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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/27/2024 and 03/01/2024 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sekels [DE 102016014192], Applicant cited prior art.
Claim 1, Sekels discloses a device for moving a magnetic object [12] in a container [14], having dipoles [5/9] grouped around the container and a quadrupole [6/7/11], wherein the magnetic fields of the dipoles and of the quadrupole can be moved relative to one another [abs], wherein two pairs of dipoles [5/9] are arranged in different planes [figures 4a and 4e], at a distance from one another [figures 4a and 4e], and wherein two quadrupoles [6/11 and 7] are arranged in a plane between the planes of the two dipoles [highlighted portion of page 5].
Claim 2, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein magnets are arranged in Halbach cylinders [highlighted portion of page 4] in order to generate the dipoles [5/9] and the quadrupoles [6/11, 7], and enclose a space [3] intended for the container [14].
Claim 3, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein two Halbach cylinders, each having magnets for generating the dipoles [5/9] and/or the quadrupoles are arranged concentric to one another [figures 4a and 4e; highlighted portion of page 5].
Claim 4, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 2, wherein the Halbach cylinders, which enclose one another concentrically, can be moved relative to one another [highlighted portion of pages 4 and 5].
Claim 5, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 2, wherein the dipoles [5/9] and quadrupoles [6/11, 7], which are configured as Halbach cylinders [highlighted portion of page 5], have a drive apparatus, in each instance, and are mounted so as to rotate relative to one another [highlighted portion of page 5].
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.
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) 8-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Sekels [DE 102016014192], in view of Schostek [EP-2347699-A1], both Applicant cited prior art.
Claim 8, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 1, wherein the magnetic object [12] is configured to be introduced into a human body or an animal body [abs, particles 12 are in a human body].
Sekels fails to specifically teach that Sekels magnetic object is arranged in a probe.
Schostek teaches a magnetic object [5] that is arranged in a probe [1/2/26] that is configured to be introduced into a human body [15] or an animal body.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to place the magnetic object of Sekels in a probe as taught by Schostek in order to provide data as the magnetic particle is moved through the body via a magnetic field [Schostek abs]
Claim 9, Sekels as modified discloses the device according to claim 8, wherein Schostek teaches that the probe [1/2/269] has at least one sensor [16] for capturing data.
Claim 10, Sekels as modified discloses the device according to claim 8, wherein Schostek teaches that an induction coil [3] is arranged in the probe [1/2/26].
Claim 11, Sekels discloses the device according to claim 1, with the exception of the magnetic object is configured as a permanent magnet.
Schostek teaches a magnetic object [5] that is configured to be introduced into a human body [15] wherein the magnetic object is configured as a permanent magnet [abs].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention configure the magnetic object of Sekels as a permanent magnet as taught by Schostek in order to guide provide a means to direct the magnetic object in the body since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6 and 7 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bernard Rojas whose telephone number is (571)272-1998. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. thru Fri. 7:00 am - 4:00 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, Shawki S Ismail can be reached at (571) 272-3985. 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.
/BERNARD ROJAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837