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 § 103
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 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.
Claims 11 and 17 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Flagle – US 20130231585.
As to claim 1, Flagle teaches a tissue holder assembly (fig.4A-4B and 5B) comprising: a base; a cover 291 configured to removably couple to the base and define an interior chamber (described fig.4A; fig.4B and described fig.5B); and a tissue holder 242 disposed within the interior chamber and rotatable around a longitudinal axis of the tissue holder assembly ([0089] and described fig.4A; fig.4B and described fig.5B), wherein the cover 291 comprises: an entry port 245 defining a fluid pathway through the cover 291 and into the interior chamber, the entry port 245 including an inlet defining an inlet axis, the inlet is shaped and sized to at least partially receive an inlet tube ([0059]: the inlet port 245 is coupled to a first portion of the vacuum line, which corresponds to “inlet tube”), the inlet axis extending radially relative to the longitudinal axis and intersecting the longitudinal axis at a right angle.
PNG
media_image1.png
327
527
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
586
430
media_image2.png
Greyscale
While Flagle teaches the inlet axis extending radially relative to the longitudinal axis and intersecting the longitudinal axis at a right angle, it does not explicitly teach the inlet axis extending radially relative to the longitudinal axis and intersecting the longitudinal axis at an acute angle.
It would thus have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify angle of inlet channel 245 of Flagle to include the inlet axis extending radially relative to the longitudinal axis and intersecting the longitudinal axis at an acute angle, because when moving a tissue specimen into a holder or transport container, tilting the sample at an angle can help prevent it from sliding/spilling out and reduce pressure on delicate structures, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention i.e. angle of inlet channel 245 of Flagle involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
As to claim 15, Flagle further teaches the tissue holder 242 includes a plurality of tissue storage compartments 243 (or “tissue accepting slots” 243), the entry port 245 disposed above one of the plurality of tissue storage compartments 243, and wherein the inlet axis is circumferentially offset relative to a radial centerline of the one of the plurality of tissue storage compartments 243 (see described fig.4A).
PNG
media_image3.png
372
527
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Claims 16 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Flagle – US 20130231585 and further in view of Sloan – US 20150231627.
As to claim 16, Flagle does not explicitly teach at least a portion of the base, the cover, or the tissue holder includes an anticoagulant surface coating.
Sloan teaches a concept of: inner surface of pathway and/or other surfaces along the fluid pathway such as but not limited to the sample inlet to the interior of a sample collection vessel may be coated with an anti-coagulant solution. The anti-coagulant solution helps prevent the sample, e.g., blood, from clotting when provided to the fluidic device ([0153]).
It would thus have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Flagle with teachings of Sloan to include at least a portion of the base, the cover, or the tissue holder includes an anticoagulant surface coating, because it helps prevent sample, e.g., blood, from clotting when provided to fluidic device ([0153]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 are allowable.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
As to claim 1, claim includes a first cross-sectional area of the transition channel at the inlet is smaller than a second cross-sectional area of the transition channel at the outlet, when in combination with all other elements in claim 1 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
As to claims 2-10, claims 2-10 are also allowable because they are dependent on claim 1.
As to claim 17, claim 17 includes an outlet disposed above the tissue storage compartment, when in combination with all other elements in claim 17 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
As to claims 18-20, claims 18-20 are also allowable because they are dependent on claim 17.
Claims 12-13 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.
As to claim 12, claim includes the transition channel has a larger cross-sectional area proximate the outlet than proximate the inlet, when in combination with all other elements in claim 1 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
As to claims 12-13, claims 12-13 are also allowable because they are dependent on claim 12.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUONG D PHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8883. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday – Friday 12pm-8pm.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /TRUONG D PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights