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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by UEDA (WO 2018100612 A1).
Regarding claim 1, UEDA discloses an ionizer disposed in an ionization chamber (figs. 1-2; 11) separated from an analysis chamber (12, 13, and/or 14) by a partition (unlabeled; supporting 30) provided with an ion introduction port (30), the ionizer comprising:
an electrospray ionization probe (21, 211, 212, 213) (abstract Note ESI) configured to charge and nebulize (213) (abstract) a liquid sample as charged droplets (abstract), the electrospray ionization probe being disposed such that a nebulization axis (of 21/213) is orthogonal to a central axis (of 30) of the ion introduction port (30); and
a heated gas supply mechanism (24) configured to blow a heated gas, from a predetermined direction (that of 24), to a position between a tip of the electrospray ionization probe (21) and an intersection point of the nebulization axis (of 21/213) and the central axis (of 30), the position being separated from the tip by a predetermined distance or more (predetermined during device 10’s construction/design/assembly);
wherein the predetermined direction and the predetermined distance are set such that the heated gas (from 24) does not reach the electrospray ionization probe (21) (fig. 1; gas from 24 blows away from ESI probe 21 towards 30 and out of vacuum pump outlets (unlabeled) at bottom of 11, 12).
(figs. 1-2; MS 10; ionization chamber 11; ESI probe 21 (211, 212, 213), heated gas flow from 24, conductive capillary 22; ion introduction tube/port 30; partition wall (unlabeled between 11 and 12));
(abstract)
(translation, pgs. 1-3 and 4-5).
Regarding claim 2, UEDA discloses that the central axis of the ion introduction port (30) is a horizontal axis, and the tip of the electrospray ionization probe (21) is disposed above the ion introduction port, and the charged droplets (abstract) are nebulized (abstract) (via 213) downward from the tip (of 21).
(figs. 1-2; ESI probe 21 (211, 212, 213), ion introduction port 30).
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.
2. Claim(s) 3 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over UEDA (WO 2018100612 A1) in view of FUKUI (WO 2017104053 A1).
Regarding claim 3, UEDA discloses wherein an angle formed by the nebulization axis (from 21/213) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (from 24) is
But UEDA fails to disclose an angle formed by the nebulization axis (from 21/213) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (from 24) is
FUKUI, however, discloses an ESI probe (101), an angle formed by the nebulization axis (from 101) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (from 103) is 60 degrees or more and 80 degrees or less (see fig. 2, 101, 103) (pgs. 1 and 3) (abstract)
(figs. 1-3; ESI probe 101, heated gas supply 103; ion introduction tube/port 102 with heater 106; partition wall (unlabeled between 10 and 12)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of UEDA, with an angle formed by the nebulization axis and a blowing direction of the heated gas is 60 degrees or more and 80 degrees or less )see, as taught by FUKUI, to use as a substitution of one known ESI probe angle and heated gas flow supply angle relation for another to desorb solvent molecules from the ESI charged droplets to obtain predictable increased resolution results (pg. 3).
Regarding claim 5, UEDA discloses wherein the ion introduction port (30) is an inlet of
But UEDA fails to disclose wherein the ion introduction port is an inlet of a desolvation tube heated by a heating member constituting a part of the partition , and the heated gas supply mechanism is configured to blow the heated gas to the heating member.
FUKUI, however, discloses an ESI probe (101), wherein the ion introduction port (102) is an inlet of a desolvation tube (102 via 106) heated by a heating member (106) constituting a part of the partition (wall between 10, 12), and the heated gas supply mechanism (from 103) is configured to blow the heated gas to the heating member (106 of 102) .
(figs. 1-3; ESI probe 101, heated gas supply 103; ion introduction tube/port 102 with heater 106; partition wall (unlabeled between 10 and 12));
(abstract)
(pgs. 1 and 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of UEDA, with the ion introduction port is an inlet of a desolvation tube heated by a heating member, as taught by FUKUI, to use as a substitution of one known ion introduction port/tube (i.e., a desolvation tube with a heater) for another generic tube, for desolvation of solvent from the ESI charged droplets prior to downstream analysis to thereby obtain the predictable results of increased resolution.
2. Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over UEDA (WO 2018100612 A1) in view of COVEY et al. (US 6759650 B2).
Regarding claim 4, UEDA discloses wherein a distance from the tip of the electrospray ionization probe (21) to “an intersection” of the nebulization axis (from 21/213) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (from 24)
But UEDA fails to disclose a distance from the tip of the electrospray ionization probe (21) to “an intersection” of the nebulization axis (from 21/213) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (from 24) is 2.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less.
COVEY. However, discloses a nebulizer ion source probe (figs. 3 and 7; 70/72) with nebulized gas flow axis (along 106), heated gas flows (104 from 110) for desolvation of droplets (in 106); and that
a distance from the tip of the spray ionization probe (70/72) to “an intersection” of the nebulization axis (from 70/72) and a blowing direction of the heated gas (104 from 110) is 2.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less (col. 11, lines 40-55)
(Note claim 4 claims “an intersection” which can be any intersection between “2.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less”).
(fig. 7; 70, 106; 110, 104);
(col. 11, lines 25-55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA applications) to combine/modify the invention of UEDA, with a distance from the tip of the spray ionization probe to “an intersection” of the nebulization axis and a blowing direction of the heated gas is 2.5 mm or more and 10 mm or less, as taught by COVEY, to use as “an intersection” distance to ensue desired entrainment and recirculation of gas for the advantages of higher sensitivity and/or lower background chemical noise (col. 11, lines 25-55).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Andrew Smyth whose telephone number is 571-270-1746. The examiner can normally be reached between 9:00AM - 6:00PM; Monday thru Friday.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Georgia Epps can be reached on (571) 272-2328. 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.
/ANDREW SMYTH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881