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 .
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.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers (CHINA 202310203119.8 03/02/2023) required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements dated 11/4/2025 and 9/10/2026 have been considered and made of record.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “a first position-limiting member” and “a second position-limiting member” of claim 3 and “a telescoping member” of claim 19 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“a magnetic member” in claims 1 and 20;
“a connecting member” in claims 1 and 20;
“a fixing member” in claim 2;
“a first position-limiting member” in claim 3;
“a second position-limiting member” in claim 3;
“a vacuuming and liquid-collecting member” in claim 12.
“a position-limiting member” in claim 17; and
“a telescoping member” in claim 19.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-19 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 1 is considered indefinite for the following reasons:
i) The claim fails to include the traditional “transitional” phrase between the preamble of the claim and the body of the claim. As result, the claim will be treated on its merits as it does not exclude additional, unrecited elements.
ii) It is not clear from the instant claim language whether the recited “bioreactor” is intended to be positively recited element of the claimed invention. Since the preamble recites “A stirring device for a bioreactor”, the claim will be treated on its merits as though the bioreactor is not part of the claimed stirring device. As result, any elements in the dependent claims that are recited as structures of the bioreactor/tank will not be considered as positively recited elements of the stirring device.
In claim 3, it is not clear how the connecting member can include a structure of the tank if it has been recited as an element of the stirring device. I would appear that the “first position-limiting member” would be part of the “fixing member”. Clarification and/or correction is requested.
Claim 2 and 4-19 are indefinite because they depend from indefinite claim 1 and do not cure the deficiencies of the claim from which they depend.
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.
Claims 1-3, 15 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Killough (US 5,167,449) (Attached PTO-892).
With respect to claim 1, the reference of Killough discloses:
A stirring device (paddle shaft assembly) (Fig. 1) for a bioreactor (Fig. 2), the bioreactor including a tank (vessel)(40) for accommodating a mixture of cells and liquid, wherein
the stirring device includes a rotating shaft (14), a magnetic member (stirring magnet)(22)(Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraph [0053] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a magnet.), and a connecting member (upper support shaft)(1) with a bearing structure (2, 4, 6) (Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraphs [0062]-[0063] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a bearing or other rotational structures.),
a bottom portion of the rotating shaft is connected with the magnetic member, the magnetic member is in no contact with a bottom portion of the tank to drive the rotating shaft to rotate; the rotating shaft is in no contact with the bottom portion of the tank; and the rotating shaft is connected with a top portion of the tank through the connecting member (Figs. 1 and 2).
With respect to claim 2, the connecting member includes a bearing assembly (upper support shaft)(1) connected to a fixing member (44, 46, 48, 50) (Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraphs [0070]-[0072] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a tubular structure.). Note: Since the fixing member is recited as part of the bioreactor or tank which is not considered a positively recited element of the device, the bearing assembly (1) of the reference of Killough is considered to be structurally capable interfacing with the tubular structure (46) of Killough.
With respect to claim 3, elements (4 and 6) of the reference of Killough are considered to be functional equivalents to the claimed a first position-limiting member and a second position limiting member (Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraphs [0059]-[0061] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a bearing or other rotational structures.).
With respect to claims 15 and 17-19, in the absence of further positively recited structure with respect to the claimed stirring device, the stirring assembly of the reference of Killough is considered to be structurally capable of being used with the additional structures associated with the intended bioreactor/tank device. Note: Since the bioreactor/tank are not positively recited elements of the device of claim 1, further limitations of the fixing member do not add additional structure to the device of claim 1.
With respect to claim 20, the reference of Killough discloses:
A bioreactor (Fig. 2), comprising a tank (vessel)(40) for accommodating a mixture of cells and liquid and a stirring device (paddle shaft assembly)(Fig. 1),
wherein the stirring device includes a rotating shaft (14), a magnetic member (stirring magnet)(22)(Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraph [0053] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a magnet.), and a connecting member (upper support shaft)(1) with a bearing structure (2, 4, 6) (Note: This claim element is considered to invoke 35 USC 112(f). Paragraphs [0062]-[0063] of the instant disclosure identifies corresponding structures, including a bearing or other rotational structures.),
a bottom portion of the rotating shaft is connected with the magnetic member, the magnetic member is in no contact with a bottom portion of the tank to drive the rotating shaft to rotate; the rotating shaft is in no contact with the bottom portion of the tank; and the rotating shaft is connected with a top portion of the tank through the connecting member (Figs. 1 and 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-14 and 16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 4 and claims 5-14 and 16 depending therefrom would be allowable because the prior art of record fails to teach or fairly suggest a stirring device, in the claimed environment or scope of claim, that includes an envelope, the envelope is disposed around the connecting member, and a lower end of the envelope is fixedly connected with the rotating shaft with no gap, and an upper end of the envelope is connected with the connecting member.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The references of Mazowski (US 3,622,129) (Attached PTO-892); Sedam (US 3,888,466) (Attached PTO-892) and Eaton et al. (US 4,483,623) (Attached PTO-892) are cited as prior art which pertains to stirring devices with similar structure to that of instant claim 1.
The reference of Scharf et al. (US 3,649,465) (Attached PTO-892) is cited as prior art which discloses a enclosure (61) for a stirring device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H BEISNER whose telephone number is (571)272-1269. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, MICHAEL A MARCHESCHI, can be reached at telephone number (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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/William H. Beisner/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1799
WHB
