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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 73, 75, and 89 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 73 recites the limitation "the particular assay" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 73 is rejected as being unclear because “wherein the thermally conducting chamber is configured to physically contact all of the external surface area of the reaction vessel, when present” because the “when present” implies that the reaction vessel is a part of the claimed invention.
Claim 75 is rejected as being unclear because “the whole reaction vessel, when present, sits substantially inside the temperature-controller chamber” because the “when present” implies that the reaction vessel or whole reaction vessel is a part of the claimed invention.
Claim 89 is rejected as being unclear because “heating of the lid to a predefined temperature when coupled to the body causes fusion of the weldable portions to seal the contents within the reaction vessel” because the “when present” implies that the reaction vessel is a part of the claimed invention.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 73 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The closest prior art references are Nazareth et al. (WO 2017/055791 A2) and Ward eta l. (US 2010/0203595 A1).
Regarding claim 73, Nazareth et al. discloses a nucleic acid amplification (NAA) reaction vessel comprising: two opposing major walls; a minor wall system attaching the major walls and thus defining a reaction chamber having a base, the major and minor walls being formed of a thermally conductive material (see Abstract).
Ward et al. discloses a thermoelectric cooler (12) (TEC) (see Abstract and figures 1 and 6).
The prior art references fail to disclose or suggest apparatus comprising: a thermally conducting chamber (TCC) formed from a first face of a first thermoelectric device, a first face of a second thermoelectric device and a first face of a third thermoelectric device, wherein: i) the first and the second thermoelectric devices are arranged in substantial opposition to one another; ii) the third thermoelectric device is located in a dual-purpose cap portion, wherein the dual-purpose cap is able to both: a) heat to a sufficient temperature so as to weld the lid of a vessel to the body of the vessel; and b) form a third wall of the TCC to ensure rapid and appropriate heating of the vessel, and/or cycle between an appropriate range of temperatures, in line with the reaction conditions for the particular assay; wherein the thermally conducting chamber is configured to physically contact all of the external surface area of the reaction vessel, when present.
Claims 74, 76-88 and 90-92 depend on claim 73.
Claims 75 and 89 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA E YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 6:00 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, Wang Claire can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
NATASHA E. YOUNG
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/NATASHA E YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights