Prosecution Insights
Last updated: July 17, 2026
Application No. 18/579,561

TRANSFER DEVICE FOR TRANSFERRING SAMPLE CONTAINERS IN A SAMPLE HANDLING SYSTEM

Non-Final OA §112
Filed
Jan 16, 2024
Priority
Jul 16, 2021 — EU 21186079.6 +1 more
Examiner
WHATLEY, BENJAMIN R
Art Unit
Tech Center
Assignee
Roche Diagnostics Operations Inc.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
67%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
8m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 67% — above average
67%
Career Allowance Rate
268 granted / 402 resolved
+6.7% vs TC avg
Strong +68% interview lift
Without
With
+68.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 2m
Avg Prosecution
37 currently pending
Career history
452
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.6%
-39.4% vs TC avg
§103
77.8%
+37.8% vs TC avg
§102
4.2%
-35.8% vs TC avg
§112
5.4%
-34.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 402 resolved cases

Office Action

§112
DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE 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 statements (IDS) submitted on 1/16/24, 3/13/24 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner. Claim Status Claims 1-15 are pending. 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 1-15 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. As to claim 1, it is unclear how the moving unit with the magnet in clause two moves in a movement plane through the array of electromagnetic actuators. Although the moving unit moving across, or over, the array would be clearly understood, it is unclear how the moving unit can move through the array of actuators because there has not been any description of what enables the movement between the actuators. Actuators in an array are typically packed and ordered such that it is unclear how anything could move through or between the actuators. The examiner notes that the limitations of claim 4 (and corresponding claim 3) which define a guiding slot through which the magnets may move would provide clarity. Claims 2-15 are rejected based on further claim dependency. As to line 2 of claim 14, it is unclear what “the movement plane" is referring to as previously one specific movement plane has not been described and instead at least one movement plane was recited. Therefore, this limitation has insufficient antecedent basis and it is unclear if applicants are intended to refer to a singular specific plane amongst a plurality or each plane. The examiner suggests amending the claim to read as "the at least one movement plane". As to line 4 of claim 15, it is unclear what the language "referring to a transfer device" is attempting to define and also unclear whether this is the same transfer device as previously recited or a different transfer device. Previously the transfer device of claim 1 has already been referenced. The examiner suggests removing this language. Appropriate correction and/or clarification is required. Other References Cited The prior art of made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include; Tamura et al (US 20220413000; hereinafter “Tamura”) teaches a gripper on the surface above and actuated by, in a horizontal movement plane, electromagnetic actuators below a surface; Fig. 2. However, the gripper does not move perpendicular to the movement plane as the gripping and movement are in the same horizontal direction, and the magnets of the gripper move on top of the electromagnets and do not move through the array of electromagnets. Eberhardt et al (US 10669049; hereinafter “Eberhardt”; already of record) teaches moving holders on top of an electromagnetic plane; Fig. 2. However, the holders and not grippers and do not move perpendicular to the movement plane a, and the magnets of the holder move on top of the electromagnets and do not move through the array of electromagnets. Riether et al (US 20160077120; hereinafter “Riether”; already of record) teaches a gripper that moves perpendicular to a movement plane, and on top, of electromagnets; Fig. 1-2. Riether does not teach that the gripper moves through the electromagnets. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 1-15 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: In addition to the remarks of record, the instant claims define over the prior art because the cited prior art does not teach or suggest a transfer device for transferring sample containers in a sample handling system, wherein the transfer device comprises: a transport device comprising an array of electromagnetic actuators; a moving unit with a permanent magnet that moves in a plane through the array by magnetic interaction with the electromagnetic actuators; and a gripper movable perpendicular to the plane; where the moving unit and gripper are movable through the array by moving through a guiding slot. 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.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R WHATLEY whose telephone number is (571) 272-9892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 8am-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, 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. /Benjamin R Whatley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 16, 2024
Application Filed
May 29, 2026
Examiner Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection mailed — §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12678785
REAGENT DELIVERY NETWORKS
3y 11m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12681030
NUCLEIC ACID ANALYSIS DEVICE
3y 9m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12678779
TESTING SYSTEM
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12678780
Testing System
3y 7m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Patent 12681031
Automatic Analyzer
3y 4m to grant Granted Jul 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
67%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+68.1%)
3y 2m (~8m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 402 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month