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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 01/13/2026 have been entered. Claims 4-5 and 8 have been canceled. New claims 14-16 have been added by way of amendment. Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 9-16 are now pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action dated 10/14/2025, hereinafter NFOA1014.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection previously set forth in NFOA1014.
Examiner notes that the double patenting rejection put forth in NFOA1014 has been overcome by the amendments to the claims, however, a new double patenting rejection is presented below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because they primarily pertain to amended claim limitations and the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
See below for further discussion.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes”, which should read ‘the plurality of first electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes’, to ensure that there is no ambiguity to which elements the ‘the’ points to;
Claim 14 recites “the ion optical devices”, which should read ‘the ion optical device’;
Claim 14, similar to claim 1, recites “the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes”, which should read ‘the plurality of first electrodes and the plurality of second electrodes’, to ensure that there is no ambiguity to which elements the ‘the’ points to.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 6-7, and 9-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 4, 8-10, and 12 of copending Application No. 18/546,931 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the co-pending application teach the instant claims as shown below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application (as amended 01/13/2026)
Appl. No. 18/546,931
An ion optical device, comprising:
first and second electrode arrangements, spatially separated from one another, arranged to operate in an environment having a high gas pressure, wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes, the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate, wherein the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement are configured to generate at least a portion of an electric field experienced by the received ions;
an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: a first RF voltage comprising one or more RF drive frequencies to the first electrode arrangement; and a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement, wherein the first and second RF voltages have an asymmetric waveform, the application of the first and second RF voltages to the first and second electrode arrangements respectively generating at least a portion of the electric field experienced by the received ions; and
wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is sufficient for the ions to experience mobility variation.
1. A multipole ion optical device, comprising: a first plurality of electrodes distributed along a first axis; and a second plurality of electrodes distributed along a second axis, generally parallel to the first axis, to define an ion channel between the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes; wherein each of the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes is configured to receive a respective RF voltage of a plurality of RF voltages having an asymmetric waveform and such that adjacent electrodes of the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes receive RF voltages having different phases; and wherein the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes and the plurality of RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field in the ion channel is sufficient for ions to experience mobility variation.
4. The multipole ion optical device of claim 3, wherein the multipole ion optical device is arranged to operate in an environment at a gas pressure of at least 25 kPa and/or wherein the gas is air.
8. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second pluralities of electrodes are configured in groups of a fixed number of adjacent of electrodes, the fixed number of electrodes in each group receiving multipole RF voltages, such that adjacent electrodes within the group receive RF voltages of the same frequency and having a phase differing by 2π divided by the fixed number.
9. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first plurality of electrodes comprises a first array of strip electrodes on a first substrate and the second plurality of electrodes comprises a second array of strip electrodes on a second substrate that is parallel to the first substrate.
(I.e., under the broadest reasonable interpretation, the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes has at least two electrode sub-arrangements in each of the planar substrates that could each be interpreted as ‘electrode arrangements’)
6. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is at least 1 MV/m.
2. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second plurality of electrodes and the plurality of RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field in the ion channel is at least 1 MV/m.
7. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes interleaved with the first electrodes.
8. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second pluralities of electrodes are configured in groups of a fixed number of adjacent of electrodes, the fixed number of electrodes in each group receiving multipole RF voltages, such that adjacent electrodes within the group receive RF voltages of the same frequency and having a phase differing by 2π divided by the fixed number.
10. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein: the first plurality of electrodes comprises: a first electrode; and a fourth electrode, adjacent the first electrode; and the second plurality of electrodes comprises: a second electrode, generally opposite the first electrode; and a third electrode, adjacent the second electrode and generally opposite the fourth electrode.
9. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein a phase difference between the first RF voltage and the second RF voltage is at least π/2.
8. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second pluralities of electrodes are configured in groups of a fixed number of adjacent of electrodes, the fixed number of electrodes in each group receiving multipole RF voltages, such that adjacent electrodes within the group receive RF voltages of the same frequency and having a phase differing by 2π divided by the fixed number.
10, the ion optical device claim 1, further comprising:
a third electrode arrangement, spatially separated from the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement and arranged to operate in the environment having a high gas pressure; and
wherein the RF voltage supply is further configured to apply a third RF voltage of the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage and than the second RF voltage, to the third electrode arrangement, wherein the third RF voltage has an asymmetric waveform, the application of the first, second and third RF voltages to the first, second and third electrodes arrangements respectively causing the received ions to experience the electric field.
8. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second pluralities of electrodes are configured in groups of a fixed number of adjacent of electrodes, the fixed number of electrodes in each group receiving multipole RF voltages, such that adjacent electrodes within the group receive RF voltages of the same frequency and having a phase differing by 2π divided by the fixed number.
10. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein: the first plurality of electrodes comprises: a first electrode; and a fourth electrode, adjacent the first electrode; and the second plurality of electrodes comprises: a second electrode, generally opposite the first electrode; and a third electrode, adjacent the second electrode and generally opposite the fourth electrode.
12. The multipole ion optical device of claim 10, wherein: a first RF voltage, having an asymmetric waveform and an RF frequency is applied to the first electrode; a second RF voltage having an asymmetric waveform and the RF frequency is applied to the second electrode, a phase difference between the first RF voltage and the second RF voltage being approximately π/2; a third RF voltage, having an asymmetric waveform and the RF frequency is applied to the third electrode, a phase difference between the second RF voltage and the third RF voltage being approximately π/2; and a fourth RF voltage having an asymmetric waveform and the RF frequency is applied to the fourth electrode, a phase difference between the third RF voltage and the fourth RF voltage being approximately π/2.
11. The ion optical device of claim 10, wherein the first and second electrode arrangements are positioned in a first plane and the third electrode arrangement is positioned in a second plane that is substantially parallel to and spatially separated from the first plane.
10. The multipole ion optical device of claim 1, wherein: the first plurality of electrodes comprises: a first electrode; and a fourth electrode, adjacent the first electrode; and the second plurality of electrodes comprises: a second electrode, generally opposite the first electrode; and a third electrode, adjacent the second electrode and generally opposite the fourth electrode.
1. A multipole ion optical device, comprising: a first plurality of electrodes distributed along a first axis; and a second plurality of electrodes distributed along a second axis, generally parallel to the first axis, to define an ion channel between the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes; wherein each of the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes is configured to receive a respective RF voltage of a plurality of RF voltages having an asymmetric waveform and such that adjacent electrodes of the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes receive RF voltages having different phases; and wherein the first plurality of electrodes and the second plurality of electrodes and the plurality of RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field in the ion channel is sufficient for ions to experience mobility variation.
Examiner additionally notes that Appl. No. 18/546,931 does not claim a method, however, the device required by the method of claim 14 is disclosed by claims 1, 4, and 8-9 as indicated above for claim 1, and thus a method of using such a device comprising only the steps of “receiving the ions and gas with the ion optical device; and applying the first RF voltage to the first electrode arrangement and applying the second RF voltage to the second electrode arrangement to produce the mobility variation.”, which amounts to mere application of the disclosed functionality of claims 1, 4, and 8-9 of 18/546,931, would be obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan. It is Examiner’s opinion that, absent specific method steps beyond the general functionality required of the apparatus, merely applying a disclosed apparatus to use the general functionality disclosed at a high level of generality would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 15 and 16 of the instant application would similarly be obvious in view of the above recited claims for claim 14, and claims 3 and 4 of 18/546,931, respectively, which disclose the functionality performed in claims 15 and 16, respectively.
Accordingly, claims 14-16 are also provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 3-4, and 8-9 of copending Application No. 18/546,931 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the co-pending application render obvious the instant claims as shown and as discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Additionally, Claims 1, 6-7, and 9-11 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 6-7, 12-15, and 22 of copending Application No. 18/546,773 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the co-pending application teach the instant claims as shown below.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application (as amended 01/13/2026)
Appl. No. 18/546,773
1. An ion optical device, comprising:
first and second electrode arrangements, spatially separated from one another, arranged to operate in an environment having a high gas pressure, wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes, the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate, wherein the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement are configured to generate at least a portion of an electric field experienced by the received ions;
an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: a first RF voltage comprising one or more RF drive frequencies to the first electrode arrangement; and a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement, wherein the first and second RF voltages have an asymmetric waveform, the application of the first and second RF voltages to the first and second electrode arrangements respectively generating at least a portion of the electric field experienced by the received ions; and
wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is sufficient for the ions to experience mobility variation.
1. An ion repulsive surface, comprising: a first plurality of elongated electrodes distributed along an axis, configured to receive a first RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform; and a second plurality of elongated electrodes distributed along the axis, the second plurality of elongated electrodes being interleaved with the first plurality of elongated electrodes and configured to receive a second RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform, having a different phase than the first RF voltage; and wherein the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is sufficient for ions to experience mobility variation.
2. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein the first and second pluralities of elongated electrodes are disposed on a substrate, wherein the substrate is substantially electrically-insulating and/or planar.
6. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein one or more of: the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is at least 1 MV/m; the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa; and the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in air.
13. An ion optical device, comprising: an ion repulsive surface in accordance with claim 2; and a plate electrode, spatially separated from the ion repulsive surface, so as to define an ion channel between the ion repulsive surface and the plate electrode.
22. The ion optical device of claim 13, further comprising a transport controller, configured to induce movement of ions within each ion channel by controlling one or more of: application of time-invariant potentials to create a steady-state electric field along a length of each ion channel; gas flow along the length of each ion channel; and application of travelling wave potentials to create a moving electric field along the length of each ion channel.
6. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is at least 1 MV/m.
6. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein one or more of: the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is at least 1 MV/m; the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa; and the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in air.
7. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes interleaved with the first electrodes.
1. An ion repulsive surface, comprising: a first plurality of elongated electrodes distributed along an axis, configured to receive a first RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform; and a second plurality of elongated electrodes distributed along the axis, the second plurality of elongated electrodes being interleaved with the first plurality of elongated electrodes and configured to receive a second RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform, having a different phase than the first RF voltage; and wherein the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is sufficient for ions to experience mobility variation.
9. The ion optical device of claim 1, wherein a phase difference between the first RF voltage and the second RF voltage is at least π/2.
7. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein a phase difference between the first RF voltage and the second RF voltage is at least π/2.
10, the ion optical device claim 1, further comprising:
a third electrode arrangement, spatially separated from the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement and arranged to operate in the environment having a high gas pressure; and
wherein the RF voltage supply is further configured to apply a third RF voltage of the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage and than the second RF voltage, to the third electrode arrangement, wherein the third RF voltage has an asymmetric waveform, the application of the first, second and third RF voltages to the first, second and third electrodes arrangements respectively causing the received ions to experience the electric field.
12. The ion repulsive surface of claim 2, further comprising: a third plurality of elongated electrodes on the substrate, distributed along a second axis and distinct from the first and second pluralities of electrodes and configured to receive a third RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform having a different phase than the first and second RF voltages; and a fourth plurality of elongated electrodes on the substrate, the fourth plurality of elongated electrodes being interleaved with the third plurality of elongated electrodes along the second axis and configured to receive a fourth RF voltage with an asymmetric waveform, having a different phase than the first, second and third RF voltages.
6. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein one or more of: the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is at least 1 MV/m; the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa; and the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in air.
Or
13. An ion optical device, comprising: an ion repulsive surface in accordance with claim 2; and a plate electrode, spatially separated from the ion repulsive surface, so as to define an ion channel between the ion repulsive surface and the plate electrode.
14. The ion optical device of claim 13, wherein the plate electrode is configured to receive a DC voltage or an RF voltage with a time-invariant potential offset.
6. The ion repulsive surface of claim 1, wherein one or more of: the first and second plurality of elongated electrodes and first and second RF voltages are configured such that a strength of an electric field adjacent the ion repulsive surface is at least 1 MV/m; the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa; and the ion repulsive surface is arranged to operate in air.
11. The ion optical device of claim 10, wherein the first and second electrode arrangements are positioned in a first plane and the third electrode arrangement is positioned in a second plane that is substantially parallel to and spatially separated from the first plane.
13. An ion optical device, comprising: an ion repulsive surface in accordance with claim 2; and a plate electrode, spatially separated from the ion repulsive surface, so as to define an ion channel between the ion repulsive surface and the plate electrode.
14. The ion optical device of claim 13, wherein the plate electrode is configured to receive a DC voltage or an RF voltage with a time-invariant potential offset.
15. The ion optical device of claim 13, wherein the plate electrode is substantially parallel to the ion repulsive surface.
Examiner additionally notes that Appl. No. 18/546,773 would render obvious claims 2 and 3 of the instant application as well, as such limitations are disclosed in the specification thereof.
Examiner additionally notes that Appl. No. 18/546,931 does not claim a method, however, the device required by the method of claim 14 is disclosed by claims 1, 4, and 8-9 as indicated above for claim 1, and thus a method of using such a device comprising only the steps of “receiving the ions and gas with the ion optical device; and applying the first RF voltage to the first electrode arrangement and applying the second RF voltage to the second electrode arrangement to produce the mobility variation.”, which amounts to mere application of the disclosed functionality of claims 1-2, 6, 13, and 22 of 18/546,773, would be obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan. It is Examiner’s opinion that, absent specific method steps beyond the general functionality required of the apparatus, merely applying a disclosed apparatus to use the general functionality disclosed at a high level of generality would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 15 and 16 of the instant application would similarly be obvious in view of the above recited claims for claim 14, and claim 6 of 18/546,773, which discloses the functionality performed in claims 15 and 16, respectively.
Accordingly, claims 14-16 are also provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 6, 13, and 22 of copending Application No. 18/546,931 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the co-pending application render obvious the instant claims as shown and as discussed above.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
Claims 1-3, 7, and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guevremont (U.S. PGPub. No. US 20060097156 A1) in view of Davis (U.S. PGPub. No. US 20150323500 A1), or in the alternative over Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng (DOI: 10.1063/1.5002635).
Examiner notes that Guevremont, Davis, and Zeng are Applicant provided prior art via the IDS dated 08/17/2023.
Regarding claim 1, Guevremont teaches an ion optical device (Abstract; FAIMS is ion optical device; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), comprising:
first and second electrode arrangements, spatially separated from one another (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), arranged to operate in an environment having a high gas pressure ([0002]-[0005]; ‘arranged to operate’ is interpreted as ‘capable of operating’), wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes on one lateral side, i.e., items 24(including 26 and 28) or 62/64/131/132/142(including 66 and 68) or 110/131(including 126 and 128); [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same [plane] (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128, each of which are on a same plane on at least one lateral side; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the [plane of the first and second electrode arrangements] (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128, with ion flow 30, gas flow 35, and/or gas flows 32/34, adjacent the plane having the first and second electrode arrangements; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), wherein the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement are configured to generate at least a portion of an electric field experienced by the received ions (See Figs. 2a, 7; Abstract; [0009]-[0011]; [0015]; [0042]-[0046]);
an RF voltage supply (Abstract; [0004]-[0006]; [0009]-[0015]; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; FAIMS are also known as RF-DC IMS, and inherently operate on RF voltages), configured to apply: a first RF voltage comprising one or more RF drive frequencies to the first electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies); and a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, the second electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies), wherein the first and second RF voltages have an asymmetric waveform ([0040]; [0042]; [0044]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]), the application of the first and second RF voltages to the first and second electrode arrangements respectively generating at least a portion of the electric field experienced by the received ions (See Figs. 2a, 7; Abstract; [0009]-[0011]; [0015]; [0040]; [0042]-[0046]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]); and
wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is sufficient for the ions to experience mobility variation ([0002]-[0007]; [0012]; [0042]; [0046]; [0062]).
Guevremont does not explicitly teach the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate and an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
In other words, Guevremont discloses an alternative means for disposing the electrodes in a similar arrangement, and does not disclose the explicit capability of using two RF voltages having different phases to the two sets of electrodes along the same plane.
Davis discloses an electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-6) in which subsets of electrodes are interleaved amongst one another on a single planar substrate (See Figs. 2-6, items 202, 206 (having electrodes 212 and 214, respectively), items 302, 306, 502, 506, each of which has subsets of electrodes of different sizes and applied voltages interleaved amongst one another; [0029] and [0050], discussing electrodes fabricated from same wafer; [0043]; [0060]-[0064]; [0070]-[0073]), wherein a gas with ions passes adjacent thereto ([0079]-[0080]).
It is Examiner’s opinion that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to use an alternative functional equivalent to the disclosed plate/rod electrodes, such as a plurality of electrodes formed on a substrate, as in Davis, and as one of ordinary skill would be reasonably apprised of, in order to achieve the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate (Emphasis added by Examiner).
Doing so represents simple substitution of one known element (i.e., stacked plate/rod electrodes held by an insulating structure) for another (i.e., electrodes fabricated on a common substrate) to obtain predictable results, as Guevremont discloses the relative arrangement of pluralities of electrodes, and one ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of the components and their functionality in view of the respective disclosures and could have substituted one element for the other with predictable results, and with a reasonable expectation of success, as such electrode forming techniques are well represented in the art for various use with various voltage and/or frequency ranges, which could be readily adapted by conventional means.
Guevremont discloses structure capable of applying RF voltages to both sets of electrodes within a same plane, and applying different voltage signals to either set (i.e., to simultaneously hold at different voltages), however, it does not explicitly disclose the capability/functionality to apply voltages with different phases to the two sets of electrodes.
Examiner notes that because claim 1 is directed toward a device, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim limitations reciting functionality require structure capable of performing such functionality, unless otherwise structurally limited. E.g., ‘configured to apply’ is understood as ‘capable of applying’.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of typical waveform generators, power sources, etc. used to provide the RF voltage signals to the respective electrodes, such as Guevremont’s ‘electrical controller’, which performs this functionality. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand Guevremont as disclosing sufficient structure to apply respective RF voltage signals to either set of electrodes. The typical structure to achieve this functionality would be understood by an ordinarily skilled artisan as having the capability to independently assign phases to the respective signals as well, as such functionality is typical in waveform generators. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would view Guevremont as disclosing the necessary structure to achieve such functionality, even if not explicitly disclosed by Guevremont.
Accordingly, while not explicitly disclosed by Guevremont, it is Examiner’s opinion that an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have understood Guevremont as disclosing an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
For completeness:
Alternatively, Zeng explicitly discloses applying two RF voltages with a phase difference between them to two spaced apart electrodes, and thus discloses an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to explicitly include a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner), as taught by Zeng.
Doing so represents combining known prior art elements according to known methods in order to achieve predictable results, as Guevremont discloses sufficient structure to apply different RF voltage signals to different electrode sets, which would function in same manner as separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art could readily apply such a phase difference between the two voltage signals, which would achieve predictable results, as Zeng provides instruction to allow to a phase difference between the voltage signals. As further disclosed in Zeng, this functionality would be desirable to achieve the following benefits: achieve better resolution, as discussed in Section 1, Paragraph 3; obtain reduced energy output, as discussed in Zeng Section IV.A; and improve the dispersion field amplitude to enable ion separation and analysis at a higher dispersion field, as discussed in Section V.
Regarding claim 2, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont further teaches wherein an amplitude of the asymmetric waveform has an integral over time of substantially zero ([0004]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 3, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont does not explicitly teach wherein the asymmetric waveform has a shape defined by a sum of two or more cosine functions.
However, Guevremont discloses generating asymmetric square waveforms (see, e.g., [0004]-[0005]), which can be itself generally understood as a sum of two or more functions (E.g., a Heaviside function and one or more scaling function), albeit not necessarily cosine functions.
As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation Guevremont teaches wherein the asymmetric waveform has a shape defined by a sum of two or more ([0004]-[0005])
One of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of general signal generation technology (wherein a generic signal generator readily in most related lab environments is capable of generating cosine waves, and of waveforms that are the summation of cosine waves) and the underlying mathematics thereof (i.e., series), and could readily form an arbitrary wave shape via the superposition (e.g., Fourier series) of periodic functions (such as sines and/or cosines, which would be understood by an ordinarily skilled artisan to be equivalent via offset(s)).
Thus, it is Examiner’s opinion that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to explicitly include wherein the asymmetric waveform has a shape defined by a sum of two or more cosine functions.
Doing so represents applying general mathematical principles and basic signal generation technology/techniques in order to achieve predictable results that would not require the use of inventive activity, as an ordinarily skilled artisan would be reasonably apprised of both the technology and techniques necessary to achieve an arbitrary shaped symmetric waveform defined by the sum of two or more cosine functions, and could readily form such an arbitrarily shaped asymmetric waveform thereby, including forming the asymmetric waveforms such as that disclosed by Guevremont, or, e.g., those disclosed in Zeng.
Regarding claim 7, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont further teaches wherein the plurality of second electrodes are interleaved with the first electrodes (See Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes on one lateral side, i.e., items 24(including 26 interleaved with 28) or 62/64/131/132/142(including 66 interleaved with 68) or 110/131(including 126 interleaved with 128)).
Regarding claim 9, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont does not explicitly teach wherein a phase difference between the first RF voltage and the second RF voltage is at least π/2.
However, as discussed in regards to claim 1, the structure of Guevremont would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art to be capable of applying such a phase difference, or in the alternative, such a phase difference would be obvious over Zeng, which discloses this limitation (See Fig. 1d; Section III.B).
Regarding claim 10, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device claim 1.
Guevremont further teaches further comprising:
a third electrode arrangement, spatially separated from the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement and arranged to operate (understood to mean ‘capable of operating’) in the environment having the high gas pressure (See Fig. 1, item 22; Figs. 4-6, items 62 or 64, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 62 or 64 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements; Figs. 8, item 124; Figs. 9, items 131 or 132, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 131 or 132 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements; Fig. 10, items 62 or 142, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 62 or 142 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements; Abstract; [0002]; and corresponding text for above elements: [0039]-[0046]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]); and
wherein the RF voltage supply is further configured to apply a third RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, (See Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128, on opposite side from items 26 and 28 of the ‘same plane’ side; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies; See also: Abstract; [0039]-[0046]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), wherein the third RF voltage has an asymmetric waveform ([0040]; [0042]; [0044]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]), the application of the third RF voltage to the third electrode arrangement generating a portion of the electric field experienced by the received ions (See Figs. 2a, 7; Abstract; [0009]-[0011]; [0015]; [0040]; [0042]-[0046]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]).
As discussed above in regards to claim 1, Guevremont does not explicitly teach an element that changes the phase of the voltage signals relative to one another, however, an ordinarily skilled artisan would understand the conventional elements required by Guevremont to have the structure/functionality necessary to change the phase between two voltage signals, or in the alternative, such structure would be obvious in view of Zeng.
However, Guevremont and Zeng do not explicitly teach wherein the RF voltage supply is further configured to apply a third RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage and than the second RF voltage, to the third electrode arrangement (Emphasis added by Examiner).
While not explicitly disclosed to have structure to apply a third RF voltage having a different phase than each of the first and second RF voltages, Guevremont was found to have disclosed sufficient structure to send signals with phase differences. The signal generator(s)/power source(s) (i.e., the disclosed ‘electrical controller’) would also necessarily be connected to the additional stacked electrodes across the analysis gap from the ‘same plane’ side (e.g., stack 64 in Fig. 4, opposite to stack 62, which for exemplary purposes can be considered the first and second electrode arrangements in this case), such that it can receive the disclosed signals corresponding to those applied to the first stack of electrodes (e.g., stack 62 in Fig. 4; Examiner notes that in the Example of Fig. 4, items 66 on both sides of the analysis gap receive the same signal). Accordingly, the connection of the signal generator(s)/power source(s) to the electrodes of the third arrangement are inherently disclosed (i.e., structure capable of applying a third RF voltage at a phase different from the first and the second), and Guevremont merely fails to explicitly disclose actually applying additional RF voltage at another phase (i.e., not identical to the first or second arrangements).
However, the broadest reasonable interpretation of functional limitations in such a device claim is limited to requiring structure capable of performing the function, which Guevremont has, as discussed above. Accordingly, as would be understood by an ordinarily skilled artisan, and under the broadest reasonable interpretation, Guevremont discloses structure that teaches the RF voltage supply is further configured to apply a third RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage and than the second RF voltage, to the third electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
For completeness:
In the alternative, however, Guevremont in view of Zeng teaches such an arrangement for only two electrodes arrangements, and merely lacks an additional electrode arrangement operating in the same fashion as the first and second electrode arrangements.
In other words, Guevremont in view of Zeng discloses the claimed invention except for a third equivalent electrode arrangement.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont in view of Zeng to include such a third equivalent electrode arrangement operating in the same fashion as the first and second electrode arrangements, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 11, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 10.
Guevremont further teaches wherein the first and second electrode arrangements are positioned in a first plane and the third electrode arrangement is positioned in a second plane that is substantially parallel to and spatially separated from the first plane (See Fig. 1, item 22 in a parallel and spatially separated plane from items 26 and 28 on the opposite side of the analysis gap; Figs. 4-6, items 62 or 64, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 62 or 64 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements, wherein 62 and 64 are in parallel spatially separated planes; Figs. 8, item 124; Figs. 9, items 131 or 132, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 131 or 132 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements, wherein 131 and 132 are in parallel spatially separated planes; Fig. 10, items 62 or 142, i.e., whichever is opposite of the items 62 or 142 that corresponds to the interleaved first and second electrode arrangements, wherein 62 and 142 are in parallel spatially separated planes; Abstract; [0002]; and corresponding text for above elements: [0039]-[0046]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]).
Regarding claim 12, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont further teaches further comprising:
a DC electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes receiving DC voltages, as discussed in: [0040]-[0046]; [0057]-[0075]; Examiner additionally notes that the inlet and outlet ion plates are configured to receive DC voltages as well, and could similarly be interpreted as one or more DC electrode arrangements); and
a DC voltage supply, configured to apply a DC voltage to the DC electrode arrangement ([0009]-[0013]; [0040]-[0046]; [0057]-[0075], ‘electrical controller’ applies electric voltages, both AC and DC).
Regarding claim 13, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 12.
Guevremont further teaches wherein the DC electrode arrangement is positioned outside a spatial extent of the first and second electrode arrangements (See Figs. 1, 4-6, 8a, 9a, 10, items 12 and 16 or 52 and 56, which are positioned outside a spatial extent of their respective first and second electrode arrangements).
Regarding claim 14, Guevremont teaches a method, comprising operating an ion optical device (Abstract; FAIMS is ion optical device;), wherein the ion optical devices comprises:
first and second electrode arrangements, spatially separated from one another (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), arranged to operate in an environment having a high gas pressure ([0022]; ‘arranged to operate’ is interpreted as ‘capable of operating’), wherein the first electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of first electrodes and the second electrode arrangement comprises a plurality of second electrodes (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes on one lateral side, i.e., items 24(including 26 and 28) or 62/64/131/132/142(including 66 and 68) or 110/131(including 126 and 128); [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same [plane] (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128, each of which are on a same plane on at least one lateral side; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the [plane of the first and second electrode arrangements] (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128, with ion flow 30, gas flow 35, and/or gas flows 32/34, adjacent the plane having the first and second electrode arrangements; [0041]; [0058]-[0062]; [0069]-[0075]), wherein the first electrode arrangement and the second electrode arrangement are configured to generate at least a portion of an electric field experienced by the received ions (See Figs. 2a, 7; Abstract; [0009]-[0011]; [0015]; [0042]-[0046]);
an RF voltage supply (Abstract; [0004]-[0006]; [0009]-[0015]; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; FAIMS are also known as RF-DC IMS, and inherently operate on RF voltages), configured to apply: a first RF voltage comprising one or more RF drive frequencies to the first electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies); and a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies), wherein the first and second RF voltages have an asymmetric waveform ([0040]; [0042]; [0044]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]), the application of the first and second RF voltages to the first and second electrode arrangements respectively generating at least a portion of the electric field experienced by the received ions (See Figs. 2a, 7; Abstract; [0009]-[0011]; [0015]; [0040]; [0042]-[0046]; [0059]; [0063]; [0070]); and
wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is sufficient for the ions to experience mobility variation ([0002]-[0007]; [0012]; [0042]; [0046]; [0062]);
the method comprising:
receiving the ions and gas with the ion optical device (See Figs. 1, 5, 8a, showing gas flow 35 and ions 30 entering the ion optical device; [0005]-[0005]; [0014]-[0015]; [0040]-[0046]; [0058]-[0062]; [0082]-[0083]); and
applying the first RF voltage to the first electrode arrangement and applying the second RF voltage to the second electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-13, in particular Figs. 1, 4-6, 8-10, and corresponding electrodes, i.e., items 26 and 28 or 66 and 68 or 126 and 128; [0040]; [0059]; [0070]; [0083]; the applied RF voltages inherently have one or more drive frequencies) to produce the mobility variation ([0002]-[0007]; [0012]; [0042]; [0046]; [0062]).
Guevremont does not explicitly teach the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate and an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
In other words, Guevremont discloses an alternative means for disposing the electrodes in a similar arrangement, and does not disclose the explicit capability of using two RF voltages having different phases to the two sets of electrodes along the same plane.
Davis discloses an electrode arrangement (See Figs. 1-6) in which subsets of electrodes are interleaved amongst one another on a single planar substrate (See Figs. 2-6, items 202, 206 (having electrodes 212 and 214, respectively), items 302, 306, 502, 506, each of which has subsets of electrodes of different sizes and applied voltages interleaved amongst one another; [0029] and [0050], discussing electrodes fabricated from same wafer; [0043]; [0060]-[0064]; [0070]-[0073]), wherein a gas with ions passes adjacent thereto ([0079]-[0080]).
It is Examiner’s opinion that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to use an alternative functional equivalent to the disclosed plate/rod electrodes, such as a plurality of electrodes formed on a substrate, as in Davis, and as one of ordinary skilled would be reasonably apprised of, in order to achieve the plurality of first electrodes and plurality of second electrodes being positioned on a same planar substrate, wherein the ion optical device is configured to receive ions and a gas such that the ions travel adjacent to the planar substrate (Emphasis added by Examiner).
Doing so represents simple substitution of one known element (i.e., stacked plate/rod electrodes held by an insulating structure) for another (i.e., electrodes fabricated on a common substrate) to obtain predictable results, as Guevremont discloses the relative arrangement of pluralities of electrodes, and one ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of the components and their functionality in view of the respective disclosures and could have substituted one element for the other with predictable results, and with a reasonable expectation of success, as such electrode forming techniques are well represented in the art for various use with various voltage and/or frequency ranges, which could be readily adapted by conventional means.
Guevremont discloses structure capable of applying RF voltages to both sets of electrodes within a same plane, and applying different voltage signals to either set (i.e., to simultaneously hold at different voltages), however, it does not explicitly disclose the capability/functionality to apply voltages with different phases to the two sets of electrodes.
Examiner notes that because claim 1 is directed toward a device, the broadest reasonable interpretation of claim limitations reciting functionality require structure capable of performing such functionality, unless otherwise structurally limited. E.g., ‘configured to apply’ is understood as ‘capable of applying’.
However, one of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of typical waveform generators, power sources, etc. used to provide the RF voltage signals to the respective electrodes, such as Guevremont’s ‘electrical controller’, which performs this functionality. As such, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand Guevremont as disclosing sufficient structure to apply respective RF voltage signals to either set of electrodes. The typical structure to achieve this functionality would be understood by an ordinarily skilled artisan as having the capability to independently assign phases to the respective signals as well, as such functionality is typical in waveform generators. Accordingly, one of ordinary skill in the art would view Guevremont as disclosing the necessary structure to achieve such functionality, even if not explicitly disclosed by Guevremont.
Accordingly, while not explicitly disclosed by Guevremont, it is Examiner’s opinion that an ordinarily skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have understood Guevremont as disclosing an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
For completeness:
Alternatively, Zeng explicitly discloses applying two RF voltages with a phase difference between them to two spaced apart electrodes, and thus discloses an RF voltage supply, configured to apply: …a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to explicitly include a second RF voltage comprising the one or more RF drive frequencies, having a different phase than the first RF voltage, to the second electrode arrangement (Emphases added by Examiner), as taught by Zeng.
Doing so represents combining known prior art elements according to known methods in order to achieve predictable results, as Guevremont discloses sufficient structure to apply different RF voltage signals to different electrode sets, which would function in same manner as separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art could readily apply such a phase difference between the two voltage signals, which would achieve predictable results, as Zeng provides instruction to allow to a phase difference between the voltage signals. As further disclosed in Zeng, this functionality would be desirable to achieve the following benefits: achieve better resolution, as discussed in Section 1, Paragraph 3; obtain reduced energy output, as discussed in Zeng Section IV.A; and improve the dispersion field amplitude to enable ion separation and analysis at a higher dispersion field, as discussed in Section V.
Claims 6 and 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guevremont (U.S. PGPub. No. US 20060097156 A1) in view of Davis (U.S. PGPub. No. US 20150323500 A1) and Zeng (DOI: 10.1063/1.5002635).
Regarding claim 6, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the ion optical device of claim 1.
Guevremont does not explicitly teach wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is at least 1 MV/m.
Guevremont is silent with respect to particular field strengths, except for the background ([0003]) indicating that fields stronger than approximately 5000 V/cm (=0.5MV/m) is the rough cutoff at which the ion drift velocity is no longer directly proportional to the applied electric field. However, an ordinarily skilled artisan would understand the operating principle of FAIMS, and the required field strengths necessary therefor.
Nevertheless, Zeng teaches wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is at least 1 MV/m (Section II.B; Examiner notes that 20,000 V/cm = 2 MV/m).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Guevremont to explicitly include wherein the first and second electrode arrangements and the RF voltage supply are configured such that a strength of the electric field experienced by the received ions is at least 1 MV/m, as taught by Zeng.
Doing so would allow one to ensure that the sufficiently high field strength condition required for FAIMS is met, as disclosed by Zeng Section II.B.
See also Swearingen (cited below), which disclose conventional p-FAIMS as typically achieving field strengths of about 20 kV/cm(=2 MV/m), and others achieving as high as 60 kV/cm(=6MV/m).
Regarding claim 15, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the method of claim 14.
Guevremont does not explicitly teach further comprising operating the first and second electrode arrangements in an environment having a gas pressure that is sufficiently high such that, in combination with the one or more RF drive frequencies, a phase shift between the electric field and a velocity of the received ions experiencing the electric field is substantially zero.
However, as discussed previously, Guevremont discloses IMS’s operating under sufficiently high bath gas pressure that ions rapidly reach constant velocity when driven by the force of a static, constant electric field.
Furthermore, one of ordinary skill in the art would be reasonably apprised of the operating principles of FAIMS devices, and would know that sufficiently high pressure is necessary for the ion mobilities to quickly reach terminal velocity.
For instance, Zeng discloses operating at 730 Torr, which is within the range indicated by Applicant’s disclosure of intended operating pressures, and would be sufficient for the phase shift between the electric field and a velocity of the received ions in the field to be substantially zero.
Accordingly, it is Examiner’s opinion that one of ordinary skill in the art would understand Guevremont in view of Zeng as further discloses further comprising operating the first and second electrode arrangements in an environment having a gas pressure that is sufficiently high such that, in combination with the one or more RF drive frequencies, a phase shift between the electric field and a velocity of the received ions experiencing the electric field is substantially zero (Zeng: Section I, paragraph 1; Section III.B).
Regarding claim 16, Guevremont in view of Davis, or in the alternative, Guevremont in view of Davis and Zeng teaches the method of claim 14.
Guevremont does not explicitly teach further comprising operating the first and second electrode arrangements in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa and/or wherein the gas is air.
Zeng further teaches further comprising operating the first and second electrode arrangements in an environment having a gas pressure of at least 10 kPa and/or wherein the gas is air (Section I, paragraph 1; Section III.B).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Swearingen (DOI: 10.1586/epr.12.50);
Garimella (US 20190004011 A1).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER J GASSEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4363. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, ROBERT H KIM can be reached at (571)272-2293. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER J GASSEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2881
/DAVID E SMITH/ Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights