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.
Claims 1-11 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tolmachev, et. al. (WO 2016069104 A1, cited IDS filed 06/28/2023), hereinafter Tolmachev.
Regarding claim 1, Tolmachev teaches an ion guide with a switchable ion path for a spectrometer (Abstract), the ion guide comprising:
a first ion transport aperture configured to receive an ion beam (inlet where ion beam enters ion guide from ion source, [0042]);
a radio frequency surface (parallel surface 215, Fig. 1B) comprising a plurality of radio frequency electrodes arranged on a first surface, such that the plurality of radio frequency electrodes are parallel to each other (array of electrodes 230, Fig. 1B, [0092]);
a radio frequency voltage source configured to apply an alternating radio frequency phase to each of the plurality of radio frequency electrodes (RF voltage source, [0091]-[0093]);
a DC potential source (DC voltage source, [0091]) configured to apply a DC gradient across the radio frequency surface, wherein the DC gradient is configured to guide an ion beam via either a first ion path or a second ion path ([0007], [0088], [0116]);
a second ion transport aperture (Fig. 5, Fig. 7, [0062], [0064]); and
a third ion transport aperture (Fig. 5, Fig. 7, [0062], [0064]);
wherein ions travelling in the first ion path are directed between the first ion transport aperture and the second ion transport aperture and ions travelling in the second ion path are directed between the first ion transport aperture and the third ion transport aperture (Fig. 7, [0064]).
Regarding claim 2, Tolmachev teaches wherein the DC gradient comprises an orthogonal component and an axial component ([0029], [0031]).
Regarding claim 3, Tolmachev teaches wherein the second ion transport aperture and the third ion transport aperture are in a first plane and wherein the orthogonal component of the DC gradient is parallel to the first plane and the axial component of the DC gradient is parallel to a direction of a shortest distance between the first ion transport aperture and the first plane (Fig. 7, [0029], [0031]).
Regarding claim 4, Tolmachev teaches wherein the radio frequency electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates arranged such that the plane of each plate is parallel to the plane of the adjacent plate (Fig. 1B).
Regarding claim 5, Tolmachev teaches wherein the radio frequency electrodes are arranged in a grid (Fig. 1B.
Regarding claim 6, Tolmachev teaches further comprising a top plate (parallel surface 210, Fig. 1B, [0091]) configured to apply a repelling voltage that repels the ion beam towards the radio frequency surface ([0091]).
Regarding claim 7, Tolmachev teaches wherein the top plate comprises the DC potential source, wherein the DC potential source is configured to apply the DC gradient to the top plate ([0026], [0091], [0092]).
Regarding claim 8, Tolmachev teaches wherein the top plate comprises a PCB and a plurality of DC electrodes printed on the PCB ([0022], [0089], [0151]).
Regarding claim 9, Tolmachev teaches wherein the plurality of DC electrodes are arranged in a grid (Fig. 1B).
Regarding claim 10, Tolmachev teaches wherein the plurality of DC electrodes are arranged in a horseshoe configuration, wherein prongs of the horseshoe are adjacent to the second ion transport aperture and the third ion transport aperture ([0089], Fig. 5A shows the electrodes to which DC potential is applied arranged in a horseshoe-like shape where the ion guide branches the ions at the T. The prongs of the horseshoe shape are inside of and consequently adjacent to the two apertures).
Regarding claim 11, Tolmachev teaches wherein the plurality of DC electrodes are connected by resistors (insulating or resistive material between electrodes, [0013]).
Regarding claim 25, Tolmachev teaches further comprising a bin opposite to the first ion transport aperture, wherein the bin is configured to receive undeflected components of the ion beam (Fig. 7).
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.
Claims 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) in view of Green, et. al. (WO 2018115828 A1), hereinafter Green.
Regarding claim 19, Tolmachev does not teach further comprising a first side guard positioned on a first side of the radio frequency surface and a second side guard positioned on a second side of the radio frequency surface.
Green teaches a first side guard positioned on a first side of the radio frequency surface and a second side guard positioned on a second side of the radio frequency surface (longitudinal plate or planar electrodes 37, Fig. 3, pg. 15, lines 4-7).
Green modifies Tolmachev by suggesting first and second side guards.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Green because the configuration allows for confinement of the ions in the ion mobility device, (Green, pg. 15, lines 41-42).
Regarding claim 20, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the first and second side guards comprise a first wall and a second wall.
Green teaches the first and second side guards comprise a first wall and a second wall (longitudinal plate or planar electrodes 37, Fig. 3, pg. 15, lines 4-7).
Green modifies Tolmachev by suggesting first and second side guards comprising a first and second wall.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Green because the configuration allows for confinement of the ions in the ion mobility device, (Green, pg. 15, lines 41-42).
Regarding claim 21, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the first and second side guards comprise a first guard electrode and a second guard electrode, wherein the first and second guard electrode are configured to receive either: a repulsive DC voltage; or an attractive DC voltage.
the first and second side guards comprise a first guard electrode and a second guard electrode, wherein the first and second guard electrode are configured to receive either: a repulsive DC voltage; or an attractive DC voltage (longitudinal plate or planar electrodes 37, Fig. 3, pg. 15, lines 4-7, lines 41-42).
Green modifies Tolmachev by suggesting the first and second guards comprise electrodes that receive a DC voltage.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Green because the configuration allows for confinement of the ions in the ion mobility device, (Green, pg. 15, lines 41-42).
Regarding claim 22, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the first surface is configured to form the first and second side guards.
Green teaches the first surface is configured to form the first and second side guards (pg. 15, lines 18-29).
Green modifies Tolmachev by suggesting the first surface forms the first and second side guards.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Green because a PCB or substrate allows for electrodes to be attached thereto, (Green, pg. 15, lines 18-29).
Claims 12-13 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) in view of Grinfeld, et. al. (US 20150228467 A1), hereinafter Grinfeld.
Regarding claim 12, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the DC potential source comprises a plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes, wherein each auxiliary DC electrode is positioned between radio frequency electrodes.
Grinfeld teaches the DC potential source comprises a plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes, wherein each auxiliary DC electrode is positioned between radio frequency electrodes ([0025], [0014]).
Grinfeld modifies Tomachev by suggesting auxiliary DC electrodes positioned between radio frequency electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Grinfeld because placing DC electrodes between the RF electrodes can help to prevent charge up of dielectric surface and may also provide an axial field, (Grinfeld, [0045]).
Regarding claim 13, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates and wherein the radio frequency electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates arranged such that the plane of each plate is parallel to the plane of the adjacent plate, wherein the planes of the plates of the DC electrodes are parallel to the planes of the plates of the adjacent radio frequency electrodes (Fig. 3B, Fig. 5, pg.).
Grinfeld teaches the plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates (planar DC electrodes 12, [0045], Fig. 1) and wherein the radio frequency electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates (planar metal RF electrodes, [0040], Fig. 1) arranged such that the plane of each plate is parallel to the plane of the adjacent plate (Fig. 1), wherein the planes of the plates of the DC electrodes are parallel to the planes of the plates of the adjacent radio frequency electrodes (Fig. 1).
Grinfeld modifies Tolmachev by suggesting elongated plate DC electrodes and elongated plate RF electrodes, with the plane of each plate being adjacent to the plane of the adjacent plate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Grinfeld because the planar surfaces and shapes allow for planar electrode attachment to the PCB surface offering simplified manufacturing ([0004], [0011]), and the configuration allows the RF electrodes to form a multipole, while the DC electrodes can provide an axial field along the ion guide, (Grinfeld, [0051]).
Regarding claim 16, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the radio frequency electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates arranged such that the plane of each plate is parallel to the plane of the adjacent plate and the first surface comprises a PCB, wherein the auxiliary DC electrodes comprise printed electrodes between the radio frequency electrodes.
Grinfeld teaches the radio frequency electrodes comprise elongated electrode plates arranged such that the plane of each plate is parallel to the plane of the adjacent plate (planar metal RF electrodes, [0040], Fig. 1) and the first surface comprises a PCB (first planar printed circuit board (PCB), [0039], Fig. 1) wherein the auxiliary DC electrodes comprise printed electrodes between the radio frequency electrodes (DC electrodes etched on the PCB, [0045], [0046]).
Grinfeld modifies Tolmachev by suggesting elongated plate RF electrodes arranged parallel to the adjacent plate, a first surface comprising PCB, and the DC auxiliary electrodes printed between the radio frequency electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Grinfeld because the configuration and planar shapes of the RF electrodes as well as etching of the DC electrodes on the PCB between the RF electrodes allows for simplified manufacturing, prevents charging, and allows for an axial field to be applied ( [0011], [0045], [0049]).
Regarding claim 17, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the ion guide comprises a top surface facing the radio frequency surface comprising: a plurality of radio frequency electrodes arranged on the top surface; and a plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes, each of the plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes mounted between radio frequency electrodes.
Grinfeld teaches the ion guide comprises a top surface facing the radio frequency surface (second PCB 4, Fig. 1) comprising: a plurality of radio frequency electrodes arranged on the top surface (RF electrodes 6, Fig. 1); and a plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes, each of the plurality of auxiliary DC electrodes mounted between radio frequency electrodes (DC electrodes 12, Fig. 1).
Grinfeld modifies Tolmachev by suggesting a top surface facing the bottom RF surface comprising RF electrodes and auxiliary DC electrodes between the RF electrodes.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Grinfeld because the configuration allows the RF electrodes to form a multipole, while the DC electrodes can provide an axial field along the ion guide, (Grinfeld, [0051]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) and Grinfeld (US 20150228467 A1), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Stewart, et. al. (GB 2574796 A), hereinafter Stewart.
Regarding claim 14, Tolmachev in view of Grinfeld does not teach wherein the elongated electrode plates are wedge-shaped in the plane of the plates.
Stewart teaches the elongated electrode plates are wedge-shaped in the plane of the plates (plate electrode 240 with wedged shape Fig. 7A, pg. 19, lines 29-30).
Stewart modifies the combination by suggesting wedge-shaped electrode plates in the plane of the plate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Stewart because the wedge shape allows the electrode plate to be fitted into a slot for placement along the axis, (Stewart, pg. 19, lines 30-34).
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) in view of Cheng, et. al. (US 10515790 B2), hereinafter Cheng.
Regarding claim 24, Tolmachev teaches a first surface (parallel surface 215, Fig. 1B), a top plate or top surface (210, Fig. 1B), a distance between the first surface and the top plate or top surface (Fig. 1B shows space between 210 and 215), a second ion transport aperture and a third ion transport aperture (Fig. 7).
Tolmachev does not teach wherein the first surface is inclined relative to the top plate or top surface, such that the distance between the first surface and the top plate or top surface decreases closer to the second ion transport aperture and the third ion transport aperture.
Cheng teaches wherein the first surface is inclined relative to the top plate or top surface, such that the distance between the first surface and the top plate or top surface decreases closer to the ion outlet (Fig. 1, Col. 7, lines 27-43).
Cheng modifies Tolmachev by suggesting inclining the first surface of Tolmachev relative to the top plate/surface such that the distance between them decreases toward the second and third ion transport apertures of Tolmachev.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Cheng because the device structure is simple, facilitating assembly, and can realize efficient transmission and effective compression of ions thereby reducing the initial spatial distribution of the ions and improving the resolution of the instrument (Cheng, Col. 4, line 56 - Col. 5, line 2)
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) and Grinfeld (US 20150228467 A1), as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Slater, et. al. (US 20190287779 A1), hereinafter Slater.
Regarding claim 15, Tolmachev in view of Grinfeld does not teach wherein each of the plurality of DC electrodes comprises a peak and a trough in the top of the plate.
Slater teaches each of the plurality of DC electrodes comprises a peak and a trough in the top of the plate (electrodes 1, 2, interleaved to define a plate, where the extensions 11, 12, 21, 22 form a peak, and 13, 23, form the trough, Fig. 1, Fig. 3, [0085], [0018]).
Slater modifies the combination by suggesting a peak and trough in the top of the DC electrode plates.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Slater because the shape and configuration defines an opening through which ions can be axially transmitted in the ion guide and is inexpensive to manufacture, (Slater, [0012]-[0015]).
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tolmachev (WO 2016069104 A1) and Green (WO 2018115828 A1), as applied to claim 19 above, and further in view of Slater (US 20190287779 A1).
Regarding claim 23, Tolmachev does not teach wherein the radio frequency electrodes are configured to form the first and second side guards.
Slater teaches the radio frequency electrodes are configured to form the first and second side guards ([0086]-[0090], Fig. 1, where the electrodes themselves define the mechanical structure of the ion guide [0090], and are therefore are interpreted as forming first and second side guards because the side parts of the electrode configuration mechanically act as guards to confine the ions).
Slater modifies Tolmachev by suggesting the RF electrodes form first and second side guards.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Slater because the configuration allows the electrodes to provide structural stability to the ion guide (Slater, [0090]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 18 is 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LAURA E TANDY whose telephone number is (703)756-1720. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 5712722293. 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.
LAURA E TANDY
Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/ROBERT H KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2881