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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 3/15/24 and 2/10/26 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
Claims 1-24 are pending and are examined.
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.
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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 18, 19, 20, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gale (US Patent 3,487,965).
Regarding Claim 1, Gale teaches a method for unloading a sample container (method of dispensing container contents. See abstract.) comprising:
inserting a capped sample tube containing a sample into a rotatable carriage of an unloading apparatus (as shown in FIGURE 2A, the container therein being shown in an initial upright position with closure end E-1 located proximate to but below the cutter means 22. Thereafter the cutter means 22 is actuated downwardly so as to completely sever closure end E-1 from the body of the container and thereafter upwardly);
providing the sample tube in an upright vertical position (see Fig. 2A);
uncapping the sample tube which creates an open top end (E1 is off in Fig. 2C, E1 is off);
rotating the sample tube to an inverted vertical position (see Figs. 2D, 2E);
ejecting the sample from the sample tube (Fig. 2G, contents are released).
Gale fails to explicitly disclose rotating the sample tube a first time to an upright vertical position, and rotating the sample tube a second time to an inverted vertical position.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to rotate the sample tube a first time to an upright vertical position, whereby the rotating of the sample tube to an inverted vertical position is a second rotation step of the sample tube, in order to ensure that the sample tube is positioned correctly for the cutter means to be able to act on the sample tube (i.e. to be able to uncap the sample tube).
Regarding Claim 2, Gale teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the carriage includes an elongated receptacle into which the sample tube is inserted (grasping means 20 in Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim 3, Gale teaches the method according to claim 1, further comprising after the uncapping step, a step of covering the uncapped sample tube with a closure plate before rotating the sample tube the second time (Fig. 2F, the cap is put back on the tube, cutter means 22 which acts as the top plate).
Regarding Claim 18, Gale teaches the method according to claim 1, wherein the carriage is both rotatable vertically to change the sample tube between upright and inverted vertical positions, and linearly movable in a vertical direction to raise or lower the sample tube (see Fig. 2, turn, downward axial movement in Claim 3. See also Fig. 1 and reference signs 76 and 78).
Regarding Claim 19, Gale teaches the method according to claim 18, wherein the carriage is rotatably supported by a horizontally oriented rotating drive shaft (Thereafter the positioning and grasping means 20 is rotated through an arc of 180° so as to position the t severed and now opened end of the container above the opening 24 and so as to freely expose the second closure end to the cutter means 22 as depicted in FIGURES 2D and 2E.).
Regarding Claim 20, Gale teaches the method according to claim 19, wherein the carriage has a rotational range of motion of 360 degrees about the drive shaft (Thereafter the positioning and grasping means 20 is rotated through an arc of 180° so as to position the t severed and now opened end of the container above the opening 24 and so as to freely expose the second closure end to the cutter means 22 as depicted in FIGURES 2D and 2E. Two rotations would be 360 degrees.).
Regarding Claim 21, Gale teaches a method for unloading a sample container comprising:
inserting a capped sample tube containing a sample into a rotatable carriage of an unloading apparatus (as shown in FIGURE 2A, the container therein being shown in an initial upright position with closure end E-1 located proximate to but below the cutter means 22. Thereafter the cutter means 22 is actuated downwardly so as to completely sever closure end E-1 from the body of the container and thereafter upwardly);
providing the sample tube in an upright vertical position (see Fig. 2A);
uncapping the sample tube which creates an open top end (E1 is off in Fig. 2C, E1 is off);
rotating the sample tube to an inverted vertical position (see Figs. 2D, 2E);
ejecting the sample from the sample tube, wherein the sample comprises a solid material or an agricultural sample material (Fig. 2G, contents are released).
Gale fails to explicitly disclose rotating the sample tube a first time to an upright vertical position, and rotating the sample tube a second time to an inverted vertical position.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to rotate the sample tube a first time to an upright vertical position, whereby the rotating of the sample tube to an inverted vertical position is a second rotation step of the sample tube, in order to ensure that the sample tube is positioned correctly for the cutter means to be able to act on the sample tube (i.e. to be able to uncap the sample tube).
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.
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.
Claims 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gale (US Patent 3,487,965), in view of Self (US Pub 2010/0126286).
Regarding Claims 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15, Gale teaches the method according to claim 3.
Gale is silent to the method steps of before the ejecting step, a step of uncovering the uncapped sample tube by removing the closure plate, the ejecting step comprises inserting a sample ejector piston-plunger through the sample tube in a downward stroke, the sample ejector piston-plunger lockingly engages a push cap slideably disposed inside the sample tube and moves the push cap downwards towards the open top end of the sample tube to eject the sample, comprising after the ejecting step, a step of moving the sample ejector piston-plunger in an upward stroke which draws the push cap back upwards in the sample tube, wherein the uncapping step includes engaging a decapper with a snap-fit cap on the top end of the sample tube, and moving the carriage to lower the tube with the decapper engaged with the snap-fit cap to remove the cap, inserting step comprises engaging a castellated bottom end of the sample tube with a mating castellated surface inside the receptacle, wherein the sample tube is in a horizontal position during the inserting step, the inserting step includes pushing the sample tube into the receptacle with a ramrod slideably movable on the unloading apparatus, wherein the ramrod engages the sample tube on a V-shaped feed chute aligned with a loading port of the unloading apparatus to guide the sample tube into the receptacle, comprising after the ejecting steps of rotating the sample tube a third time to a horizontal position, and pushing the sample tube out of the unloading apparatus with a tube ejector piston- plunger, the sample tube is both inserted into the unloading apparatus and pushed out of the unloading apparatus in opposing linear directions along a common feed axis, comprising a programmable controller operably coupled to the unloading apparatus and configured to control operation of the unloading apparatus.
Self teaches in the related art of decapper/capper unit in [0112] and sample processing in the Abstract. [0111] While the shown embodiments generally refer to decapping and capping operations for threaded twist-off caps, it will be understood that, in other embodiments, the DCU may be adapted to perform these operations on pushcaps instead of or in addition to threaded caps. In such an embodiment, the grips 614, 616 may be adapted to apply a force to pull the cap off a bottle. [0112] As noted above, the decapper/capper unit 222 may be mounted on a rotating platform 618. The platform 618 may be rotated as needed by any suitable drive mechanism and control system. As explained in more detail in the below exemplary process examples, the platform 618 may be rotated to positioned the bottles contained in the bottle grips 614 at various locations for various processing steps. For example, the platform may be rotated 90 degrees to locate a bottle at a pipetting station where an pipette is used to aspirate a sample from the bottle. The decapper/capper unit 222 is shown in the decapping (and capping)-position in FIG. 6A, and in the aspirating position in FIG. 6B. [0122] During the run, the DCU-OP may use a PLC controller or other control logic to select and use sensors that monitor some or all of the processing steps to assure quality control and correct handling of the samples. [0125] During operation, the DCU-OP may perform any of the processes described herein, and may perform other processes as well.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have added the method steps and a controller, as taught by Self, to the method, as taught by Gale, to allow for automated sample processing.
Claims 16, 17, 22, 23, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gale (US Patent 3,487,965), in view of Agrawal (US Pub 2011/0092377).
Regarding Claims 16, 17, 22, 23, and 24, Gale teaches the method according to claim 1.
Gale is silent to the sample comprises agricultural sample material, wherein the sample material comprises soil, the sample is the solid material.
Agrawal teaches in the related art of fluid handling systems in [0023] such as cappers and decappers. [0001] This method can be used to analyze environmental samples of soil. [0002] Environmental and industrial hygiene samples originate from a number of places, such as industrial sites, waste storage and dumps, around these areas in air, water and soil.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have applied the method, as taught by Gale, to a solid material and an agricultural sample material such as soil, as taught by Agrawal, to allow for handling environmental samples which may need to be tested for contaminants, as taught by Agrawal in [0001].
Other References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
. Kitamura (JP H06201705) teaches a method for unloading a sample container (Fig. 7, Pg. 6 3rd-4th Paras., sample bottle 9c) comprising:
inserting a capped sample tube containing a sample into a rotatable carriage of an unloading apparatus (robot 63 is interpreted as a carriage);
uncapping the sample tube which creates an open top end (A sample transfer robot 63 for opening the sample is provided, where it is implicit that the sample tube is uncapped in the act of opening the sample);
rotating the sample tube a second time to an inverted vertical position (A robot 61 is attached which grips and conveys a and rotates. As shown in the front view of FIG. 7, the bulk specific gravity measuring device 33 with static eliminator grips and conveys the subdivided sample bottle 9c containing the powder sample and inverts the sample container.); and
ejecting the sample from the sample tube, wherein the sample comprises a solid material or an agricultural sample material (the powder in a sample tube falls into a funnel 201).
However, Kitamura is silent on rotating the sample tube a first time to an upright vertical position, as the sample bottle 9c is in an upright vertical position initially since there is no preceding method step to indicate otherwise.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACQUELINE BRAZIN whose telephone number is (571)270-1457. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at 571-270-3638. 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.
/JB/
/JOHN MCGUIRK/Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights