DETAILED ACTION
In application filed on 12/08/2023, Claims 1-15 are pending. The claim set submitted on 5/22/2026 is considered because this is the most recent claim set with some preliminary amendments. Claims 1-12 are considered in the current office 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) submitted on 02/19/2024 and 05/28/2026 are 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 05/22/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 13-15 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Groups, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 05/22/2026.
Group I, Claims 1-12 are considered on the merits below.
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.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over by Staats et al. (US20030026740A1).
Regarding 1, Staats teaches a method for producing a microfluidic apparatus (See Abstract… microfluidic device is provided and comprises a device that is assembled from segments of microfluidic features using built-in alignment features, such as the raised walls of the channels or protrusion/recess pairs to comprise channels, nozzles, optical detectors, distillation columns, etc., to form a device for a specific application, such as an electrospray-mass spectrometer interface.) according to one or more design constraints (referred to as some of the segments can be of standard dimensions with standard alignment features [Abstract]), the method comprising:
providing a first substrate (referred first substrate [Para 0053) comprising multiple fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels), wherein the channels have an inlet and an outlet (See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 have a fluid input port 156 and a fluid outlet port 156 that opens on to the side of the substrate in each of the channels 154),
implementing a configuration of connecting channels (See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) on at least one second substrate (See Para 0085… The second substrate 240 has a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220 ) depending on the specified design constraints (referred to as some of the segments can be of standard dimensions with standard alignment features [Abstract]) of the microfluidic apparatus (See Abstract… microfluidic device is provided and comprises a device that is assembled from segments of microfluidic features using built-in alignment features,
such that by aligning the first substrate (referred first substrate [Para 0053) with the at least one second substrate (See Para 0053… a second substrate is aligned with the first substrate), at least some inlets and outlets (See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 have a fluid input port 156 and a fluid outlet port 156 that opens on to the side of the substrate in each of the channels 154) of the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; Under BRI, the mcirofludic channels have inlets and outlets) of the first substrate (referred first substrate [Para 0053) are connected to the connecting channels (See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) and a microfluidic device (See Abstract… microfluidic device complying with the one or more design constraints is obtained (referred to as some of the segments can be of standard dimensions with standard alignment features [Abstract]).
Staats does not explicitly teach that at least some inlets and outlets of the fluid channels are connected to the connecting channel.
Staats teaches that it will be appreciated that the various substrates can be combined in a number of different manners than the aforementioned Example 1 depending upon the precise configurations of the substrates and also the desired application for the microfluidic device (Para 0090). Further Staats teaches that while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention (Para 0091).
Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would recognize these limitations as nothing more than a rearrangement of parts to effect the determination of the optimal structural configuration and design of the device and could seek the benefits associated with having that at least some inlets and outlets of the fluid channels are connected to the connecting channel, given that a rearrangement of parts is a supporting rationale of obviousness especially because Staat discloses all the claimed structures of as cited above only in a different configuration (under broadest reasonable interpretation). Please see MPEP 2144.04(VI) (C) for further details.
Regarding Claim 2, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches wherein the first substrate (referred first substrate [Para 0053) is a silicon wafer (See Para 00017… these devices can be fabricated using insulating substrates such as polymers, glass, silicon compounds, ceramics, or quartz, with polymer substrates being the preferred substrates; See Para 0073… For non-metallic molds for injection molding, the mold may be made of a flat and hard material such as Si wafers, glass wafers, quartz or sapphire).
Regarding Claim 3, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches wherein the at least one second substrate (See Para 0085… The second substrate 240 has a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220 ) is a glass wafer or a silicon wafer (See Para 00017… these devices can be fabricated using insulating substrates such as polymers, glass, silicon compounds, ceramics, or quartz, with polymer substrates being the preferred substrates; See Para 0073… For non-metallic molds for injection molding, the mold may be made of a flat and hard material such as Si wafers, glass wafers, quartz or sapphire).
Regarding Claim 4, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches wherein the connecting channels (See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) are near the side of the second substrate (See Para 0085… The second substrate 240 has a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220) which is near first substrate (referred first substrate [Para 0053).
Staats does not explicitly teach that the connecting channels are implemented on that side of the second substrate which joins with the first substrate.
Staats teaches that it will be appreciated that the various substrates can be combined in a number of different manners than the aforementioned Example 1 depending upon the precise configurations of the substrates and also the desired application for the microfluidic device (Para 0090). Further Staats teaches that while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention (Para 0091).
Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would recognize these limitations as nothing more than a rearrangement of parts to effect the determination of the optimal structural configuration and design of the device and could seek the benefits associated with the connecting channels being implemented on that side of the second substrate which joins with the first substrate, given that a rearrangement of parts is a supporting rationale of obviousness especially because Staat discloses all the claimed structures of as cited above only in a different configuration (under broadest reasonable interpretation). Please see MPEP 2144.04(VI) (C) for further details.
Regarding Claim 4, the method of claim 4 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches a through-holes (referred to as capillaries 130 and 140 [Para 0063) are arranged in the second substrate (See Para 0070… Because the channel architecture of the devices described herein provide for interconnecting ducts or capillaries to provide fluids to various channels in multiple layers of substrates; See Para 0085… The second substrate 240 ) for connection with inlets and outlets (See Para 0036… capillaries attached to the inlet and outlet ports) of the fluid channels on the first substrate (See Para 0070… Because the channel architecture of the devices described herein provide for interconnecting ducts or capillaries to provide fluids to various channels in multiple layers of substrates; referred first substrate [Para 0053]).
Regarding Claim 7, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that pillars (‘structural features’) are present in fluid channels (See Para 0019… the inside surface of the raised wall of the channels may also contain structural features) of the provided first substrate (See Para 0020… The raised and structurally rigid nature of the raised walls of the channel also creates space between the first and second substrates after the first and second substrate have been appropriately assembled.).
Regarding Claim 8, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels) of the provided first substrate (See Para 0050…channel opening of the first substrate 40.) have the same shape (See Para 0046… the microfluidic channels may be about 20 μm to several hundred μm wide or so in width or diameter, thereby teaching “same shape”).
Regarding Claim 9, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 ) of the provided first substrate (See Para 0050…channel opening of the first substrate 40.) are substantially parallel and aligned with each other (See Fig. 14…for substantially parallel and aligned with each other).
Regarding Claim 10, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that the connecting channels See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) are designed to be near at least a portion of the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 ) of the first substrate in series (See Para 0050…channel opening of the first substrate 40.).
Staats does not explicitly teach that the connecting channels are designed so as to interconnect at least a portion of the fluid channels of the first substrate in series.
However, Staats teaches that it will be appreciated that the various substrates can be combined in a number of different manners than the aforementioned Example 1 depending upon the precise configurations of the substrates and also the desired application for the microfluidic device (Para 0090). Further Staats teaches that while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention (Para 0091).
Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would recognize these limitations as nothing more than a rearrangement of parts to effect the determination of the optimal structural configuration and design of the device and could seek the benefits associated with the connecting channels being implemented on that side of the second substrate which joins with the first substrate, given that a rearrangement of parts is a supporting rationale of obviousness especially because Staat discloses all the claimed structures of as cited above only in a different configuration (under broadest reasonable interpretation). Please see MPEP 2144.04(VI) (C) for further details.
Regarding Claim 11, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that the connecting channels See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) are designed to be near at least a portion of the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 ) of the first substrate (See Para 0050…channel opening of the first substrate 40.).
Staats does not explicitly teach that the connecting channels are designed so as to interconnect at least a portion of the fluid channels of the first substrate in parallel.
However, Staats teaches that it will be appreciated that the various substrates can be combined in a number of different manners than the aforementioned Example 1 depending upon the precise configurations of the substrates and also the desired application for the microfluidic device (Para 0090). Further Staats teaches that while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention (Para 0091).
Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would recognize these limitations as nothing more than a rearrangement of parts to effect the determination of the optimal structural configuration and design of the device and could seek the benefits associated with the connecting channels being implemented on that side of the second substrate which joins with the first substrate, given that a rearrangement of parts is a supporting rationale of obviousness especially because Staat discloses all the claimed structures of as cited above only in a different configuration (under broadest reasonable interpretation). Please see MPEP 2144.04(VI) (C) for further details.
Regarding Claim 11, the method of claim 1 is obvious over Staats.
Staats teaches that the connecting channels See Para 0085; See Fig. 21… a channel 250 that is aligned with the middle channel 220; See Para 0056…a set of intersecting channels may be used to direct the flow of the fluid from one channel to another) are designed to be near at least a portion of the fluid channels (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 ) of the first substrate (See Para 0050…channel opening of the first substrate 40.) and near at least a portion of the fluid channels in series (See Para 0053… the microfluidic channels; See Para 0064…The adjacent channels 154 ).
Staats does not explicitly teach that the connecting channels are designed so as to interconnect at least a portion of the fluid channels of the first substrate in parallel and interconnect at least a portion of the fluid channels in series.
However, Staats teaches that it will be appreciated that the various substrates can be combined in a number of different manners than the aforementioned Example 1 depending upon the precise configurations of the substrates and also the desired application for the microfluidic device (Para 0090). Further Staats teaches that while the invention has been particularly shown and described with reference to preferred embodiments thereof, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that various changes in form and details can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention (Para 0091).
Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made would recognize these limitations as nothing more than a rearrangement of parts to effect the determination of the optimal structural configuration and design of the device and could seek the benefits associated with the connecting channels being implemented on that side of the second substrate which joins with the first substrate, given that a rearrangement of parts is a supporting rationale of obviousness especially because Staat discloses all the claimed structures of as cited above only in a different configuration (under broadest reasonable interpretation). Please see MPEP 2144.04(VI) (C) for further details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OYELEYE ALEXANDER ALABI whose telephone number is (571)272-1678. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:30am-5:30pm.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached on (571) 272-1254. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/OYELEYE ALEXANDER ALABI/ Examiner, Art Unit 1797
Prosecution Insights