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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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 5, 6, 8, 10 and 11 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 5 recites “the slide tray” in lines 3 and 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note, claim 1 from which claim 5 depends recites a plurality of slide trays.
Claim 6 recites “the first installation position” in lines 8 and 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note, claim 5 from which claim 6 depends recites a plurality of first installation positions.
Claim 8 recites “the first installation position” in lines 9 and 10-11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note, claim 5 from which claim 8 depends recites a plurality of first installation positions.
Claim 10 recites “the slide tray” in lines 3, 11 and 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note, claim 3 from which claim 10 ultimately depends recites a plurality of slide trays and claim 9 recites a predetermined slide tray.
Claim 11 recites “the glass slide” in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Note, claim 1 from which claim 11 depends recites a plurality of glass slides.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
1. Claims 1, 3, 4 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0218400 to Kurata et al. (cited by applicant).
Kurata et al. discloses a glass slide supply storage unit shown in Fig. 10.
The supply storage unit includes a supply portion (standby portion P1) on which a plurality of slide holders (slide trays) are stacked in a first vertical position.
A first moving mechanism (slide holder-transporting unit 11) is configured to move the plurality of slide trays mounted on the supply portion in a second directed that intersects the first direction. [0050]-[0053], [0059]-[0060]
A plurality of glass slides on each of which a sample is placed are placeable on each of the slide trays as shown in Fig. 2. [0012]
The glass slide supply storage unit includes a first identification code reader (position-detecting sensor 21a3 shown in Fig. 13. [0100]
The first identification code reader is provided in the supply portion and configured to be moved in the first directed inasmuch as it is connected to the articulated arm 11a that is capable of moving upwards and downwards. [0202]
An identification code 2b is provided on the plurality of glass slides and the first identification code reader is capable of reading information in the identification code on each of the plurality of glass slides. [0100].
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 1, as noted above, Kurata et al. teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Therefore, Kurata et al. anticipates claim 1.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 3, as noted above Kurata et al. anticipates claim 1 from which claim 3 depends.
Claim 3 recites that the first moving mechanism is capable of moving the plurality of slide trays from an initial position in the second direction in a range corresponding to a width of at least one of the slide trays, the initial position being a position where the plurality of slide trays are mounted on the supply portion.
In Kurata et al. the first moving mechanism (slide holder-transporting unit 11) is capable of moving the plurality of slide trays from an initial portion on the supply portion in the second direction in a range corresponding to a width of at least one of the slide trays as shown in Fig. 15. [0052]
Therefore, Kurata et al. anticipates claim 3.
III.) Regarding applicant’s claim 4, as noted above Kurata et al. anticipates claim 3 from which claim 4 depends.
Claim 4 recites that wherein while the plurality of slide trays are moving from the initial position in a direction toward the inside of the glass slide supply storage unit, a read operation of reading information of the identification code of each of the plurality of glass slides is executed by the first identification code reader.
Claim 4 recites intended use of the glass slide supply storage unit, without reciting further structural limitations other than those recited in claims 3 and 1 from which claim 4 depends.
Therefore, Kurata et al. anticipates claim 4 via anticipating claims 3 and 1.
IV.) Regarding applicant’s claim 13, as noted above Kurata et al. anticipates claim 1 from which claim 13 depends.
Claim 13 recites that the identification code is any of a barcode, a two-dimensional code, or and RFID.
Kurata et al. teaches that the identification code is a bar code. [0186]
Therefore, Kurata et al. anticipates claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
2. Claims 5 and 8 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Kurata et al. as applied to claim 1 and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0087904 to Heid et al. (cited by applicant).
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 5, as noted above Kurata et al. anticipates claim 1 from which claim 5 depends.
Claim 5 recites a plurality of first installation portions that are provided in the supply portion and on each of which the slide tray is placeable, wherein the plurality of first installation portions on each of which the slide tray is placed are individually moved in the second direction by the first moving mechanism such that the plurality of slide trays are moved.
Kurata et al. does not teach a plurality of first installation portions that are provided in the supply portion and on each of which the slide tray is placeable, wherein the plurality of first installation portions on each of which the slide tray is placed are individually moved in the second direction by the first moving mechanism such that the plurality of slide trays are moved.
Heid et al. teaches an apparatus for handling microtomized tissue samples that includes a supply device 8 that includes a plurality of shelf-like levels that receive and support object carriers. (claim 23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Kurata et al. to include a supply device having shelf-like levels (that read on installation portions) as taught by Heid et al. in place of stacking the slide trays for purposes of preventing environmental exposure to undesirable contamination.
Therefore Kurata et al. in view of Heid et al. renders claim 5 obvious.
II.) Regarding applicant’s claim 8, as noted above Kurata et al. in view of Heid et al. renders claim 5 obvious from which claim 8 depends.
Claim 8 recites that the first moving mechanism includes a pinch mechanism configured to grip each of the plurality of the first installation portions, a first actuator configured to move the pinch mechanism in the first direction, and a second actuator configured to move the pinch mechanism in the second direction, and while the first installation portion is gripped by the pinch mechanism, the pinch mechanism is moved by the first actuator and the second actuator such that the first installation portion is moved.
Kurata et al teaches that the slide trays (installation portions) are pinched when being moved by the moving mechanism. [0060].
Kurata et al. does not specifically teach a first actuator configured to move the pinch mechanism in the first direction and a second actuator configured to move the pinch mechanism in the second direction.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Kurata et al. include separate actuators to move the moving mechanism with the pinching mechanism in the first and second direction. Note, the mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. (VI)(B))
Therefore, Kurata et al. in view of Heid et al. renders claim 8 obvious.
3. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Kurata et al. as applied to claim 4 and further in view of International Patent Application Publication No. WO 2016148166 to Tatsutani et al.
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 9, as noted above Kurata et al. anticipates claim 4 from which claim 9 depends.
Claim 9 recites that the first identification code reader is provided inside the glass slide supply storage unit in the supply portion, and when a predetermined slide tray is introduced from the outside of the glass slide supply storage unit into the initial position of the supply portion by an operator, the predetermined slide tray is moved from the initial position in a direction toward the inside of the glass slide supply storage unit by the first moving mechanism, and the read operation is executed during the movement of the predetermined slide tray.
Kurata et al. does not teach that the first identification code reader is provided inside the glass slide supply storage unit in the supply portion, and when a predetermined slide tray is introduced from the outside of the glass slide supply storage unit into the initial position of the supply portion by an operator, the predetermined slide tray is moved from the initial position in a direction toward the inside of the glass slide supply storage unit by the first moving mechanism, and the read operation is executed during the movement of the predetermined slide tray.
Tatsutani et al. teaches an installation portion 31 shown in Fig. 4 that includes a barcode reader 311 that reads bar codes attached to trays 36 that hold sample containers 60. (English translation page 4, 4th and 5th paragraphs; page 6, 4th and 5th paragraphs)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Kurata et al. to provide an identification code reader that is positioned to read the identification codes on the slides as they are placed in the supply portion P1 as taught by Tatsutani et al. for purposes of verifying the identification of the slides in the supply portion.
Therefore, Kurata et al, in view of Tatsutani et al. renders claim 9 obvious.
4. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Kurata et al. as applied to claim 1 and further in view of Japanese Patent Application Publication No. JP2012141287 to LeFebvre. (cited by applicant)
I.) Regarding applicant’s claim 11 as noted above, Kurata et al. anticipates claim 1 from which claim 11 depends.
Claim 11 recites that the sample processing system further comprising: a transport unit attached to the glass slide supply storage unit and configured to transport the glass slide; and a staining unit configured to stain the sample placed on the glass slide, wherein among the plurality of slide trays mounted on the supply portion, a first slide tray on which a first glass slide to be stained is placed is moved from the supply portion by the first moving mechanism such that the first glass slide is positioned at a first transport position in the glass slide supply storage unit, the first glass slide is transported from the first transport position to the staining unit by the transport unit, and the sample placed on the first glass slide is stained in the staining unit.
Kurata et al. teaches a transport unit 11 that transports slides from a storage position to a microscopic image pickup apparatus, but does not teach a staining unit configured to stain the sample placed on the glass slide, wherein among the plurality of slide trays mounted on the supply portion, a first slide tray on which a first glass slide to be stained is placed is moved from the supply portion by the first moving mechanism such that the first glass slide is positioned at a first transport position in the glass slide supply storage unit, the first glass slide is transported from the first transport position to the staining unit by the transport unit, and the sample placed on the first glass slide is stained in the staining unit.
LeFebvre teaches an automated system and method for processing biological samples in which includes at least one of a stainer module 210 and a coverslipper module 220; an imaging module 230; a storage module 202; an automated transport module 302 for transporting at least one slide 424 between at least one of the stainer module 210 and the coverslipper module 220, the imaging module 230 and the storage module 202; and a controller 400. (Abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before applicant’s effective filing date to modify Kurata et al. to include a stainer module (unit) and use the transport unit 11 of Kurata et al. to transport glass slides to the staining unit for purposes of automating processing of biological samples as taught by LeFebvre.
In this regard, it would have been obvious to us the transport unit of Kurata et al. to move a first slide tray from the supply position P1 by moving the transport unit so that the first slide is in a transport position and then move the slide to the staining unit using the transport unit and staining the slide.
Therefore, Kurata et al. in view of LeFebvre et al. renders claim 11 obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 10 and 12 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims and if the 35 USC 112(b) rejections of claims 7 and 10 were overcome.
The prior art or record does not teach or suggest a glass slide supply storage unit as recited in claim 1 in which the first moving mechanism includes an air cylinder, a linear shaft arranged parallel to the air cylinder and extending in the second direction, a linear bushing connected to the air cylinder, the linear shaft, and the first installation portion, an electric actuator connected to the first installation portion and extending in the second direction, and a positioning member linked to the electric actuator, compressed air in the air cylinder is controlled such that the first installation portion moves along the linear shaft to be pressed against the positioning member, and while the first installation portion is pressed against the positioning member, the electric actuator is driven such that the first installation portion is moved as recited in claim 6.
The prior art does not teach or suggest a glass slide supply storage unit as recited in claims 1 and 5 wherein each of the plurality of first installation portions includes a tooth-shaped rack, the first moving mechanism includes a tooth-shaped pinion that meshes with the rack and a motor that is connected to the pinion, and the motor is driven to rotate the pinion such that the first installation portion is moved as recited in claim 7.
The prior art of record does not teach or suggest a glass slide supply storage unit as recited in claim 1, 3 and 4 wherein the first moving mechanism includes a third installation portion on which the slide tray is placeable, a second driving mechanism configured to mount the third installation portion and to move the third installation portion in the second direction, and a first driving mechanism configured to move the second driving mechanism in the first direction, the third installation portion is moved from the inside of the glass slide supply storage unit in a direction toward the initial position by the first driving mechanism and the second driving mechanism, the slide tray mounted on the supply portion is placed on the third installation portion at the initial position, and the third installation portion on which the slide tray is placed is moved from the initial position in a direction toward the inside of the glass slide supply storage unit by the second driving mechanism as recited in claim 10.
The prior art or record does not teach or suggest a glass slide supply storage unit as recited in claim 1 and 11 wherein the glass slide supply storage unit further includes a storage portion on which the plurality of slide trays are mountable such that the plurality of slide trays are stacked in a first direction that is a vertical direction, and a second moving mechanism configured to individually move the plurality of slide trays mounted on the storage portion in the second direction, among the plurality of slide trays mounted on the storage portion, a second slide tray is moved from the storage portion to a position including a second transport position in the glass slide supply storage unit by the second moving mechanism, the first glass slide on which the stained sample is placed is placed by the transport unit on the second slide tray positioned at the second transport position, and the second slide tray on which the first glass slide is placed is moved to the storage portion by the second moving mechanism as recited in claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL S. GZYBOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)270-3487. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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.
/MICHAEL STANLEY GZYBOWSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights