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
This is a first action on the merits (FAOM) to this instant application in which claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 18 and 20 are independent and claims 2-17 and 19 are dependent.
Independent claim 1 is directed to a system for generating a signal map; independent claim 18 is directed to a method for generating a signal map; and claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory computer-readable medium.
Problem with claim 18:
Independent claim 18 is a method claim and it appears to have a problem with patent subject-matter eligibility issue. The method claim appears to express an idea of generating a signal map; however, it is unclear if the method claim is tied to any kind of apparatus to carry out the method steps. The method claim does not positively describe any concrete and tangible elements to carry out the method steps. According to US Patent law such a claim may be subject to rejection because it should be considered an idea which is an abstract idea as it does not explicitly set forth any apparatus or device to carry out method steps and abstract ideas are not patentable. The applicant needs to add tangible elements to the claim to make it patent eligible.
Claim Rejection under 35 USC §101
35 U.S.C. §101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite a Judicial Exception. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claims are merely a thought process as it does not mention any tangible structure to carry out the process. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the process or method of the claims lack any mention of any specific device to carry out the method or process.
Rejection under 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 1,3-5, 7-8, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Svekolkin (US-2021/0279866-A1).
Claim No
Claim feature
Prior art
Svekolkin (US-2021/0279866-A1)
1
A system for generating a signal map, comprising:
Svekolkin discloses a system (100) for generating a signal map1 as claimed.
memory;
See para [0006] in Svekolkin which discloses the system (100) to comprise a non-transitory computer readable storage medium which is a memory as claimed.
one or more processors; and
See para [0006] which discloses the system 100 to comprise a processor (hardware processor).
a plurality of instructions and data stored in the memory and configured for execution by the one or more processors, the plurality of instructions including instructions for:
Svekolkin meets this claim feature, see para [0277] where it discloses computer executable instructions included in a ‘program’ or “software” stored in the memory of the computer.
generating a signal profile for each block of a plurality of blocks obtained from a tissue sample, wherein each block of the plurality of blocks contains multiple cells; and
Svekolkin meets this claim feature as it discloses a plurality of blocks (groups of cells).
generating a spatial map of signals from a plurality of signal profiles corresponding to the plurality of blocks.
Svekolkin meets this claim feature as it discloses generating a spatial map (distribution) of the cells.
3
The system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of instructions further includes instructions for: creating a tree of cell populations based on scores of occurrences from the spatial map.
Svekolkin meets claim 3.
Svekolkin classifies cells based on a “threshold” number which indicates a creation of classification tree in Svekolkin is based on population.
4
The system of claim 3, wherein the instructions for creating the tree of cell populations further include instructions for: identifying abnormal cell populations in the tissue sample; and determining a spatial relationship between the abnormal cell populations.
Svekolkin meets claim 4.
Abnormal cells (“tumor” cells, “damaged” cells, etc.)
Svekolkin discloses determining spatial relationship between abnormal cell populations when it discloses determination of location of “tumor” cells or “damaged” cells.
5
The system of claim 3, wherein the plurality of instructions further includes instructions for: obtaining signal data for a plurality of cell types, wherein the instructions for creating the tree of cell populations based on scores of occurrences from the spatial map comprises instructions for comparing the spatial map with the signal data to identify cell types.
Svekolkin meets claim 5 as it identifies (determines) cell types of the cells in the tissue, see Fig. 35 and see many other places in Svekolkin.
7
The system of claim 3, wherein the instructions for creating the tree of cell populations include instructions for: determining probabilities of occurrences of cell populations; and ranking cell populations in accordance with the determined probabilities.
Svekolkin meets claim 7 as it discloses determining a “probability” table of cells which provides ranking as claimed.
8
The system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of instructions further includes instructions for: recording a coordinate of each block of the plurality of blocks, wherein the spatial map of signals is generated based on a plurality of recorded coordinates corresponding to the plurality of blocks.
Svekolkin meets claim 8 as it determines spatial distribution cell groups.
18
A method of generating a signal map, comprising: generating a signal profile for each block of a plurality of blocks obtained from a tissue sample, wherein each block of the plurality of blocks contains multiple cells; and generating a spatial map of signals from a plurality of signal profiles corresponding to the plurality of blocks.
Svekolkin meets claim 18.
Claim 18 is a method claim and method steps of the claim is broader in scope than that of claim 1 and claim 1 contains all features of claim 18, therefore, see treatment of claim 1 for claim 18.
20
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by a system, cause the system to perform operations comprising: generating a signal profile for each block of a plurality of blocks obtained from a tissue sample, wherein each block of the plurality of blocks contains multiple cells; and generating a spatial map of signals from a plurality of signal profiles corresponding to the plurality of blocks.
Svekolkin meets claim 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 6, 9-17 and 19 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
As to claim 2, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the signal profile for each block of the plurality of blocks include instructions for: generating an impedance profile for each block of the plurality of blocks.
As to claim 6, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests the system of claim 3, wherein the signal profile for each block comprises an impedance profile, and the plurality of instructions further includes instructions for: determining a histogram of impedance gradient boundaries in the plurality of blocks from a plurality of impedance profiles corresponding to the plurality of blocks, wherein the tree of cell populations is created based on the histogram of impedance gradient boundaries.
As to claim 9, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests the system of claim 1, wherein the instructions for generating the signal profile for each block comprises instructions for inputting respective multiple cells of each block into a microfluidic device.
As to claims 10-17, these claims would allowable if claim 9 is written in independent form because each of these claims, either directly or indirectly depends from claim 9.
As to claim 19, the claim would be allowable if written in independent form because the prior art of the record neither discloses nor reasonably suggests the method of claim 18, wherein generating the signal profile for each block of the plurality of blocks comprises: generating an impedance profile for each block of the plurality of blocks.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Citation
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Swami (US-2022/0091014-A1) discloses a method for impedance-based quantification and microfluidic control of tissue cells. However, it does not generate signal map and it is unclear if this reference should be combined with applied reference, Svekolkin, to render claim 2 unpatentable. It appears that there may not be any teaching, suggestions, or motivation toward the instant invention.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to G.M. HYDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3896. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9 AM- 5 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, Stephanie Bloss can be reached on (571) 272-3555. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
G.M. HYDER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2852
/G.M. A HYDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2852
1 Examiner Comment: Svekolkin discloses a system 100 for mapping of cells based on signal (i.e., fluorescence signal, or immunofluorescence signal), see Fig. 1 in Svekolkin. Therefore, Svekolkin discloses a system for generating signal map when it generates cell distribution based on fluorescence signal from the cells.
Prosecution Insights