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 § 112
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
It is unclear to the Examiner how an optical assembly, which should consist of optical components, can transmit a force in a first direction to a deflection assembly. The Examiner will examine the claims as using a radiation detector that generates a detection signal (from a reflected beam from an ATR/FTIR system with a sample in contact) and the signal is transmitted to a processor and the processor sends a control signal to the deflection assembly. Clarification is required.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-8 and 11-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pastore et al. (US 2016/0258863) hereinafter known as Pastore, and further in view of Blair (US 2005/0171413).
With regards to claim 1 and 11, Pastore discloses an attenuated total reflectance (ATR) measurement system and method (FIG. 1; [0004][0038][0064]), comprising:
an optical assembly ([0010]; “…an optical assembly contained within the handheld enclosure,…”)([0039]; assorted optical components that includes detectors and 150)([0030[0064]; a sample contact actuator (e.g., an anvil actuator))([0065]; anvil arm) configured to transmit a force in a first direction ([0064]; “…a sample contact actuator (e.g., an anvil actuator) to be disclosed herein applies a desired contact force to the sample material against the ATR surface face 122a.”)[0071];
a deflection assembly ([0038]; a moveable (rotationally and vertically) sample contact arm (hereinafter anvil arm 191)…”) configured to:
receive the force from the optical assembly ([0081]; “…the movement of anvil arm 191 is configured to be controlled by a sensor (e.g., detector 132, as shown in FIG. 1)… The anvil 191 keeps moving based on electrical settings 808 while instrument 100 is simultaneously and continuously querying 810 the signal strength provided by Infrared (IR) detector 132 of FIG. 1. If the signal strength (i.e., sample spectroscopic signature strength) provides a reasonable signal, the anvil stops 816. If not, the anvil force is continued and the anvil arm 191 only stops moving 816 when an electrical maximum signal 814 (i.e., desired force as provided by the lookup tables 804) is met or the signal strength (i.e., spectroscopic signature strength) as feedback provided by the sensor 812, is acceptable by instrument 100. ”); and
redirect a portion of the force from the first direction to a second direction ([0071]; “ FIG. 3A also shows a designed non-limiting example anvil arm 191 coupled to an anvil post 194 that can be driven by a desired force mechanism, i.e., actuator (not shown) up (Z as shown in FIG. 3A) for clearance of enclosure 156, angularly moved Θ (as shown in FIG. 3B) via a motorized internal gear set, and thereafter down for vertical compression of a sample material,….”).
Pastore teaches of a load cell that can be used for controlling an applied force to a sample and to also measure the force on the ATR as input to a control loop [0083]. Also, the reference teaches of a sensor that utilizes signal strength (i.e., spectroscopic signature strength) as feedback for controlling anvil arm force [0081].
Pastore do not disclose a sensor mounted to the deflection assembly, wherein the sensor is configured to:
detect force communicated in the second direction from the deflection assembly.
Blair discloses an ATR device (FIG. 7; [0068][0069]; 200) that utilizes a pressure maintaining component 208 used to maintain a minimum threshold pressure on a measurement area. The pressure maintaining component 208 utilizes a pressure sensor 210 that can be integrated into the said component arm 208 for the purpose of measuring adherence to minimum pressure. The sensor can also provide a “no-go/go" type of signal to a user ([0070]; The Examiner correlates the component arm and pressure sensor to Pastore’s anvil arm and load cell, respectively.).
In view of Blair, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill within the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the moveable anvil arm (deflection assembly) of Pastore with a pressure sensor. The motivation is to utilize a pressure sensor to detect, measure, and send a output signal (or feedback signal) when the applied contact pressure/force from the anvil arm attains a specific pressure level/threshold pressure when in contact with a sample on a ATR surface.
With regards to claim 2 and 12, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, wherein the first direction comprises a vertical direction, and wherein the second direction is angularly offset from the first direction. (Pastore; [0038][0069]; moveable (rotationally and vertically) sample contact arm/ anvil arm 191)(Pastore; [0065]; “…the sample contact arm (e.g., anvil arm 191) thereafter raised and rotated into position,…”)
With regards to claim 3 and 13, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 2 and 12, wherein the second direction is in a direction orthogonal to the first direction. (In view of the rejection for claim 2, Pastore teaches that the anvil arm can be moved rotationally and vertically, therefore, moving in a first vertical direction and moving in a second orthogonal directions would be obvious.)
With regards to claim 4 and 14, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, further comprising a chassis, and wherein the deflection assembly is mounted to the chassis. (Pastore; [0063][0064]; instrument 100)
With regards to claim 5 and 15, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 4 and 14, wherein the deflection assembly is fixedly mounted to the chassis (see the rejection of claim 4), such that the deflection assembly deflects when receiving the force from the optical assembly (see the rejection of claim 1).
With regards to claim 6 and 16, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, wherein the sensor is hingeably mounted to the deflection assembly. (Pastore [0038] teaches that the anvil arm is rotationally and vertically moveable which suggest the use of a hinge.)
With regards to claim 7 and 17, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, wherein the sensor comprises a load cell or a load gauge. (see the rejection of claim 1)
With regards to claim 8 and 18, Pastore, in view of Blair, discloses the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, wherein the sensor generates a signal indicative of the force received by the sensor. (see the rejection of claim 1)
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10 and 19-20 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:
With regards to claim 9 and 19, Pastore, in view of Blair, do not specifically disclose the ATR measurement system and method of claim 1 and 11, wherein the sensor is configured to detect a deflection of the deflection assembly that is less than approximately 30 microns.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected based on the 112(a) rejection above and would be objected based on being allowable and dependent on rejected base claim 1 and 11 once the 112(a) rejections are overcome.
With regards to claim 10 and 20, Pastore, in view of Blair, do not specifically disclose the ATR measurement system of claim 1 and 11, wherein the deflection assembly further comprises a retention element configured to translate in the second direction, thereby causing a repositioning of the sensor with respect to a projection surface of the deflection assembly.
Claims 10 and 20 are rejected based on the 112(a) rejection above and would be objected based on being allowable and dependent on rejected base claim 1 and 11 once the 112(a) rejections are overcome.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Aeschbach (US 2012/0262710)
Oba et al. (US 2022/0386875)
Hoult et al. (US 2008/0285122)
Neuberg (US 2013/0163077)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUGH H MAUPIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1495. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30 - 5:00 pm.
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/HUGH MAUPIN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2884