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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pidgeon et al. (WO 00/45929, hereafter referred to as Pidgeon).
Regarding claim 1, Pidgeon teaches a gas analysis system (see figures 1 & 5) comprising: a first column (column 1) that separates a gas component contained in sample gas; a second column (column 2) that separates a gas component contained in the sample gas; a detector (Detector) that detects the gas components introduced from the first column and the second column; a valve (Eluent switch) that switches gas introduction from the first column into the detector; and a controller (electronic control system) that performs delay processing of switching the valve between open and closed states so that timing of start of introduction of the gas component separated in the first column into the detector is delayed to be later than timing of completion of introduction of the gas component separated in the second column into the detector (see page 24, ‘The eluent switch device includes a pre-detector manifold allowing sequential analysis of the eluents from the various columns with a single spray-needle, the analysis sequence being determined by a program entered by the operator’).
Additionally, regarding the limitation the functional recitation that the ‘controller performs delay processing of switching the valve between open and closed states so that timing of start of introduction of the gas component separated in the first column into the detector is delayed to be later than timing of completion of introduction of the gas component separated in the second column into the detector’, has not been given patentable weight because it is narrative in form. In order to be given patentable weight, a functional recitation must be expressed as a "means" for performing the specified function, as set forth 35 U. S. C. 112, 6th paragraph, and must be supported by recitation in the claim of sufficient structure to warrant the presence of the functional language. In re Fuller, 1929 C.D. 172; 388 O.G. 279.
Regarding claim 4, Pidgeon further teaches wherein the valve includes a base portion provided with a flow inlet for introduction of gas into inside and a flow outlet for flow of gas introduced from the flow inlet to outside (see figure 7), and a diaphragm portion, arranged as being opposed to the base portion, the diaphragm portion elastically deforming to switch between flow and cut-off of gas from the flow inlet to the flow outlet (see page 30).
Regarding claim 5, Pidgeon further teaches wherein the first column is a capillary column (see page 7).
Regarding claim 7, Pidgeon further teaches a merge portion connected to an outlet of the first column and an outlet of the second column, wherein the detector detects the gas component introduced from the merge portion (see para. 0163, ‘detector 3150 is fluidically coupled to outlet ports of the microfluidic device 3135 and can be operated in parallel to receive sample from both columns 3121, 3122 at the same time’.) The microfluidic device 3135 acts as a switch (figure 8: 835 and para. 0137) and alternatively as a merge portion.
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pidgeon in view of Tipler et al. (U.S. 2015/0089998, hereafter referred to as Tipler.
Regarding claim 2, Pidgeon does not explicitly teach wherein in the delay processing, the controller controls the valve to close to enclose in the first column, the gas component separated in the first column while the gas component separated in the second column is being introduced into the detector.
Tipler teaches a similar system wherein first and second columns (3121, 3122) are connected to a detector 3150 by way of a microfluidic device 3135. Para. 0135 teaches a switching valve may take numerous forms including a solenoid valve, ball valve, a microfluidic device or other devices. Tipler further teaches in para. 0137, ‘the valve is configured so that the fluid flow path 830 is loaded with sample and is fluidically decoupled from the detector 840 in a first position…At a second period, the valve 835 may be switched to a second position to fluidically couple the second fluid flow path 830 and the detector 840 and to fluidically decouple the first fluid flow path 830 and the detector 840’.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the device of Pidgeon with the teaching of Tipler in order to prevent loss of sample.
Regarding claim 3, Pidgeon further teaches wherein the controller controls the valve to open to introduce the gas component separated in a column into the detector, but does not explicitly teach that this step occurs after the controller performs the delay processing. Pidgeon does teach a sequence cycle (see table 1) divided into four quarters, wherein the key feature of this programming is that the eluent from only one column is delivered into the detection system (see pages 28 & 29). Moreover, Pidgeon teaches, ‘In one embodiment, the pre-detector eluent switch device is electronically controlled and allows the operator to preset the time, sequence and/or volume parameters for the introduction of the eluent from the various columns to the eluent analyzer. For example, the analysis sequence can be set so that eluents from column 1, column 2, column 3 and column 4 alternatively enter the electrospray housing for 2-3 seconds at a time, with introduction of reference solvent in between analyses for sample carryover problem elimination. Thus, the eluting samples from each column are analyzed alternatively, according to a pre-determined sequence programmed by the operator through a computer software interfaced with the LC MS system’ (see page 21).
Additionally, the step ‘wherein the controller controls the valve to open to introduce the gas component separated in the first column into the detector after the controller performs the delay processing’, has not been given patentable weight because it is narrative in form. In order to be given patentable weight, a functional recitation must be expressed as a "means" for performing the specified function, as set forth 35 U. S. C. 112, 6th paragraph, and must be supported by recitation in the claim of sufficient structure to warrant the presence of the functional language. In re Fuller, 1929 C.D. 172; 388 O.G. 279.
Claim(s) 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pidgeon in view of Tipler, and further in view of Quint et al. (U.S. 12,306,147, hereafter referred to as Quint).
Neither reference explicitly teaches the gas analysis system further comprises a switching module arranged between the first column and the second column, the switching module being configured to switch between a serial state in which the first column and the second column are connected in series in this order to the detector and a parallel state in which the first column and the second column are connected in parallel to the detector.
Quint teaches a similar system wherein the LC system may be embodied as a single channel or as a multi-channel system that may comprise one or a plurality of LC columns arranged in parallel and/or in series. (see page 2, line 60 - page 3, line 67; lines see page 4, lines 6-10).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the teachings of Pidgeon and Tipler with the teaching of Quint since such a configuration is normal in the art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMEL E WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-7027. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 10am-4pm.
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, John Breene can be reached at (571)272-4107. 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.
/JAMEL E WILLIAMS/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855