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 Group I, claims 1-9 in the reply filed on 04/24/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“stated” should be “state[[d]]” in lines 9-10.
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(s) 1-9 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites poly(ethylene glycol) based and poly(propylene glycol) based monomer. The word “based”, in the current context, is interpreted to be synonymous to the word “type”. As discussed in MPEP 2173.05(b), the addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression (e.g., Friedel-Crafts catalyst) extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. Ex parte Copenhaver, 109 USPQ 118 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1955). Likewise, the phrases "poly(ethylene glycol) based and poly(propylene glycol) based monomer" were held to be indefinite because it was unclear what "based" was intended to convey.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites “a first primer set grafted to a core particle” in line 3 and “the first primer set grafted to a polymeric hydrogel” in lines 4-5. It is unclear if the first primer set grafted to a core particle is the same primer set as the first primer set grafted to a polymeric hydrogel.
Claims 2-8 are also rejected for being dependent on claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Regarding claim 1, the closest prior art, Fisher (US 20210139975 A1), discloses a flow cell (claim 24) comprising:
a base support (support, claim 24);
a resin positioned over the base support (a patterned resin on the support, claim 24), the resin including at least one hydrophilic monomer selected from the group consisting of poly(ethylene glycol) monomer (para. [0026]); and
a depression defined in the resin (…the patterned resin including first depressions and second depressions separated by interstitial regions, claim 24).
Fisher does not disclose the resin is reversibly swellable so that the depression has a first opening dimension when the resin is in a non-swelled state and having a second opening dimension, that is smaller than the first opening dimension, when the reversibly swellable resin is in a swelled state.
The closest secondary reference, Ren (US 20210086174 A1), discloses a flow cell comprising a resin and depression within resin (Fig. 3). Ren discloses a polymer layer comprising a hydrogel (20, Fig. 3) in the depression wherein the hydrogel is reversibly swellable (para. [0058]). However, one of ordinary skill in the art would not have been motivated to use the material of the hydrogel coating layer as a substitute for the material of claimed resin in order to derive a resin with depression that is reversibly swellable.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
CN 101566615 A discloses a capture-and-release system based on a stimuli-responsive smart gel in porous silicon composite material. The smart gel comprises acrylic gel (Abstract and claim 3).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICKEY HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7690. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30 PM ET.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at 5712707698. 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.
/M.H./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights