for magnetic beads for a plurality of known concentrations. Weidemaier teaches analyzing the light data of the sensed reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes determining the concentration of the magnetic beads in the plurality of wells, using a standard curve of per-wavelength reflected light intensities for magnetic beads for a plurality of known concentrations ([0329]; figure 56). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, by analyzing the light data of the sensed reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes determining the concentration of the magnetic beads in the plurality of wells, using a standard curve of per-wavelength reflected light intensities for magnetic beads for a plurality of known concentrations in order to show pellet formation (Weidemaier, [0329]).
9. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tao et al. (CN 105806812) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2010/0174491), further in view of in view of Jiang et al. (CN 210528936), further in view of Kobayashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,039,868), and further in view of Yguerabide et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2002/0028519). Hereafter “Tao”, “Kim”, “Jiang”, “Kobayashi”, “Yguerabide”.
Regarding Claim(s) 8, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, teach all the limitations of claim 1 as stated above except for the detector is a colorimeter. Yguerabide teaches the detector is a colorimeter, ([0448], lines 22-26, CCD single chip color video camera is not different from a colorimeter). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, by having the detector is a colorimeter in order to detect color light.
10. Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tao et al. (CN 105806812) in view of Kim et al. (U.S. Pub. 2010/0174491), further in view of in view of Jiang et al. (CN 210528936), further in view of Kobayashi et al. (U.S. Pat. No. 5,039,868), and further in view of Shelton et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2019/0204201). Hereafter “Tao”, “Kim”, “Jiang”, “Kobayashi”, “Shelton”.
Regarding Claim(s) 10, Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, teach all the limitations of claim 1 as stated above except for irradiating the plurality of light beams includes irradiating the light beams having the different wavelengths according to on-off combinations by a controller, and wherein sensing the reflected light beams at the different wavelengths includes driving the detector in synchronization with the irradiation by the controller. Shelton teaches driving the detector in synchronization with the irradiation by the controller ([0371]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to modify Tao, Kim, Jiang, Kobayashi, by driving the detector in synchronization with the irradiation by the controller in order to control light beams and detector efficiently ([0371]).
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 7, 17, 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 allowable Subject matter was indicated in office Action mailed on 05/21/25.
Conclusion
12. 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Fax/Telephone Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRI T TON whose telephone number is (571)272-9064. The examiner can normally be reached on 8am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached on (571)270-5789. 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.
September 16, 2026
/Tri T Ton/
Primary Examiner Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights