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
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding claims 1, 12, and 18, the phrase “to determine whether the analysis target sample is normal or abnormal” discloses the relative terms “normal” and “abnormal” which renders the claim indefinite. The terms “normal” and “abnormal” are not defined by the claims, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. In this case, the claim discloses the “normal” and “abnormal” state or conditions of the analysis target sample without defining the criteria for determining a normal or an abnormal analysis target sample. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 4, the phrase “the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to simultaneously fill the first syringe pump and the second syringe pump with the analysis target sample” appears to disclose both an apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as normal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 5, the phrase “in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump” appears to disclose both an apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as normal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 6, the phrase “in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the methods step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as abnormal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 7, the phrase “the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit and the sample injection unit so that at least a part of the analysis target sample is left in at least one of the one or more second sample introduction unit syringe pumps, and the remainder of the analysis target sample is supplied to the sample analysis unit” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the claim discloses the steps for saving a remainer of the analysis target sample and then supplying said remainer to the sample analysis unit. The inclusion of such steps in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 8, the phrase “in response to determining that the remainder of the target analysis sample is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the at least a part of the analysis target sample left in the at least one of the one or more second sample introduction unit syringe pumps” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as normal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 9, the phrase “in response to determining that the remainder of the analysis target sample is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the at least a part of the analysis target sample left in the at least one of the one or more second sample introduction unit syringe pumps” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as abnormal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 10, the phrase “the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit so that the remainder of the analysis target sample and the at least a part of the analysis target sample have the same volume” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller draws a predetermined volume for the analysis target sample. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Furthermore, the phrase “the remainder of the analysis target sample and the at least a part of the analysis target sample have the same volume” is confusing because the claim does not appear to clearly define “a part of the analysis target sample” and how it’s different from the remainer of the analysis target sample. Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase “in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump” appears to disclose both an apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as normal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 14, the phrase “in response to a determination that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the methods step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as abnormal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 15, the phrase “the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit and the sample injection unit so that at least a part of the analysis target sample is left in at least one of the one or more ion syringe pumps, and the remainder of the analysis target sample is supplied to the sample analysis unit” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the claim discloses the steps for saving a remainer of the analysis target sample and then supplying said remainer to the sample analysis unit. The inclusion of such steps in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 16, the phrase “in response to a determination that the supplied analysis target sample is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the at least a part of the analysis target sample left in at least one of the one or more ion syringe pumps” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step of using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as normal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 17, the phrase “in response to a determination that the supplied analysis target sample is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the at least a part of the analysis target sample left in at least one of the one or more ion syringe pumps” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step using the apparatus. In this case, the control step by the analysis controller only occurs when the analysis target sample is determined as abnormal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Regarding claim 18, the phrase “to reanalyze a second analysis target sample identical to a first analysis target sample in response to the sample analysis unit determining that the first analysis target sample is abnormal” appears to disclose both the apparatus and the method step using the apparatus. In this case, the step of reanalyzing the second analysis target sample by the analysis controller only occurs when the first analysis target sample is determined as abnormal. The inclusion of such step in an apparatus claim creates confusion as it is unclear at what point an infringement of the claimed language would occur -- upon the structural existence of the device or only during a use of the device (see MPEP 2173.05(p) IT). Further clarification is respectfully requested.
Claims 1-3, 11, and 19-20 are rejected as being dependent on the rejected base claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-2, 4-6, 11-14, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wiederin et al. (Pub No. US 2019/0383840) (hereafter Wiederin).
Regarding claim 1, Wiederin teaches a contaminant analysis apparatus comprising:
a pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample preparation device 108) (see Fig. 1) configured to collect and filter an effluent discharged through a discharge pipe to provide an analysis target sample (i.e., sample 150) (see Fig. 1);
a sample introduction unit configured to receive the analysis target sample from the pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample receiving line 162) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample injection unit configured to selectively supply the analysis target sample supplied from the sample introduction unit (i.e., valve 148) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample analysis unit including an integrated analyzer configured to analyze ion components (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured for ion chromatography) (see paragraph section [0029]) and heavy metal components of the analysis target sample (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured to detect one or more trace metals in a sample 150) (see paragraph section [0029]) which is supplied from the sample injection unit (i.e., the analysis devices 112 can include, but are not limited to, ICPMS (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ICPOES (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ion chromatograph (e.g., for anion and cation determinations), liquid chromatograph (LC) (e.g., for organic contaminants determinations), FTIR infrared (e.g., for chemical composition and structural information determinations), particle counter (e.g., for detection of undissolved particles), moisture analyzer (e.g., for detection of water in samples), gas chromatograph (GC) (e.g., for detection of volatile components), or the like. The system 100 can include one or more additional analysis devices 112 located remotely from the remote sampling system 104 for additional or differing sample analysis than those analys(es) performed by the plurality of analysis devices 112) (see paragraph section [0028]) and to determine whether the analysis target sample is normal or abnormal (i.e., one or more chemical streams can be continuously monitored via analysis of the samples obtained by one or more of the remote sampling systems 104 linked to the analysis system 102, whereby a contamination limit can be set for each of the chemical streams. Upon detection of a contaminant exceeding the contamination limit for a particular stream, the system 100 can provide an alert) (see paragraph section [0029]); and
an analysis controller (i.e., controller 118) (see Fig. 4) configured to control the sample introduction unit, the sample injection unit, and the sample analysis unit (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]),
wherein the sample introduction unit comprises a first sample introduction unit including two or more first sample introduction unit syringe pumps (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032]) and a second sample introduction unit including one or more second sample introduction unit syringe pumps (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032]).
Regarding claim 2, Wiederin teaches that the two or more first sample introduction unit syringe pumps comprises a first syringe pump and a second syringe pump (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032])., wherein the first syringe pump and the second syringe pump are connected to different switching valves of the pretreatment sampler, respectively (i.e., the remote sampling device 106 can include components, such as pumps, valves, tubing, sensors, etc., suitable for acquiring the sample from the sample source and delivering the sample over the distance to the analysis system 102) (see paragraph section [0025]).
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
Regarding claim 4, Wiederin teaches that the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to simultaneously fill the first syringe pump and the second syringe pump with the analysis target sample (i.e., the controller 118 can use a logical AND operation on a high state at each of the first detector 126 and the second detector 126 and initiate a selective coupling of the sample loop 164 with the analysis device 112 using the valve 148 so that the sample loop 164 is operable to be in fluid communication with the analysis device 112 to supply the continuous liquid sample segment to the analysis device 112) (see paragraph sections [0046]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 5, Wiederin teaches that, in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]).
Regarding claim 6, Wiederin teaches that, in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]).
Claims 7-10 are objected to as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
Regarding claim 11, Wiederin teaches that the first sample introduction unit is a heavy metal sample introduction unit configured to introduce a heavy metal sample (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured to detect one or more trace metals in a sample 150) (see paragraph section [0029]) , wherein the second sample introduction unit is an ion sample introduction unit configured to introduce an ion sample (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured for ion chromatography) (see paragraph section [0029]).
Regarding claim 12, Wiederin teaches a real-time water quality monitoring system comprising:
a plurality of wastewater treatment facilities configured to purify wastewater generated from semiconductor manufacturing lines (i.e., systems as described herein can be used for various applications, including, but not necessarily limited to: pharmaceutical applications (e.g., with a central mass spectrometer analysis device connected to multiple pharmaceutical reactors), waste monitoring of one or more waste streams, semiconductor fabrication facilities, and so forth) (see paragraph sections [0024]-[0025]); and
a plurality of contaminant analysis apparatuses configured to obtain and analyze samples from effluent discharged through discharge pipes of each of the wastewater treatment facilities (i.e., one or more remote sampling systems 104) (see paragraph sections [0024]-[0025), wherein each of the plurality of contaminant analysis apparatus comprises:
a pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample preparation device 108) (see Fig. 1) configured to collect and filter the effluent discharged through the discharge pipe to provide an analysis target sample (i.e., sample 150) (see Fig. 1);
a sample introduction unit configured to receive the analysis target sample from the pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample receiving line 162) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample injection unit configured to selectively supply the analysis target sample supplied from the sample introduction unit (i.e., valve 148) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample analysis unit (i.e., analysis device 112) (see Fig. 1) including an integrated analyzer configured to analyze ion components (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured for ion chromatography) (see paragraph section [0029]) and heavy metal components of the analysis target sample (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured to detect one or more trace metals in a sample 150) (see paragraph section [0029]) which is supplied from the sample injection unit (i.e., the analysis devices 112 can include, but are not limited to, ICPMS (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ICPOES (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ion chromatograph (e.g., for anion and cation determinations), liquid chromatograph (LC) (e.g., for organic contaminants determinations), FTIR infrared (e.g., for chemical composition and structural information determinations), particle counter (e.g., for detection of undissolved particles), moisture analyzer (e.g., for detection of water in samples), gas chromatograph (GC) (e.g., for detection of volatile components), or the like. The system 100 can include one or more additional analysis devices 112 located remotely from the remote sampling system 104 for additional or differing sample analysis than those analys(es) performed by the plurality of analysis devices 112) (see paragraph section [0028]) and
to determine whether the analysis target sample is normal or abnormal (i.e., one or more chemical streams can be continuously monitored via analysis of the samples obtained by one or more of the remote sampling systems 104 linked to the analysis system 102, whereby a contamination limit can be set for each of the chemical streams. Upon detection of a contaminant exceeding the contamination limit for a particular stream, the system 100 can provide an alert) (see paragraph section [0029]); and
an analysis controller (i.e., controller 118) (see Fig. 4) configured to control the sample introduction unit, the sample injection unit, and the sample analysis unit (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]),
wherein the sample introduction unit comprises a heavy metal sample introduction unit (i.e., a sample preparation device 108 can add one or more internal standards to a sample delivered to the analysis system 102 to calibrate the analysis system 102) (see paragraph sections [0025]-[0026]) including a first syringe pump and a second syringe pump (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032]) and an ion sample introduction unit (i.e., a sample preparation device 108 can add one or more internal standards to a sample delivered to the analysis system 102 to calibrate the analysis system 102) (see paragraph section [0026]) including one or more ion syringe pumps (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032]).
Regarding claim 13, Wiederin teaches that, in response to determining that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is normal, the analysis controller controls the sample introduction unit to discharge the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]).
Regarding claim 14, Wiederin teaches that, in response to a determination that the analysis target sample of the first syringe pump is abnormal, the analysis controller controls the sample analysis unit to reanalyze the analysis target sample of the second syringe pump (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041])..
Claims 15-17 are objected to as being dependent on the rejected base claim.
Regarding claim 18, Wiederin teaches a contaminant analysis apparatus comprising:
a pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample preparation device 108) (see Fig. 1) configured to collect and filter an effluent discharged through a discharge pipe to provide an analysis target sample (i.e., sample 150) (see Fig. 1);
a sample introduction unit configured to supply the analysis target sample from the pretreatment sampler (i.e., sample receiving line 162) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample injection unit configured to selectively supply the analysis target sample (i.e., valve 148) (see Fig. 3A);
a sample analysis unit (i.e., analysis device 112) (see Fig. 1) having an integrated analyzer configured to analyze ion components (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured for ion chromatography) (see paragraph section [0029]) and heavy metal components of the analysis target sample (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured to detect one or more trace metals in a sample 150) (see paragraph section [0029]) supplied from the sample introduction unit (i.e., the analysis devices 112 can include, but are not limited to, ICPMS (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ICPOES (e.g., for trace metal determinations), ion chromatograph (e.g., for anion and cation determinations), liquid chromatograph (LC) (e.g., for organic contaminants determinations), FTIR infrared (e.g., for chemical composition and structural information determinations), particle counter (e.g., for detection of undissolved particles), moisture analyzer (e.g., for detection of water in samples), gas chromatograph (GC) (e.g., for detection of volatile components), or the like. The system 100 can include one or more additional analysis devices 112 located remotely from the remote sampling system 104 for additional or differing sample analysis than those analys(es) performed by the plurality of analysis devices 112) (see paragraph section [0028]) and to determine whether the analysis target sample is normal or abnormal (i.e., one or more chemical streams can be continuously monitored via analysis of the samples obtained by one or more of the remote sampling systems 104 linked to the analysis system 102, whereby a contamination limit can be set for each of the chemical streams. Upon detection of a contaminant exceeding the contamination limit for a particular stream, the system 100 can provide an alert) (see paragraph section [0029]); and
an analysis controller (i.e., controller 118) (see Fig. 4) configured to control the sample introduction unit, the sample injection unit (i.e., one or more components of the system, such as the analysis system 102, remote sampling system 104, valves 148, pumps, and/or detectors (e.g., the first detector 126, the second detector 126, the sample detector 130) can be coupled with a controller for controlling the collection, delivery, and/or analysis of samples 150) (see paragraph sections [0039]-[0041]), and
the sample analysis unit to reanalyze a second analysis target sample identical to a first analysis target sample in response to the sample analysis unit determining that the first analysis target sample is abnormal (i.e., the system 100 can include context-specific actions when an element is determined to be above an element-specific limit in a sample for a particular sample location, where such context-specific actions can include, but are not limited to, ignoring an alert and continuing the process operation, stopping the process operation, running a system calibration and then re-running the over-limit sample, or the like) (see paragraph section [0056]).
Regarding claim 19, Wiederin teaches that the sample introduction unit comprises a heavy metal sample introduction unit including two or more syringe pumps (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured to detect one or more trace metals in a sample 150) (see paragraph section [0029]) and an ion sample introduction unit including one or more ion syringe pumps (i.e., the analysis device 112 may be configured for ion chromatography) (see paragraph section [0029]).
Regarding claim 20, Wiederin teaches that at least one of the syringe pumps and the ion syringe pump is configured to store the second analysis target sample (i.e., a pump, such as a syringe pump or a vacuum pump, may be used to load sample into the sampling device 106) (see paragraph section [0032]).
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wiederin et al. (Pub No. US 2019/0383840) (hereafter Wiederin)
Regarding claim 3, Wiederin as disclosed above does not directly or implicitly or implicitly teach that capacities of the first syringe pump and the second syringe pump are the same as each other. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have selected syringe pumps having the same capacities. Furthermore, it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. MPEP 2144.05 (II-B) and a change in size is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (IV)).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: see PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRAN M. TRAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0307. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 11:30am - 7:00pm.
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, Laura Martin can be reached on (571)-272-2160. 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.
/Tran M. Tran/Examiner, Art Unit 2855