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 .
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: “said at least one manifolds” is a typo of –said at least one manifold—.
Claim 12: instead of reciting “Use of a method according to claim 6…” the claim should be amended to recite –The method of claim 6, wherein the method provides for solvent exchange of liquid samples and/or for drying an analyte—or something similar.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-5, 9 and 11 are 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the horizontal upper surface" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Regarding claim 3, the phrase "such as" 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).
Regarding claim 4, use of the term “it” is unclear. In particular, it is unclear what specifically is connected with one or more analysis apparatus downstream.
Claims 10 and 11 are indefinite because they merely recite a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how the uses are actually practiced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-5, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kearsley et al (US 6,357,141).
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Kearsley discloses an evaporator 100 comprising (see Abstract; col. 1, lines 6-10; Fig. 3, 5, 6, 9):
a plate holder (locators 110) arranged for rigidly holding a multiwell plate 111 such that a horizontal upper surface thereof is vertically positioned at a desired level (see col. 3, lines 10-15; col. 4, lines 10-20);
at least one gas heating and injecting manifold 120 arranged above the plate holder and having at least one injection nozzle 121 positionable approximately at the desired level, wherein each nozzle is adapted to inject inert drying gas into a corresponding well of the multiwell plate (see col. 4, lines 33-41); and
a heat sink integrated into the at least one manifold (see marked-up reproduction of Fig. 9 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
503
743
media_image1.png
Greyscale
While not explicitly recited in the reference, the office notes that the highlighted portion of the marked up figure above represents a heat sink which would function to warm injection gas in the nozzles, given that warmed gas flow 141 is flowing through the gap 143 and passes over the inert gas injection nozzles, such that heat transfer is inherent (see col. 4, line 55 – col. 5, line 10). Accordingly, the structural features of the apparatus in Kearsley are considered to fully teach the structural features required by the instant claim.
Regarding claim 2, Kearsley is considered to teach the structural features of the claimed apparatus, as discussed above. The manner in which the apparatus is intended to be operated as recited in the claim does not structurally distinguish over the cited prior art. MPEP 2114 II.
Regarding claim 3, the arrangement depicted in the marked up version of Fig. 9 (above) is considered to be equivalent to a pin cooler (i.e., the injection nozzles are pins).
Regarding claims 4 and 5, Kearsley discloses the evaporator being connected with a liquid chromatography apparatus (see col. 1, lines 14-18).
Regarding claim 11, Kearsley discloses the evaporator being used for solvent exchange of liquid samples and/or for drying an analyte (see col. 1, lines 5-18; col. 3, lines 10-20).
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 6-9 and 12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kearsley.
Regarding claims 6 and 9, Kearsley discloses the apparatus as described above in the rejection of claim 1, equally applicable herein. Kearsley discloses using the apparatus in a method of evaporating a solvent using an inert gas, wherein the inert gas is injected into the wells of the plate. As discussed above, heat transfer from the heated gas stream 141 flowing through gap 143 to the injection nozzles is inherent (see col. 4, line 55 – col. 5, line 10), i.e., preheated inert gas. Determining the time at which to start the heat sink (i.e., the flow of warmed gas at a pre-selected temperature into the evaporator of Kearsley) amounts to nothing more than routine experimentation and would be associated with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 7, Kearsley discloses the evaporator being connected with a liquid chromatography apparatus (see col. 1, lines 14-18).
Regarding claim 8, Kearsley discloses wherein the inert gas is nitrogen gas (see col. 5, lines 10-12).
Regarding claim 12, Kearsley discloses the evaporator being used in the process for solvent exchange of liquid samples and/or for drying an analyte (see col. 1, lines 5-18; col. 3, lines 10-20).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENEE ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7371. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00a-5:00p and Friday 8:00a-2:00p.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571)272-5954. 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.
/Renee Robinson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights