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 § 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.
U.S.
1. Claims 1, 3, 4 and 6-16 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/063159 to Vann (cited by applicant) in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (found in “BACKGROUND” of specification) and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2016/0242422 to Elizer et al.
Vann discloses a system (storage and retrieval system 200) for automatically supplying a pellet (oligonucleotides supported on frits) to each well of a cartridge comprising a plurality of wells, wherein the system comprises:
a pellet supply reservoir (plurality of storage arrays 222, 224) containing a supply of dried reagent pellets ([0049], oligonucleotides supported on frits);
a cartridge support (implicit; fig. 8 and [0049]: storage and retrieval system 200 must have a support, not shown in the figure, configured to hold supporting retainment region array 216) configured to hold a cartridge;
a pellet transfer head (robot head 230) disposed above the pellet supply reservoir and a cartridge (retainment region array 216) disposed on the cartridge support, wherein the pellet transfer head comprises a plurality of vacuum nozzles (capture devices 232) and the number and arrangement of the vacuum nozzles corresponds to the number and arrangement of wells of the cartridge (see figure), and wherein each vacuum nozzle comprises a downwardly-facing vacuum port in selective communication with a vacuum source (aspirator 206; 0051]: "The aspirator 206 can be capable of creating suction at the distal ends of the support capture devices 232.'');
one or more downwardly-facing pressure ports in selective communication with a pressure source ([0051] and fig. 8, compressed gas source 202 and computer controlled valves 204);
a vertical actuator system configured to selectively move the pellet transfer head up or down (implicit: robot head 230 moves vertically up and down to retrieve and release the supported oligonucleotides);
a vision sensor system (detector system 210) including a vision sensor camera ([0050]: "the detection system can comprise a detector" ..."vision sensor model CV-700''), wherein the vision sensor camera is disposed above the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge disposed on the cartridge support (see figure 8);
a horizontal actuator system configured to effect relative horizontal movement of the vision sensor camera ([0050]: a detector can be placed along an emitted radiation path that passes through a detection region 220. For example,
a detector system, vision sensor model CV-700" ... "can be used to detect whether a single support is captured by one or each of the support capture devices 232.'') and the pellet transfer head with respect to the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support ([0049]: "The robot head 230 can travel along a rail 234 to deliver supports retrieved from storage arrays 222, 224 and can deliver them into a mixture retainment region 218''); and
a controller connected to the vacuum source, the pressure source, the vertical actuator system, the horizontal actuator system, and the vision sensor system, wherein the controller is configured to execute operational commands of a control algorithm ([0022]: "The control unit can be programmed, programmable, and/or operable to control the handling device to pool in the mixture retainment region different supported oligonucleotides from different ones of the retainment regions, thereby forming a pool.''),
The operational commands includes:
(A) Activate the horizontal actuator system to position the pellet transfer head above the pellet supply reservoir (implicit: fig. 8 shows robot head 230 positioned above storage array 222);
(B) After command (A), activate the vertical actuator system to lower the pellet transfer head to a pellet pickup position with respect to the pellet supply reservoir (implicit: fig. 8 shows support capture devices 232 in a position to pick up the supports (oligonucleotides));
(C) With the pellet transfer head in the pellet pickup position, activate the vacuum source to create a vacuum at each vacuum port to draw a pellet from the pellet supply reservoir to each vacuum port (implicit: [0051]: "The aspirator 206 can be capable of creating suction at the distal ends of the support capture devices 232.'');
(D) After command (C), activate the vertical actuator system to raise the pellet transfer head from the pellet pickup position with respect to the pellet supply reservoir (implicit: fig. 8);
(E) After command (D), activate the horizontal actuator system to position the pellet transfer head within a field of view of the vision sensor camera ( [0050]: "The robot head 230 can traverse a field of view of a detector system 210''.);
(F) After command (E), activate the vision sensor system to detect whether a dried reagent pellet is disposed at each of the vacuum nozzles ( [0050]: ''A desired brightness threshold value"..."can be established such that the existence of single supports on the support capture devices 232 can be detectable.'');
(G) After command (F), activate the horizontal actuator system to position the pellet transfer head above the cartridge so that each vacuum nozzle is aligned with a corresponding well of the cartridge (see, in fig. 8, robot head 230 shown in dotted lines);
(H) After command (G), activate the vertical actuator system to lower the pellet transfer head to a pellet dispensing position with respect to the cartridge (implicit: fig. 8); and
(I) After command (H), deactivate the vacuum source to terminate the vacuum at each vacuum port to release the pellet from each vacuum nozzle into the corresponding well of the cartridge (implicit: fig. 8).
Vann does not teach supplying dried reagent pellets from a single container into wells of a cartridge.
Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art found in the “BACKGROUND” section on pages 1-2 teaches that it is known to load dried reagent pellets from a container of loose, randomly-arranged pellets into each well of the cartridge by hand. [0005].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann to load dried reagent pellets from a single container into wells of a cartridge as taught by Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art for purposes of automating such loading.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art does not teach activating the pressure source to supply gas flow at the one or more pressure ports of the pellet transfer head to fluidize the supply of pellets within the pellet supply reservoir.
Elizer et al. teaches fluidizing pellets with heated compressed air to evaporate water from the pellets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art to direct heated compressed air into the storage arrays to fluidize and remove any excess moisture from the pellets.
I.) As noted above, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders all the limitations of claim 1 obvious.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 3, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 3 depends.
Claim 3 recites that the operational commands further comprise, before command (D), deactivate the pressure source to terminate gas flow at the pressure ports.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to terminate gas flow at the pressure ports before raising the pellet transfer head so as not to inadvertently dislodge pellets from the vacuum ports.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 3 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 4 depends.
Claim 4 recites that the operational commands further comprise, before command (G):(J) activate the horizontal actuator system to position the cartridge within the field of view of the vision sensor camera; and (K) activate the vision sensor system to detect at least one of (1) whether each well of the cartridge is empty, and (2) whether a correct cartridge is placed in the cartridge support.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to activate the horizontal actuator system to position the cartridge within the field of view of the vision sensor camera; and (K) activate the vision sensor system to detect at least one of (1) whether each well of the cartridge is empty, and (2) whether a correct cartridge is placed in the cartridge support before command (G) in view of applicant disclosing that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty. [0005]
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 4 obvious.
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 6, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 6 depends.
Claim 6 recites that the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support are supported on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and wherein the horizontal actuator system comprises a horizontal actuator motor, a horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly and coupled to the horizontal lead screw.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach that the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support are supported on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and wherein the horizontal actuator system comprises a horizontal actuator motor, a horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly and coupled to the horizontal lead screw.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to support the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and wherein the horizontal actuator system comprises a horizontal actuator motor, a horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly and coupled to the horizontal lead screw for bringing the pellet supply reservoir and cartridge support into proximity with the transfer head. A horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly is considered a known and conventional lifting assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 6 obvious.
V.) Regarding applicant’s claim 7, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 6 obvious from which claim 7 depends.
Claim 7 recites a horizontal home sensor configured to detect when the horizontal carriage assembly is in a horizontal home position.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include a sensor to monitor the horizontal position of the horizontal carriage assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 7 obvious.
VI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 8, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 8 depends.
Claim 8 recites that pellet transfer head is supported on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein the vertical actuator system comprises a vertical actuator motor, a vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the vertical actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly and coupled to the vertical lead screw.
From Fig. 8 of Vann it is clear that the pellet transfer head moves vertically; however, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not specifically teach that that pellet transfer head is supported on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein the vertical actuator system comprises a vertical actuator motor, a vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the vertical actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly and coupled to the vertical lead screw.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to support the pellet transfer head on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein the vertical actuator system comprises a vertical actuator motor, a vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the vertical actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly and coupled to the vertical lead screw for purpose of moving the transfer head between the pellet supply reservoir and cartridges with moving up and down during pellet transferring. A vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly is considered a known and conventional moving assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 8 obvious.
VII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 9, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 9 depends.
Claim 9 recites that vertical carriage assembly comprises: a vertical carriage mount supported on the one or more vertical tracks by a linear slide associated with each vertical track; and a transfer head mounting bracket attached to the vertical carriage mount, wherein the pellet transfer head is attached to the transfer head mounting bracket.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to mount the vertical carriage assembly on the one or more vertical tracks by a linear slide associated with each vertical track; and a transfer head mounting bracket attached to the vertical carriage mount, wherein the pellet transfer head is attached to the transfer head mounting bracket. The use of one or more vertical tracks would guide the vertical movement of the vertical carriage assembly and the transfer head.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 9 obvious.
VIII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 10, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 8 obvious from which claim 10 depends.
Claim 10 recites a vertical home sensor configured to detect when the vertical carriage assembly is in a vertical home position.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a sensor or detector to determine when the vertical carriage assembly is in a vertical home position.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 10 obvious.
IX.) Regarding applicant’s claim 11, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 11 depends.
Claim 11 recites that the vision sensor camera has a downward field of view, and the system further comprises an upwardly-facing mirror disposed beneath the vision sensor camera and the pellet transfer head, and wherein the pellet transfer head is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera when the pellet transfer head is positioned above a first portion of the mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera.
Vann teaches a vision sensor (camera); however, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach that the vision sensor camera has a downward field of view, and the system further comprises an upwardly-facing mirror disposed beneath the vision sensor camera and the pellet transfer head, and wherein the pellet transfer head is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera when the pellet transfer head is positioned above a first portion of the mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera.
As noted above, applicant disclosing that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty.
Therefore, in Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to position the vision sensor camera so that it has a downward field of view to “see” into the wells of the cartridge and to include an upwardly-facing mirror disposed beneath the vision sensor camera and the pellet transfer head, and wherein the pellet transfer head is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera when the pellet transfer head is positioned above a first portion of the mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera, for purposes of seeing and verifying that vacuum nozzles each include a pellet for transferring into the wells of the cartridge.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 11 obvious.
X.) Regarding applicant’s claim 12, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 11 obvious from which claim 12 depends.
Claim 12 recites that the first portion of the mirror comprises a first mirror and the second portion of the mirror comprises a second mirror disposed at an angle with respect to the first mirror.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include any number of mirrors that are oriented/aligned to allow the vision sensor camera to “see” the vacuum nozzle heads from different angles to verify the presence of reagent pellets held by the vacuum nozzle heads.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. render claim 12 obvious.
XI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 13, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 13 depends.
Claim 13 recites that the plurality of vacuum nozzles of the pellet transfer head are arranged in at least two rows of vacuum nozzles, each row comprising a plurality of vacuum nozzles.
As shown in Fig. 8 of Vann, the pellet transfer head includes plurality of vacuum nozzles arranged in at least two rows of vacuum nozzles, each row comprising a plurality of vacuum nozzles.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 13 obvious.
XII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 14, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 14 depends.
Claim 14 recites an environmentally-controlled housing, wherein at least the pellet supply reservoir, the cartridge support, and the pellet transfer head are disposed within the housing.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach an environmentally-controlled housing, wherein at least the pellet supply reservoir, the cartridge support, and the pellet transfer head are disposed within the housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include an environmentally-controlled housing, wherein at least the pellet supply reservoir, the cartridge support, and the pellet transfer head are disposed within the housing, for purposes of isolating these elements from any ambient environment contamination.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. render claim 14 obvious.
XIII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 15, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 14 obvious from which claim 15 depends.
Claim 15 recites a pellet insertion tube for transferring pellets from outside the housing to the pellet supply reservoir within the housing comprising: a pipe extending through a wall of the housing with a proximal end of the pipe situated outside the housing and a distal end of the pipe situated inside the housing; a funnel attachment at a proximal end of the pipe; and a bracket attached to the wall of the housing for holding the pipe at an incline.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach a pellet insertion tube for transferring pellets from outside the housing to the pellet supply reservoir within the housing comprising: a pipe extending through a wall of the housing with a proximal end of the pipe situated outside the housing and a distal end of the pipe situated inside the housing; a funnel attachment at a proximal end of the pipe; and a bracket attached to the wall of the housing for holding the pipe at an incline.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include a means for adding reagent pellets into the pellet supply reservoir to provide for continuous operation of the overall system. A pellet supply chute/tube in the form of an inclined pipe having one end extending through a wall of the pellet supply reservoir and a larger flared upper end in which pellets can be received would have been an obvious means to resupply pellets.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 15 obvious.
XIV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 16, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 16 depends.
Claim 16 recites that the vision sensor system is configured to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles, and command (F) includes activating the vision sensor camera and the vision system to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles.
As noted above applicant discloses that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty. [0005]
Applicant further discloses that it is known to watch for and discard pellets that are misshapen,
deformed, broken, or otherwise defective. [0006]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. so that the vision sensor system is configured to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles, and command (F) includes activating the vision sensor camera and the vision system to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 16 obvious.
2. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0227563 to Nishigaki.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 5, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 5 depends.
Claim 5 recites a static eliminator fan directed downwardly toward the pellet supply reservoir for reducing static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach a static eliminator fan directed downwardly toward the pellet supply reservoir for reducing static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir.
Nishigaki teaches using a fan a static eliminator, which fan blow air to neutralize static charges. [0041]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include a static eliminator fan directed downwardly toward the pellet supply reservoir for reducing static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir as taught by Nishigaki to neutralize any undesirable static charges on the pellets.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Elizer et al. and Nishigaki renders claim 5 obvious.
3. Claims 17, 19, 20 and 22-30 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al.
As noted above, Vann teaches a system and method for automatically supplying a dried reagent pellet to each well of a cartridge comprising a plurality of wells, wherein the method comprises:
(A) Automatically positioning a pellet transfer head above a pellet supply reservoir containing a supply of pellets (oligonucleotides supported on frits), wherein the pellet transfer head comprises (i) a plurality of vacuum nozzles, wherein each vacuum nozzle comprises a downwardly-facing vacuum port in selective communication with a vacuum source and wherein the number and arrangement of the vacuum nozzles corresponds to the number and arrangement of wells of the cartridge and (ii) one or more downwardly-facing pressure ports in selective communication with a pressure source;
(B) After step (A), automatically lowering the pellet transfer head to a pellet pickup position with respect to the pellet supply reservoir;
(C) With the pellet transfer head in the pellet pickup position activating the vacuum source to create a vacuum at each vacuum port to draw a pellet from the pellet supply reservoir to each vacuum port;
(D) After step (C), automatically raising the pellet transfer head from the pellet pickup position with respect to the pellet supply reservoir;
(E) After step (D), automatically positioning the pellet transfer head within a field of view of a vision sensor camera;
(F) After step (E), activating the vision sensor camera and a vision sensor system to detect whether a dried reagent pellet is disposed at each of the vacuum nozzles;
(G) After step (F), automatically positioning the pellet transfer head above the cartridge so that each vacuum nozzle is aligned with a corresponding well of the cartridge;
(H) After step (G), automatically lowering the pellet transfer head to a pellet dispensing position with respect to the cartridge; and
(I) After step (H), deactivating the vacuum source to terminate the vacuum at each vacuum port to release the pellet from each vacuum nozzle into the corresponding well of the cartridge.
Vann does not teach supplying dried reagent pellets from a single container into wells of a cartridge.
Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art found in the “BACKGROUND” section on pages 1-2 teaches that it is known to load dried reagent pellets from a container of loose, randomly-arranged pellets into each well of the cartridge by hand. [0005].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann to load dried reagent pellets from a single container into wells of a cartridge as taught by Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art for purposes of automating such loading.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art does not teach activating the pressure source to supply gas flow at the one or more pressure ports of the pellet transfer head to fluidize the supply of pellets within the pellet supply reservoir.
Elizer et al. teaches fluidizing pellets with heated compressed air to evaporate water from the pellets.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art to direct heated compressed air into the storage arrays to fluidize and remove any excess moisture from the pellets as taught by Elizer et al. before transferring the pellets into the cartridge.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 17, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders all the limitations of claim 17 obvious.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 19, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 19 depends.
Claim 19 recites before step (D), deactivating the pressure source to terminate gas flow at the pressure ports.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to terminate gas flow at the pressure ports before raising the pellet transfer head so as not to inadvertently dislodge pellets from the vacuum ports.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 19 obvious.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 20, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 20 depends.
Claim 20 recites before step (G): (J) automatically positioning the cartridge within the field of view of the vision sensor camera; and (K) activating the vision sensor system to detect at least one of (1) whether each well of the cartridge is empty, and (2) whether a correct cartridge is placed in the cartridge support.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to automatically position the cartridge within the field of view of the vision sensor camera; and (K) activating the vision sensor system to detect at least one of (1) whether each well of the cartridge is empty, and (2) whether a correct cartridge is placed in the cartridge support to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty in view of applicant disclosing that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty. [0005]
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 20 obvious.
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 22, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 22 depends.
Claim 22 recites that the cartridge is supported on a cartridge support, and wherein the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support are supported on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and steps (A), (E), and (G) comprise moving the horizontal carriage assembly by rotating a horizontal lead screw with a horizontal actuator motor, wherein the horizontal lead screw is operatively coupled to a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach that the cartridge is supported on a cartridge support, and wherein the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support are supported on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and steps (A), (E), and (G) comprise moving the horizontal carriage assembly by rotating a horizontal lead screw with a horizontal actuator motor, wherein the horizontal lead screw is operatively coupled to a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to support the pellet supply reservoir and the cartridge support on a horizontal carriage assembly supported for horizontal movement on one or more horizontal tracks, and wherein the horizontal actuator system comprises a horizontal actuator motor, a horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly and coupled to the horizontal lead screw for bringing the pellet supply reservoir and cartridge support into proximity with the transfer head. A horizontal lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly is considered a known and conventional lifting assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 22 obvious
V.) Regarding applicant’s claim 23, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 22 obvious from which claim 23 depends.
Claim 23 recites detecting when the horizontal carriage assembly is in a horizontal home position with a horizontal home sensor.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include means to detect and detect when the horizontal carriage assembly is in a horizontal home position with a horizontal home sensor for purposes of monitoring the position of the pellet supply reservoir and cartridge.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 23 obvious.
VI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 24, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 24 depends.
Claim 24 recites that the pellet transfer head is supported on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein steps (B), (D), and (H) comprise moving the vertical carriage assembly by rotating a vertical lead screw with a vertical actuator motor, wherein the vertical lead screw is operatively coupled to a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly.
From Fig. 8 of Vann it is clear that the pellet transfer head moves vertically; however, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not specifically teach that that pellet transfer head is supported on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein the vertical actuator system comprises a vertical actuator motor, a vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the vertical actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly and coupled to the vertical lead screw.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to support the pellet transfer head on a vertical carriage assembly supported for vertical movement on one or more vertical tracks, and wherein the vertical actuator system comprises a vertical actuator motor, a vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the vertical actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the vertical carriage assembly and coupled to the vertical lead screw. A vertical lead screw operatively coupled to the horizontal actuator motor, and a lead screw nut attached to the horizontal carriage assembly is considered a known and conventional moving assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 24 obvious.
VII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 25, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 24 obvious from which claim 25 depends.
Claim 25 recites detecting when the vertical carriage assembly is in a vertical home position with a vertical home sensor.
In Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to include a sensor to monitor the horizontal position of the horizontal carriage assembly.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 25 obvious.
VIII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 26, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 26 depends.
Claim 26 recites that step (E) comprises automatically positioning the pellet transfer head above a first portion of a mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera, and wherein the first portion of the mirror comprises a first mirror and the second portion of the mirror comprises a second mirror disposed at an angle with respect to the first mirror.
Vann teaches a vision sensor (camera); however, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach that the vision sensor camera has a downward field of view, and the system further comprises an upwardly-facing mirror disposed beneath the vision sensor camera and the pellet transfer head, and wherein the pellet transfer head is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera when the pellet transfer head is positioned above a first portion of the mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera.
As noted above, applicant disclosing that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty.
Therefore, in Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to position the vision sensor camera so that it has a downward field of view to “see” into the wells of the cartridge and to include an upwardly-facing mirror disposed beneath the vision sensor camera and the pellet transfer head, and wherein the pellet transfer head is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera when the pellet transfer head is positioned above a first portion of the mirror while a second portion of the mirror is within the field of view of the vision sensor camera, for purposes of seeing and verifying that vacuum nozzles each include a pellet for transferring into the wells of the cartridge.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 25 obvious.
IX.) Regarding applicant’s claim 27, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 27 depends.
Claim 27 recites that the plurality of vacuum nozzles of the pellet transfer head are arranged in at least two rows of vacuum nozzles, each row comprising a plurality of vacuum nozzles.
As shown in Fig. 8 of Vann, the pellet transfer head includes plurality of vacuum nozzles arranged in at least two rows of vacuum nozzles, each row comprising a plurality of vacuum nozzles.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 27 obvious.
X.) Regarding applicant’s claim 28, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 28 depends.
Claim 28 recites that at least the pellet supply reservoir, the cartridge support, and the pellet transfer head are disposed within an environmentally-controlled housing, and wherein the method further comprises transferring pellets from outside the housing to the pellet supply reservoir within the housing.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include an environmentally-controlled housing, wherein at least the pellet supply reservoir, the cartridge support, and the pellet transfer head are disposed within the housing, for purposes of isolating these elements from any ambient environment contamination.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. render claim 28 obvious.
XI.) Regarding applicant’s claim 29, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 28 obvious from which claim 29 depends.
Claim 29 recites transferring pellets from outside the housing to the pellet supply reservoir within the housing with a pellet insertion tube, wherein the pellet insertion tube comprises: a pipe extending through a wall of the housing with a proximal end of the pipe situated outside the housing and a distal end of the pipe situated inside the housing; a funnel attachment at a proximal end of the pipe; and a bracket attached to the wall of the housing for holding the pipe at an incline.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach a pellet insertion tube for transferring pellets from outside the housing to the pellet supply reservoir within the housing comprising: a pipe extending through a wall of the housing with a proximal end of the pipe situated outside the housing and a distal end of the pipe situated inside the housing; a funnel attachment at a proximal end of the pipe; and a bracket attached to the wall of the housing for holding the pipe at an incline.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include a means for adding reagent pellets into the pellet supply reservoir to provide for continuous operation of the overall system. A pellet supply chute in the form of an inclined pipe having one end extending through a wall of the pellet supply reservoir and a larger flared upper end in which pellets can be received would have been an obvious means to resupply pellets.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 29 obvious.
XII.) Regarding applicant’s claim 30, as noted above Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 17 obvious from which claim 30 depends.
Claim 30 recites that step (F) further comprises activating the vision sensor camera and the vision sensor system to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles.
As noted above applicant discloses that it is known to ensure that only one pellet is in each well and none of the wells are empty. [0005]
Applicant further discloses that it is known to watch for and discard pellets that are misshapen,
deformed, broken, or otherwise defective. [0006]
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. so that the vision sensor system is configured to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles, and command (F) includes activating the vision sensor camera and the vision system to detect whether more than one dried reagent pellet, a misshapen dried reagent pellet, or a broken dried reagent pellet is disposed at any of the vacuum nozzles.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. renders claim 30 obvious.
4. Claim 21 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. as applied to claim 17 and further in view of Nishigaki.
Claim 21 recites directing a static eliminator fan at the pellet supply reservoir to reduce static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir.
Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. does not teach a static eliminator fan directed at the pellet supply reservoir for reducing static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir.
Nishigaki teaches using a fan a static eliminator, which fan blow air to neutralize static charges. [0041]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art and Elizer et al. to include a static eliminator fan directed toward the pellet supply reservoir for reducing static buildup in the pellet supply reservoir as taught by Nishigaki to neutralize any undesirable static charges on the pellets.
Therefore, Vann in view of Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art, Elizer et al. and Nishigaki renders claim 21 obvious.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
/MICHAEL STANLEY GZYBOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights