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. DETAILED ACTION Status of Claims Claims 1-11 are pending and have been examined. Priority This application, Serial No. 18/477,819 ( PGPub : US 2024/0027483 ) was filed 09/29/2023 . This application is a CONTINUATION of PCT/JP22/20018 filed 05/12/2022. This application claims priority to foreign application Japan 2021-101064 filed 06/17/2021. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Should applicant desire to obtain the benefit of foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)- (d) prior to declaration of an interference, a certified English translation of the foreign application must be submitted in reply to this action. 37 CFR 41.154(b) and 41.202(e). Failure to provide a certified translation may result in no benefit being accorded for the non-English application. Information Disclosure Statements The Information Disclosure Statements filed 09/29/2023, 01/08/2024 and 12/04/2024 have been considered by the Examiner. 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(s) 1-2 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Eisenmann et al. (US 2005/0256382). Regarding claim s 1 and 10-11 , Eisenmann teaches throughout the publication a component measurement device and system (see Figures 1 and 9) comprising: a test strip (test strip 12) comprising: a main body portion with a thin plate shape (see strip 12 in Figure 1) , a flow path that is formed inside the main body portion, extends from a first end portion toward an opposite second end portion in a longitudinal direction of the main body portion, and accommodates a liquid (see strip 12 in Figure 1; paragraph 0010, test strip wetted by a fluid) , and an introduction port located at the first end portion (see Figure 1, end of test strip 12; paragraph 0030, end of strip 12 extending out of the strip port 56) ; and a component measurement device (measuring device of Figure 9, paragraph 0029) comprising: a housing having a distal portion and a proximal portion (see Figure 9, housing including top part 48 and bottom part 46) , an insertion hole that is located inside the housing and configured to accommodate the test strip (paragraphs 0029-0029, strip port 54) , a measurement unit configured to detect a target component in the liquid in at least a part of the flow path in a state in which the test strip is completely accommodated in the insertion hole (paragraphs 0029-0030, measuring optical system) , and a positioning mechanism configured to maintain an insertion position of the test strip, the positioning mechanism comprising a gripping mechanism that is located between the insertion hole and the proximal portion of the housing and is configured to grip the test strip while biasing the test strip from a width direction (see Figure 1 and paragraphs 0024, clamping jaw holder holding leaf spring that forms clamping jaws) . Regarding claim 2, Eisenmann teaches the system wherein: the gripping mechanism comprises a pair of opposing leaf springs (see Figure 1 , paragraph 0024, leaf spring whose ends are bend inwardly and form resilient clamping jaws) . 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(s) 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eisenmann et al. (US 2005/0256382) , as applied to claims 1-2 above . Regarding claim 3, Eisenmann teaches the system as described above and further wherein the test strip comprises an engagement portion that abuts on the gripping mechanism (see Figure 1, sides of test strip that engage with jaws 18). While Eisenmann does not specifically teach that the gripping mechanism abuts on a first inclined portion of the engagement portion to bias the test strip toward the proximal portion of the housing and the first inclined portion is inclined with respect to a longitudinal center axis of the test strip in a direction of expanding outward in the width direction of the test strip toward the second end portion, such a modification would have been obvious to one skilled in the art as a matter of design choice absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed strip was significant. (see MPEP 2144.04). Regarding claim 4, Eisenmann teaches the system wherein: the positioning mechanism comprises a receiving portion that abuts on the second end portion of the test strip, and the gripping mechanism is configured to cause the test strip to abut on the receiving portion, so that the test strip is positioned in the longitudinal direction (see Figures 2-4 and paragraphs 0005-0011 and 0024-0026). Regarding claim 5, Eisenmann teaches the system further comprising: a discharge mechanism configured to push out the test strip toward the distal portion of the housing (paragraph 0013) . Allowable Subject Matter Claims 6-9 are 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. The prior art is generally silent regarding a test strip encompassing the limitations of claim 6. For example, w hile Hamanaka (US 2006/0133956, cited below as prior art of the record) teaches a notch (101a) interpreted as a first inclined portion of the test strip expanding outward in the width direction, the reference fails to teach a second inclined portion between the first inclined portion and the second end portion of the test strip, with a width of the second inclined portion deceasing toward the second end portion. Given the structure of Hamanaka and the purpose of the notch to engage with the holder and elastic part (111), one skilled in the art would not be motivated to change the structural shape of the test strip to also include a second inclined portion and it would not be merely a matter of design choice to do so as the test strip would not function as intended by Hamanaka . Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Hamanaka (US 2006/0133956) teaches a test strip and holder configured for engagement with one another and then configured to be inserted into a measurement device. Elder et al. (US 2015/0144505) teaches a test strip and reader configured for engagement with one another (see Figures 2 and 3). Faulkner et al. (US 2012/0252133) teaches a test strip and reader configured for engagement with one another (see Figures 1 and 5). Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT REBECCA M GIERE whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-5084 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8:30-4:30 . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Bao-Thuy L Nguyen can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-0824 . 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. /REBECCA M GIERE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1677