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 1-7, 19 and 20) in the reply filed on 03/30/2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 8-18 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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.
1. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0211077 to Schwichtenberg et al. (cited by applicant)
Schwichtenberg et al. teaches a system that senses analytes that includes a removable cartridge 14 and a base configured to receive the cartridge. [00365]-[0036]
The cartridge includes multiple reservoirs 62, 64 and 66 that read on a plurality of sample wells that are configured to receive a fluid for analysis. [0044].
A controller or processor 40 within the base 16 is equipped to receive signals from flow sensor 80 within removable cartridge 14, and send signals to valves 110 within the removable cartridge 14, thus providing "the base configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge when the cartridge is received by the base". (Fig. 3), [0039],[0051]
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above Schwichtenberg et al, teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Therefore, Schwichtenberg et al. anticipates claim 1.
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
2. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0154625 to Quevy et al. (cited by applicant) in view of Schwichtenberg et al.
Quevy et al. teaches detection system includes a platform configured to receive a sample holder that includes a plurality of sample wells 150. The detection system also includes a plurality of sensing modules (vials 601) that can be coupled to the platform 310 as shown in Fig. 3B. A sensing module of the plurality of sensing modules includes a sensor coupled to the platform, and a first electrode coupled to the platform. The first electrode is configured to electrically connect with the sensor via a feedback circuit. The feedback circuit is configured to provide a feedback signal via the first electrode to a sample received in a sample well of the plurality of sample wells. The feedback signal is based on a potential of the received sample detected via a second electrode. [0012].
Quevy et al. further teaches that in one aspect, one or more of platform and sample well are configured to shield the sample by attenuating external electromagnetic radiation. In another aspect, the first electrode includes a first end and a second end. The first end is coupled to the platform and the second end is configured to electrically connect with the sample in the sample well. In yet another aspect, the second end includes a surface configured to extend across the sample well. The surface and the platform are substantially parallel to each other. In one aspect, the sample well includes a first, a second and a third well electrode configured to electrically connected to the first electrode, the second electrode and the third electrode, respectively. In another aspect, the sample well includes a first end and a second end. The first well electrode is located at the first end of the sample well and the third well electrode is located at the second end of the sample well. [0011]
In Quevy et al. the sample wells are held in a rack 650 so that the vials are coupled to a sensing module 622 of the detection system 600 as shown in Fig. 6. [0067]
Quevy et al. does not teach that the sample wells and vials are provided in a cartridge that are removable received by a base that is configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge.
As noted above, Schwichtenberg et al. teaches a system that senses analytes that includes a removable cartridge 14 and a base configured to receive the cartridge. [00365]-[0036]
The cartridge includes multiple reservoirs 62, 64 and 66 that read on a plurality of sample wells that are configured to receive a fluid for analysis. [0044].
A controller or processor 40 within the base 16 is equipped to receive signals from flow sensor 80 within removable cartridge 14, and send signals to valves 110 within the removable cartridge 14, thus providing "the base configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge when the cartridge is received by the base". (Fig. 3), [0039],[0051]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Quevy et al. to provide the sample wells and vials are in a cartridge that are removable received by a base that is configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge, with the base including the sensing module of the detection system, as taught by Schwichtenberg et al. for purposes of being able to use the same base and detection system with different sample wells and vials in different cartridges.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders all the limitations of claim 1 obvious.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 1 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 2, as noted above Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 2 depends.
Claim 2 recites that each of the plurality of sample wells comprising a sensor comprising: a first electrode arranged to contact the sample fluid; a second electrode arranged to contact the sample fluid; and a third electrode arranged to contact the sample fluid.
As noted above, Quevy et al. teaches that in one aspect, the sample well includes a first, a second and a third well electrode configured to electrically connected to the first electrode, the second electrode and the third electrode, respectively. In another aspect, the sample well includes a first end and a second end. The first well electrode is located at the first end of the sample well and the third well electrode is located at the second end of the sample well. [0011]
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 2 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 3, as noted above Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 2 obvious from which claim 3 depends.
Claim 3 recites that the base comprises: a receptacle configured to receive a plurality of electrical pins coupled to the first electrode, the second electrode, and the third electrode; and a controller coupled to the receptacle, the controller configured to direct an exchange of signals with the first electrode, the second electrode, and the third electrode by the receptacle and pins.
Quevy et al. teaches providing electrical contact between the electrodes in the receptacles and sensing modules 622 in the base module 620. [0067].
Quevy et al. further teaches the use of conductive pins for electrical contact between the electrodes in the receptacles and sensing modules in the base module. [0045]
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 3 obvious.
3. Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. as applied to claim 3 and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0255001 to Padmanabhan et al. (cited by applicant)
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, as noted above Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 3 obvious from which claim 4 depends.
Claim 4 recites that the controller is configured to: identify each sample well of the plurality of sample wells of the cartridge; determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge; direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed; and produce a spectrum based on the performed analysis.
Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. includes a controller, but does not teach that the controller is configured to: identify each sample well of the plurality of sample wells of the cartridge; determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge; direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed; and produce a spectrum based on the performed analysis.
Padmanabhan et al. teaches a sample analyzer with a removable and/or disposable cartridge. (Abstract).
Padmanabhan et al. teaches further teaches that the analyzer displays or prints out quantitative results (e.g. inside and/or outside of a predefined range). [0011] Providing quantitative results inside and outside of a predefined range is interpreted as producing a spectrum based on performed analysis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. to produce a spectrum based on the performed analysis as taught by Padmanabhan et al. for reference purposes.
As for configuring the controller to identify each sample well of the plurality of sample wells of the cartridge, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to configure the controller to identify each sample well for purposes of correlating analysis results with identifiable samples for purposes of relating back to where the samples originated.
As for configuring the controller to determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to configure the controller to determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge for purposes of verifying that each sample is present and is analyzed.
As for configuring the controller to direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed as taught by Quevy et al. and Schwichtenberg et al.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 4 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 5, as noted above, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 4 obvious from which claim 5 depends.
Claim 5 recites that the controller is further configured to determine a presence of a target analyte based on the produced spectrum.
In Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to determine if a target analyte is inside and/or outside of a predefined range as taught by Padmanabhan et al.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 5 obvious.
4. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. as applied to claim 4 and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0201898 to Cucchi et al.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 6, as noted above over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 4 obvious from which claim 6 depends.
Claim 6 recites that the controller is further configured to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service.
While Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. teaches providing quantitative results inside and outside of a predefined range, i.e., producing a spectrum based on performed analysis, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. does not teach that the controller is further configured to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service.
Cucci et al. teaches that it is known to store analysis data in the cloud. [0450]
It would have been obvious to modify Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. to configured the controller to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service as taught by Cucchi et al. as a well know manner of storing data.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al., Padmanabhan et al. and Cucchi et al. renders claim 6 obvious.
5. Claim 7 is rejected over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of U.S. Patent No. 10,816,545 to Hatamian.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 7, as noted above Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. renders claim 1 obvious from which claim 7 depends.
Claim 7 recites that the cartridge comprises: a rocking linkage configured to separate the cartridge from the base.
Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. does not teach that the cartridge comprises: a rocking linkage configured to separate the cartridge from the base.
Hatamian teaches a housing 130 in which a cartridge 240 is received in the housing.
Hatamian teaches that the housing may include receptacles, sockets, etc. that may allow the housing to be attached to various elements, as appropriate (e.g., stands, carts, etc.). The housing may include various mechanical features (e.g., a cartridge release lever and associated mechanism, a hinged lid or door that provides access to elements within the housing, etc.). (column 5, line 66 through column 6, line 7)
Movement of a lever is interpreted as providing a rocking linkage.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. to provide a lever on the cartridge than can be pivoted/rocked to release the cartridge from the base in view of Hatamian teaching the use of a cartridge release lever and associated mechanism to remove the cartridge from the housing.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Hatamian renders claim7 obvious.
5. Claim 19 stands rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al.
As noted above, Quevy et al. teaches detection system includes a platform configured to receive a sample holder that includes a plurality of sample wells 150. The detection system also includes a plurality of sensing modules (vials 601) that can be coupled to the platform 310 as shown in Fig. 3B. A sensing module of the plurality of sensing modules includes a sensor coupled to the platform, and a first electrode coupled to the platform. The first electrode is configured to electrically connect with the sensor via a feedback circuit. The feedback circuit is configured to provide a feedback signal via the first electrode to a sample received in a sample well of the plurality of sample wells. The feedback signal is based on a potential of the received sample detected via a second electrode. [0012].
Quevy et al. further teaches that in one aspect, one or more of platform and sample well are configured to shield the sample by attenuating external electromagnetic radiation. In another aspect, the first electrode includes a first end and a second end. The first end is coupled to the platform and the second end is configured to electrically connect with the sample in the sample well. In yet another aspect, the second end includes a surface configured to extend across the sample well. The surface and the platform are substantially parallel to each other. In one aspect, the sample well includes a first, a second and a third well electrode configured to electrically connected to the first electrode, the second electrode and the third electrode, respectively. In another aspect, the sample well includes a first end and a second end. The first well electrode is located at the first end of the sample well and the third well electrode is located at the second end of the sample well. [0011]
In Quevy et al. the sample wells are held in a rack 650 so that the vials are coupled to a sensing module 622 of the detection system 600 as shown in Fig. 6. [0067]
Quevy et al. does not teach that the sample wells and vials are provided in a cartridge that are removable received by a base that is configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge.
As noted above, Schwichtenberg et al. teaches a system that senses analytes that includes a removable cartridge 14 and a base configured to receive the cartridge. [00365]-[0036]
The cartridge includes multiple reservoirs 62, 64 and 66 that read on a plurality of sample wells that are configured to receive a fluid for analysis. [0044].
A controller or processor 40 within the base 16 is equipped to receive signals from flow sensor 80 within removable cartridge 14, and send signals to valves 110 within the removable cartridge 14, thus providing "the base configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge when the cartridge is received by the base". (Fig. 3), [0039],[0051]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Quevy et al. to provide the sample wells and vials are in a cartridge that are removable received by a base that is configured to send and receive signals to the cartridge, with the base including the sensing module of the detection system, as taught by Schwichtenberg et al. for purposes of being able to use the same base and detection system with different sample wells and vials in different cartridges.
As noted above, As noted above, Quevy et al. teaches that in one aspect, the sample well includes a first, a second and a third well electrode configured to electrically connected to the first electrode, the second electrode and the third electrode, respectively. In another aspect, the sample well includes a first end and a second end. The first well electrode is located at the first end of the sample well and the third well electrode is located at the second end of the sample well. [0011]
Further as noted above, Quevy et al. further teaches the use of conductive pins for electrical contact between the electrodes in the receptacles and sensing modules in the base module. [0045]
Padmanabhan et al. teaches a sample analyzer with a removable and/or disposable cartridge. (Abstract).
Padmanabhan et al. teaches further teaches that the analyzer displays or prints out quantitative results (e.g. inside and/or outside of a predefined range). [0011] Providing quantitative results inside and outside of a predefined range is interpreted as producing a spectrum based on performed analysis.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. to produce a spectrum based on the performed analysis as taught by Padmanabhan et al. for reference purposes.
As for configuring the controller to identify each sample well of the plurality of sample wells of the cartridge, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to configure the controller to identify each sample well for purposes of correlating analysis results with identifiable samples for purposes of relating back to where the samples originated.
As for configuring the controller to determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to configure the controller to determine a status of each sample well of the cartridge for purposes of verifying that each sample is present and is analyzed.
As for configuring the controller to direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to direct an analysis of a substance within at least one of the sample wells to be performed as taught by Quevy et al. and Schwichtenberg et al.
In Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to determine if a target analyte is inside and/or outside of a predefined range as taught by Padmanabhan et al.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 19 obvious.
7. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. as applied to claim 4 and further in view of Cucchi et al.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 20, as noted above over Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. renders claim 19 obvious from which claim 20 depends.
Claim 20 recites that the controller is further configured to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service.
While Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. teaches providing quantitative results inside and outside of a predefined range, i.e., producing a spectrum based on performed analysis, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. does not teach that the controller is further configured to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service.
Cucci et al. teaches that it is known to store analysis data in the cloud. [0450]
It would have been obvious to modify Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al. and Padmanabhan et al. to configured the controller to upload the produced spectrum to a cloud service as taught by Cucchi et al. as a well know manner of storing data.
Therefore, Quevy et al. in view of Schwichtenberg et al., Padmanabhan et al. and Cucchi et al. renders claim 20 obvious.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-7, 19 and 20 are provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claims 1-7, 19 and 20 of copending Application No. 19/122,404 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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.
/MICHAEL STANLEY GZYBOWSKI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights