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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 12-19, in the reply filed on July 8, 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-11 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 8, 2026.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Para. 0047 of the specification filed August 1, 2023 appears to contain a typographical error. The examiner believes that the phrase “coupon recess 1245” should be corrected to “coupon recess 124” to be commensurate with the depictions in Fig. 10 of the drawings filed August 1, 2023.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 12-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sattar et al (S.A. Sattar et al, Disinfectant wipes are appropriate to control microbial bioburden from surfaces: use of a new ASTM standard test protocol to demonstrate efficacy, Journal of Hospital Infection, Volume 91, Issue 4, 2015, Pgs. 319-325, ISSN 0195-6701, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2015.08.026) as evidenced by Filtaflex (Filtaflex Wiperator Wipes System User Manual, "Wiperator - User Manual", Manualzz (https://manualzz.com/doc/4229368/filtaflex-wiperator-wipes-system-user-manual?p=3); archived at Wayback Machine (https://web.archive.org/); > https://web.archive.org/web/20170305082025/http://filtaflex.ca/downloads/Wiperator%20user%20manual.pdf; citing a capture dated 5 March 2017), in view of Tasic (AU 2021/107004 A4).
With respect to claim 12 Sattar discloses a pathogen test device (Wiperator, See “Introduction” pg. 320 and Pg. 321; reference is made to disclosure of Wiperator – User Manual” for figures) comprising:
a base (See Fig. A reproduced below);
a support arm (See Fig. B reproduced below);
a wiping block (wipe boss; See Fig. B reproduced below);
the wiping block connected to the support arm with a pivot member (spindle on Pg. 3 of Filtaflex manual; See Fig. B reproduced below);
a tray (sample carrier, See Fig. C);
the tray having one or more coupon recesses for holding a coupon (coupon = metal discs discussed under “Carriers” on Pg. 320 of Sattar; also See Fig. C depicted below);
the tray having one or more access recesses (See Fig. C reproduced below), wherein the one or more access recesses intersect with the one or more coupon recesses;
wherein the one or more access recesses are configured to allow a coupon removal tool to engage the coupon to remove a coupon from the one or more coupon recesses (Pg. 2of the Filtaflex Wiperator manual discusses how slots on either side of each recess allows the use of forceps to remove the disks);
and wherein a selected constant downward force is applied to a surface of a coupon (See Pg. 3 of Filtaflex for discussion of how the carrier is raised to meet the wipe on the boss, while the boss is positioned in a stationary position).
PNG
media_image1.png
302
348
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Fig. A (reproduction from manual)
PNG
media_image2.png
304
359
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Fig. B (reproduction from manual)
Sattar fails to disclose the incorporation of a track, and a trolley, wherein that the support arm is connected to the trolley, the trolley travels in a back-and-forth linear motion along the track, and the wiping block travels back and forth over the one or more coupon recesses.
Tasic teaches a device for decontaminating a surface of an object, wherein the device has a decontamination area that comprises a void into which the surface of the object is placed (See abstract). One embodiment depicted in Figs. 11a-c comprises a device (10) adapted to be installed on a display monitor, wherein the decontamination area (16) is formed adjacent to the screen of the display monitor between two arms that extend from respective ends of the body of the device. The arms form a track, along which the body is adapted to move (See Fig. 11c) therealong and across the decontamination area. Thus, the body is traversed along the tracks of the two arms (See Para. 0045).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the claimed invention to incorporate the depicted rail and arms of Tasic into the device of Sattar, by combining the wiping block, support arm, and pivot member with the device of Tasic such that, when the wiping block is moved along the rails, the tray and coupons contained within the decontamination area can be addressed without moving the carrier tray (See Para. 0045 of Tasic).
With respect to claim 13 the combination of Sattar and Tasic, as evidenced by the Filtaflex Wiperator manual, teaches that a weight is incorporated for providing the selected constant downward force (See Pg. 1of Filtaflex Wiperator manual).
With respect to claim 14 the combination of Sattar and Tasic, as evidence by the Filtaflex Wiperator manual, teaches the incorporation of a load cell (See Pg. 1 of the Filtaflex manual for discussion of the inclusion of the inclined ramp and recessed dock; See Fig. A reproduced above).
With respect to claim 15 the combination of Sattar and Tasic, as evidence by the Filtaflex Wiperator manual, teaches the incorporation of a force actuator (See Pg. 3 of the Filtaflex manual for discussion of how a hand is used to press the spindle down to prevent it rising up).
With respect to claim 16 the combination of Sattar and Tasic, as evidenced by the Filtaflex Wiperator manual, teaches that the one or more access recesses extends through the tray (See Fig. C reproduced above of Filtaflex).
With respect to claim 17 the combination of Sattar and Tasic, as evidenced by the Filtaflex Wiperator manual, teaches that the one or more coupon recesses have a depth that is the same depth as a thickness of the coupon (See Fig. 3 reproduced above of Filtaflex).
Claim(s) 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sattar et al (S.A. Sattar et al, Disinfectant wipes are appropriate to control microbial bioburden from surfaces: use of a new ASTM standard test protocol to demonstrate efficacy, Journal of Hospital Infection, Volume 91, Issue 4, 2015, Pgs. 319-325, ISSN 0195-6701, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2015.08.026) as evidenced by Filtaflex (Filtaflex Wiperator Wipes System User Manual, "Wiperator - User Manual", Manualzz (https://manualzz.com/doc/4229368/filtaflex-wiperator-wipes-system-user-manual?p=3); archived at Wayback Machine (https://web.archive.org/); > https://web.archive.org/web/20170305082025/http://filtaflex.ca/downloads/Wiperator%20user%20manual.pdf; citing a capture dated 5 March 2017), and Tasic (AU 2021/107004 A4) in view of Grossman et al (US 2018/0243790 A1).
Refer above for the combined teachings of Sattar and Tasic.
With respect to claims 18 and 19, the combination fails to teach that the coupon is made of a non-metallic material (claim 18) such as a laminate material (claim 19).
Grossman teaches testing the efficacy of a wet wipe that provides both contact sanitization of a surface and application of a residual antimicrobial coating on the surface through the same wiping (See abstract), wherein Formica coupons are used for testing purposes (See Para. 0031). Specifically, the formica coupons are sanitized then inoculated with MRSA (See Para. 0033). A common route of transmission of cold, flu, diarrhea and other common infections is through contact with surfaces contaminated with infectious microorganisms (pathogens). Contamination occurs by settling of droplets from coughs and sneezes onto surfaces, and by touching of surfaces with hands contaminated with pathogens. The pathogens then contaminate the hands of the next person who touches the same surface, and when they bring their hands to their eyes, nose, or mouth infection can result (See Para. 0035). Applicants' composite disinfecting wipe is capable of cleaning and removing residues from soiled surfaces while simultaneously destroying undesirable microorganisms, e.g. bacteria, mold, viruses, prions and the like that colonize on common surfaces with which people come into contact, such as doorknobs, countertops, toilet seats, floors, beds, walls, and the like (See Para. 0086).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before ethe effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate formica as the material of the coupons of combined Sattar and Tasic to test the efficacy of various cleaning solutions on a material that is commonly utilized as a surface into which people come into contact with (See Para. 0086 of Grossman).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITTANY I FISHER whose telephone number is (469)295-9182. The examiner can normally be reached IFP.
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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
/BRITTANY I FISHER/Examiner, Art Unit 1796 July 25, 2026
Prosecution Insights