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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 8/18/2026 is acknowledged. Accordingly, non-elected claims 7-14 are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by applicant’s cited Paullier et al (US 20170096629).
Regarding claim 1, Paullier (FIGs 5, 13-14) discloses “A method comprising:
filling at least one cassette (100) with sample fluid (from 340, via opening 334);
increasing pressure in the at least one cassette (as 320 is a pump, the pressure in 100 would increase with opening 334);
reducing the pressure in the at least one cassette (pressure control in paragraphs 181-183 seen to necessarily include reducing pressure, as 220, 320 only increase pressure such that 233, 333 would offset that increase);
filling the cassette with media fluid (from 240, via opening 234); and
increasing the pressure in the at least one cassette (as 220 is a pump, the pressure in 100 would increase with opening 234).”
Regarding claim 2, Paullier (FIGs 13-14) discloses “wherein the cassette comprising an upper chamber (120), a lower chamber (110), and a membrane (130) disposed between the upper and lower chambers, the method comprising:
filling the upper chamber of the at least one cassette with the sample fluid (from 340, via opening 334); and increasing pressure in the upper chamber of the at least one cassette (as 320 is a pump, the pressure in 100 would increase with opening 334) to force the sample fluid through the membrane into the lower chamber (during “transmembrane flow” in paragraphs 187-188).”
Regarding claim 5, Paullier (FIGs 13-14) discloses “comprising:
filling the lower chamber of the at least one cassette with the media fluid (from 240), the media fluid being a solid, liquid (evidenced by 220 being a liquid pump in paragraph 154), gel, gas, or aerosol; and
increasing the pressure in the lower chamber of the at least one cassette to force the media fluid to interact with the membrane (during upward filtering of fluid in analogous paragraph 160).”
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paullier.
Paullier is silent regarding “wherein the pressure in the upper chamber is increased by greater than or equal to 1 pound per square inch (PSI) or by greater than or equal to 4 PSI.”
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date, to modify the pressure change operation of Paullier to be any preferred value, in this case such that “wherein the pressure in the upper chamber is increased by greater than or equal to 1 pound per square inch (PSI) or by greater than or equal to 4 PSI”, as Paullier already discloses pressure increase/decrease of the chambers, and choosing preferred magnitudes of pressure increase/decrease to achieve the same expected result would be within routine skill in the art.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Paullier in view of Dhanvijay (US 20220412851, filed 10/12/2016).
Regarding claim 3, Paullier is silent regarding “comprising:
filling the upper chamber of the at least one cassette with pre-rinse fluid; and
increasing the pressure in the upper chamber of the at least one cassette”, although Paullier does increase/decrease the pressure normally during paragraphs 181-183.
However, Dhanvijay teaches it is known in the art of transmembrane cell collection/isolation (analogous to Paullier) to conduct a liquid pre-flush (paragraph 174) (seen to read on filling with pre-rinse liquid) in the system prior to the filtration process in order to reduce or eliminate any peak in pressure differential across the membrane where air is sucked through the membrane, prior to the sample passing through.
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date, to modify the process of Paullier with a preliminary liquid pre-flush step, as taught by Dhanvijay, such that the combination teaches “filling the upper chamber of the at least one cassette with pre-rinse fluid (understood that running pre-flush liquid at the membrane would include the liquid entering the upper chamber); and
increasing the pressure in the upper chamber of the at least one cassette (this would happen after Dhanvijay, as pressure is being added later)” to reduce or eliminate any peak in pressure differential across the membrane where air is sucked through the membrane, prior to the sample passing through.
Regarding claim 4, Paullier is silent regarding “comprising filling the upper chamber of the at least one cassette with post-rinse fluid; and
increasing the pressure in the upper chamber of the at least one cassette”, although Paullier does increase/decrease the pressure normally during paragraphs 181-183.
However, Dhanvijay teaches it is known in the art of transmembrane cell collection/isolation (analogous to Paullier) to conduct a collection of the isolated cells via back-flushing a fluid (read on pre-rinse fluid) into the system, and includes a pressure increase (paragraphs 196-199).
It would have been obvious, before the effective filing date, to modify the process of Paullier with a back-flushing step, as taught by Dhanvijay, such that the combination teaches “comprising filling the upper chamber of the at least one cassette with post-rinse fluid; and increasing the pressure in the upper chamber of the at least one cassette (understood that running back-flush liquid at the membrane would include the liquid entering the upper chamber)” to collect the isolated cells from the membrane.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Devices similar to the application are disclosed by Mostowfi et al (US 20140369889) and Mori (US 20080124249).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK C WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)431-0767. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 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, Kenneth Rinehart can be reached at 571-272-4881. 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.
/PATRICK C WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3753
Prosecution Insights