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
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 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, 4, 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chow (US 2002/0023684):
Regarding claim 1, Chow discloses a microfluidic mixer comprising: first (132) and second (126) input chambers respectively for receiving first and second fluid reactants; an output chamber (130) for withdrawing the product of the first and second fluid reactants; a first flow path (124) interconnecting the first and second input chambers; and a second flow path (122) interconnecting the second input chamber and the output chamber; wherein, the first and second input chambers respectively have open tops allowing the first and second fluid reactants to be fed from their respective open tops (see Fig. 1C); the second input chamber is larger in size than that of the first input chamber (see Fig. 1C), the first input chamber and the output chamber respectively have their bottom surfaces leveled with that of the first and/or the second flow paths (see Fig. 1C), while the second input chamber has its bottom surface protruded below that of the first flow path (see Fig. 1C). The mixer would be capable of being used such that a three-dimensional flow is created in the second input chamber when the first fluid reactant perfused across the first flow path in lateral direction collides with the second fluid reactant, which is in a non-lateral direction (see Fig. 1C).
Regarding claim 3, the second input chamber has its bottom surface protruded below that of the first and/or second flow paths by a distance that is at least 2-folds of the height of the first or second flow paths (see Fig. 1C).
Regarding claim 4, the second input chamber has its bottom surface protruded below that of the first and/or second flow paths by a distance that is about 5-folds of the height of the first or second flow paths (see Fig. 1C).
Regarding claim 6, a microfluidic system comprises a pump (see [0037]) and the mixer discussed above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claim 7, analyzer is disclosed (see [0009]).
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.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chow (US 2002/0023684) in view of Pugia (US 7,347,617). The mixer of Chow was discussed above. The first flow path having a section that diverges into a plurality of fluid conduits independently leading toward the second input chamber is not disclosed. Pugia teaches providing a flow path that diverges into a plurality of fluid conduits (20, 20a, 20b) independently leading toward a second input chamber. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided a plurality of fluid conduits independently leading toward the second input chamber as taught by Pugia to improve mixing (see col. 9, lines 1-7).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chow (US 2002/0023684) in view of Jovanovich (US 8,672,532). The mixer of Chow was discussed above. The second channel having zigzag turns is not disclosed. Jovanovich teaches providing a micromixer with zigzag turns. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have provided the second channel with zigzag turns as taught by Jovanovich to achieve a longer path length within a compact area thereby improving mixing (see col. 20, lines 38-46).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID L SORKIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1148. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-3:30pm.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
DAVID L. SORKIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/DAVID L SORKIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights