Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/454,298

APPARATUS AND METHODS FOR SPATIALLY AND TEMPORARILY SORTING IONS USING RF TRAVELLING WAVES

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 23, 2023
Examiner
SMITH, DAVID E
Art Unit
2881
Tech Center
2800 — Semiconductors & Electrical Systems
Assignee
Thermo Finnigan LLC
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
92%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
889 granted / 1049 resolved
+16.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +7% lift
Without
With
+7.3%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
1084
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.2%
-38.8% vs TC avg
§103
51.6%
+11.6% vs TC avg
§102
21.0%
-19.0% vs TC avg
§112
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1049 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
8DETAILED 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 . 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. Claims 1, 3-4, 6-10, 12-19 and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hoyes (US 20220291167 A1). Regarding claim 1, Hoyes teaches a method of operating an ion guide (AC or RF ion guide, [0027]) comprising a series of electrodes (ring electrodes of units 4 and/or 6, fig. 3) and first and second ends and having, therein, a gas at a pressure that is greater than or equal to 0.01 Torr (e.g. greater than or equal to 0.1 mbar (0.07 Torr) [0035]), the method comprising: Applying a set of radio-frequency (RF) voltage waveforms to electrodes of the series that generate a plurality of moving pseudopotential wells that exert forces on ions within the ion guide that urge the ions to migrate from the first end to the second end of the ion guide (RF traveling wave, [0031]); Applying, simultaneously with the application of the set of RF voltage waveforms, a set of two or more direct-current (DC) electrical potentials to electrodes of the series that generate forces on the ions within the ion guide that are independent of the mass-to-charge ratio and that urge the ions to migrate from the second end to the first end (first opposing field, [0037], fig. 4, urges ions to move back to entrance, [0038]), Whereby there is caused one or more of m/z dependent spatial separation, differential migration, or filtering of ions within the ion guide (ions distribute spatially, based on mobility, [0039]). Regarding claim 3, Hoyes teaches that the ion guide is an ion mobility separation apparatus and wherein the differential migration is controlled by controlling either a magnitude or frequency of an applied RF voltage waveform (increasing driving force so that ions of different mobilities pass through device, [0009]). Regarding claim 4, Hoyes teaches that the forces on the ions that are generated by the application of the two or more DC electrical potentials are generated by a dynamic DC field (opposing field can change with time, [0004]). Regarding claim 6, Hoyes teaches that the application of the two or more DC electrical fields generates a static DC field within the ion guide (field shown in fig. 4). Regarding claim 7, Hoyes teaches that the first end of the guide is an ion inlet and the second end of the guide is an ion outlet and the static DC field comprises: A first segment (trapping region 4;, alternately left half of trapping region 4, fig. 4) adjacent to the first end where a magnitude of the DC field progressively increases along a direction away from the first end; and A second segment (analyzing region 6, alternately right half of trapping region 4) adjacent to the second end wherein the magnitude of the DC field is greater than or equal to any magnitude of the DC field within the first segment (fig. 4). Regarding claim 8, Hoyes teaches that within the second segment (second half of mobility device 4) a variation of the magnitude of the DC field as a function of distance from the first end of the ion guide is substantially linear. Regarding claim 9, Hoyes teaches that applying the set of RF voltage waveforms to electrodes of the series comprises applying the set of RF voltage waveforms to a series of ring electrodes (fig. 3). Regarding claim 10, Hoyes teaches that applying the set of RF voltage waveforms to the series of ring electrodes comprises applying the set of RF voltages to ring electrodes of an ion tunnel apparatus ([0024]). Regarding claim 12, Hoyes teaches that the applying of the two or more DC electrical potentials comprises applying electrical potentials that generate a static, uniform DC field within the ion guide (fig. 4), whereby ions having a particular mass-to-charge ratio are caused to accumulate within the ion guide, and ions having other mass-to-charge ratios are caused to migrate out of the ion guide (ions separated by ion mobility which depends on m/z, [0039]; also present specification states that an RF traveling wave inherently separates ions by m/z, [0011]). Regarding claim 13, Hoyes teaches ramping a magnitude of an applied DC electrical potential or an amplitude of an applied RF voltage waveform (adjusting the driving force and/or opposing field with time, [0009]), whereby the accumulated ions having the particular mass-to-charge ratio are caused to migrate out of the ion guide through the second end (adjusting magnitude of opposing field such that ions pass out of system as function of time, [0041]) Regarding claim 14, Hoyes that the applying of the two or more DC electrical potentials comprises applying electric potentials that generate a static non-uniform field within the ion guide (fig. 4), whereby ions are caused to accumulate at a plurality of different locations within the ion guide, in accordance to their respective mass-to-charge ratio values (separating into groups based on mobility, which depends on m/z). Regarding claim 15, Hoyes teaches ramping a magnitude of an applied DC potential (magnitude of second opposing electric field progressively reduced, [0009]) whereby the accumulated ions are caused to migrate out of the ion guide, in either ascending or in reverse order of the respective mass-to-charge ratios, through the second end ([0041-0042]). Regarding claim 16, Hoyes teaches that applying the set of RF voltages to the series of ring electrodes comprises applying the set of RF voltages to ring electrodes of an ion funnel apparatus ([0084]), wherein the first end is a wide end and the second end is a narrow end of the ion funnel apparatus; and The applying of the two or more DC electric potentials comprises applying electrical potentials that generate a static, uniform DC field within the ion guide that exerts forces on the ions that urge the ions towards the narrow end of the ion funnel apparatus, Whereby ions are caused to accumulate at a plurality of different locations within the ion guide, in accordance with their respective mass-to-charge ratio values ([0039], separating ions according to mobility which depends on m/z). Regarding claim 17, Hoyes teaches ramping a magnitude of an applied DC electrical potential or an amplitude of an applied RF voltage waveform, whereby the accumulated ions are caused to migrate out of the ion guide, in reverse order of their respective mass-to-charge ratios, through the narrow end of the ion funnel apparatus (sequential scanning, fig. 4, [0041-0042]). Regarding claim 18, Hoyes teaches a mass spectrometer system comprising: An ion source ([0094]) configured to generate a plurality of ions by ionization of a sample, the ions comprising a plurality of mass-to-charge ratio (m/z) values; An ion guide (ion mobility separator with sections 4 and 6, [0094]) having, therein, a gas at a pressure that is greater than or equal to 0.01 Torr (e.g. greater than or equal to 0.1 mbar (0.07 Torr) [0035]), and comprising: An ion inlet (aperture 3) configured to receive a stream of ions from the ion source; An ion outlet (aperture 7); and A series of electrodes (ring electrodes of sections 4 and 6, fig. 3) disposed between the ion inlet and the ion outlet, the series of electrodes defining an ion occupation volume and an axis of the ion guide between the ion inlet and the ion outlet; and One or more power supplies ([0060]) electrically coupled to the series of electrodes, the one or more power supplies configured to: Apply a set of radio-frequency (RF) voltage waveforms to the series of electrodes that confine the ions within the ion occupation volume and that generate a plurality of moving pseudopotential wells that exert forces on the ions that urge the ions to migrate from the inlet end to the outlet end (RF traveling wave, [0031]); and Apply, simultaneously with the application of the set of RF voltage waveforms, a set of two or more direct-current (DC) electrical potentials to electrodes of the series that generate forces on the ions within the ion guide that are independent of the mass-to-charge ratio and that oppose the forces exerted by the moving pseudopotential wells (first opposing field, [0037], fig. 4, urges ions to move back to entrance, [0038]), Regarding claim 19, Hoyes teaches that the forces on the ions that are generated by the application of the two or more DC electrical potentials are generated by a dynamic DC field (opposing field can change with time, [0004]). Regarding claim 21, Hoyes teaches that the application of the two or more DC electrical fields generates a static DC field within the ion guide (field shown in fig. 4). Regarding claim 22, Hoyes teaches that the DC field generates forces on the ions that are configured to urge the ions towards the ion inlet and wherein the static DC field comprises: A first segment (trapping region 4; alternately left half of trapping region 4, fig. 4) adjacent to the first end where a magnitude of the DC field progressively increases along a direction away from the ion inlet and towards the ion outlet; and A second segment (analyzing region 6, alternately right half of trapping region 4) adjacent to the second end wherein the magnitude of the DC field is greater than or equal to any magnitude of the DC field within the first segment (fig. 4). Regarding claim 23, Hoyes teaches that within the second segment (second half of mobility device 4) a variation of the magnitude of the DC field as a function of distance from the first end of the ion guide is substantially linear. 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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoyes. Regarding claim 2, Hoyes teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hoyes does not specify that the m/z dependent spatial separation, differential migration, or filtering of ions within the ion guide is controlled in part by controlling the gas pressure. However Hoyes teaches that the gas pressure determines the drag forces acting on the ions ([0035]) and that the pressure may be selected within a wide range ([0035]). It would therefore have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the invention that the pressure is a result-effective variable (since it determines the drag on the ions which affects their mobility and thus their separation) which can be optimized through routine experimentation (adjusting the pressure within the system) in order to control the ion movement with no unexpected result. See MPEP 2144.05 II A [R-01. 2024] Claims 5 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoyes in view of Green (US 20150294848 A1). Regarding claims 5 and 20, Hoyes teaches all the limitations of claims 4 and 19 as described above. Hoyes does not teach that the dynamic DC field comprises a DC traveling wave. Green teaches a method of ion mobility separation using a DC field to oppose the motion of the ions which consists of a traveling wave ([0184-0185]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Hoyes to have the opposing dynamic DC field be the traveling wave of Green, as a matter of substituting a known equivalent voltage which can achieve the same purpose of ion mobility separation as taught by Green Claims 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hoyes in view of Anderson (US 8,835,839 A). Regarding claim 11, Hoyes teaches all the limitations of claim 1 as described above. Hoyes does not teach that applying the set of RF voltage waveforms to electrodes of the series comprises: applying the set of RF voltage waveforms to a first series of electrodes disposed on a surface of a first substrate plate or wafer and to a second series of electrodes disposed on a surface of a second substrate plate or wafer, wherein the first substrate plate or wafer is substantially parallel to the second substrate plate or wafer and separated therefrom by a gap. Anderson teaches a mass spectrometer which can separate ions (ion mobility, col. 7 lines 21-22) using voltage waveforms applied to a first set of electrodes disposed on a substrate plate and a second set of electrodes disposed on a surface of the second substrate plate (plates 210, fig. 1B) It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the system of Hoyes to have the plate electrodes of Anderson as a matter of selecting a known equivalent electrode structure with the advantages of low cost and simple structure (Anderson col. 10 lines 20-27) which is capable of applying a traveling RF wave and axial DC gradient to the ions as described by Anderson (col. 1 lines 64-65). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID E SMITH whose telephone number is (571)270-7096. The examiner can normally be reached M to F 8:30 AM-5:00 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, Robert Kim can be reached at 22293. 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. /DAVID E SMITH/Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 23, 2023
Application Filed
Oct 09, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103
Mar 16, 2026
Response Filed
Mar 16, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582316
APPARATUS AND PROCESS FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC IMAGING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586771
ELECTRODE PROTRUSION ADJUSTMENT FOR MAXIMIZING PRESSURE DROP ACROSS LIQUID TRANSPORT CONDUIT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12586770
Mass Spectrometer
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580169
MASS SPECTROMETRY TO IDENTIFY PREDICTIVE FAILURE WITH CHEMICAL DETECTION IN MICROELECTRONIC SYSTEMS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12567559
ION IMPLANTATION DEVICE WITH ENERGY FILTER HAVING ADDITIONAL THERMAL ENERGY DISSIPATION SURFACE AREA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
92%
With Interview (+7.3%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1049 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month