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 § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-4 and 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. Claim 1 is unclear reciting “wherein the empty nozzle assembly has a nozzle body without a nozzle and an o-ring”, because the claim does not specify method steps. A claim is indefinite where it merely recites a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced. In addition, the phrase “inserting [...] under a cuvette, [...] a nozzle body without a nozzle and an o-ring” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the cuvette, the nozzle body, the nozzle, and the o-ring are part of the claimed invention. Although the negative limitation appears to limit the empty nozzle assembly, the claim employs the open-ended transitional phrase 'comprising,' making it unclear which elements are actually part of the claimed invention. For the reasons given above, dependent claims are similarly unclear.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the plurality of bolts/screws" in L15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 7-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a1/a2) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Durack et al. (US 2019/0040356).
Regarding claims 1-4 and 7-13, Durack et al. teach:
A method for installing a subassembly of a cell sorter, the method comprising:
installing a carriage assembly (i.e., assembly including a mount 331, a frame 349, and a mounting plate 1093) to a flow cell (see annotated Fig. 5 for example), including installing a carriage plate (e.g., 359) to a linear stage (e.g., 361) by inserting a plurality of fasteners through a plurality of holes (see Figs. 5 & 22 and Examiner’s explanation below);
inserting an empty nozzle assembly (e.g., flow body 133) into a mount (see i.e., the mount 331 including a first stage 333, second stage 337, and a third stage 343, ¶ 0824 & Fig. 22) of the carriage assembly (see Fig. 5 showing the flow body 133 is inserted into the third stage 343 of the mount 331), wherein the empty nozzle assembly has a nozzle body without an o-ring (see for example, Fig. 5 showing the flow body 133 does not include the nozzle 137 or the O-ring seal 155; see also the flow body 133 is removably connected to the nozzle 137, where the connection is being sealed by an O-ring seal 155 ¶ 0799);
inserting a first test nozzle assembly (e.g., nozzle system 101’) into the mount (see Figs. 5, 22, 109, 114 & ¶ 1146 for example),
an orifice (e.g., 103 Nozzle Orifice), a light source (e.g., 393), a flow channel (e.g., Abstract+),
inserting a second test nozzle assembly (e.g., nozzle system 101’) into the mount (see Figs. 5, 22, 109, 114 & ¶ 1146 for example),
inserting a third test nozzle assembly (e.g., nozzle system 101’) into the mount (see Figs. 5, 22, 109, 114 & ¶ 1146 for example),
inserting a fourth test nozzle assembly (e.g., nozzle system 101’) into the mount (see Figs. 5, 22, 109, 114 & ¶ 1146 for example), and
a microscope (¶ 1064).
Durack et al. teach releasably assembling a flow cytometer system including inserting a plurality of fasteners (e.g., releasable fasteners, adjustable fasteners, threaded bolts) through a plurality of holes, and tightening the plurality of fasteners (see for example Figs. 3-5, 22, 26-27, 29-35, 83-84, 106, 109-114, 119-120; and ¶ 0835, 0837-0842, 0852-0854, 0875, 1040, 1145, 1166, 1174). Durack et al. further teach: The flow cytometry units 1003 are mounted side-by-side as modules on an appropriate framework 1087 in the housing 1009. Specifically, the nozzle mounts 331′ for positioning the nozzles 101′ are releasably attached to a cross bar 1089 (FIG. 106) affixed to the side walls 1071 of the housing, and the bases 429′ of the epi-illumination instruments 417′ are releasably fastened to an angled mounting plate 1093 extending between the side walls 1071 of the housing toward the rear of the housing 1085 (FIG. 109), the arrangement being such that a particular unit can be installed or removed as a module. This modularity facilitates installation, removal for maintenance and/or replacement, and enables any number of flow cytometry units 1003 to be readily added as needed or desired to increase the throughput capacity of the system (¶ 1146). In the event that the claimed invention is not shown with sufficient specificity, then it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to install and adjust the flow cytometer system as necessary, as disclosed by Durack et al. (¶ 0824-0825, 0832-0841, 0852-0854, 1146+).
PNG
media_image1.png
2310
1680
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 05/15/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The objection to the Drawings has been withdrawn.
The amendments have been considered and 35 USC § 112 rejections have been revised.
In response to the Applicant's argument that “Durack does not disclose any "empty nozzle assembly 450E having a nozzle body without a nozzle and an o-ring;" as is recited in claim 1”, Examiner disagrees.
Durack et al. teach, among other things, wherein the empty nozzle assembly has a nozzle body without an o-ring (see for example, Fig. 5 showing the flow body 133 does not include the nozzle 137 or the O-ring seal 155; see also the flow body 133 is removably connected to the nozzle 137, where the connection is being sealed by an O-ring seal 155 ¶ 0799).
Applicant is thanked for their thoughtful amendments to the claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DEAN KWAK whose telephone number is (571)270-7072. The examiner can normally be reached M-TH, 4:30 am - 2:30 pm 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.
/DEAN KWAK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
DEAN KWAK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights