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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-16 are pending and have been examined.
Priority
This application 18/372,558 (PGPub US2024/0019398) is a DIVISIONAL of Application 16/624,643 filed 12/19/2019, now US Patent 11,821,818, which is a 371 of PCT/US2018/041003 filed 07/06/2018, which claims benefit of Provisional Patent Application 62/529,052 filed 07/06/2017.
Information Disclosure Statements
The Information Disclosure Statement filed 10/06/2022 has been considered by the Examiner.
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.
Claim 4 is 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 4 recites “a buffer/seed layer” and it is unclear what structure is intended to be imparted to the layer – for example does the layer function as both a buffer and a seed layer or alternatively, a buffer or a seed layer or lastly, is the limitation implying that buffer and seed are synonymous and the layer is provided with functionality for a combination of both seed and buffer.
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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engel et al. (US2004/0023365A1) in view of Rife et al. (Design and performance of GMR sensors for the detection of magnetic microbeads in biosensors, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, Volume 107, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 209-218).
Regarding claim 1, Engel teaches a method for biochemical testing (Abstract: by measuring the magnitude of the shift in the magnetic field and correlating the magnitude of the shift to the presence of the target molecules, accurate measurements regarding the presence of the target molecules can be made), using a biosensor system comprising:
a free layer that is ferromagnetic (Fig. 1 and Par. 24: a free ferromagnetic layer 128),
a pinned layer that is ferromagnetic (Fig. 1 and Par. 23: ferromagnetic layers 125 and 126 are described as fixed, or pinned), and
a nonmagnetic layer sandwiched between the free and the pinned layers (Fig. 1 and Pa. 18: a structure that includes ferromagnetic layers separated by at least one non-magnetic layer),
wherein when magnetization directions of the free and the pinned layers are parallel, the MR sensor is in a low-resistance state, and when the magnetization directions of the free and the pinned layers are perpendicular, the MR sensor is in a high-resistance state (Par. 18: while the magnetization direction of the other magnetic layer is free to switch between the same and opposite directions that are called “parallel” and “antiparallel” states, respectively. In response to parallel and antiparallel states, the magnetic memory element represents two different resistances. The resistance has minimum and maximum values when the magnetization vectors of the two magnetic layers point in substantially the same and opposite directions).
Engel does not specifically teach that the MR sensor provides a quasi-digital response to a magnetic field sweep.
Rife teaches throughout the publication a biosensor system, the Bead ARray Counter (BARC), based on the capture and detection of micron-sized, paramagnetic beads on a chip containing an array of giant magnetoresistive (GMR) sensors (Abstract). In detail, Rife teaches that because the magnetoresistance is an even function of the magnetic field (Fig. 6), it must be measured with the lock-in amplifier at the second harmonic frequency (Page 213, right column, 2nd paragraph); the GMR signal from individual sensors was measured as a function of the number of beads; the lock-in signal was recorded digitally (Page 213, right column, 4th paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Engel, to incorporate the features of the MR sensor providing a quasi-digital response to a magnetic field sweep, as taught by Rife, for the purpose of improving the detector sensitivity so that minimum number of labels can be detected as mentioned by Rife (Page 216, right column, 3rd paragraph). One of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining Engel with Rife because both are directed to a method of measuring MR sensor signals.
Regarding claims 2-3, Engel in view of Rife teach the system wherein the free layer is amorphous ferromagnetic layer film (Engel, Fig. 1 shows a ferromagnetic free layer without defining its shape), and the pinned layer is a ferromagnetic layer with its magnetization pinned by adjacent antiferromagnetic layer (Engel Fig. 1 and Par. 21: a layer of antiferromagnetic (AF) pinning material 124).
Regarding claim 4, Engel in view of Rife teach the system further comprising a cap layer (Engel, paragraph 0025) and a buffer/seed layer (Engel, paragraph 0021).
Regarding claim 5, Engel in view of Rife teach the system wherein a design of the MR sensor aids switching as a single domain (Engel, paragraphs 0030-0031).
Regarding claim 6, Engel in view of Rife teaches the system wherein the MR sensor is part of an array of MR sensors (Rife, Page 209, right column: a chip containing an array of GMR sensors).
Regarding claims 7-8, Engel in view of Rife teaches the system wherein the array of MR sensors are arranged in symmetric NxN array, where N sensors sets are interconnected in parallel with each of the sensor sets comprises N sensors interconnected in series, or alternatively as asymmetric N1xN2 array, where N1≠N2, N1 represents a number of sensors in series, and N2 represent a number of sensor sets in parallel (Rife, Fig. 2 shows the array of MR sensors are arranged in symmetric and asymmetric arrangements).
Regarding claim 9, Engel in view of Rife teach the system wherein a surface of the MR sensor is functionalized with a first analyte binding agent (Engel, paragraphs 0003-0005).
Claim 10-11 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engel et al. (US2004/0023365A1) in view of Rife et al. (Design and performance of GMR sensors for the detection of magnetic microbeads in biosensors, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, Volume 107, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 209-218) and further in view of Liang et al. (Sensors, 17, 1296, 2017, pages 1-10).
Regarding claims 10-11, Engel teaches a method for forming a biosensor comprising:
depositing a magnetoresistive film on a substrate (paragraphs 0021-0026), wherein the MR film comprises a free layer that is ferromagnetic (Fig. 1 and Par. 24: a free ferromagnetic layer 128),
a pinned layer that is ferromagnetic (Fig. 1 and Par. 23: ferromagnetic layers 125 and 126 are described as fixed, or pinned), and
a nonmagnetic layer sandwiched between the free and the pinned layers (Fig. 1 and Pa. 18: a structure that includes ferromagnetic layers separated by at least one non-magnetic layer),
wherein when magnetization directions of the free and the pinned layers are parallel, the MR sensor is in a low-resistance state, and when the magnetization directions of the free and the pinned layers are perpendicular, the MR sensor is in a high-resistance state (Par. 18: while the magnetization direction of the other magnetic layer is free to switch between the same and opposite directions that are called “parallel” and “antiparallel” states, respectively. In response to parallel and antiparallel states, the magnetic memory element represents two different resistances. The resistance has minimum and maximum values when the magnetization vectors of the two magnetic layers point in substantially the same and opposite directions).
Engel does not specifically teach that the MR sensor provides a quasi-digital response to a magnetic field sweep or patterning the MR film into a desired pattern (as seen in claims 10-11) and depositing leads in contact with the MR film.
Rife teaches throughout the publication a biosensor system, the Bead ARray Counter (BARC), based on the capture and detection of micron-sized, paramagnetic beads on a chip containing an array of giant magnetoresistive (GMR) sensors (Abstract). In detail, Rife teaches that because the magnetoresistance is an even function of the magnetic field (Fig. 6), it must be measured with the lock-in amplifier at the second harmonic frequency (Page 213, right column, 2nd paragraph); the GMR signal from individual sensors was measured as a function of the number of beads; the lock-in signal was recorded digitally (Page 213, right column, 4th paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the system of Engel, to incorporate the features of the MR sensor providing a quasi-digital response to a magnetic field sweep, as taught by Rife, for the purpose of improving the detector sensitivity so that minimum number of labels can be detected as mentioned by Rife (Page 216, right column, 3rd paragraph). One of skill in the art would have a reasonable expectation of success in combining Engel with Rife because both are directed to a method of measuring MR sensor signals.
While Engel in view of Rife do not specifically teach the patterning steps and deposition of leads, Liang teaches throughout the publication the patterning and manufacturing of GMR multilayers (abstract). More specifically, Liang teaches patterning step for the MR film comprises the steps of depositing a first bilayer resist on the MR film and patterning the first bilayer resist into a first pattern that is a long line, transferring the first pattern to the MR film, and removing the first bilayer resist, and the method further comprises the steps of: depositing a second bilayer resist on the MR film and the leads; patterning the second bilayer resist into a second pattern that is a long line orthogonal to the first pattern; transferring the second pattern to the MR film and the leads; removing the second bilayer resist; and depositing pads on the leads that are in contact with the MR film (see pages 2-5. Section 2. Materials and Method sections).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to incorporate within the methods of forming the biosensor of Engel in view of Rife, deposition and patterning steps as taught by Liang because it would have been desirable to optimize the manufacturing of the biosensor in order to maximize the GMR effect (Liang, page 3, first full paragraph).
Regarding claim 14, Engel in view of Rife teach the system wherein the free layer is amorphous ferromagnetic layer film (Engel, Fig. 1 shows a ferromagnetic free layer without defining its shape), and the pinned layer is a ferromagnetic layer with its magnetization pinned by adjacent antiferromagnetic layer (Engel Fig. 1 and Par. 21: a layer of antiferromagnetic (AF) pinning material 124).
Regarding claim 15, Engel in view of Rife teaches the system wherein the MR sensor is part of an array of MR sensors (Rife, Page 209, right column: a chip containing an array of GMR sensors).
Regarding claim 16, Engel in view of Rife teaches the system wherein the array of MR sensors are arranged in symmetric NxN array, where N sensors sets are interconnected in parallel with each of the sensor sets comprises N sensors interconnected in series, or alternatively as asymmetric N1xN2 array, where N1≠N2, N1 represents a number of sensors in series, and N2 represent a number of sensor sets in parallel (Rife, Fig. 2).
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Engel et al. (US2004/0023365A1) in view of Rife et al. (Design and performance of GMR sensors for the detection of magnetic microbeads in biosensors, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical, Volume 107, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 209-218) and Liang et al. (Sensors, 17, 1296, 2017, pages 1-10), as applied to claim 10 above (hereinafter “Modified Engel”), and further in view of Vig et al. (US 2013/0249544, 09/26/2013).
Regarding claim 12, Modified Engel teaches the method as described above and further teaches that the chip can be bonded to a printed circuit board in a disposable plastic cartridge (Rife, page 210, left column, second paragraph) but does not specifically teach the method further comprising the step of using an anisotropic conducting film (ACF) to bond the biosensor onto the printed circuit board (PCB), wherein the ACF is a conductive paste. Vig teaches throughout the publication a magnetic field sensor (abstract) and more specifically teaches that connection methods can be used including an anisotropic conductive paste (paragraph 0096) sandwiched between the die (see Figure 6), where such connection is also utilized for connecting to a printed circuit board (paragraph 0122). It would have been prima facie obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to incorporate within the method of Modified Engel, bonding using ACF such as anisotropic conductive paste as taught by Vig because Modified Engel is generic regarding the types of bonding that can be used throughout the sensor and one skilled in the art would have been motivated to choose the appropriate bonding method based on the desired manufacturing process.
Regarding claim 13, Modified Engel teaches the method as described above and further teaches that the chip can be bonded to a printed circuit board in a disposable plastic cartridge (Rife, page 210, left column, second paragraph) but does not specifically teach using ACF to bond the PCB. Vig teaches applying an anisotropic conducting film (ACF) (paragraph 0096) to contact pads on a printed circuit board (PCB) (paragraph 0122); aligning, pressing and curing for bonding (see paragraphs 0058, 0104, 0115). It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the attachment of the chip and PCB of Modified Engel with ACF film as well as steps of aligning, pressing and curing as taught by Vig because Modified Engel is generic regarding the types of bonding that can be used throughout the sensor and one skilled in the art would have been motivated to choose the appropriate bonding method based on the desired manufacturing process.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REBECCA M GIERE whose telephone number is (571)272-5084. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
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, Bao-Thuy L Nguyen can be reached at 571-272-0824. 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.
/REBECCA M GIERE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1677