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 03/29/2024 was being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2 and 19 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
With regards to claims 2 and 19, the phrase "preferably" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claim(s) 1 – 5, 11 – 26 and 35 - 38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharpe et al. (EP 1562035 A2) in view of Makarewicz et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0200164 A1).
With regards to claim 1, Sharpe discloses a system for measuring the photoluminescence in a droplet [0093] – [0096], [0105] – [0115] (Figure 6 – 15), comprising:
a source 71, prism 74, cylindrical band of light 75, paraboloid reflector 20/78, nozzle assembly 79, particle stream 80 and detector 82/501 (Figures 6 – 10);
a source 71 with a prism 74 of light for exciting photoluminescence in a liquid, said source71 being located at a first position [0045], [0082];
a redirection system comprising at least one redirecting element positioned outside said shadow zone, wherein said at least one redirecting element is adapted to receive light from said source 71 and to redirect said received light towards said the sample-receiving region inside the said shadow zone; and
a detector 82/501 receiving, at a second position, photoluminescent radiation emanating from said the sample-receiving region [0048] [0085]; and
wherein said redirection system extends around said shadow zone to redirect light into the sample-receiving region from a plurality of converging directions, such that the sample-receiving region receives light from said plurality of converging directions (i.e., Figure 14, the radial optics configuration for a flow cytometer 500 can combine 360-degree radial illumination and radially symmetric collection) [0077] – [0085], [0117].
Sharpe fails to expressly disclose a stop positioned relative to said source so as to define a shadow zone in which light of at least one wavelength emanating from said source is blocked from direct transmission by the stop, said shadow zone including a sample-receiving region
Makarewicz provides a system, including methods and apparatus, for detection of spaced droplets [0062]. The system may include an obscuration bar 219, operatively positioned between the sample and detector, which reduces the amount of direct (unscattered) excitation radiation (light) that falls on the detector. The obscuration bar, shown here as a small square object in front of optical element 216, may create a triangular-shaped shadow 219a behind the optical element. This arrangement makes it easier for detector 206 to detect changes in index of refraction that have scattered (at small angles) the normal beam [0083].
FIG. 2, the transmission optics may include a converging lens 222, which is configured to focus radiation from source 202 onto intersection region 214 to maximize scattering and fluorescence caused by the radiation. The transmission optics may further include additional components such as aperture stops, filters, diverging lenses, shaped mirrors, and the like, to affect the transmission path and/or properties of the radiation from source 202 before it arrives at intersection region 214 [0089] [0124].
In view of the utility, to reduce the amount of direct (unscattered) excitation radiation (light) that falls on the detector in addition to detect changes in index of refraction that have scattered (at small angles) the normal beam, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 2, Sharpe discloses said plurality of converging directions encompass in aggregate a combined angular extent of at least 90 degrees [0023] – [0024], [0033] – [0034], [0085]. In Figure 14, the radial optics configuration for a flow cytometer 500 can combine 360-degree radial illumination and radially symmetric collection [0117].
With regards to claim 3, Sharpe discloses said redirection system includes one or more redirecting elements 20/78/528 (i.e., paraboloid reflector 20/78 geometrically surrounds the inspection zone) that are disposed on substantially all sides of the said shadow zone, and which illuminate the sample- receiving region from substantially all sides simultaneously. Notice that Figures 6 – 10 teach radially symmetric illumination and collection at the sample receiving region and inspection zone F [0081] - [0085]. In Figure 14, the radial optics configuration for a flow cytometer 500 can combine 360-degree radial illumination and radially symmetric collection [0117].
With regards to claim 4, Sharpe discloses said at least one redirecting element 20/78/528 is a reflective surface (i.e., paraboloid reflector 20/78/528 geometrically surrounds the inspection zone) [0030]. Sharpe teaches that the optical apparatus includes a paraboloidal reflector having an internal paraboloidal-shaped reflective surface and an optical axis. In Figure 14, the radial optics configuration for a flow cytometer 500 can combine 360-degree radial illumination and radially symmetric collection [0117].
With regards to claim 5, Sharpe discloses said at least one redirecting element (i.e., prisms, mirrors, reflectors) is a refractive element 1. Figure 1(a) illustrates an optical apparatus including a prism 1. The prism 1 has an apex 2 at a forward end of the prism, a right conical portion having a conical face 2, and a right cylindrical base portion contiguous with the conical portion. Figure 1 (d) illustrates an alternative form of prism 22. Figure 1(e) illustrates the prism 1. Figure 1(g) illustrates an alternative prism arrangement known as a w-axicon or waxicon.
With regards to claim 11, Sharpe modified discloses said source 75, the sample-receiving region and the stop are located along a common axis with the stop being located between said source 75 and the sample-receiving region [0082], (Figures 6 – 7). Notice the alignment with the central axis (i.e., axis geometry) along with the rejection of claim 1, specifically, Makarewicz with regards to “the stop”.
With regards to claim 12, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose the second position is located along said common axis with the sample-receiving region being located between the second position and the stop.
Makarewicz teaches a system for detection of spaced droplets (Abstract). FIG. 2 depicts a detection system 200 configured to detect both scattered and fluorescence radiation. Detection system 200 includes a radiation source 202, transmission optics generally indicated at 204, a forward scatter detector 206, and a fluorescence detector 208. The forward scatter detector may be replaced or augmented, by side and/or back scatter detectors, among others, configured to detect light detected to the side or back of the sample, respectively (Example 1; Detection System 1) [0081] – [0085]. Notice the detector behind the shadow stop (Figure 2).
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 13, Sharpe modified discloses the second position is between the stop and the sample-receiving region [0087] – [0101] (Figure 7). Notice the detector 82 alignment within the optical axis (Figures 6 – 7). Notice the detector behind the shadow stop (Figure 2). Also see Makarewicz from the rejection of claim 1, (Example 1; Detection System 1) [0081] – [0085].
With regards to claim 14, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose said the second position is directly behind the stop and in the shadow thereof.
Makarewicz teaches the second position being behind the stop and in the shadow thereof, see figure 2, [0081] – [0091].
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 15, Sharpe modified discloses the detector is shielded against illumination by light from said the source both along a direct path and along an indirect path via the redirection system. See the rejection of claim 1, wherein the addressing the shadow zone from stop provides the shielding as claimed, Makarewicz [0083].
With regards to claim 16, Sharpe modified discloses the stop and the redirection system constrain the light travelling between the first position and the sample-receiving region to an indirect path and cause light to enter the sample-receiving region at a non-zero angle to said axis, thereby preventing the direct transmission of light from said source 71 to the detector via the droplet [0030] – [0032], [0047], [0048]. Notice the indirect coupling via reflector in addition to the annular beam reflected by the paraboloid as well [0047] [0048].
With regards to claim 17, Sharpe modified discloses the light is caused to enter the sample-receiving region at an angle of more than 45 degrees to said axis [0070] – [0080]. Notice the oblique or inclined radial illumination [0077], [0085], [0117].
With regards to claim 18, Sharpe modified discloses the light is caused to enter the sample-receiving region at an angle of between 70 and 110 degrees to said axis [0080] – [0085]. Notice the inherent radial geometry of the reflectors [0030], [0048], [0076].
With regards to claim 19, Sharpe modified discloses the light is caused to enter the sample-receiving region at said non-zero angle to said axis from a range of different lateral directions around said axis, and preferably from substantially all lateral directions simultaneously [0098 – [0101], [0117]. Notice the 360-degree radial illimitation in addition to the reflector illuminating from a full circumference [0081], [0117].
With regards to claim 20, Sharpe modified discloses said redirection system is adapted to focus the incident light at the sample-receiving region in a concentrated focus within the volume of a sample, whereby relative movement of one or more of the sample, the redirection system, said source 71, or an optical element located in the an indirect path between said the source 71 and the sample via the redirection system, causes the concentrated focus to move within the sample to optimize the photoluminescent signal from the sample [0030], [0047], [0048], [0085], [0098], [0117].
With regards to claim 21, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, and further using an optical element, such as a light shaping diffuser element to provide lateral displacement with a minimal dispersive effect [0099], absent some degree of criticality, the recitation that the said redirection system is adapted to focus the incident light such that at the sample-receiving region the incident light is spread across a diffuse focus area intersecting the majority of the sample volume is considered only a matter of design choice involving routine skill of the art. Notice that spreading light out across a diffuse focus area is a general method and application in the art.
For example, Makarewicz describes a method of detecting fluorescence from sample-containing droplets (Detection Methods) [0145].
Makarewicz further teaches that the droplets in the radiation intersection region encounter and are irradiated with stimulating radiation, which includes at least one wavelength chosen to excite the fluorescent probe(s) known to be present in the reagents within the droplets. Makarewicz goes on to teach that illuminating radiation may be produced by a laser, and LED, or any other suitable radiation source, and may be transferred to the intersection region through free space or through one or more optical fibers. Furthermore, the radiation may be focused, diverged, split, filtered, and/or otherwise processed before reaching the intersection region, to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration [0089] [0149].
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed such as to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the general known methods and applications in the art along with the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 22, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, and teaches that a relative movement between said source 71 and the redirection system, or the adjustment of an optical element in the path of the incident light, causes the focus to switch from a concentrated focus to a diffuse focus. See the rejections of claims 1 and 20 up above. See beam configuration variation and laterally broaden or defocus the radial focus [0030], [0047], [0048], [0085], [0098], [0099], [0117].
With regards to claim 23, Sharpe modified discloses the redirection system is configurable between a first configuration providing a concentrated focus and a second configuration providing a diffuse focus [0097] – [0101], [0104], [0117].
With regards to claims 24 - 26, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, and further using an optical element, such as a light shaping diffuser element to provide lateral displacement with a minimal dispersive effect in addition to laterally broaden or to affect the radial focus to cause divergence around its circular cross-section as needed [0099].
Sharpe fails to expressly disclose an activation of a second source, at a different position relative to the redirection system than said source, causes the focus to switch between a diffuse focus and a concentrated focus.
Makarewicz teaches a system for detection of spaced droplets (Abstract).
Makarewicz discloses how three-dimensional detection configurations such as concentrated focus or wide-field imaging types. One system includes a radiation source 576 is configured to illuminate droplets within chambers 568, 570, and after a desired number of droplets are transferred into one of the detection chambers, the chamber may be illuminated with radiation from source 576. Source 576 may be configured in various ways to illuminate substantially all of the droplets within a chamber [0088], [0140], [0149].
For example, radiation source 576 may include a single radiation emitting element, configured to illuminate substantially the entire chamber either by emitting a broad beam of radiation or by emitting radiation toward intermediate optics (not shown) that spread the emitted beam to cover the entire chamber. The radiation source also may include a plurality of radiation emitting elements, such as lasers, LEDs, and/or lamps, among others, each configured to illuminate a portion of the appropriate detection chamber. Alternatively, or in addition, one or more radiation emitting elements of radiation source 576 may be configured to scan the chamber, to sequentially illuminate droplets within the chamber, or the chamber itself may be configured to move so that all portions of the chamber intersect a substantially stationary beam of radiation. In some cases, a combination of two or more of the above techniques may be effective [0088], [0140], [0149].
Notice how the droplets in the radiation intersection region encounter and are irradiated with stimulating radiation, which includes at least one wavelength chosen to excite the fluorescent probe(s) known to be present in the reagents within the droplets. As described above, the illuminating radiation may be produced by a laser, and LED, or any other suitable radiation source, and may be transferred to the intersection region through free space or through one or more optical fibers. Furthermore, the radiation may be focused, diverged, split, filtered, and/or otherwise processed before reaching the intersection region, to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration [0088], [0140], [0149].
Notice how there are teaching for numerous variations and many possible configurations and nonobvious combinations and subcombinations of the various measuring photoluminescence in a droplet wherein since it has been held that a mere rearrangement of elements without modification of the operation of the device involves only routine skill in the art. As such, many elements, features, functions, and/or properties are disclosed herein to include that the particular placement of an element is held to be obvious.
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed such as to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the general known methods and applications in the art along with the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 35, Sharpe further comprising a support base having a sample-receiving surface defined thereon within the said shadow zone, and having said at least one redirecting element of said redirection system provided as a circumferential redirecting element at least partially surrounding the sample-receiving surface, wherein said circumferential redirecting element is shaped to redirect light received from said source to a sample-receiving region adjacent the sample-receiving surface, such that when a sample in the form of a drop is placed on the sample-receiving surface it is illuminated with said redirected light [0047] – [0048], [0082] – [0085]. See the reflector surrounding the sample (Figures 1 – 2).
With regards to claim 36, Sharpe discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose that the frequency characteristics of the illumination from said the source or sources of light are controllable.
Makarewicz discloses frequency characteristics and a control as claimed [0071] [0087] [0114] [0118] [0122] [0149] [0160].
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed such as to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the general known methods and applications in the art along with the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 37, Sharpe discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose that wherein the frequency characteristics can be controlled to vary the photoluminescent response of different species in a sample.
Makarewicz discloses frequency characteristics, a wide range of species in a sample and a controller as claimed [0035] [0071] [0087] [0114] [0118] [0122] [0149] [0160].
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed such as to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the general known methods and applications in the art along with the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
With regards to claim 38, Sharpe discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose that said source comprises a plurality of sources each with different frequency characteristics, which may be activated and deactivated independently, or mixed together, or activated with different intensities.
Makarewicz discloses frequency characteristics, a wide range of species in a sample, activated and deactivated independently, or mixed together or activated with different intensities [0071] [0087] [0114] [0118] [0122] [0123] [0149] [0160].
In view of the utility, to improve the detection as needed such as to efficiently irradiate the droplets in the most suitable manner for a particular detector system configuration, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the general known methods and applications in the art along with the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
Claim(s) 6 - 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharpe et al. (EP 1562035 A2) and Makarewicz et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0200164 A1) in view of Hansen et al. (EP 1861653 B1).
With regards to claim 6, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose a drop-supporting surface located at said the sample-receiving region, said drop-supporting surface being adapted to receive and retain thereon a sample in the form of a liquid drop.
Hansen relates to the fluorometry of nanodrop liquids and even more particularly to such nanodrops contained by surface tension [0001].
Hansen teaches a system for sample containment, directing exiting light and barring stray light from entering the measuring detection part (Background of the invention [0002] – [0009]. Lastly, Hansen discloses measurements of fluorescently-excited samples in the form of a fluorescently-excited liquid nanodrop contained by surface tension forces between two anvil surfaces in a substantially parallel relationship, wherein an optical path having been established between wetted areas on each of the two surfaces. As such, Hansen shows supported droplet sample with the nanodrop between two anvil surfaces [0009] – [0011], [0016], [0024].
In view of the utility, to draw the droplet into a column to establish an optical path through the length of which light is projected when needed, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Hansen.
With regards to claim 7, Sharpe modified discloses the detector is shielded from direct illumination by said the source (see the rejection of claim 1, where the obscuration bar blocking the excitation light, and as such reduces direct excitation radiation, see Makarewicz) [0083].
With regards to claim 8, Sharpe discloses the detector is shielded due to said the second position being in said shadow zone (see the rejection of claim 1, wherein a shadow 219a behind obscuration bar which places the detector in shadow region, triangular-shaped shadow 219a, see Makarewicz figure 2) [0083].
With regards to claims 9 and 10, Sharpe modified discloses the detector is shielded due to receiving illumination via a wave guide (i.e., claim 10 claims the wave guide is an optical fiber) which receives light at said the second position from a predetermined range of angles, wherein said source is not in a direct line of sight within said range of angles.
Makarewicz provides a system, including methods and apparatus, for detection of spaced droplets [0062].
Makarewicz further teaches an optical detection system (Figure 5), generally indicated at 270, which is similar to system 200 depicted in FIG. 2 except that optical elements 216 and 218 of system 200 have been replaced by optical fibers 286 and 288 in system 270 of FIG. 5. As in the case of optical fiber 254 shown in FIG. 4 and described above, optical fibers 286 and 288 each may be constructed from a glass, a plastic, and/or any other material that is substantially transparent to radiation of one or more particular desired wavelengths and configured to transmit that radiation along the length of the fiber, preferably with little or no loss of intensity (Example 2, Detection Systems Using Optical Fibers, paragraph 0095) [0095] – [0112].
In view of the utility, allowing significant design flexibility, cost savings and space savings, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
Claim(s) 27 – 34 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharpe et al. (EP 1562035 A2) and Makarewicz et al. (US Pub. No. 2014/0200164 A1) in view of Bjornson et al. (US Pub. No. 2016/0266040 A2).
With regards to claim 27, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose that the system further comprises a sample-receiving surface for receiving a sample at the sample-receiving region; a positioning system for controllably causing relative movement between one or more of the sample-receiving surface, the redirection system, said the source, and an optical element in the path of the incident light; and a controller for operating the positioning system to achieve a desired focusing of the incident light at the sample- receiving region.
Bjornson relates to optical measuring apparatus and method for the analysis of droplets (Abstract).
Bjornson also teaches an optical measuring system including relative position of the liquid drops 2 with respect to the optics system 43 of the optical measuring apparatus 1, i.e. the first and second optical elements 18,19 of the optics system 43, can be mutually adapted as well. For coarse mutual positioning of liquid drop 2 and optics system 43, a robot arm 45 of the liquid handling system 3, to which robot arm 45 the liquid handling tip 4 is attached, can be utilized [0069] – [0071].
Preferably, the robot arm 45 is configured to be controlled by the central processor 44 of the liquid handling system 3 and to be moved in one or more directions of a coordinate system. This coordinate system can be a Cartesian or any other coordinate system, so that robot arm 45 may be moved in a defined way in one or more directions of the respective coordinate system. Preferably, the robot arm 45 is accomplished in effective combination with the processor 13 of the optical measuring apparatus 1 and with the central processor 44 of the liquid handling system (3) and thus, the robot arm 45 is a means for the mutual adaption of the position of the liquid drop 2 with respect to the first and second optical elements 18,19 or with respect to at least one optical element 18,19 of the optics system 43 [0069] – [0071].
In view of the utility, allowing significant design flexibility, position control and automated droplet/optical positioning, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Bjornson.
With regards to claim 28, Sharpe fails to expressly disclose said controller receives as an input a signal from the detector, whereby an optimal position may be identified according to the characteristics of the detector signal.
Bjornson teaches the there are a plurality of feedbacks that will affect the positioning mechanism via control [0069] – [0071], [0075] – [0085], [0103] – [0108].
In view of the utility, allowing significant design flexibility, position control and automated droplet/optical positioning, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Bjornson.
With regards to claims 29 and 30, Sharpe discloses the claimed invention according to claim 1, but fails to expressly disclose the system further comprising an imaging system for imaging said the sample-receiving region, wherein the said imaging system comprises a camera.
Bjornson teaches using an imager such as a CCD camera [0075], [0150].
In view of the utility, CCD cameras offer good image quality, high light sensitivity, low noise, and excellent color fidelity, making them ideal for a variety of applications including low-light applications, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Bjornson.
With regards to claims 31, 32 and 34, Sharpe discloses the invention according to claim 29, absent some degree of criticality, the recitations of said imaging system is provided with protection against overexposure from said the source, wherein said protection is selected from a filter that attenuates light of a wavelength emitted by said the source and an electronically controlled shutter that is timed to the excitation of said the source and the system further comprising a support body having a hollow cavity having an opening and having said at least one redirecting element on the interior thereof, said source being mounted in said cavity to illuminate the said at least one redirecting element and said stop being mounted internally of the said cavity to block at least a portion of the light from said source from travelling towards the opening, whereby a sample may be introduced at or within the opening to receive redirected illumination from the said at least one redirecting element are considered only a matter of design choice by one of ordinary skill in the involving only routine and general knowledge.
The examiner takes Official Notice that these elements and mechanical packaging or selection are only a selection among known optical components performing the same function with predictable results. The over-exposure protection, incorporating shutters in the imaging and arranging a droplet measurement region within a support body or cavity while surrounding it with optical components are well known and are design incentives with well-known benefits in other prior art arrangements and such are just considered a matter of design choice involving routine skill of the art.
Also, many implicit motivations to combine has been found to exist when the improvements are technology-independent and the combination of references results in a product that is more desirable (e.g., “stronger , cheaper, cleaner, faster, lighter, smaller, more durable , or more efficient.”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the well-known elements as claimed, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges and/or configurations involves only routine skill in the art. One would have been motivated to include these limitations for the purpose of improving damage form overexposure, to improve the measurements using the shutter and timing elements and to better configure the elements in the support body as needed to improve spacing, sensory and performance as needed.
With regards to claim 33, Sharpe modified discloses the claimed invention according to claim 29 but fails to expressly disclose the system further comprising a computerized system programmed to calculate, from an image provided by the imaging system, one or more dimensional characteristics of the sample, and to normalize a photoluminescence measurement according to the said one or more dimensional characteristics and a signal from the detector.
Makarewicz discloses that a determination of droplet volume may be useful for normalizing the results of any corresponding fluorescence detection [0085]. Notice that the controller may provide automation of any suitable operation or combination of operations [0160] [0161].
In view of the utility, to normalize and improve the system in places where improve may be achieved in combination to achieving coordinated operation and control of system functions while doing so, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify Sharpe to include the teachings such as that taught by Makarewicz.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DJURA MALEVIC whose telephone number is (571)272-5975. The examiner can normally be reached M-F (9-5).
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, Uzma Alam can be reached at 571.272.3995 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.
/DJURA MALEVIC/Examiner, Art Unit 2884
/UZMA ALAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2884