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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/13/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 16-19 and 23 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.
Claims 16-19 recites the limitation "said vertically-extending member" in line 1 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 23 recites the limitation "the device" in line 1 of each claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Appropriate corrective action is required.
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.
Claims 1, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 14-18, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Inman et al. (US 2020/0116600 A1 – hereafter ‘600).
‘600 discloses a method for performing measurements (Abstract) that includes the following limitations for claim 1:
“An apparatus”: ‘600 discloses a measurement system ([0048]) that is being interpreted as the apparatus of the instant application.
“a lid”: ‘600 discloses a lid (lid 130; Fig. 4) that includes a bottom lid (lid 130) and an upper lid (device 110; [0049]).
“a ceiling layer and a floor layer separated by a gap”: ‘600 discloses that the lid has an upper layer (device 110; Fig. 4B; [0049]; i.e. the ceiling layer) and a lower layer (lid 130; Fig. 4B; [0049]). The two layers are separated by a gap (Fig. 5B; gap 510; [0098]) that does separate the device and lid. This dead space ([0092]) separates the two elements.
“wherein said ceiling layer is configured to permit application of a first force that pushes against a control surface that transfers said first force to said floor layer”: The device (device 110, i.e. the ceiling layer) transfers a force to the lid (lid 130, i.e. the floor layer) that pushes against a control surface (Fig. 4B) via an extending separator pin ([0049]).
“wherein said ceiling is further configured to be held by a second force that constrains motion of said ceiling layer such that said ceiling layer moves independently of said floor layer”: ‘600 discloses a second force such as a magnet (magnet (135 & 136; Fig. 1A; [0069]) that constrains the device and maintain the device in place.
“wherein a change in said first and second forces initiates an adjustment of said gap.”: The two forces of ‘600 initiate an adjustment of the gap (Fig. 4B; Fig. 4C; [0049]).
For claim 4, ‘600 discloses a hole in the lid/floor layer (Fig. 4B; [0093]).
For claim 6, ‘600 discloses a second force such as a magnet (magnet (135 & 136; Fig. 1A; [0069]) that constrains the device and maintain the device in place.
For claim 7, ‘600 discloses a second force such as a magnet (magnet (135 & 136; Fig. 1A; [0069]) that constrains the device and maintain the device in place.
For claim 9, ‘600 discloses separator pins ([0049]; Fig. 4B; Fig. 1A) that exerts a force on the gap.
For claim 10, the pin exerts a force on that would extend the gap and would be capable of being insufficient to prevent the gap from collapsing in response to a weight that bears down on the device (i.e. the ceiling layer).
For claim 14, ‘600 discloses an array of probes (probes 160; Fig. 1A; Fig. 1B; [0065]) that extends down from the lid and forms a plane that is parallel to the lid.
For claim 15, the probes of ‘600 are being interpreted as affixed to the device, i.e. the ceiling, when the two parts are connected. Also, since the probes can be raised and lowered into the wells, this is being interpreted as being a variable distance below the floor layer ([0065]).
For claim 16, ‘600 discloses that the probes are optical fibers ([0067]) which are being interpreted as a type of wave guide.
For claim 17, ‘600 discloses that the vertically extending member is a probe ([0065]; [0049]).
For claim 18, ‘600 discloses that the optical probe (probe 160; [0049]) emits light based on the oxygen concentration where this is being interpreted as the probe is fully capable of emitting light in response to the oxygen partial pressure.
For claim 20, ‘600 discloses an engagement feature such as a flange (Fig. 4B) that the device (device 110, i.e. the ceiling) lacks.
‘600 discloses a method for performing measurements (Abstract) that includes the following limitations for claim 22:
“An apparatus”: ‘600 discloses a measurement system ([0048]) that is being interpreted as the apparatus of the instant application.
“a lid”: ‘600 discloses a lid (lid 130; Fig. 4) that includes a bottom lid (lid 130) and an upper lid (device 110; [0049]).
“a ceiling layer and a floor layer separated by a gap”: ‘600 discloses that the lid has an upper layer (device 110; Fig. 4B; [0049]; i.e. the ceiling layer) and a lower layer (lid 130; Fig. 4B; [0049]). The two layers are separated by a gap (Fig. 5B; gap 510; [0098]) that does separate the device and lid. This dead space ([0092]) separates the two elements.
“further comprising means for receiving a first force that constrains motion of said ceiling layer such that said ceiling layer moves independently of said floor layer and means for permitting application of a second force to a control surface inside said lid”: The device (device 110, i.e. the ceiling layer) transfers a force to the lid (lid 130, i.e. the floor layer) that pushes against a control surface (Fig. 4B) via an extending separator pin ([0049]). ‘600 discloses a second force such as a magnet (magnet (135 & 136; Fig. 1A; [0069]) that constrains the device and maintain the device in place.
“wherein a change in said first and second forces initiates an adjustment of said gap.”: The two forces of ‘600 initiate an adjustment of the gap (Fig. 4B; Fig. 4C; [0049]).
Therefore, ‘600 meets the limitations of claims 1, 4, 6-7, 9-10, 14-18, 20 and 22.
Claims 1, 4, 5 8, 10, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Bader (US 2003/0186217 A1 – hereafter ‘217).
‘217 discloses a method for growing and treating cells (Abstract) that includes the following limitations for claim 1:
“An apparatus”: ‘217 discloses a well plate that is used for growing and treating cells ([0021]; Fig. 5; plate 1) that is being interpreted as the apparatus of the instant application.
“a lid”: ‘217 discloses a cover plate (plate 10; Fig. 5; [0026]) that is being interpreted as the lid of the instant application.
“a ceiling layer and a floor layer separated by a gap”: ‘217 discloses that the cover plate (i.e. the lid) has a upper cover (cover 10a) and a lower cover (cover 10b) that are separated b a gap (Fig. 5; [0027]).
“wherein said ceiling layer is configured to permit application of a first force that pushes against a control surface that transfers said first force to said floor layer”: The upper cover applies a first force to the lower cover or the control surface via a spring (spring 13; Fig. 5; [0027]).
“wherein said ceiling is further configured to be held by a second force that constrains motion of said ceiling layer such that said ceiling layer moves independently of said floor layer”: ‘217 discloses using bridges (bridges 14; Fig. 5; [0027]) that applies a second force to maintain the cover plate in place.
“wherein a change in said first and second forces initiates an adjustment of said gap.”: The change in forces applied to each plate results in an adjustment of the gap ([0027[; adjusts the seal to the well plate).
For claim 4, ‘217 discloses a hole in the lower plate (plate 10b; Fig. 5; [0027]).
For claim 5, ‘217 discloses a hole in the upper plate that is above the lower plate and control surface ([0027]; Fig. 5).
For claim 8, ‘217 discloses that the bridges (bridges 14; [0027]; Fig. 5) is being interpreted as an alignment feature that engages with the upper cover when it is attached to the device.
For claim 10, ‘217 discloses springs (springs 13; Fig. 5; [0027]) that is a feature that applies a force to the gap, but does not provide a force that would make it difficult to compress the upper and lower plates together.
For claim 19, ‘217 discloses supply connections (connections 4’; Fig. 5; [0025]) that extends from the ceiling, through the floor and into the well and is therefore wetted by the culture medium.
For claim 20, ‘217 discloses extensions (extensions 15; Fig. 5; [0027]) that extends from the lower plate and engages with the well plate. Furthermore, the upper plate does not include an equivalent feature.
Therefore, ‘217 meets the limitations of claims 1, 4, 5 8, 10, 19 and 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 25 is allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: For the prior art taken either singly or in combination fails to teach or reasonably suggest the following limitation when taken in context of the claim as a whole an apparatus that includes the following limitations: a lid configured to be disposed between a device and a receptacle with a plurality of wells holding liquid samples such that in operation, the lid is placed on the lid and the device is supported above and in contact with the lid, the lid comprising: a ceiling layer and a floor layer forming a gap between said layers, wherein the floor layer is configured to be placed on the receptacle in operation, the ceiling layer is configured to have contact with the device in operation, and to support at least some of the weight of the device; and a feature that exerts force between the floor layer and the ceiling layer that opposes closing of the gap, and in operation causes the ceiling layer to maintain contact with the device; a plurality of elongated probe affixed to the ceiling layer, each passing through a corresponding hole in the floor layer, and in operation protruding below the floor layer into a corresponding well of the receptacle, wherein change in the gap between the floor layer and the ceiling layer causes a change in a length of the probe extending below the floor layer, and in operation causing a change in a depth of the probe in a liquid sample in the well; wherein the floor layer includes a surface to support in operation a force imparted by an adjustable member of the device extending through an opening in the ceiling layer to the surface without imparting said force on the ceiling layer such that the weight of the device is in part supported by the ceiling layer and in part by said surface, and wherein in operation, adjustment of the adjustable member causes adjustment of the gap and thereby adjustment of the length of the probes extending below the floor layer into the liquid samples in the wells; wherein the lid provides an air path from an environment of the lid to draw air from the environment into the gap when the gap is increased and to expel air when the gap is decreased, and the floor of the lid provides tortuous paths between the environment and the wells of the receptacle.
The closest prior art is Inman et al. (US 2020/0116600 A1) which discloses an apparatus for measurement that detects oxygen content within a well plate using optical fibers, but Inman does not teach or suggest the limitations of claim 25.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Claims 2, 3, 11-13, 21, 23 and 24 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: For claim 2, the prior art fails to teach for fairly suggest where the probe is affixed to the ceiling layer and where an adjustment of the gap controls an extent to which the probe protrudes beneath the lid.
For claim 3, the prior art fails to teach for fairly suggest where the probe is affixed to the ceiling layer and where an adjustment of the gap controls an extent to which the probe protrudes from a surface on the bottom of the floor layer.
For claim 11, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest where the apparatus includes first and second extrusions that protrude into said gap from opposite directions, wherein said floor layer comprises an opening, wherein said first extrusion forms a tube that surrounds said opening, and wherein one of said first and second extrusions fits inside the other.
For claim 12, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest where the control surface is disposed on a surface of a post that extends from the floor layer into the gap and towards the ceiling layer.
For claim 13, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest a control surface disposed within a recess formed in a post that extends from the floor layer into the gap and towards the ceiling layer.
For claim 21, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest where the floor layer is a plurality of floor layers where each layer is configured with alignment features to engage different well plates and where the ceiling layer is configured to operate with each of the floor layers.
The closest prior art is Inman et al. (US 2020/0116600 A1) which discloses an apparatus for measurement that detects oxygen content within a well plate using optical fibers, but Inman does not teach or suggest the limitations of claims 2, 3, 11-13, 21, 23 and 24.
Claims 23-24 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.
For claim 23, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest an apparatus that forms a kit comprising the lid and the device, wherein the device is configured to be supported above the lid in operation, the device comprising: an actuator including the adjustable member and a motor for causing the adjustable member to change a distance of extension from the device, and in operation to cause a change in the gap between the ceiling layer and the floor layer; and a plurality of optical sensors configured to acquire optical signals from the probes when in operation the device is contact with the ceiling layer.
Claim 24 would be allowable for the same reasons as claim 23.
The closest prior art is Inman et al. (US 2020/0116600 A1) which discloses an apparatus for measurement that detects oxygen content within a well plate using optical fibers, but Inman does not teach or suggest the limitations of claims 19, 23 and 24.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Zhong et al. (US 2010/0029000 A1) discloses a system for tissue culture and treatment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL L HOBBS whose telephone number is (571)270-3724. The examiner can normally be reached Variable, but generally 8AM-5PM M-F.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at 571-272-1374. 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 L HOBBS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights