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 statements (IDSs) submitted on 5/24/2024 and 3/19/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: it is recommended that "a drive device that uses magnetic force to rotatably drive the agitator . Appropriate correction is required.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Watkins et al. (US 2016/0281043 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Watkins et al. discloses a cell culturing device that cultures cells (para. 0001), comprising: a vessel (bioreactor 100) that accommodates a culture solution containing a medium (abstract “culture medium”) and cells (para. 0002 “cells”); an agitator that is provided in the vessel and agitates the culture solution (impeller 109); a discharge pipe that discharges the culture solution in the vessel to outside the vessel (harvest tube 105); and an oxygen intake pipe that draws oxygen into the vessel (sparger tube 106), the discharge pipe having an end below the agitator in a vertical direction (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 2, Watkins et al. discloses a cell culturing device wherein the oxygen intake pipe has an end positioned so as to overlap the agitator in the vertical direction (Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3, Watkins et al. discloses a cell culturing device further comprising: a drive device that uses magnetic force to rotatably drive the agitator contactlessly from outside the vessel (para. 0035 “magnetic drive assembly for impeller”; para. 0038 “the driving assembly remains isolated from the culture medium inside vessel”); and a control device that controls an operation of the drive device (para. 0004 “control system… agitation”; paras. 0044-0045).
Regarding the limitation “wherein after the control device stops the drive device, the culture solution is discharged through the discharge pipe to outside the vessel”, it has been held that a claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim (MPEP § 2114 II). Therefore, the apparatus disclosed by Watkins et al. would be fully capable of achieving every claimed intended use because the prior art apparatus is disclosed to have a magnetic drive assembly to control an impeller (para. 0035), and a harvest tube (105) and would be structurally capable of discharging a culture solution after operation of a drive device has stopped absent clear evidence otherwise.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Anderson (US 4,649,118) discloses a cell culture apparatus including a magnetic stirrer and tubes for introducing gas and withdrawing medium and cells.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ASHLEY LOPEZLIRA whose telephone number is (703)756-5517. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri: 8:30-5:00.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at 571-272-1374. 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.
/ASHLEY LOPEZLIRA/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/MICHAEL A MARCHESCHI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights