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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 07/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-2 and 4-21 are pending in the application and are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
All rejections of claim 3 are obviated by Applicant’s cancellation.
The objection to the drawing is being withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
The rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 are being withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
New grounds under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 are necessitated by Applicant’s amendments.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“temperature controller configured to control the heating elements independently from each other to provide different temperatures in the different sample receiving compartments” in claim 1, lines 8-10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
In this instant case, the corresponding structure for:
the " temperature controller configured to control the heating elements independently from each other to provide different temperatures in the different sample receiving compartments "comprises a control interface that is an electrical circuit (para. 0027), and equivalents thereof.
The examiner notes that the “temperature controller” in claims 6-9 and 21 is being interpreted under BRI, because the claims provide sufficient structure for the temperature controller to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-21 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 recites the limitation “to provide different temperatures in the different sample receiving compartments” in lines 9-10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for “the different sample receiving compartments” in the claim. It is suggested that the limitation be amended to “to provide a different temperature in each sample receiving compartment.”
Claims 2 and 4-21 are indefinite because of their dependence on claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-2, 4, 6, 8-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Scherze (US 20050266547 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Scherze teaches a sample carrier for an imaging device, the sample carrier comprising:
at least two sample receiving elements (two of the cell culture chambers 20)(Fig. 4), each sample receiving element having a sample receiving compartment (plate 1) configured to receive a sample, wherein the sample receiving elements are either arranged in or form a frame (10)(Fig. 4), the frame being configured to be received in the imaging device (video system B), and wherein each sample receiving compartment (plate 1) includes a heating element (paras. 0055-0056, each individual cell culture 20 is individually heated by heating E, and thus includes its own heating element); and
a temperature controller (control system G, infrared temperature measuring devices 25, power source of heating E) configured to control the heating elements independently from each other to provide different temperatures in the different sample receiving compartments (para. 0056).
Regarding Claim 2, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches the temperature controller is configured to heat and/or cool each of the sample receiving compartments individually (para. 0056).
Regarding claim 4, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein each respective heating element is configured to heat the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of a respective sample receiving element of the sample receiving elements (para. 0056).
Regarding Claim 6, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein the temperature controller (control system G, infrared temperature measuring devices 25, power source of heating E) comprises a power interface (power source of heating E) configured to be connected to an external electrical power source, and to relay electrical power provided by the electrical power source to each of the heating elements (paras. 0055-56, electrical heating).
Regarding Claim 8, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1, wherein the temperature controller (control system G, infrared temperature measuring devices 25, power source of heating E) comprises at least one temperature sensor (infrared temperature measuring device 25) configured to measure the temperature of at least one of the sample receiving compartments (para. 0025).
Regarding Claim 9, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze wherein the temperature controller (control system G, infrared temperature measuring devices 25, power source of heating E) comprises a control interface (data processing system 37, which is part of control system G) configured to be connected to a control unit of the imaging device (Fig. 4, system 37 is connected to video system B).
Regarding claim 10, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze wherein at least one sample receiving element of the sample receiving elements (20) is configured to receive a microscope slide (glass pane 3), the microscope slide defining a first wall of the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element (para. 0014) when the microscope slide is received in the sample receiving element (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 11, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 10. Scherze further teaches wherein the at least one sample receiving element (20) comprises a lid (cap 5) configured to cover the sample receiving compartment (plate 1), and wherein the lid defines a second wall of the sample receiving compartment of the at least one sample receiving element when the lid covers the sample receiving compartment (Figs. 2 and 3), the second wall being arranged on a side of the sample receiving compartment opposite to the first wall (cap 5 is opposite of glass pane 3).
Regarding Claim 12, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 10. Scherze further teaches wherein the at least one sample receiving element (20) comprises an optically transparent element (transparent glass pane 6) for observing the sample received in the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element, and wherein the optically transparent element defines a second wall of the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element (Figs. 2 and 3), the second wall being arranged on a side of the sample receiving compartment opposite to the first wall (glass pane 3)(Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 13, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 11, wherein the at least one sample receiving element (20) comprises at least one spacer element (the protrusions at the bottom of cap 5 and retaining ring 7)(Figs. 2-3) defining a predetermined distance between the first wall and the second wall.
Regarding claim 14, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 13. Scherze further teaches wherein the spacer element extends around the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element (20) and forms a seal (para. 0038).
Regarding claim 15, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 12, wherein the at least one sample receiving element comprises at least one spacer element (the protrusions at the bottom of cap 5 and retaining ring 7)(Figs. 2-3) defining a predetermined distance between the first wall and the second wall (Figs. 2-3).
Regarding claim 16, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein at least one of the sample receiving elements (20) comprises at least one injection port (the opening of channel 4) and a fluidics channel (channel 4) connecting the injection port to the sample receiving compartment (plate 1)(para. 0032, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 17, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 16. Scherze further teaches wherein the at least one sample receiving element (20) comprises at least one venting port (the opening of channel 4”) and a second fluidics channel (channel 4”) connecting the venting port to the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element (20)(Fig. 3 and para. 0032).
Regarding claim 18, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein the at least two sample receiving elements (20) are thermally isolated from each other (the temperature of chambers 20 can be controlled individual, and thus chambers 20 are thermally isolated).
Regarding Claim 19, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein at least one of the at least two sample receiving elements (20) is configured to be removable from the frame (10)(chambers 20 are fixed in plate 10 by screws and thus removable, para. 0049).
Regarding Claim 20, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein the imaging device (video system B) is a microscope (para. 0052), and the frame is configured to be received by a sample stage of the microscope (Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scherze et al. (US 20050266547 A1) in view of Klein et al. (US 20050176155 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Scherze teaches a cell culture plate comprising culture chambers 20. Scherze teaches each individual chamber 20 is individually heated by heating E (para. 0055-0056), and thus each chamber 20 is controlled by its own heating element. Scherze does not disclose the locations of the heating elements and thus fail teach wherein each heating element is arranged in the frame at or next to one of the sample receiving elements (chamber 20).
However, Klein teaches a cell culture comprising wells (sample receiving elements). Klein teaches each individual well is individually heated (para. 0063), each by a heating element 206 that are within the well (Fig. 17).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the location of each heating element taught by Scherze with the location of inside the sample receiving element (chamber/well)(Klein, Fig. 17) because generally, differences in a rearrangement of parts will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration is significant (See MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C)) and it would have been a matter of choice to relocate the heating element to a location inside the sample receiving element since one of ordinary skill in the art would accordingly have recognized the location of inside the sample receiving element (chamber/well) would result in the predictable result of providing a location for the heating element to heating to the corresponding sample receiving element (chamber/well) individually.
Claims 7 and 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scherze et al. (US 20050266547 A1) in view of Bernhard et al. (WO 9531716 A1), and further in view of Raviv (US 20220033751 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1.
Scherze teaches a sample carrier system for in situ, microscopic monitoring a cell culture (abstract, para. 0011). Scherze teaches the system comprises a temperature controller, which in combination with heating E, enables heating of individual culture chambers 20 (paras. 0055-0056). Scherze heating E employs electrical heating, and thus fails to teach wherein the temperature controller comprises a liquid interface configured to be connected to an external liquid source, and is configured to selectively direct a liquid received via the external liquid source around each of the sample receiving compartments in order to control the temperature of each of the sample receiving compartments independently.
However, Bernhard teaches apparatus comprises a holder for a microscope slide that can be fixed to a stage of an inverted microscope (paras. 0019 and 0022) for in situ monitoring of cell culture (paras. 0009, 0013). Bernhard further teaches the holder enables the holder and the slide to be temperature controlled (para. 0022). Bernhard further teaches the holder comprises a liquid interface (inlet 16) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (interpreted as a functional limitation. Inlet 16 is structurally capable of connecting to an external liquid source. Moreover, inlet 16 is connected to a thermostatically controlled water bath), and is configured to direct a liquid received via the liquid source around the sample receiving compartment (the interior of holder 14)(para. 0052) in order to control the temperature, the sample receiving compartments (para. 0052). Bernhard further teaches holder 14 with the liquid heating means described is able to provide very precise heating to holder 14 and slide 1 (para. 0052).
In addition, Scherze teaches the temperature controller comprises a liquid interface (multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33, lines 27 and 28) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (tanks 31’)(Fig. 4), and is configured to
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrical heating of culture chambers 20 taught by Scherze with the liquid heating means taught by Bernhard in order to provide very precise heating to a chamber (Bernhard, para. 0052) with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143)(I)(G). In addition, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified plate 1 of each culture chamber 20 taught by Scherze to include a channel that is circumferential around plate 1 as taught by Bernhard and to have modified the temperature controller taught by Scherze to comprises an additional liquid interface for one liquid source (Scherze, multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33 and line 27 or 28), configured to be connected to an external liquid source (an additional tank 31’) is configured to direct a liquid received via the liquid source around each of the plate 1 (sample receiving compartments) through the channel circumferential around the plate 1 as taught by Bernhard to receive the liquid in order to provide very precise heating (Bernhard, para. 0052) to each individual chamber (Scherze, paras. 0055) with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143)(I)(G).
The teachings of Scherze as modified by Bernard would yield the temperature control unit further comprises a liquid interface (Scherze, an additional multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33, line 27 or 28) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (Scherze, Fig. 4), and is configured to
Modified Scherze teaches the liquid interface and the culture chambers are connected through in a serial configuration, and thus fails to teach the liquid interface is configured to selectively directing the liquid from the additional tank 31’to culture chambers 20.
However, Raviv teaches a cell culture system comprising a medium container 202 and a plurality of 201 culture vessels (para. 0016, Fig. 2). Raviv further teaches medium container 202 is fluidic connected to the culture vessels in a parallel configuration (Fig. 2, claim 1), wherein the medium in medium contained 202 is configured to be selectively directed to the culture vessel through its corresponding pumped 203 (Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the serial configuration of the liquid interface and the culture chambers taught by Scherze with the parallel configuration (a pump for each culture chamber) as taught by Raviv because one of ordinary skill in the art would accordingly have recognized the parallel configuration would result in the predictable result of providing a means of connecting liquid interface to the plurality of chambers, and simple substitution of one known element (serial configuration) for another element (parallel configuration) is likely to be obvious when predictable results (connecting a liquid interface to plurality of culture chambers) are achieved. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The teachings of modified Scherze would yield the temperature control unit further comprises a liquid interface (modified Scherze’s additional liquid interface in parallel configuration with a pump for each chamber) (Scherze, Fig. 4 and Raviv, Fig. 2) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (Scherze, additional tank 31’ ), and is configured to selectively direct a liquid received via the liquid source (Raviv, Fig. 2, parallel configuration) around each of the sample receiving compartments (Scherze’s plate 1 of chamber 20 with the channel circumferential around plate 1)(Bernhard, para. 0042) in order to control the temperature (Bernhard, para. 0052) of each of the sample receiving compartments independently (Scherze, paras. 0055).
Regarding claim 21, Scherze teaches all of the elements of the current invention as stated above with respect to claim 1. Scherze further teaches wherein at least one sample receiving element (chamber 20) of the sample receiving elements is configured to receive a microscope slide (glass pane 3), the microscope slide defining a first wall of the sample receiving compartment (plate 1) of the at least one sample receiving element (para. 0014) when the microscope slide is received in the sample receiving element (Figs. 2-3).
Scherze teaches a sample carrier system for in situ, microscopic monitoring a cell culture (abstract, para. 0011). Scherze teaches the system comprises a temperature controller, which in combination with heating E, enables heating of individual culture chambers 20 (paras. 0055-0056). Scherze heating E employs electrical heating, and thus fails to teach wherein the temperature controller comprises a liquid interface configured to be connected to an external liquid source, and is configured to selectively direct a liquid received via the external liquid source around each of the sample receiving compartments in order to control the temperature of each of the sample receiving compartments independently.
However, Bernhard teaches apparatus comprises a holder for a microscope slide that can be fixed to a stage of an inverted microscope (paras. 0019 and 0022) for in situ monitoring of cell culture (paras. 0009, 0013). Bernhard further teaches the holder enables the holder and the slide to be temperature controlled (para. 0022). Bernhard further teaches the holder comprises a liquid interface (inlet 16) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (interpreted as a functional limitation. Inlet 16 is structurally capable of connecting to an external liquid source. Moreover, inlet 16 is connected to a thermostatically controlled water bath), and is configured to direct a liquid received via the liquid source around the sample receiving compartment (the interior of holder 14)(para. 0052) in order to control the temperature, the sample receiving compartments (para. 0052). Bernhard further teaches holder 14 with the liquid heating means described is able to provide very precise heating to holder 14 and slide 1 (para. 0052).
In addition, Scherze teaches the temperature controller comprises a liquid interface (multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33, lines 27 and 28) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (tanks 31’)(Fig. 4), and is configured to
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the electrical heating of culture chambers 20 taught by Scherze with the liquid heating means taught by Bernhard in order to provide very precise heating to a chamber (Bernhard, para. 0052) with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143)(I)(G). In addition, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified plate 1 of each culture chamber 20 taught by Scherze to include a channel that is circumferential around plate 1 as taught by Bernhard and to have modified the temperature controller taught by Scherze to comprises an additional liquid interface for one liquid source (Scherze, multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33 and line 27 or 28), configured to be connected to an external liquid source (an additional tank 31’) is configured to direct a liquid received via the liquid source around each of the plate 1 (sample receiving compartments) through the channel circumferential around the plate 1 as taught by Bernhard to receive the liquid in order to provide very precise heating (Bernhard, para. 0052) to each individual chamber (Scherze, paras. 0055) with a reasonable expectation of success (MPEP 2143)(I)(G).
The teachings of Scherze as modified by Bernard would yield the temperature control unit further comprises a liquid interface (Scherze, an additional multi-valve module 30’, pump system 29, line 33, line 27 or 28) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (Scherze, Fig. 4), and is configured to
Modified Scherze teaches the liquid interface and the culture chambers are connected through in a serial configuration, and thus fails to teach the liquid interface is configured to selectively directing the liquid from the additional tank 31’to culture chambers 20.
However, Raviv teaches a cell culture system comprising a medium container 202 and a plurality of 201 culture vessels (para. 0016, Fig. 2). Raviv further teaches medium container 202 is fluidic connected to the culture vessels in a parallel configuration (Fig. 2, claim 1), wherein the medium in medium contained 202 is configured to be selectively directed to the culture vessel through its corresponding pumped 203 (Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have substituted the serial configuration of the liquid interface and the culture chambers taught by Scherze with the parallel configuration (a pump for each culture chamber) as taught by Raviv because one of ordinary skill in the art would accordingly have recognized the parallel configuration would result in the predictable result of providing a means of connecting liquid interface to the plurality of chambers, and simple substitution of one known element (serial configuration) for another element (parallel configuration) is likely to be obvious when predictable results (connecting a liquid interface to plurality of culture chambers) are achieved. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
The teachings of modified Scherze would yield the temperature control unit further comprises a liquid interface (modified Scherze’s additional liquid interface in parallel configuration with a pump for each chamber) (Scherze, Fig. 4 and Raviv, Fig. 2) configured to be connected to an external liquid source (Scherze, additional tank 31’ ), and is configured to selectively direct a liquid received via the liquid source (Raviv, Fig. 2, parallel configuration) around each of the sample receiving compartments (Scherze’s plate 1 of chamber 20 with the channel circumferential around plate 1)(Bernhard, para. 0042) in order to control the temperature (Bernhard, para. 0052) of each of the sample receiving compartments independently (Scherze, paras. 0055).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments see pp. 8-15, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation of “temperature controller” have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Controller is nonce term. A temperature controller can be interpreted as mechanical structure such as a knob or an electrical one such as a circuit. Therefore, this argument is unpersuasive.
Applicant’s argument, see pp. 8-15, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 35 U.S.C. 103 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant’s arguments, see pp. 15-16, filed 07/09/2026, with respect to new claim 21 have been fully considered. As mentioned in the interview, claim 21 with combined limitations of claim 7 and 10 are distinguishable from the cited references in the OA of 04/20/2026. However, upon further search and consideration, claim 21 is not allowable because it is unpatentable over Scherze et al. (US 20050266547 A1) in view of Bernhard et al. (WO 9531716 A1) and further in view of Raviv (US 20220033751 A1) as discussed in the 35 U.S.C. 103 section above.
Conclusion
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 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 MAY CHIU whose telephone number is (571)272-1054. The examiner can normally be reached 9 am - 5 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at 571-270-7698. 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.
/M.L.C./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights