DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
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 5/17/24 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
Claims 1-8 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claims 1, 4 are rejected based on the following analysis:
Step 2A, Prong One: Identify the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract ideas.
Claims 1 and 4 recite the abstract idea of “receiving” values, “comparing” values, and “determining” if the system has to be activated or deactivated, which are mental processes.
Receiving, determining, and comparing are abstract ideas in the form of mental processes and MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)III is clear that using a computer/controller to perform the abstract idea does not preclude the steps from being considered an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two: Has the abstract idea been integrated into a particular practical application?
No. After determining if the system has to be deactivated or activated, then the control just does the determined deactivation or activation. This recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally applying the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f), and also is just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications. Further, this is insignificant post-solution activity and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(g).
The claim also recites a laboratory system with a pipettor and pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, and a temperature sensor. This recitation is just using the system to gather data to be used in the abstract idea. However, data gathering to be used in the abstract idea does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because data gathering is insignificant extra-solution activity, and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, this is recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally applying the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f), and also is just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications.
The abstract idea is performed by a computer/controller/processor, but performing the abstract idea on a general-purpose computer is not enough to integrate the exception into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(b)I.).
Step 2B: Does the claim recite any elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea?
The claim recites the additional elements of a laboratory system with a pipettor and pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, and a temperature sensor. These additional elements do not amount to significantly more as they are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art as evidenced by Curtis et al (US 20070241130; hereinafter “Curtis”; already of record). Curtis teaches a laboratory system (Curtis; Fig. 4), t with a pipettor (Curtis teaches pipettor 110/115; Fig. 4, [40]) and pressure sensor (Curtis teaches pressure sensor 117; [38, 47, 50], Fig. 4, 6), a humidity sensor, and a temperature sensor (Curtis teaches a humidity and temperature sensor 150/151; [28, 30, 44, 47], claim 2, Fig. 4). See also the references cited below.
Claims 7, 8 are rejected based on the following analysis:
Step 2A, Prong One: Identify the law of nature/natural phenomenon/abstract ideas.
Claims 7 and 8 recite the abstract idea of “receiving” values, “comparing” values, and “determining” if the system has to be activated or deactivated, which are mental processes.
Receiving, determining, and comparing are abstract ideas in the form of mental processes and MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)III is clear that using a computer/controller to perform the abstract idea does not preclude the steps from being considered an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong Two: Has the abstract idea been integrated into a particular practical application?
No. After determining if the system has to be deactivated or activated, then the control just does the determined deactivation or activation. This recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally applying the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f), and also is just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications. Further, this is insignificant post-solution activity and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.04(d) and 2106.05(g).
The claim also recites a laboratory system with a pipettor and pressure sensor, a humidity sensor, and a temperature sensor. This recitation is just using the system to gather data to be used in the abstract idea. However, data gathering to be used in the abstract idea does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because data gathering is insignificant extra-solution activity, and not a particular practical application. See MPEP 2106.05(g). Additionally, this is recited at such a high level of generality that it amounts to just generally applying the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f), and also is just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h), which are not particular practical applications.
The abstract idea is performed by a computer/controller/processor, but performing the abstract idea on a general-purpose computer is not enough to integrate the exception into a practical application (MPEP 2106.05(b)I.).
Claims 7 and 8 recite a computer program and/or a CRM, which amount to no more than a general-purpose computer, and a general-purpose computer is not a particular machine. See MPEP 2106.05(b), I.
Step 2B: Does the claim recite any elements which are significantly more than the abstract idea?
The claim recites the additional elements of a computer program and/or a CRM, which amount to no more than a general-purpose computer, and a general-purpose computer is not a particular machine. See MPEP 2106.05(b), I. A general-purpose computer also does not amount to significantly more as it is well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) in the art. See also the rejection above for claims 1 and 4.
The dependent claims 2, 3, 5, 6 do not appear to resolve any of the above issues, and are therefore similarly rejected. Claims 2 and 5 recite the abstract ideas of monitoring and determining under step 2A prong one, and as best understood (see 112(b) below), recite decreasing the pressure where these are not tied to the determinations and comparisons based on humidity in claim 1 and therefore there is no application under step 2A prong two, but also the actions with respect to the pressure determination is just generally applying the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f), and also is just generally linking the abstract idea to a field of use per MPEP 2106.05(h). Claims 3 and 6 recite details of the database values which are part of the abstract ideas themselves under step 2A prong one.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a computer program product is not directed to a statutory category of invention as a computer program does not have a physical or tangible form. This recitation could encompass computer readable storage media and therefore, transitory signals which are unpatentable under In re Nuijten (Fed. Cir. 2007). The examiner notes that claim 8 remedies the issues present in claim 7.
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 1-8 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
As to claim 1, it is unclear what an anti droplet system is attempting to describe as recited in line 1. An anti droplet system is not an actual structure and the nomenclature and terminology is not something that is known in the art. The anti droplet system is not coupled to functional language (ex: “for…”) and therefore does not invoke 112(f). However, it is unclear what the anti droplet system structure is defined by. Line 15 of claim 1, Lines 14-15 of claim 4, and line 14 of claim 7 recite similar limitations and are rejected similarly. Further, it is unclear if “an anti droplet control system of the pipettor” in line 15 of claim 1 is the same or different than the previously recited anti droplet system of a laboratory system as recited in claim 1. If these are different, because different terminology is used (of a laboratory vs. of a pipettor), then it remains unclear what is being recited for the same reasons discussed previously. As to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 (and the corresponding dependent claims), it is largely unclear what defines the anti droplet system. Claims 2 and 5 recite that pressure is decreased, but this is in response to sensing by the pressure sensor. It is unclear if or how the pressure sensor information is tied to the anti droplet system, and also unclear if or how the pressure information relates in any way to the humidity and temperature determinations and comparisons. Further, the specification does not help clarify any relationship between the pressure determination or the humidity/temperature determinations and it is unclear if the humidity and temperature variations automatically imply a pressure change determination based on the database.
Claims 2-3, 5-6, 8 are rejected based on further claim dependency.
Regarding claims 2 and 5, it is unclear if the decreasing the pressure in lines 6-7 is the same as the activating or deactivating recited in claim 1 or if the process in claims 2 and 5 is different from the activating and deactivating.
As to claims 3 and 6, it is unclear what a “clot handling workflow status” is describing. What is a clot, what is a workflow of a clot, and what statuses are encompassed? Is this a blood clot that is evaluated, or are applicants attempting to claim some type of clog in the pipetting system?
Claim 7 recites “the laboratory system or device” in line 4 where “the…device” has not been previously recited. Therefore, this limitation is unclear and has insufficient antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction and/or clarification 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 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.
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Curtis et al (US 20070241130; hereinafter “Curtis”; already of record).
As to claim 1, Curtis teaches a method for controlling an anti droplet system of a laboratory system (Curtis; Fig. 4), the laboratory system comprising: at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system (Curtis teaches pipettor 110/115; Fig. 4, [40]), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Curtis teaches pressure sensor 117; [38, 47, 50], Fig. 4, 6), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Curtis teaches a humidity and temperature sensor 150/151; [28, 30, 44, 47], claim 2, Fig. 4), a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Curtis teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; [42-50], Fig. 4), the method comprising the following steps: the control unit receiving a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, the control unit comparing the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, the control unit determining if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, the control unit activating or deactivating said anti droplet system of the pipettor (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. Curtis teaches that the resulting action/protocol can include moving a pipette from t1 to t2 whereby the pressure increases and then sensing the resulting pressure and changing the pipette pressure/flow rate to decrease at t3; [56, 57], Fig. 6. This process also works to add a gas bubble to prevent leakage).
As to claim 2, Curtis teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising the anti droplet system of the pipettor carrying out the following steps: monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in the pipettor tip, determining a pressure increase above the fluid column in the pipettor tip over a predetermined threshold, and decreasing the pressure above the fluid column below the predetermined threshold by displacing air above the fluid column (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. The determination of these would be done via a referenced database that included the variables. Curtis teaches that the resulting action/protocol can include moving a pipette from t1 to t2 whereby the pressure increases and then sensing the resulting pressure and changing the pipette pressure/flow rate to decrease at t3; [56, 57], Fig. 6. This process also works to add a gas bubble to prevent leakage).
As to claim 3, Curtis teaches the method of claim 1, wherein in the threshold database the different pairs of humidity and temperature values are related to other parameters selected from the list comprising fluid type, assay type, rack type, tube type, and clot handling workflow status (Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. This would qualify as the fluid type or assay type. The determination of these would be done via a referenced database that included the variables. Although Curtis teaches fluid type, Curtis also teaches bubble status; [60]).
As to claim 4, Curtis teaches a laboratory system (Curtis; Fig. 4), comprising: at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system or device (Curtis teaches pipettor 110/115; Fig. 4, [40]), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Curtis teaches pressure sensor 117; [38, 47, 50], Fig. 4, 6), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Curtis teaches a humidity and temperature sensor 150/151; [28, 30, 44, 47], claim 2, Fig. 4), and a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Curtis teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; [42-50], Fig. 4), wherein the control unit is configured to: receive a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, compare the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, determine if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, activate or deactivate said anti droplet system of the pipettor based on the previously performed determination (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. Curtis teaches that the resulting action/protocol can include moving a pipette from t1 to t2 whereby the pressure increases and then sensing the resulting pressure and changing the pipette pressure/flow rate to decrease at t3; [56, 57], Fig. 6. This process also works to add a gas bubble to prevent leakage).
As to claim 5, Curtis teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the control unit, upon activation of the anti droplet system, is further configured to: monitor the pressure above a fluid column in the pipettor tip, determine a pressure increase above the fluid column in the pipettor tip over a predetermined threshold, and decrease the pressure above the fluid column below the predetermined threshold by displacing air above the fluid column (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. Curtis teaches that the resulting action/protocol can include moving a pipette from t1 to t2 whereby the pressure increases and then sensing the resulting pressure and changing the pipette pressure/flow rate to decrease at t3; [56, 57], Fig. 6. This process also works to add a gas bubble to prevent leakage).
As to claim 6, Curtis teaches the system of claim 5, wherein in the threshold database the different pairs of humidity and temperature values are related to other parameters selected from the list comprising fluid type, assay type, rack type, tube type, and clot handling workflow status (Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. This would qualify as the fluid type or assay type. The determination of these would be done via a referenced database that included the variables. Although Curtis teaches fluid type, Curtis also teaches bubble status; [60]).
As to claim 7, Curtis teaches a computer program product (Curtis teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; [42-50], Fig. 4) comprising instructions to cause a laboratory system comprising at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system or device (Curtis teaches pipettor 110/115; Fig. 4, [40]), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Curtis teaches pressure sensor 117; [38, 47, 50], Fig. 4, 6), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Curtis teaches a humidity and temperature sensor 150/151; [28, 30, 44, 47], claim 2, Fig. 4), and a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Curtis teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; [42-50], Fig. 4), to perform the steps of: the control unit receiving a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, the control unit comparing the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, the control unit determining if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, and the control unit activating or deactivating said anti droplet system of the pipettor (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Curtis teaches sensing the temperature, humidity, and pressure from the sensors which is then used to determine calculated properties or conditions of the liquid and environment and then establishing a pipetting protocol based on the determinations/calculations; [30, 31, 46-50], Fig. 5. Curtis teaches that the resulting action/protocol can include moving a pipette from t1 to t2 whereby the pressure increases and then sensing the resulting pressure and changing the pipette pressure/flow rate to decrease at t3; [56, 57], Fig. 6. This process also works to add a gas bubble to prevent leakage).
As to claim 8, Curtis teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon the computer program product of claim 7 (Curtis teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; [42-50], Fig. 4. See also claim 7 above).
Claims 1-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1/a2 as being anticipated by Komatsu, A et al (US 5811306; hereinafter “Komatsu”; already of record).
As to claim 1, Komatsu teaches a method for controlling an anti droplet system of a laboratory system (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), the laboratory system comprising: at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Komatsu teaches that pressures are known and compared to predetermined pressures and that pressures are continually evaluated and compared, where these would require some type of sensor in order to convey the pressure; Fig. 1, 8, col. 5 line 16-30, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Komatsu teaches a humidity and temperature sensor; col 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8), a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Komatsu teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; Fig. 1, 8), the method comprising the following steps: the control unit receiving a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, the control unit comparing the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, the control unit determining if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, the control unit activating or deactivating said anti droplet system of the pipettor (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Komatsu teaches correcting pressure based on the humidity and temperature, where these would form a database in the memory where based on the temperature and humidity then a correction amount would be determined; col. 3 line 14-34, col. 5 lines 16-30 and 45-57, col. 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8).
As to claim 2, Komatsu teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising the anti droplet system of the pipettor carrying out the following steps: monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in the pipettor tip, determining a pressure increase above the fluid column in the pipettor tip over a predetermined threshold, and decreasing the pressure above the fluid column below the predetermined threshold by displacing air above the fluid column (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Komatsu teaches correcting pressure based on the humidity and temperature, where these would form a database in the memory where based on the temperature and humidity then a correction amount would be determined; col. 3 line 14-34, col. 5 lines 16-30 and 45-57, col. 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8).
As to claim 3, Komatsu teaches the method of claim 1, wherein in the threshold database the different pairs of humidity and temperature values are related to other parameters selected from the list comprising fluid type, assay type, rack type, tube type, and clot handling workflow status (Komatsu teaches that the database includes parameters of humidity and temperature; see above. This would be correlated to the fluid type).
As to claim 4, Komatsu teaches a laboratory system (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), comprising: at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system or device (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Komatsu teaches that pressures are known and compared to predetermined pressures and that pressures are continually evaluated and compared, where these would require some type of sensor in order to convey the pressure; Fig. 1, 8, col. 5 line 16-30, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Komatsu teaches a humidity and temperature sensor; col 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8), and a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Komatsu teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; Fig. 1, 8), wherein the control unit is configured to: receive a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, compare the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, determine if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, activate or deactivate said anti droplet system of the pipettor based on the previously performed determination (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Komatsu teaches correcting pressure based on the humidity and temperature, where these would form a database in the memory where based on the temperature and humidity then a correction amount would be determined; col. 3 line 14-34, col. 5 lines 16-30 and 45-57, col. 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8).
As to claim 5, Komatsu teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the control unit, upon activation of the anti droplet system, is further configured to: monitor the pressure above a fluid column in the pipettor tip, determine a pressure increase above the fluid column in the pipettor tip over a predetermined threshold, and decrease the pressure above the fluid column below the predetermined threshold by displacing air above the fluid column (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Komatsu teaches correcting pressure based on the humidity and temperature, where these would form a database in the memory where based on the temperature and humidity then a correction amount would be determined; col. 3 line 14-34, col. 5 lines 16-30 and 45-57, col. 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8).
As to claim 6, Komatsu teaches the system of claim 5, wherein in the threshold database the different pairs of humidity and temperature values are related to other parameters selected from the list comprising fluid type, assay type, rack type, tube type, and clot handling workflow status (Komatsu teaches that the database includes parameters of humidity and temperature; see above. This would be correlated to the fluid type).
As to claim 4, Komatsu teaches a laboratory system (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), comprising: at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in
As to claim 7, Komatsu teaches a computer program product (Komatsu teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; Fig. 1, 8) comprising instructions to cause a laboratory system comprising at least one air displacement pipettor arranged in a working area of the laboratory system or device (Komatsu; Fig. 1, 8), wherein the displacement pipettor comprises a pressure sensor for monitoring the pressure above a fluid column in a pipettor tip (Komatsu teaches that pressures are known and compared to predetermined pressures and that pressures are continually evaluated and compared, where these would require some type of sensor in order to convey the pressure; Fig. 1, 8, col. 5 line 16-30, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15), at least one humidity sensor for monitoring the humidity in the working area, at least one temperature sensor for monitoring the air temperature in the working area (Komatsu teaches a humidity and temperature sensor; col 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8), and a control unit for controlling operation of the pipettor (Komatsu teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; Fig. 1, 8), to perform the steps of: the control unit receiving a humidity value from the humidity sensor and a temperature value from the temperature sensor, the control unit comparing the pair of humidity and temperature values with a threshold database connected to the control unit, the threshold database comprising, for different pairs of humidity and temperature values, instructions to activate or deactivate an anti droplet control system of the pipettor, the control unit determining if the anti droplet system of the pipettor has to be activated or deactivated, and the control unit activating or deactivating said anti droplet system of the pipettor (In as much as claimed, and as best understood, changing a pressure qualifies as the anti drop control. Komatsu teaches correcting pressure based on the humidity and temperature, where these would form a database in the memory where based on the temperature and humidity then a correction amount would be determined; col. 3 line 14-34, col. 5 lines 16-30 and 45-57, col. 10 line 40-50, col. 12 line 45-col. 13 line 15, Fig. 1, 8).
As to claim 8, Komatsu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon the computer program product of claim 7 (Komatsu teaches an automated controller/computer with programming; Fig. 1, 8. See also claim 7 above).
Other References Cited
The prior art of made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure include;
Lemmo et al (US 20030215957; hereinafter “Lemmo”) teaches pressure variations and leakage [157], and that prior to aspirating that pressure is reduced or decreased [160] and conversely prior to dispensing that pressure is increased [158, 159], and that correlations are obtained [164].
Moore et al (US 20050003458; hereinafter “Moore”) teaches the correlation of temperature, humidity, and velocity (pressure) [36, 64].
Beroz et al (US 20130283884; hereinafter “Beroz”) teaches that fluid, pipette tip, temperature, humidity are all known factors that cause variance in pipetting volumes [4] and that adjustments can be made based on pressure [7, 77].
Arumugam et al (US 20160291049; hereinafter “Arumugam”) teaches that accuracy of pipettor depends on the type of liquid, environment, temperature, and humidity.
Shahar et al (US 20220097037; hereinafter “Shahar”) teaches that pressure, temperature, and humidity are all correlated and that 10 measurements can be taken for calibrating due to these factors, thereby creating a table; [3, 9].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN R WHATLEY whose telephone number is (571) 272-9892. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 8am-5pm.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at (571) 270-3638. 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.
/Benjamin R Whatley/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights