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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on August 14, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed August 14, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Amendments to the current set of claims have changed the scope of the claimed invention, in which a new prior art rejection has been made using newly found reference Manke et al., (“Manke”, US 2012/0012719).
On page 5 of the Remarks section as indicated by the page number at the bottom of each page, Applicant discusses the claim status, as well as support for the added amendments to the claims.
On pages 5-8, Applicant argues that the previous prior art does not disclose independent Claim 1 as presently amended. Specifically, Applicant argues that previous anticipatory reference Lundkvist, (US 2012/0043450) does not disclose the first and second gripping surfaces are adapted to hold both a first and a second chromatography column. The Examiner notes that while Lundkvist does not disclose the newly added limitations to independent Claim 1 as indicated, newly found anticipatory reference Manke discloses independent Claim 1 as detailed in the prior art rejection section below. Thus, these remarks by Applicant applied toward Lundkvist as a whole are moot.
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) 1-4, 6, 9, 11 & 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by Manke et al., (“Manke”, US 2012/0012719).
Regarding Claims 1-4, 6, 9, & 11, Manke discloses a clamp, (See Abstract, See paragraph [0009]), wherein the clamp comprises:
- a first gripping surface comprising a first recess for accommodating a support, (Upper Support Plate 30 and recess accommodating Mounting Shaft 26, See Figure 1, 2, See paragraph [0027]);
- a second gripping surface comprising a second recess for accommodating the support, (Lower Support Plate 31 and recess accommodating Mounting Shaft 26, See Figure 1, 2, See paragraph [0027]);
- the first gripping surface and second gripping surface being connected at one end to a hinge, movable between a first position and a second position, (Locking Lever 50 connected to Upper/Lower Support Plates 30/31 via Vertical Stabilizing Pins 56, See Figures 3, 5, See paragraph [0033], [0034]);
- the hinge defining, in the first position, a first angle between the first gripping surface and the second gripping surface, (Lever 50 moves up/down in at least two positions shown, See Figure 5, 6A/B, 7, 8, See paragraph [0033]-[0036]), wherein the recesses provide a clamping force against the support, and defining in the second position, a second angle between the first gripping surface and the second gripping surface, (Lever 50 moves up/down in at least two positions shown, See Figure 5, 6A/B, 7, 8, See paragraph [0033]-[0036]), where the clamp is slidable along the support within the recesses, wherein the first and second recesses align such that the support fits within both the first and second recesses and the clamp is slidable along the support within the first and second recesses, (Aperture 84 formed by recesses in each of Upper/Lower Support Plates 30/31 through which Shaft 26 is placed, and Carriage 15 (including Plates 30/31) positioning varies up/down (slides) as desired, See Figure 1-3, 5, See paragraph [0031], [0033], [0034], [0036]),
wherein the first gripping surface further comprises at least one first protrusion extending from the first gripping surface, (Upper Support Plate 30 with series of Indentations 38, See Figures 1, 3, 5, See Figure 1, 3, 5, See paragraph [0027]), wherein the at least one first protrusion is adapted to receive a first chromatography column, (At least one Indentation 38 for Upper Support Plate 30 can receive a Cylindrical Apparatus 27, See paragraph [0027] & [0009])
wherein the second gripping surface further comprises at least one protrusion extending from the second gripping surface, (Lower Support Plate 31 with series of Indentations 38, See Figures 1, 3, 5, See Figure 1, 3, 5, See paragraph [0027]), wherein the at least one second protrusion is adapted to receive a second chromatography column, (A differently aligned Indentation 38 for Lower Support Plate 31 can receive another Cylindrical Apparatus 27, See paragraph [0027] & [0009]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 2: A clamp according to claim 1, wherein the second angle is smaller than the first angle (Lever 50 moves up/down in at least two positions shown, See Figure 5, 6A/B, 7, 8, See paragraph [0033]-[0036]; angle formed in one position is smaller than the other).
Claim 3: A clamp according to claim 1, wherein the hinge is biased to the first position, (Lever 50 moves up/down in at least two positions shown, See Figure 5, 6A/B, 7, 8, See paragraph [0032], [0034]; spring force urges/biases locking lever into a certain position against which operator must pull upwards against spring force to change position).
Claim 4: A clamp according to claim 1, the hinge is biased to the first position by a spring, (Spring 52 for Lever 50, See Figure 5, See paragraph [0034]).
Claim 6: A clamp according to claim 1, wherein the hinge is moved to the second position by compression of the first gripping surface and second gripping surface towards each other, (Lever 50 moves up/down in at least two positions shown, See Figure 5, 6A/B, 7, 8, See paragraph [0032], [0034]; spring force urges/biases locking lever into a certain position by compressing springs 52 in turn securing Plates 30/31 towards each other).
Claim 9: A clamp according to claim 7, wherein the at least one protrusion extends in substantially the same plane as the first gripping surface, (Indentations 38 level with Aperture formed for Shaft 26 for each of Support Plates 30/31, See Figures 1, 3, 5, See paragraph [0027]).
Claim 11: A clamp according to claim 1, wherein the support is substantially perpendicular to the first and second gripping surfaces, (Support Plates 30/31 with apertures each are horizontally formed versus Shaft 26 which is vertically formed, See Figure 1, 3, 5, See paragraph [0027]).
Regarding Claim 12, Manke discloses a method of attaching the clamp of claim 1 to the support comprising: moving the hinge from the first position to the second position, and positioning the clamp such that the support is positioned inside the first and second recesses, (Release lock/Pull Lever 50 from first biased position to realign with Shaft 26, Figure 5, See paragraph [0034]); and returning the hinge to the first position, (Lever 50 urged into locking engagement with Shaft 26 back to first biased position, See Figure 5, See paragraph [0034]).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manke et al., (“Manke”, US 2012/0012719), in view of Lundkvist, (US 2012/0043450).
Regarding Claim 5, Manke discloses a clamp according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the hinge is biased to the first position by a solid state hinge.
Lundkvist discloses wherein the hinge is biased to the first position by a solid state hinge, (Resilient Arm 1a/Grip Arm 15a are joined to Resilient Arm 1b/Grip Arm 15b via Bend 19, See Figure 3, See paragraph [0016] & [0013]; the arms are joined via this bend, a unitary “solid” hinge that can be squeezed or compressed).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to have modified the clamp of Manke by incorporating wherein the hinge is biased to the first position by a solid state hinge as in Lundkvist for an “attachment arrangement that can be attached easily and kept firmly in place”, (See paragraph [0004], Lundkvist), in a manner that is “fatigue resistant”, (See paragraph [0019], Lundkvist).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN M PEO whose telephone number is (571)272-9891. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 9AM-5PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at 571-270-3240. 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.
/JONATHAN M PEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights