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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6 remain pending in the application.
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over translated Beckman Coulter (DE-202012010656-U1) herein Beckman, in view of Boeke (US-2015/0346151-A1) and Yaremko (US-5620898-A).
Regarding claim 1, Beckman teaches a method for increasing operational security of a laboratory system (apparatus 1), the laboratory system (1) comprising ([0059], Figure 1):
- a reagent storage area (housing 3) comprising at least two reagent drawers (drawers 17) mounted slidably along a first axis Y between an open position and a closed position, and each being associated with a position sensor (drawer sensor) for determining the closed position of the respective reagent drawer (17) ([0012] see drawer may be movably supported in the apparatus by rails or guides and the movement path of the drawer between closed and open positions can be substantially horizontal, [0059], [0062] see where in Figure 1 all drawers 17 are in the closed position where in Figure 1 there are nine drawers shown however there may be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, or 12 drawers instead, [0051] see the device may comprise two sensors: a drawer sensor and a handle sensor, where the drawer sensor is configured such that when the drawer is displaced from the open position to the closed position the drawer sensor is triggered to start a timer, and that the drawer sensor may be a contact sensor configured to detect whether or not the drawer is in the closed position),
- at least one robotic handler head (sample treatment arm, not shown in the figures) movably arranged in the reagent storage area (3) at least along the first axis Y ([0063] see sample treatment arm movably supported on a frame 37, Figure 2), and
the method comprising the following steps:
- defining for each reagent drawer (17) a first forbidden zone along the first axis Y ([0048] see the apparatus may perform one or more of the following actions when detecting an object entering the area detected by the sensor: avoiding an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, where one skilled in the art would find it obvious that therefore for each of the drawers a forbidden zone will be defined such that when the sensor detects an object the robot will avoid that area, where the robot being referred to is understood to be the sample treatment arm. Please note the sensor being described by [0048] is understood to be different from the drawer sensor, as the handle sensor described in [0051] is described to trigger when an object penetrates the area),
While Beckman teaches that there may be fewer drawers than shown as seen in Figure 1, Beckman does not teach:
a first reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers being arranged above a second reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers, with respect to a second axis Z perpendicular to the first axis Y,
In the same problem solving area of loading PCR plates, tube strips, vials, or other sample containers, Boeke teaches a series of at least four vertically stacked user-accessible drawers (Boeke; [0012], [0034]).
Examiner finds that the prior art contained a device/method/product (i.e., an apparatus) which differed from the claimed device by the substitution of component(s) (i.e., drawers arranged side-by-side horizontally) with other component(s) (i.e., drawers arranged vertically above and below each other), and the substituted components and their functions were known in the art as above set forth. An ordinarily skilled artisan could have substituted one known element with another (i.e., side-by-side drawers for vertical drawers), and the results of the substitution (i.e., holding racks within the drawers) would have been predictable.
Therefore, pursuant to MPEP §2143 (I), Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan to substitute the side-by-side drawers of reference Beckman with the vertical drawers of reference Boeke, since the result would have been predictable.
As the drawers are now vertical drawers, one skilled in the art would find it obvious to modify the sample treatment arm such that it may access the vertical drawers, and thus move along the Z axis. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that there will be an avoid area along the Z axis for each of the drawers.
While Beckman does describe where conditions within the sample treatment space can be controlled and controlling the robot (Beckman; [0035], [0049]), Beckman does not explicitly teach a control unit. Therefore Beckman does not teach:
- a control unit configured to control the operation of the robotic handler head and connected to the position sensors,
- the control unit determining by means of the position sensors if the reagent storage drawers are in the closed position, and
- the control unit, if the closed position determination is successful, controlling the operation of the handler head.
In the analogous art of blood analysis systems/instruments, Yaremko teaches where a system includes a transport system, a control means and drawer assembly (Yaremko; abstract, column 5 lines 13-18).
Specifically, Yaremko teaches where the drawer assembly 900 is provided for holding a supply of containers that are used in instrument 100, and the control means 800 is connected to the transport assembly 700 and the control means 800 operates the transport assembly 700 to carry containers from drawer assembly 900 to other stations of the system (Yaremko; column 5 lines 49-65). Column 5 lines 32-38 further describes that the transport assembly 700 includes robot arm 702 and gripper 704, control means 800 includes a central control unit 802 and processor 804, and drawer assembly 900 includes a drawer 902. It is further described in column 19 lines 39-44 that a sensor may be provided to sense when the drawer 902 is in the closed position and that the sensor may generate and transmit to the processor 804 a signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the apparatus of Beckman such that it includes the control means, including the processor, as taught by Yaremko because Yaremko teaches that the control means is effective for controlling a transport assembly and sensing when a drawer is closed.
Because [0048] of Beckman describes that if an object entering the area detected by the sensor causes the robot to avoid an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that if the drawers are closed, the control means will control operation of the sample treatment arm.
Regarding claim 4, Beckman teaches a laboratory system (apparatus 1) comprising ([0059], Figure 1):
- a reagent storage area (housing 3) comprising at least two reagent drawers (drawers 17) mounted slidably along a first axis Y between an open position and a closed position, and each being associated with a position sensor (drawer sensor) for determining the closed position of the respective reagent drawer (17) ([0012] see drawer may be movably supported in the apparatus by rails or guides and the movement path of the drawer between closed and open positions can be substantially horizontal, [0059], [0062] see where in Figure 1 all drawers 17 are in the closed position where in Figure 1 there are nine drawers shown however there may be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, or 12 drawers instead, [0051] see the device may comprise two sensors: a drawer sensor and a handle sensor where the drawer sensor is configured such that when the drawer is displaced from the open position to the closed position the drawer sensor is triggered to start a timer, and that the drawer sensor may be a contact sensor configured to detect whether or not the drawer is in the closed position),
- at least one robotic handler head (sample treatment arm, not shown in the figures) movably arranged in the reagent storage area (3) at least along the first axis Y ([0063] see sample treatment arm movably supported on a frame 37, Figure 2), and
wherein,
- for each reagent drawer (17) a first forbidden zone along the first axis Y is defined ([0048] see the apparatus may perform one or more of the following actions when detecting an object entering the area detected by the sensor: avoiding an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, where one skilled in the art would find it obvious that therefore for each of the drawers a forbidden zone will be defined such that when the sensor detects an object the robot will avoid that area, where the robot being referred to is understood to be the sample treatment arm. Please note the sensor being described by [0048] is understood to be different from the drawer sensor, as the handle sensor described in [0051] is described to trigger when an object penetrates the area), and
While Beckman teaches that there may be fewer drawers than shown as seen in Figure 1, Beckman does not teach:
a first reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers being arranged above a second reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers, with respect to a second axis Z perpendicular to the first axis Y,
In the same problem solving area of loading PCR plates, tube strips, vials, or other sample containers, Boeke teaches a series of at least four vertically stacked user-accessible drawers (Boeke; [0012], [0034]).
Examiner finds that the prior art contained a device/method/product (i.e., an apparatus) which differed from the claimed device by the substitution of component(s) (i.e., drawers arranged side-by-side horizontally) with other component(s) (i.e., drawers arranged vertically above and below each other]), and the substituted components and their functions were known in the art as above set forth. An ordinarily skilled artisan could have substituted one known element with another (i.e., side-by-side drawers for vertical drawers), and the results of the substitution (i.e., holding racks within the drawers) would have been predictable.
Therefore, pursuant to MPEP §2143 (I), Examiner concludes that it would have been obvious to an ordinarily skilled artisan to substitute the side-by-side drawers of reference Beckman with the vertical drawers of reference Boeke, since the result would have been predictable.
As the drawers are now vertical drawers, one skilled in the art would find it obvious to modify the sample treatment arm such that it may access the vertical drawers, and thus move along the Z axis. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that there will be an avoid area along the Z axis for each of the drawers.
While Beckman does describe where conditions within the sample treatment space can be controlled and controlling the robot (Beckman; [0035], [0049]), Beckman does not explicitly teach a control unit. Therefore Beckman does not teach:
- a control unit configured to control the operation of the robotic handler head and connected to the position sensors;
- the control unit is configured to:
determine by means of the position sensors if the reagent storage drawers are in the closed position, and
if the closed position determination is successful, control the operation of the handler head.
In the analogous art of blood analysis systems/instruments, Yaremko teaches where a system includes a transport system, a control means and drawer assembly (Yaremko; abstract, column 5 lines 13-18).
Specifically, Yaremko teaches where the drawer assembly 900 is provided for holding a supply of containers that are used in instrument 100, and the control means 800 is connected to the transport assembly 700 and the control means 800 operates the transport assembly 700 to carry containers from drawer assembly 900 to other stations of the system (Yaremko; column 5 lines 49-65). Column 5 lines 32-38 further describes that the transport assembly 700 includes robot arm 702 and gripper 704, control means 800 includes a central control unit 802 and processor 804, and drawer assembly 900 includes a drawer 902. It is further described in column 19 lines 39-44 that a sensor may be provided to sense when the drawer 902 is in the closed position and that the sensor may generate and transmit to the processor 804 a signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the apparatus of Beckman such that it includes the control means, including the processor, as taught by Yaremko because Yaremko teaches that the control means is effective for controlling a transport assembly and sensing when a drawer is closed.
Because [0048] of Beckman describes that if an object entering the area detected by the sensor causes the robot to avoid an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that if the drawers are closed, the control means will control operation of the sample treatment arm.
Claim(s) 2-3, 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over translated Beckman Coulter (DE-202012010656-U1) herein Beckman, Boeke (US-2015/0346151-A1) and Yaremko (US-5620898-A), and in further view of Marty (US-2010/0018330-A1).
Regarding claim 2, modified Beckman teaches the method of claim 1. Modified Beckman further teaches wherein the control unit further performs the steps of:
- if the closed position determination is unsuccessful, determining which reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers is not in the closed position,
- determining a position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y and the second axis Z,
- determining if the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with the reagent drawer not in the closed position, and
Beckman has been modified with Yaremko such that it includes the control means, and thus the processor, where the drawer sensors of Beckman will be connected to the control means such that the control means receives the signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position as described by column 19 lines 39-44 of Yaremko. Based on [0051] of Beckman which describes that the drawer sensor detects whether or not the drawer is in the closed position, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that each of the drawers present will have such a drawer sensor and that therefore the control means will determine which drawer is not closed.
Further, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that for avoiding an area around the drawer described by [0048] of Beckman the control means would need to be determining the position of the of the sample treatment arm. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that once the control means determines that an area is to be avoided, it would need to determine if the sample treatment arm is in the avoid area.
However, Beckman does not teach:
- stopping the operation of the robotic handler head if it has been determined that the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with the reagent drawer not in the closed position.
In the same problem solving area of providing safety for laboratory equipment, Marty teaches where if a door to a storage section is opened a safety switching circuit ensures that all moving systems (robotic arms or other transfer or conveying systems) come to a standstill, for example in a neutral or home position (Marty; [0028]).
Beckman teaches that it is desirable to avoid an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, therefore it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the control means of Yaremko such that when a drawer is in the open position and the sample treatment arm is in an avoid area, it will cause the sample treatment arm of Beckman to come to a standstill as taught by Marty because Marty teaches that causing moving systems to come to a standstill when a door is opened, it provides safety for the operator (Marty; [0028]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Beckman teaches the method of claim 2. Modified Beckman further teaches wherein the control unit further performs the steps of:
- if the closed position determination is unsuccessful and the control unit determines that both reagent drawers are not in the closed position, determining a position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y and the second axis Z,
- determining if the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with both reagent drawers, and
- stopping the operation of the robotic handler head if it has been determined that the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with both reagent drawers.
Beckman has been modified with Yaremko such that it includes the control means, and thus the processor, where the drawer sensors of Beckman will be connected to the control means such that the control means receives the signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position as described by column 19 lines 39-44 of Yaremko. Based on [0051] of Beckman which describes that the drawer sensor detects whether or not the drawer is in the closed position, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that each of the drawers present will have such a drawer sensor and that therefore the control means will determine which drawer is not closed, or if multiple drawers are not closed.
Further, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that for avoiding an area around the drawer described by [0048] of Beckman the control means would need to be determining the position of the of the sample treatment arm. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that once the control means determines that an area is to be avoided, it would need to determine if the sample treatment arm is in the avoid area.
Beckman has been modified with Marty such that when the drawer is opened and the sample treatment arm is within an avoid area, it will cause the sample treatment arm to come to a standstill. One skilled in the art would find it obvious that this process will occur for if multiple drawers are opened and the sample treatment arm is in any of their respective avoid areas.
Regarding claim 5, modified Beckman teaches the system according to claim 4. Modified Beckman further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to:
- if the closed position determination is unsuccessful, determine which reagent drawer of the at least two reagent drawers is not in the closed position,
- determine a position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y and the second axis Z,
- determine if the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with the reagent drawer not in the closed position, and
Beckman has been modified with Yaremko such that it includes the control means, and thus the processor, where the drawer sensors of Beckman will be connected to the control means such that the control means receives the signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position as described by column 19 lines 39-44 of Yaremko. Based on [0051] of Beckman which describes that the drawer sensor detects whether or not the drawer is in the closed position, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that each of the drawers present will have such a drawer sensor and that therefore the control means will determine which drawer is not closed.
Further, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that for avoiding an area around the drawer described by [0048] of Beckman the control means would need to be determining the position of the of the sample treatment arm. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that once the control means determines that an area is to be avoided, it would need to determine if the sample treatment arm is in the avoid area.
However, Beckman does not teach:
- stop the operation of the robotic handler head if it has been determined that the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with the reagent drawer not in the closed position.
In the same problem solving area of providing safety for laboratory equipment, Marty teaches where if a door to a storage section is opened a safety switching circuit ensures that all moving systems (robotic arms or other transfer or conveying systems) come to a standstill, for example in a neutral or home position (Marty; [0028]).
Beckman teaches that it is desirable to avoid an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, therefore it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the control means of Yaremko such that when a drawer is in the open position and the sample treatment arm is in an avoid area, it will cause the sample treatment arm of Beckman to come to a standstill as taught by Marty because Marty teaches that causing moving systems to come to a standstill when a door is opened, it provides safety for the operator (Marty; [0028]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Beckman teaches the system according to claim 4. Modified Beckman further teaches wherein the control unit is further configured to:
- if the closed position determination is unsuccessful and the control unit determines that both reagent drawers are not in the closed position,
- determine a position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y and the second axis Z,
- determine if the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with both reagent drawers, and
Beckman has been modified with Yaremko such that it includes the control means, and thus the processor, where the drawer sensors of Beckman will be connected to the control means such that the control means receives the signal each time the drawer is moved into its closed position as described by column 19 lines 39-44 of Yaremko. Based on [0051] of Beckman which describes that the drawer sensor detects whether or not the drawer is in the closed position, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that each of the drawers present will have such a drawer sensor and that therefore the control means will determine which drawer is not closed, or if multiple drawers are not closed.
Further, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that for avoiding an area around the drawer described by [0048] of Beckman the control means would need to be determining the position of the of the sample treatment arm. Additionally, one skilled in the art would find it obvious that once the control means determines that an area is to be avoided, it would need to determine if the sample treatment arm is in the avoid area.
However, Beckman does not teach:
- stop the operation of the robotic handler head if it has been determined that the position of the robotic handler head along the first axis Y is within the first forbidden zone and the position of the handler head along the second axis Z is within the second forbidden zone associated with both reagent drawers.
In the same problem solving area of providing safety for laboratory equipment, Marty teaches where if a door to a storage section is opened a safety switching circuit ensures that all moving systems (robotic arms or other transfer or conveying systems) come to a standstill, for example in a neutral or home position (Marty; [0028]).
Beckman teaches that it is desirable to avoid an area around the drawer that is accessible to the operator, therefore it would be obvious to one skilled in the art to modify the control means of Yaremko such that when one or more drawers are in the open position and the sample treatment arm is in an avoid area, it will cause the sample treatment arm of Beckman to come to a standstill as taught by Marty because Marty teaches that causing moving systems to come to a standstill when a door is opened, it provides safety for the operator (Marty; [0028]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA LYLE whose telephone number is (571)272-9856. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30-5:00 M-Th.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at (571)272-1234. 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.
/S.Y.L./Examiner, Art Unit 1796
/MELVIN C. MAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights