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 claims 1-29 in the reply filed on 4/1/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 29 is objected to under 37 CFR 1.75 as being a substantial duplicate of claim 28. When two claims in an application are duplicates or else are so close in content that they both cover the same thing, despite a slight difference in wording, it is proper after allowing one claim to object to the other as being a substantial duplicate of the allowed claim. See MPEP § 608.01(m).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 28, and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156.
Regarding claim 1, Park ‘156 discloses a method, comprising: introducing an ion quantity into an ion accumulation region 11 (“The ions are usually introduced into the drift region” [0007]), wherein the ion accumulation region 11 includes an ion wall (“corresponding barriers Ez of the electric counter field” [0019] – figure 1D illustrates a single ion wall, while figure 5C illustrates two ion walls) controllably blocking a movement of the ion quantity past the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier” [0019] – “A pattern of electrodes at the inner wall of the tube generates both the RF quadrupole field and the DC potential profile for the DC electric field barriers. The electric field barriers form two ion mobility low pass filters for ions with mobilities µ<µ1 and µ<µ2, respectively. The ions (33) of highest mobility are held back by the first barrier (31), the ions (35) of lowest mobility pass the second barrier (32), and the selected ions (34) of the mobility range between µ1 and µ2 are collected and stored in the quadrupolar RF field of the tube between the two electric barriers (31) and (32) shown in FIG. 5C. These (34) ions may then be investigated in more detail, e.g. by a mobility measurement with highest resolution using the second electric field barrier” [0046]), wherein the ion wall is produced by one or more ion wall electrodes of an electrode arrangement (“RF and DC voltages are applied to a pattern of electrodes on the inside wall of a tube, the RF and DC voltages generating an RF multipole field, preferably a quadrupole field, enclosing the filters and an axial DC electric field profile for the two filters, and wherein the tube guides the moving gas. The strength of RF multipole field is adjusted for best and undisturbed collection of the ions collected” [0028] – “A pattern of electrodes at the inner wall of the tube generates both the RF quadrupole field and the DC potential profile for the DC electric field barriers. The electric field barriers form two ion mobility low pass filters for ions with mobilities µ<µ1 and µ<µ2, respectively” [0046]); and directing the ion quantity in a direction towards the ion wall to increase a density of the ion quantity adjacent to the ion wall, such that the quantity of ions becomes space charge separated based on mobility along the direction and adjacent to the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)” [0019] – “A pattern of electrodes at the inner wall of the tube generates both the RF quadrupole field and the DC potential profile for the DC electric field barriers. The electric field barriers form two ion mobility low pass filters for ions with mobilities µ<µ1 and µ<µ2, respectively. The ions (33) of highest mobility are held back by the first barrier (31), the ions (35) of lowest mobility pass the second barrier (32), and the selected ions (34) of the mobility range between µ1 and µ2 are collected and stored in the quadrupolar RF field of the tube between the two electric barriers (31) and (32) shown in FIG. 5C. These (34) ions may then be investigated in more detail, e.g. by a mobility measurement with highest resolution using the second electric field barrier” [0046]).
Regarding claim 2, Park ‘156 discloses directing at least one space charge separated ion or group of ions of the ion quantity from the ion accumulation to a separate ion region coupled to the ion accumulation region (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019]).
Regarding claim 3, Park ‘156 discloses that the at least one space charge separated ion or group of ions is directed to the separate ion region without directing other ions or groups of ions of the ion quantity to the separate region (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019] – see also the DC potential profiled 22-26 in figure 1C).
Regarding claim 4, Park ‘156 discloses that the at least one space charged separated group of ions is directed to the separate region through the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019] – ions exit to the downstream, separate region, by passing beyond the wall formed by the ion barrier (as illustrated in figures 1C and 1D)).
Regarding claim 6, Park ‘156 discloses that the separate ion region includes an ion mobility spectrometer and/or a mass spectrometer (“These ions may be further investigated by a mass spectrometer” [0026]).
Regarding claim 7, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to block the movement of the ion quantity past the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier” [0019]) by applying a static electrode potential to one or more of the ion wall electrodes (“the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential” [0023] – a DC barrier is a static electrode potential).
Regarding claim 8, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to only allow the highest mobility ions of the ion quantity past the ion wall by applying a static electrode potential to one or more of the ion wall electrodes (“In FIG. 6C, a first electric driving field with strength (44) in the counter-flowing gas (14a) forms an ion mobility high pass filter for ions with mobilities µ<µ3, and an electric field barrier (46) generated by the potential profile (40, 41, 42 in FIG. 6B) forms an ion mobility low pass filter in the gas flow (14b) for ions with mobilities µ<µ4, so that ions with selected mobilities µ4-µ3 can pass continuously the two mobility filters” [0049]).
Regarding claim 9, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to move past the ion wall in an order established in the accumulation region by removing or decreasing an electrode potential applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes (“The invention is based on the insight that all ion mobility measuring devices with electrical forces and counteracting gas flows act either as ion mobility high pass or low pass filters, each separating ions by their mobilities into those which pass the device and those which are held back. If an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow, a mobility high pass filter for ions with smaller cross sections than a limit is produced. If the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential, a mobility low pass filter for ions of larger cross sections than a limit is produced” [0023] – “The ions collected can then be transferred to a detector or an analyzing device, such as a mass spectrometer, by changing the electric field of at least one of the low pass filters, for example by decreasing the maximum field strength E2 of the second low pass filter, or by increasing the height of the first low pass filter E1 including the field strength of the plateau” [0051]).
Regarding claim 10, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to move past the ion wall in an order related to their decreasing mobility by sequentially or continually decreasing an electrode potential applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes (“The invention is based on the insight that all ion mobility measuring devices with electrical forces and counteracting gas flows act either as ion mobility high pass or low pass filters, each separating ions by their mobilities into those which pass the device and those which are held back. If an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow, a mobility high pass filter for ions with smaller cross sections than a limit is produced. If the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential, a mobility low pass filter for ions of larger cross sections than a limit is produced” [0023] – “The ions collected can then be transferred to a detector or an analyzing device, such as a mass spectrometer, by changing the electric field of at least one of the low pass filters, for example by decreasing the maximum field strength E2 of the second low pass filter, or by increasing the height of the first low pass filter E1 including the field strength of the plateau” [0051]).
Regarding claim 11, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to sequentially move past the ion wall in an order related to their decreasing mobility by sequentially or continually decreasing an electrode potential applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes (“The invention is based on the insight that all ion mobility measuring devices with electrical forces and counteracting gas flows act either as ion mobility high pass or low pass filters, each separating ions by their mobilities into those which pass the device and those which are held back. If an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow, a mobility high pass filter for ions with smaller cross sections than a limit is produced. If the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential, a mobility low pass filter for ions of larger cross sections than a limit is produced” [0023] – “The ions collected can then be transferred to a detector or an analyzing device, such as a mass spectrometer, by changing the electric field of at least one of the low pass filters, for example by decreasing the maximum field strength E2 of the second low pass filter, or by increasing the height of the first low pass filter E1 including the field strength of the plateau” [0051]).
Regarding claim 12, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to sequentially move past the ion wall in an order related to their decreasing mobility by sequentially or continually decreasing an electrode potential applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes and to enter an adjacent region containing an ion mobility spectrometer or a mass spectrometer (“The invention is based on the insight that all ion mobility measuring devices with electrical forces and counteracting gas flows act either as ion mobility high pass or low pass filters, each separating ions by their mobilities into those which pass the device and those which are held back. If an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow, a mobility high pass filter for ions with smaller cross sections than a limit is produced. If the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential, a mobility low pass filter for ions of larger cross sections than a limit is produced” [0023] – “The ions collected can then be transferred to a detector or an analyzing device, such as a mass spectrometer, by changing the electric field of at least one of the low pass filters, for example by decreasing the maximum field strength E2 of the second low pass filter, or by increasing the height of the first low pass filter E1 including the field strength of the plateau” [0051]).
Regarding claim 13, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to block the movement of the ion quantity past the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier” [0019]), wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes that results in a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall.
Regarding claim 18, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall comprises a moving ion gate.
Park ‘156 disclsoes that: “The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019].
The ion wall (the potential profile) of Park ‘156 is an ion gate since it selectively allows ions to pass (meaning it can either be closed, preventing ions from passage, or opened, allowing certain ions to pass). The ion gate of Park ‘156 is a moving ion gate since it moves from one gate state (preventing certain ions from passage) to a second gate state (allowing passage of certain ions), where figures 1C and 1D illustrate the downward trajectory of the potential forming the moving ion gate as the barrier is lowered in height during a scan (as described in paragraph [0019].
Regarding claim 19, Park ‘156 discloses that the directing the ion quantity in a direction towards the ion wall comprises applying one or more potentials to one or more movement electrodes of the electrode arrangement (“an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow” [0023]).
Regarding claim 20, Park ‘156 discloses that the ions are directed in the direction towards the ion wall with a DC gradient (“an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow” [0023]) and/or with a traveling wave.
Regarding claim 21, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion accumulation region comprises an ion storage region (“If the space between the filters acts as an ion storage volume, e.g. formed by an enveloping RF multipole field, these filters cause ions within a predetermined range of mobilities to collect between the two filters” [0025]).
Regarding claim 22, Park ‘156 discloses that the directing the ion quantity in the direction comprises moving the ions entering the accumulation region towards the ion wall at least in part by a gas flow in the direction of the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier” [0019]).
Regarding claim 25, Park ‘156 discloses applying potentials to one or more of the ion wall electrodes that are selected to limit the maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region (“When a suitable number of ions have been collected, the supply of further ions is stopped; for instance, by reversing the direction of the DC field within the ion funnel (10)” [0019]).
Regarding claim 28, Park ‘156 discloses that maximum potentials applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes are selected to cause ion activation or dissociation of ions in a highest ion density region near the ion wall (“The steepest potential profile (22) is generated, producing the highest electric field barrier, collecting ions of all ion mobilities… ions with low mobility gather near the summit… During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019] – “These ions may be further investigated by a mass spectrometer, e.g. by acquiring spectra of fragment ions after application of a suitable fragmentation method” [0026] – the potentials governing the formation of the electric field barrier are selected to cause dissociation/fragmentation of the highest ion density region near the ion wall when the ions of this region are permitted to surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier for passage to a downstream fragmentation method).
Regarding claim 29, Park ‘156 discloses that maximum potentials applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes are selected to cause ion activation or dissociation of ions in a highest ion density region near the ion wall (“The steepest potential profile (22) is generated, producing the highest electric field barrier, collecting ions of all ion mobilities… ions with low mobility gather near the summit… During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019] – “These ions may be further investigated by a mass spectrometer, e.g. by acquiring spectra of fragment ions after application of a suitable fragmentation method” [0026] – the potentials governing the formation of the electric field barrier are selected to cause dissociation/fragmentation of the highest ion density region near the ion wall when the ions of this region are permitted to surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier for passage to a downstream fragmentation method).
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156 in view of Park U.S. PGPUB No. 2013/0009050.
Regarding claim 5, Park ‘156 discloses that the at least one space charged separated group of ions is directed to the separate region through the ion wall (“The ions (27) are blown by the gas flow against the field barrier and are stopped there because they cannot surmount the field barrier. Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector” [0019] – ions exit to the downstream, separate region, by passing beyond the wall formed by the ion barrier (as illustrated in figures 1C and 1D)). However, Park ‘156 does not disclose that the at least one space charged separated ion or group of ions is directed to the separate region laterally and not through a position of the ion wall.
Park ‘050 discloses a method of trapping ions and then ejecting the ions to a separate region (“a group of analyte ions is trapped near the center of the quadrupole ion trap… When performing a mass selective instability scan, the amplitude of the RF potential applied to the ring electrode is ramped to higher values. At each point in the RF ramp, ions below a given m/z have unstable trajectory and are ejected from the trap” [0029]), wherein at least one space charged separated ion or group of ions is directed to the separate region laterally and not through a position of the ion wall (“Ions of high m/z will be ejected in a direction orthogonal to the low m/z ions, through the two remaining gaps. Ejected ions may be detected via an ion detector or recaptured via another ion optical device for further analysis” [0056]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Park ‘156 with the orthogonal ejection of Park ‘050 in order to provide a more compact arrangement for manipulating ions, without requiring all elements of the device to be linearly arranged.
Claim(s) 14, 15, 16, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156 in view of Garimella et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2021/0351003.
Regarding claim 14, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to only allow the highest mobility ions of the ion quantity past the ion wall (“The invention is based on the insight that all ion mobility measuring devices with electrical forces and counteracting gas flows act either as ion mobility high pass or low pass filters, each separating ions by their mobilities into those which pass the device and those which are held back. If an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow, a mobility high pass filter for ions with smaller cross sections than a limit is produced. If the gas flow drives entrained ions in the original direction of the ion current against an electrical barrier, either a DC electric barrier or an RF pseudofield barrier generated by an RF pseudopotential, a mobility low pass filter for ions of larger cross sections than a limit is produced” [0023] – “The ions collected can then be transferred to a detector or an analyzing device, such as a mass spectrometer, by changing the electric field of at least one of the low pass filters, for example by decreasing the maximum field strength E2 of the second low pass filter, or by increasing the height of the first low pass filter E1 including the field strength of the plateau” [0051]), wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes (“an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow” [0023]). However, although Park ‘156 discloses an RF pseudopotential profile that drives ions in the direction of the ion wall, it does not disclose a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall.
Garimella discloses an ion wall controllably blocks a movement of an ion quantity past an ion wall, such that the quantity of ions becomes space charge separated based on mobility along the direction and adjacent to the ion wall, wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes that results in a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall (“Distribution shapes were also affected based on ion mobility, as shown by the different distributions for ions having an m/z 602 and ions having an m/z 1334. For the accumulation times tA of 0.8 s, 0.8 s, 1.6 s, and 2.0 s the peak ion intensity steadily increased and shape varied considerably. Peak shapes occurring earlier in the distributions are due to ions being pushed against the potential wall at the interface of the traveling waveforms TWA and TWB” [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the PR pseudopotential of Park ‘156 with the traveling waveforms of Garimella in order to explore other mechanisms for generating the relative motion of ions through a separation region (and against a potential wall) for the purpose of separating ions according to mobility. Such different mechanisms may result in different amounts of control and/or different mass resolution(s) of ions detected in such a device.
Regarding claim 15, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to move past the ion wall in the order established in the accumulation region by removing the potentials (“Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector, favorably by a mass spectrometer. The measured ion current curve reflects directly the ion mobility spectrum” [0019]), but does not disclose a traveling wave.
Garimella discloses an ion wall controllably blocks a movement of an ion quantity past an ion wall, such that the quantity of ions becomes space charge separated based on mobility along the direction and adjacent to the ion wall, wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes that results in a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall (“Distribution shapes were also affected based on ion mobility, as shown by the different distributions for ions having an m/z 602 and ions having an m/z 1334. For the accumulation times tA of 0.8 s, 0.8 s, 1.6 s, and 2.0 s the peak ion intensity steadily increased and shape varied considerably. Peak shapes occurring earlier in the distributions are due to ions being pushed against the potential wall at the interface of the traveling waveforms TWA and TWB” [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the PR pseudopotential of Park ‘156 with the traveling waveforms of Garimella in order to explore other mechanisms for generating the relative motion of ions through a separation region (and against a potential wall) for the purpose of separating ions according to mobility. Such different mechanisms may result in different amounts of control and/or different mass resolution(s) of ions detected in such a device.
Regarding claim 16, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to move past the ion wall in an order related to their decreasing mobility by sequentially or continually decreasing an amplitude of the potential (“Ions with high mobility gather at the foot of the barrier, ions with low mobility gather near the summit, as symbolically indicated by the smaller and larger cross sections of the ions (27)… Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector, favorably by a mass spectrometer. The measured ion current curve reflects directly the ion mobility spectrum” [0019]), but does not disclose a traveling wave.
Garimella discloses an ion wall controllably blocks a movement of an ion quantity past an ion wall, such that the quantity of ions becomes space charge separated based on mobility along the direction and adjacent to the ion wall, wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes that results in a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall (“Distribution shapes were also affected based on ion mobility, as shown by the different distributions for ions having an m/z 602 and ions having an m/z 1334. For the accumulation times tA of 0.8 s, 0.8 s, 1.6 s, and 2.0 s the peak ion intensity steadily increased and shape varied considerably. Peak shapes occurring earlier in the distributions are due to ions being pushed against the potential wall at the interface of the traveling waveforms TWA and TWB” [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the PR pseudopotential of Park ‘156 with the traveling waveforms of Garimella in order to explore other mechanisms for generating the relative motion of ions through a separation region (and against a potential wall) for the purpose of separating ions according to mobility. Such different mechanisms may result in different amounts of control and/or different mass resolution(s) of ions detected in such a device.
Regarding claim 17, Park ‘156 discloses that the ion wall is configured to allow ions of the ion quantity to move past the ion wall in an order related to their decreasing mobility by sequentially or continually decreasing an amplitude of the potential, and to enter an adjacent region containing an ion mobility spectrometer or a mass spectrometer (“Then, to acquire a spectrum, the potential profile (22) is lowered in height continuously in a scan (28), through potential profiles (23) to (26), resulting in a decrease of the electric barrier. During the scan, ions of higher and higher mobilities (smaller and smaller cross sections) can surmount the decreasing summit of the barrier, exit the spectrometer and be measured by an ion detector, favorably by a mass spectrometer. The measured ion current curve reflects directly the ion mobility spectrum” [0019]), but does not disclose a traveling wave.
Garimella discloses an ion wall controllably blocks a movement of an ion quantity past an ion wall, such that the quantity of ions becomes space charge separated based on mobility along the direction and adjacent to the ion wall, wherein the ion wall is created by applying potentials to a set of electrodes of the ion wall electrodes that results in a traveling wave moving in a second direction that opposes the direction towards the ion wall (“Distribution shapes were also affected based on ion mobility, as shown by the different distributions for ions having an m/z 602 and ions having an m/z 1334. For the accumulation times tA of 0.8 s, 0.8 s, 1.6 s, and 2.0 s the peak ion intensity steadily increased and shape varied considerably. Peak shapes occurring earlier in the distributions are due to ions being pushed against the potential wall at the interface of the traveling waveforms TWA and TWB” [0116]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the PR pseudopotential of Park ‘156 with the traveling waveforms of Garimella in order to explore other mechanisms for generating the relative motion of ions through a separation region (and against a potential wall) for the purpose of separating ions according to mobility. Such different mechanisms may result in different amounts of control and/or different mass resolution(s) of ions detected in such a device.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156 in view of Park U.S. PGPUB No. 2022/0299473.
Regarding claim 23, Park ‘156 discloses the claimed invention except that there is no explicit disclosure that the gas flow is held constant.
Park ‘473 discloses “a TIMS analyzer comprising a trapping region and a separating region for parallel accumulation… A gas flow drives ions against a ramp of a counteracting electric DC field barrier of the trapping region such that the ions are axially trapped and get separated according to their mobility at locations along the ramp” [0004], wherein “As shown in FIG. 2F, there is a constant gas velocity, vgas, pushing the ions through the ion region in the direction of the z-axis. Opposing this motion is an electric DC field −EDC(t) that has a spatial gradient along the z-axis, which produces the effective velocity component −vDC(t) shown in the figures, and which increases from zero to a maximum at longitudinal position zp at the plateau 203” [0095].
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Park ‘156 with the constant gas flow of Park ‘473 in order to ensure a control regimen which best separates ions according to their mobilities in the particular region in which it is desired that the ions are separated according to their mobilities.
Claim(s) 24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156 in view of Kovtoun U.S. Patent No. 11,099,153.
Regarding claim 24, Park ‘156 discloses the claimed invention except that while Park ‘156 discloses varying the gas flow (“a gas to flow through the tube of part (11) in a laminar way, so that the gas flow assumes the usual parabolic velocity profile (14)” [0018]), there is no explicit disclosure of increasing or varying the gas flow to move ions of decreasing mobility past the ion wall.
Kovtoun discloses a method of ion mobility separation wherein “ions can be separated along the axis based on their ion mobility to equilibrium positions where the force applied by the electric field balances the drag force applied by the gas flow, and, during the ejection time period, ions can be driven through the second end by the second electric field such that the separation achieved during the trapping and equilibration time period is maintained” [col. 1; lines 50-56]. Kovtoun discloses increasing or varying the gas flow to move ions of decreasing mobility past the ion wall (“the gas velocity decreases with decreasing mass flow within the TIMS device. In various embodiments, the gas flow can decrease along the direction of gas flow by providing flow paths out of TIMS device” [col. 7; lines 8-24]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Park ‘156 with the variable gas flow of Kovtoun in order to provide an alternative mechanism for controlling the movement of ions over a potential barrier, thereby offering differing levels of control over the movement of ions and potentially a different resolution of mobilities of ions detected having passed through such a mobility filter.
Claim(s) 26 and 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. U.S. PGPUB No. 2012/0286156 in view of Giles et al. WIPO Publication WO 2014/174260 A1.
Regarding claim 26, Park ‘156 discloses applying drift potentials to one or more of movement electrodes of the electrode arrangement in the accumulation region (“an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow” [0023]), and Park ‘156 discloses limiting a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region (“When a suitable number of ions have been collected, the supply of further ions is stopped; for instance, by reversing the direction of the DC field within the ion funnel (10)” [0019]), but Park ‘156 does not disclose applying drift or traveling wave potentials to one or more of movement electrodes of the electrode arrangement in the accumulation region that are selected to limit a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region.
Giles discloses applying drift or traveling wave potentials to one or more of movement electrodes of the electrode arrangement in the accumulation region (“An electric field or travelling DC wave is applied along the drift tube so as to urge ions from an ion entrance to an ion exit of the drift tube. As the ions traverse the drift tube they separate according to their mobility through the buffer or drift gas” [page 2; lines 15-18]) that are selected to limit a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region (“It is known to limit the charge density in ion traps and mass analysers that store ions in order to avoid space-charge effects therein” [page 2; lines 26-27] – “a continuous beam of ions from the ion source is accelerated through the IMS drift region 5 and the charge density of the ions is recorded by the detector 7. The charge density recorded during this survey experiment may be used to calculate and set the desired accumulation time for a subsequent IMS experiment or group of IMS experiments” [page 13; line 42-page 14; line 4]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Park ‘156 with the density selection of Giles in order to provide additional control over the movement of ions through the device, providing better selection of the number of ions being analyzed so that a maximum density of ion mobilities is not exceeded.
Regarding claim 27, Park ‘156 discloses applying drift potentials to one or more of movement electrodes of the electrode arrangement in the accumulation region (“an electric force generated by a DC potential profile or by an RF pseudopotential profile drives the ions in the direction of the original ion current from the ion source against a gas flow” [0023]), and Park ‘156 discloses limiting a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region (“When a suitable number of ions have been collected, the supply of further ions is stopped; for instance, by reversing the direction of the DC field within the ion funnel (10)” [0019]), but Park ‘156 does not disclose that maximum potentials applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes are selected to limit a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region to reduce or minimize ion activation or ion dissociation.
Giles discloses that maximum potentials applied to one or more of the ion wall electrodes are selected to limit a maximum ion density achieved in the accumulation region to reduce or minimize ion activation or ion dissociation (“It is known to limit the charge density in ion traps and mass analysers that store ions in order to avoid space-charge effects therein” [page 2; lines 26-27]).
It would have been obvious to one possessing ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Park ‘156 with the density selection of Giles in order to provide additional control over the movement of ions through the device, providing better selection of the number of ions being analyzed so that a maximum density of ion mobilities is not exceeded.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON L MCCORMACK whose telephone number is (571)270-1489. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM-5:00PM 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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/JASON L MCCORMACK/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights