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 Amendment filed on 9/1/2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-11 and 15-24 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the non-final Office Action mailed 6/3/2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4, 6-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Application Publication No. 2005/0016852, hereinafter Amirkhanian in view of United States Application Publication No. 2007/0068573, hereinafter Cox.
Regarding claim 1, Amirkhanian teaches a system (item 200) for processing fluid containers, the system comprising: a first tray holder (labeled in annotated figure below) configured to hold a first inlet tray (functional language (MPEP § 2114) and is taught as item 72) and a first outlet tray (functional language (MPEP § 2114) and as taught as item 70), the first inlet tray comprising one or more reservoirs (paragraph [0050]), and the first outlet tray comprising one or more cavities (paragraph [0050]); a couplable upper member (item 100) comprising a sealing surface (paragraphs [0050] and [0082]); a moving mechanism (labeled in annotated figure below) configured to move the first tray holder in a first direction so as to bring each of the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray in contact with the sealing surface of the couplable upper member (paragraph [0050]); and a floating plate (labeled in annotated figure below) disposed between at least one of the first outlet tray and a top surface of the moving mechanism (see figure below), and the first inlet tray and the top surface of the moving mechanism (see figure below); wherein the couplable upper member comprises a cartridge (item 100) comprising a plurality of capillaries (paragraph [0050]), the capillaries being in fluid contact with the reservoirs of the first inlet tray and with the cavities of the first outlet tray (functional language (MPEP § 2114)); and wherein the moving mechanism is configured to move the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray in the first direction (functional language (MPEP § 2114) and paragraph [0050]).
Amirkhanian fails to teach the moving mechanism is configured to independently move the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray in the first direction, and to independently press the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray against the sealing surface of the cartridge to form a first sealing interface between the first inlet tray and the cartridge and a second sealing interface between the first outlet tray and the cartridge; and the floating plate is configured to permit the at least one of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray to articulate relative to the other of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray while the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray are pressed against the sealing surface of the cartridge.
Cox teaches a system for control of fluids in which the trays are loaded onto XYZ mechanism which permit complete flexibility (Cox, paragraph [0201]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the moving mechanism of Amirkhanian into two XYZ mechanism which have an individual tray loaded onto each one because it would permit complete flexibility (Cox, paragraph [0201]). The examiner notes that as the first inlet tray and second inlet tray are each on their own moving mechanism and floating plate, the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray would move independently in the first direction and would be able to be independently pressed into the sealing surface of the cartridge as well as at least one of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray to articulate relative to the other of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray while the first inlet tray and the first outlet tray are pressed against the sealing surface of the cartridge.
PNG
media_image1.png
673
1529
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Amirkhanian teaches wherein the first direction is a vertical direction along an axis of the couplable upper member (see figure above).
Regarding claim 4, modified Amirkhanian teaches wherein the first direction is a vertical direction along an axis of the couplable upper member (see supra).
Regarding claim 6, Amirkhanian teaches a pressure applied to the couplable upper member by the moving mechanism via one of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray is independent from another pressure applied by the moving mechanism to the couplable upper member via the other one of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray, such that a first sealing force applied at the first sealing interface is independently controllable relative to a second sealing force applied at the second sealing interface (functional limitation (MPEP § 2114) and see supra).
Regarding claim 7, Amirkhanian teaches a portion of the first tray holder that is underneath at least one of the first outlet tray and the first inlet tray comprises a cutout so as to expose a bottom portion thereof (see figure above).
Regarding claim 8, Amirkhanian teaches the moving mechanism is further configured to move the first tray holder in a horizontal direction (paragraph [0050]).
Regarding claim 9, modified Amirkhanian teaches the moving mechanism comprises at least two independent moving platforms (see supra), a first moving platform configured to move the first inlet tray against a bottom surface of the couplable upper member (see supra), and a second moving platform configured to move the first outlet tray against the bottom surface of the couplable upper member (see supra) independently of the first moving platform (see supra), wherein the first moving platform is configured to apply a first sealing force through the first inlet tray to the cartridge (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and see supra), and the second moving platform is configured to apply a second sealing force through the first outlet tray to the cartridge independently of the first sealing force (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and see supra).
Claim(s) 10, 11, 15 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amirkhanian and Cox as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of United States Application Publication No. 2015/0276780, hereinafter Bremer.
Regarding claim 10, Amirkhanian and Cox teaches all limitations of claim 1; however, they fail to teach a second tray holder configured to hold a second inlet tray and a second outlet tray; the second inlet tray being configured to contain one or more fluid reservoirs; and the second outlet tray comprising one or more cavities; wherein the moving mechanism is configured to move the second tray holder in the first direction.
Bremer teaches a device for extraction in which there is a first and second tray holder so that the device is able to have a collector tray and a sample container tray where the sample containers are placed (Bremer, paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have duplicated the first tray holder along with the moving mechanism and floating platform because it would allow for two trays with one tray being a collector tray and the other tray being a sample container tray where the sample containers are placed (Bremer, paragraph [0034]).
Regarding claim 11, modified Amirkhanian teaches the second tray holder is a movable second tray holder (see supra).
Regarding claim 15, modified Amirkhanian teaches the moving mechanism comprises at least two independent moving platforms (see supra), a first moving platform configured to move one of the first inlet tray and the second inlet tray against a bottom surface of the couplable upper member (see supra), and a second moving platform configured to move one of the first outlet tray and the second outlet tray against the bottom surface of the couplable upper member independently of the first moving platform (see supra), wherein the first moving platform is configured to apply a first sealing force through the one of the first inlet tray and the second inlet tray to the couplable upper member (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and see supra), and the second moving platform is configured to apply a second sealing force through the one of the first outlet tray and the second outlet tray to the couplable upper member independently of the first sealing force (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II) and see supra).
Regarding claim 16, Amirkhanian teaches the couplable upper member comprises the cartridge (item 100) comprising a plurality of capillaries (paragraph [0050]), the capillaries being in fluid contact with the reservoirs of the first inlet tray or the second inlet tray and with the cavities of the first outlet tray or the second outlet tray (intended use MPEP § 2114 (II)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed 9/1/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 2 and 6-8 under 102(a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Amirkhanian and Cox.
Regarding applicant’s argument that Cox does not disclose the independent tray-sealing arrangement of claim 1 or the claimed floating plate-articulation is not found persuasive. Amirkhanian is being utilized for the teaching of tray-sealing and well as the floating plate. As described above, Amirkhanian fails to teach the independent nature of both of these structures. Cox teaches a device in which two XYZ mechanisms are utilized for controlling trays as they permit complete flexibility. In applying the teaching of Cox to the device of Amirkhanian one of ordinary skill in the art would have kept the sealing portions and floating plate and just made each of the separate structures which each have XYZ movements and as they are separate structures they would be able to be moved independently have articulation relative to each other as described in the claim thereby rendering the claim as obvious.
Conclusion
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 MATTHEW D KRCHA whose telephone number is (571)270-0386. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571)270-7698. 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.
/MATTHEW D KRCHA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796
