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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 and 11 objected to because of the following informalities: "comprises slots adjacent each arm" should be "comprises slots adjacent to each arm". Appropriate correction is required.
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 12 rejected under 112(b) as it recites the limitation "the slot adjacent the respective fluid capture devices," which has no antecedent basis.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 7-9, 13-15, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodwill (US 4740077 A) in view of Klemm et al (US 3684450 A).
Regarding claim 1, Goodwill teaches a capillary pressure measurement device, comprising (Fig 1-2 and Col 1 lines 5-10, invention pertains to the measurement of relative permeabilities and capillary pressures by centrifuging natural or synthetic mineral core samples. More particularly, this invention relates to an improved control and data collection system for centrifugal measurement of core samples):
a centrifuge (Fig 1-2, 10) comprising a rotating apparatus (Fig 1-2 motor and Col 5 lines 28-53) adapted to hold a plurality of porous media samples (Col 5 lines 28-53) and configured to test the porous media samples under centrifugal motion during rotation of the rotating apparatus (Col 7 lines 3-55, test porous samples under centrifugal motion);
a fluid capture device disposed adjacent to each of the porous media samples during rotation (Fig 1-2, 20-23) for receiving fluid displaced from the respective porous media samples due to centrifugal motion applied to the respective porous media samples by rotation of the rotating apparatus (Fig 1-2 and Col 1 lines 5-10 and Col 1 lines 3-55);
a measurement system that measures an amount of fluid displaced from each of the porous media samples (Col 8 lines 1-68), the measurement system including a light source that illuminates respective fluid capture devices (Fig 1-2, light source is 25 and 50 (strobe));
a camera that takes an image of a fluid meniscus in the respective fluid captures devices (Fig 1-2, camera is module] 24), and a position sensor that determines a position of the respective fluid capture device and triggers the camera to take the image of each fluid meniscus when the fluid meniscus is in a field of view of the camera (Fig 1-2 and Col 5 lines 10-14), wherein each fluid meniscus represents a fluid volume (Col 7 lines 15-19 and Col 6 lines 1-60) that is correlated to capillary pressure of a corresponding porous media sample.
Goodwill does not teach, a shield configured to block light from the light sources from reaching the camera other than when the meniscus is in the field of view of the camera.
In a similar field of endeavor, Klemm et al teaches, a shield configured to block light from the light sources from reaching the camera other than when the meniscus is in the field of view of the camera (Fig 2 and Col 4 lines 1-21, a light shutter 81 having a circular geometry and provided with a spiral-like aperture 83, as shown in FIG. 1D, is positioned between centrifuge head 49 and photodetector arrangement 79. Light shutter 81 is rotated by synchronous motor 85 via a spindle 87. Normally, light shutter 81 is positioned, as shown in FIG. iD, and rotated in the direction of the arrow such that discrete portions of capillary chamber 61 are scanned progressively, whereby aperture 83 tracks the interface between the supernatent fluid, or plasma, and the packed cells in the blood sample. The output of photodetector arrangement 79 is connected to the input of amplifier 89, which controls the operation of synchronous motor 85. Also, motor 85 is connected via spindle 91 to the wiping arm 93 of a potentiometer 95 connected across voltage source 97. The instantaneous position of light shutter 81 is indicated by a voltage signal along leads 99 connected to a conventional stylus recorder 101. i.e. light shutter is 81 as can be seen in Fig 2, which blocks light from reaching the camera (a shutter) other than when the meniscus is in the field of view of the camera. Also see Col 5 lines 20-60)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Goodwill (US 4740077 A) in view of Klemm et al (US 3684450 A) so that the apparatus includes a shield configured to block light from the light sources. Doing so would allow for proper identification of the liquid samples is a paramount importance in clinical analysis, the processing rate being of importance primarily in reducing the analysis cost (Klemm, Col 2 lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 5, Goodwill teaches the capillary pressure measurement device of claim 1, wherein the position sensor detects an indicia of the rotating apparatus and triggers the camera to capture the image of the fluid meniscus of each fluid capture device at a time thereafter that is a function of a speed of rotation of the rotating apparatus and a distance of the indicia from the fluid meniscus (Fig 1-2 and Col 5 lines 1-20, as well as Col 8-9).
Regarding claim 7, Goodwill teaches the capillary pressure measurement device of claim 1 comprising an image processing device that processes images captured by the camera to determine the fluid volume in the respective fluid capture devices (Fig 1-2 and Col 3 line 60- Col 4 line 10, computer does image processing).
Regarding claim 8, Goodwill teaches the capillary pressure measurement device of claim 7 wherein the image processing device further calculates capillary pressures of the respective porous media samples as a function of the determined fluid volumes and outputs the respective calculated capillary pressures to a display (Fig 1-2 samples 16-19 and Col 5 lines 10-14, controller 43 and transmitter/receiver 40, also Fig 5 output).
Claim 9 rejected for the same reasons as claim 1.
Claim 13 rejected for the same reasons as claim 5.
Claim 14 rejected for the same reasons as claim 7.
Regarding claim 15, Goodwill teaches the capillary pressure measurement method of claim 9, wherein placing the porous media samples in the rotating apparatus comprises simultaneously placing porous media samples of variable sizes and configurations in the rotating apparatus (Fig 1-5 and different media samples 16, 17, 18, 19 and rotating apparatus 10 and 11).
Claim 17 rejected for the same reasons as claim 8.
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodwill (US 4740077 A) in view of Klemm et al (US 3684450 A) and Fleury (US 6185985 B1).
Regarding claim 6, Goodwill and Klemm et al does not teach the capillary pressure measurement device of claim 1, wherein at least one fluid capture device includes one or more solid spacers to reduce a volume of the at least one fluid capture device for different porous media sample configurations.
In a similar field of endeavor, Fleury et al teaches, the capillary pressure measurement device of claim 1, wherein at least one fluid capture device includes one or more solid spacers to reduce a volume of the at least one fluid capture device for different porous media sample configurations (Col 5 line 40-60 and Fig 2-3, in order to subject porous rock samples 1 to a centrifugation operation, elongate containers or vessels 2 comprising each (FIGS. 2, 3) a first main chamber 3 and a second, tubular lateral chamber 4 communicating with the first chamber are used. Sample 1, previously associated with two plates 5A, 5B on the two end faces thereof, is placed in chamber 3. It occupies only part of the volume (half thereof for example). The other part comprises a solid cylindrical part or spacer 6. The cross-section thereof is so selected that the remaining volume of chamber 3 around it and sample 1 is at least equal to the volume of the pores of the sample. See also Col 3 lines 25-40, the device comprises, in each first chamber, a spacer situated after the sample, the volume of the spacer being so selected that, in operation, the interface between the two fluids does not come into contact with the sample, the respective positions of the sample and of the associated spacer in the first chamber being inverted according to whether a drainage phase or an imbibition phase is carried out. The volume of each spacer is preferably so selected that the free volume remaining in the first chamber around the sample and the spacer is at least equal to the pore volume of the sample and preferably close thereto, so as to maximize the position variation of the interface as a function of the fluid volume variation in the first chamber. i.e. solid spacers can be considered a spacer that reduces volume by being situated after the sample, and is selected to fill the space based on different sample volume configurations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Goodwill (US 4740077 A) in view of Klemm et al (US 3684450 A) and Fleury (US 6185985 B1) so that the device includes one or more solid spacers to reduce a volume of the at least one fluid capture device for different porous media sample configurations. Doing so would maximize the position variation of the interface as a function of the fluid volume variation in the first chamber (Col 3 lines 35-40, Fleury).
Claim 16 rejected for the same reasons as claim 6.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2-4 and 10-12 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 12 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 2, Klemm et al does not teach claim 2, the slot is not adjacent to each fluid capture device, but instead placed above the meniscus (fluid capture device), and therefore does not teach: wherein the shield comprises a slot adjacent to each fluid capture device adapted to expose the camera to the light source when the meniscus is in the field of view of the camera. Therefore, no prior art alone or in combination teaches the limitations of claim 2.
Claims 3-4 objected based on dependency on claim 2. Claims 10-11 objected based on corresponding claims 2-3.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 objected to as allowable if the 112(b) rejection were to be resolved. Claim 12 rejected for the same reasons as claim 2. No prior art alone or in combination teaches the limitations: wherein determining the position of the respective fluid capture devices comprises the position sensor detecting when the respective fluid capture devices and the slot adjacent the respective fluid capture devices pass over or under the position sensor and triggering the camera comprises triggering the camera to immediately capture the image of each fluid meniscus when the respective fluid capture devices and the slot adjacent the respective fluid capture devices pass over or under the position sensor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Park, J. M., Cho, Y. K., Lee, B. S., Lee, J. G., & Ko, C. (2007). Multifunctional microvalves control by optical illumination on nanoheaters and its application in centrifugal microfluidic devices. Lab on a Chip, 7(5), 557-564.
Shen, T., Huang, L. & Wang, J. Analysis and experiment of transient filling flow into a rectangular microchannel on a rotating disk. Microfluid Nanofluid 20, 52 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10404-015-1687-9
EP-0106398-A2
US-7352179-B2
US 4671102 A
US 4567373 A
US 20200346207 A1
US 20200340973 A1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK PETER KRAYNAK whose telephone number is (703)756-1713. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:30 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, Vu Le can be reached at (571) 272-7332. 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.
/JACK PETER KRAYNAK/Examiner, Art Unit 2668
/UTPAL D SHAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2668