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 .
Priority
The instant application is a continuation-in-part of application No. 16/699,141, and independent claim 1 recites new matter, e.g., “demoulded” and “demoulding angle,” and thus is not eligible for the priority date of its parent application. The filing date of the instant application, January 26, 2024 is its effective filing date.
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(s) 6 is/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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "wherein the bonding step makes use of an adhesive or ultrasonic oscillation," which contradicts the recitation “a bonding step for bonding the first plate and the second plate via welding” in claim 1 on which it depends. It seems claim 6 refers to the sealing step as recited in claim 2, not the bonding step in claim 1. It is suggested to be “wherein the sealing step makes use of an adhesive or ultrasonic oscillation.”
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 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
Claim(s) 1-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manusu (US 5954934) in view of Speakman (US 2011/0207328).
Regarding claims 1, 4, and 7, Manusu teaches an improved method for forming a unassembled electrophoresis gel cassette (Fig. 1; col. 3, l. 55: the electrophoresis cassette 10 formed in two part), comprising following steps:
a first injecting step for forming a first plate (Fig. 1; col. 3, ll. 57-58: a first side wall 11 of the cassette; ll. 55-57: by injection moulding), and a second injecting step for forming a second plate (Fig. 1; col. 3, l. 60: a second side wall 13 of the cassette; ll. 55-57: by injection moulding), in which a plurality of bottom protrusions and/or a plurality of top protrusions are concurrently formed with the first plate or the second plate (Fig. 1: ridges 12 and 14, which are with the first wall 11 and the second wall 13), with each injecting step using a simple plastic moulding process (col. 3, ll. 55-57: the electrophoresis cassette 10 formed in two part by injection moulding from a suitable synthetic plastics material; for claim 7: the two parts are made from plastic), wherein the first plate and the second plate (Fig. 1: both the first wall 11 and the second wall 13 having a top side, a bottom side, a left side, and a right side) respectively comprise a top side, a bottom side, a left side with a left spacer, a right side with a right spacer (e.g., Fig. 5: a left lug 23 and a right lug 23), a first surface and a second surface (Fig. 1: each wall having an inner surface and an outer surface), and the left spacer on the first plate and the left spacer on the second plate, as well as the right spacer on the first plate and the right spacer on the second plate, are respectively provided with a convex edge and a corresponding concave edge for up and down accommodation (Fig. 1, 5: indicating the lugs 23 having a convex edge and a concave edge at the opposite walls to fit with each other), and wherein the bottom sides of the first plate and the second plate are demoulded after injection with rough and unflat surfaces having parting lines and demoulding angles (since the two walls are made by injection moulding to form a cassette, they must be demoulded from the mold of the molding machine for use; any demoulded part would inherently have rough and unflat surfaces, e.g., parting lines and demoulding angles);
an engaging step for engaging the convex edges and the concave edges of the two left spacers and the two right spacers when in accommodation (Fig. 1: indicating the interlock of lugs 23 of both plates for forming the cassette 10);
a bonding step for bonding the first plate and the second plate via welding (col. 2, ll. 16-17: the projections can be clipped or welded into the opposite wall) the plurality of bottom protrusions and/or the plurality of top protrusions (Fig. 1; col. 3, l. 62: ridges 12 and 14), thereby to assemble the first plate and the second plate to form an unassembled electrophoresis gel cassette (this limitation is intended result of the bonding step and does not further limit the claim scope because it does not require steps to be performed. In method claims, it is the overall method steps that are given patentable weight not the intended result thereof because the intended result does not materially alter the overall method. MPEP 2111.04).
Manusu does not explicitly disclose a cutting step of cutting off the part lines and the demoulding angles of the bottom sides of the first plate and the second plate in one process to form a smooth and flat peripheral surface at the bottom sides of the first plate and the second plate for the unassembled electrophoresis gel cassette (claim 1) or wherein the cutting step makes use of a laser knife (claim 4).
However, Speakman teaches the region of the substrate can be laser smoothed to produce a highly smooth surface finish ([0495] lines 1-3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Manusu by utilizing laser knife to cut off the overlapping part of the bottom sides of two plates for a highly smooth surface finish as taught by Speakman because laser knife would provide the smoothing technique to produce a highly smooth surface finish for subsequent assembly of the electrophoresis gel cassette. Here, the claimed limitations are obvious because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results. MPEP 2143(I)(A). Using a laser knife for obtaining a highly smooth surface finish is a known technique ready for the known method as recited to yield predictable results and thus is prima facie obvious. MPEP 2141(III)(D).
The designation “whereby leakage of electrophoresis gel when in gel injection is avoided and a smiling effect via bonding of the bottom protrusions and/or the top protrusions is eliminated” is the intended result of the forming method of forming the unassembled electrophoresis gel cassette and does not further limit the method as claimed. Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed. In method claims, it is the overall method steps that are given patentable weight not the intended result thereof because the intended result does not materially alter the overall method. Thus, this designation is not given patentable weight because it simply expresses the intended result of a process step positively recited. MPEP 2111.04.
Regarding claim 2, Manusu teaches a sealing step, via providing a sealing element, for sealing the smooth peripheral surface of the bottom sides of the electrophoresis gel cassette (col. 1, ll. 31-33: the side edges of the space between the glass plates are sealed with adhesive tape or a similar material, when the gel is poured) to prevent from leakage of a liquid matrix of gel (this limitation is intended result of the bonding step and does not further limit the claim scope because it does not require steps to be performed. In method claims, it is the overall method steps that are given patentable weight not the intended result thereof because the intended result does not materially alter the overall method. MPEP 2111.04).
Regarding claim 3, Manusu teaches wherein the sealing element is a tape (col. 1, l. 32: adhesive tape).
Regarding claim 5, Manusu teaches wherein the plurality of bottom protrusions and top protrusions are each disposed in a position at which an electrophoresis sample does not flow through during electrophoresis processing (Fig. 1: indicating the gel received into the gel receiving space 15 would not flow to the ridges 12 and 14).
Regarding claim 6, Manusu teaches wherein the bonding step makes use of an adhesive (col. 1, l. 32: adhesive tape).
Claim(s) 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manusu in view of Speakman, and further in view of Updyke (US 2011/0042217).
Regarding claim 8, Manusu and Speakman disclose all limitations of claim 7, but fail to teach wherein the plastic is selected from Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC), Acrylic, Polylactic Acid (PLA), Polystyrene (PS), Polypropylene (PP), Styrene-acrylonitrile copolymer (AS), Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene (ABS), Polycarbonate (PC), Polyethylene terephthalate (PET), or Polyethylene (PE).
However, Updyke teaches an apparatus for gel electrophoresis cassette including a retainer plate and a divider plate (¶36). The plates may be formed by a process such as injection molding using any suitable plastic, such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) (¶36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Manusu and Speakman by substituting the plates with one formed from plastic such as PET as taught by Updyke. The suggestion for doing so would have been that plastic, such as PET, is a suitable material for the plates of electrophoresis gel cassette and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.07.
Regarding claim 9, Manusu and Speakman disclose all limitations of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the first plate, the second plate, the first spacers and the second spacers, and the plurality of top protrusions and the plurality of bottom protrusions are made from glass.
However, Updyke teaches the cassette may be constructed from glass plates (¶36). ([0051] lines 12-13). As indicated in Manusu, the ridges 12 and 14, and lugs 23 are integral parts of the two plates (Manusu, Fig. 1: walls 11 and 13), and thus they are integral parts of the plates which are made from glass.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Manusu and Speakman by substituting the plates, including its ridges and plugs, with one formed from glass as taught by Updyke. The suggestion for doing so would have been that glass is a suitable material for the plates of electrophoresis gel cassette and the selection of a known material, which is based upon its suitability for the intended use, is within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art. MPEP § 2144.07.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAITLYN M SUN whose telephone number is (571)272-6788. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am - 5:30pm.
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, Luan Van can be reached on 571-272-8521. 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.
/C. SUN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795