Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. LU501039, filed on 12/17/2021.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: The reference character (33) shown in Fig. 6 is not described in the instant Specification filed 06/11/2024. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claim(s) 25-27, 30-31, and 38-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Schroeder et al. (US20200224139A1) or, in the alternative under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Tsai et al. (US20240228938A1) .
Regarding Claim 25, Schroeder et al. teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the Abstract, the processing device 100, the deep well source microplate 120, and the Claim(s) 1-27 in [0006]-[0132] in Fig. 1-6B) wherein the processing device (See in Fig. 1A-2 in claim(s) 1-19) comprises:
a housing with a bottom part and a lid part (See how the pneumatic lid 110 includes a body 111 that couples to the bottom well plate in [0046] in Fig. 1A-D), wherein the bottom part and the lid part delimit an inner space of the housing (See how the channels 114,314,414 form an inner space in [0046]-[0069] in Fig. 1A-4B); and
a connection part for fluidically connecting the processing device with a processing unit wherein the connection part is fluidically connected with the inner space (See how the pneumatic lid 110 may have a plurality of portions 111a-c, i.e. connection parts, to facilitate coupling to the microplate labware by allowing each section to be individually coupled to a corresponding microplate labware and then bridged together in [0050]-[0059] in Fig. 1A-2; Also, see the microplates 130,330,430, i.e. processing units, in [0046]-[0069] in Fig. 1A-4B; See the one or more pneumatic control fittings 108, i.e. connection parts, in [0046]-[0055] in Fig. 1A-D);
wherein the housing has several hollow extension tubes, which extend from the bottom part and which are fluidically connected with the inner space (See how the one or more first extension pieces 116,316,416 are connected to the channels 114,314,414, i.e. inner spaces, in [0046]-[0069] in Fig. 1A-4B); and
wherein the processing device comprises at least one valve device that is at least partly arranged in the inner space of the housing (See how the second layer 313 is utilized as a deflection layer for an integrated valve design in [0064] in Fig. 3A; Also, see the Quake valve and the controller 200 in [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073]) and is moveable between an open position in which the connection part is fluidically connected with an outlet opening of an extension tube and a closed position in which the valve device fluidically disconnects the connection part from the outlet opening of the extension tube (See how the bridge portion 111b, i.e. a connection part, is fluidically connected to an outlet opening of an extension tube dependent on the position of the valve integrated e.g. in the deflection layer 313 in [0050],[0064] in Fig. 1A-D, 3A).
Alternatively, in the analogous art of processing devices for processing a liquid sample, Tsai et al. teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the processing device 1, the multiwell carrier 21, and the Claim(s) 39-58 in [0001]-[0097] in Fig. 1-10), wherein the processing device (See in Fig. 1) comprises:
a housing with a bottom part and a lid part (See how the housing 29 comprises a lid part 3 and a bottom part 4 in [0069] in Fig. 1), wherein the bottom part and the lid part delimit an inner space of the housing (See the space 10 in [007 in Fig. 1); and
a connection part for fluidically connecting the processing device with a processing unit wherein the connection part is fluidically connected with the inner space (See how the connection part 7 that fluidically connects the space 10 with a pressure control system 8 of the processing system 18 in [0071] in Fig. 1)
wherein the housing has several hollow extension tubes, which extend from the bottom part and which are fluidically connected with the inner space (See the extension tubes 5 in [0069]-[0074] in Fig. 1); and
wherein the processing device comprises at least one valve device that is at least partly arranged in the inner space of the housing and is moveable between an open position in which the connection part is fluidically connected with an outlet opening of an extension tube and a closed position in which the valve device fluidically disconnects the connection part from the outlet opening of the extension tube (See the pressure control system 8 in [0029]-[0030], [0071]-[0077] in Fig. 1).
Regarding Claim(s) 26-27, Schroeder et al. teach the device limitations of claim 25.
Schroeder et al. further teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the Abstract, the processing device 100, the deep well source microplate 120, and the Claim(s) 1-27 in [0006]-[0132] in Fig. 1-6B), wherein: a. the valve device is partially arranged in a cavity of the extension tube; and/or b. the valve device closes an inlet opening of the extension tube when the valve device is arranged in the closed position; and/or c. the valve device moves translatory from the open position to the closed position or vice versa; and/or d. the valve device moves from the open position to the closed position or vice versa along a length axis of the extension tube; and/or e. the valve device moves from the open position to the closed position by means of force of gravity (See the various arrangements of the deflection layer 313 in [0050]-[0055],[0064] in Fig. 1A-D, 3A);
wherein: a. the valve device has a sealing element for sealing an inlet opening of the extension tube when the valve device is arranged in the closed position; and/or b. the valve device has a sealing element that surrounds an inlet opening of the extension tube when the valve device is arranged in the closed position (See the various arrangements of the deflection layer 313 and the fourth layer in [0050],[0060]-[0067] in Fig. 1A-D, 3A).
Note what is discussed in MPEP § 2144 VI. concerning the rearrangement of parts of a claimed invention in comparison to the prior art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). The current claim limitations regarding the positioning of the valve device, does not change the function of the claimed invention in comparison to the prior art.
Regarding Claim(s) 30-31, Schroeder et al. teaches the device limitations of claim 25.
Schroeder et al. further teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the Abstract, the processing device 100, the deep well source microplate 120, and the Claim(s) 1-27 in [0006]-[0132] in Fig. 1-6B), wherein the processing device comprises a further connection part for connecting the inner space with a measurement device (See the local interface 200 and the system interface 218 in [0006], [0055]-[0067] in Fig. 2);
wherein: a. the connection part and/or the further connection part protrude from the lid part and/or bottom part; and/or b. the connection part and/or the further connection part protrude from the same housing side (See in [0006], [0055]-[0067] in Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim(s) 38-44, Schroeder et al. teaches the device limitations of claim 25.
Schroeder et al. further teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the Abstract, the processing device 100, the deep well source microplate 120, and the Claim(s) 1-27 in [0006]-[0132] in Fig. 1-6B), wherein the processing device comprises an actuating element that is configured to act on the valve device so that the valve device moves from the closed position to the open position (See how the apparatus 100 may incorporate a normally closed valve such that fluid flow does not occur unless actuated by the pneumatic controller 220 in [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073] in Fig. 4A-5C).
wherein: a. the actuating element is moveable relative to the processing device; or b. the actuating element is arranged in the same position independent of whether the valve device is in the open position or the closed position (See in [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073] in Fig. 4A-5C);
wherein: a. the actuating element and the valve device are arranged opposite to each other with respect to the lid part; and/or b. the actuating element comprises a magnetic element (See in [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073] in Fig. 4A-5C);
wherein: a. the actuating device is arranged on the lid part; and/or b. the actuating device comprises an actuating housing wherein the actuating element is arranged at least partly in an inner space of the actuating housing (See in [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073] in Fig. 4A-5C);
wherein the processing device comprises an actuating device, wherein: a. the actuating device is arranged on the lid part; and/or b. the actuating device comprises an actuating housing wherein the actuating element is arranged at least partly in an inner space of the actuating housing (See how the pneumatic lid 110 includes a body 111 that couples to the bottom well plate in [0046], [0061]-[0062], [0069], [0073] in Fig. 1A-D);
wherein the processing device is arranged such that at least one extension tube extends in a well containing the liquid sample of the multiwell carrier (See the one or more first extension pieces 116, one or more second extension pieces 118 in [0046], [0064] in Fig. 1A-3A);
wherein: a. the processing system comprises a processing unit wherein the processing unit is configured to apply a positive pressure or a negative pressure in the inner space of the processing device; and/or b. the processing device is arranged on the multiwell carrier (See how the pneumatic pressure or the vacuum may be introduced through the one or more pneumatic control fittings 108 in [0052]-[0069], [0074], [0076], [0102] in Fig. 1A-3A).
Note what is discussed in MPEP § 2144 VI. concerning the rearrangement of parts of a claimed invention in comparison to the prior art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). The current claim limitations regarding the positioning of the valve device, the actuating element, the inner space, the housing, and the processing unit, does not change the function of the claimed invention in comparison to the prior art.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 28-29 and 32-37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable Schroeder et al. (US20200224139A1) or Tsai et al. (US20240228938A1) as applied to claim 25 above, and further in view of Cambron (US20190083974A1).
Regarding Claim(s) 28-29, Schroeder et al. or Tsai et al. teach the device limitations of claim 25.
Schroeder et al. or Tsai et al. fails to explicitly teach a processing device, wherein the valve device has a valve head and a valve body, wherein: a. the valve head is configured such that the valve head cannot enter a cavity of the extension tube; and/or b. at least one guiding portion is arranged at a valve body wherein the guiding portion is guided by a tube wall of the extension tube; and/or c. several guiding portions are arranged at a valve body wherein the guiding portions are arranged at a distance to each other in a circumferential direction of the valve body.
However, in the analogous art of processing devices for processing a liquid sample, Cambron teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the well-plate assembly 100, the well-plate 102, the fluidic manifold assembly 120, and the Claim(s) 1-20 in [0034]-[0113] in Fig. 1-16), wherein the valve device has a valve head and a valve body (See how the fluidic manifold assembly 120, i.e. a valve device, may include a plurality of fittings 130 with a head and body, that may be used to discretely plump the plurality of fluid inlets and outlets 124, 126 in [0044] in Fig. 1),
wherein: a. the valve head is configured such that the valve head cannot enter a cavity of the extension tube; and/or b. at least one guiding portion is arranged at a valve body wherein the guiding portion is guided by a tube wall of the extension tube; and/or c. several guiding portions are arranged at a valve body wherein the guiding portions are arranged at a distance to each other in a circumferential direction of the valve body (See in [0034]-[0113] in Fig. 1-16);
wherein: a. the valve body has a cylindrical portion and/or a tapered portion; and/or b. an end of the valve body distant to the valve head has a tapered portion (See in [0034]-[0113] in Fig. 1).
Thus, it would be obvious to modify the combined device of Schroeder et al. and Tsai et al. by incorporating a valve device has a valve head and a valve body (as taught by Cambron) for the benefit of controlling pressure and fluid flow in and out of the device.
Regarding Claim(s) 32-37, Schroeder et al. or Tsai et al. teach the device limitations of claim 25.
Schroeder et al. or Tsai et al. fails to explicitly teach a processing device, wherein: a. the valve device has a magnetic element; and/or b. the valve device has a magnetic element that it is arranged at an end of the valve device distant to the extension tube.
However, in the analogous art of processing devices for processing a liquid sample, Cambron teaches a processing device for processing of a liquid sample contained in a multiwell carrier (See the well-plate assembly 100, the well-plate 102, the fluidic manifold assembly 120, and the Claim(s) 1-20 in [0034]-[0113] in Fig. 1-16), wherein: a. the valve device has a magnetic element; and/or b. the valve device has a magnetic element that it is arranged at an end of the valve device distant to the extension tube (See how the fluidic manifold assembly 120, i.e. a valve device, may include a plurality of fittings 130 with a head and body, that may be used to discretely plump the plurality of fluid inlets and outlets 124, 126 in [0044],[0076] in Fig. 1);
wherein the lid part comprises a lid frame and a membrane arranged on at least a part of the lid frame (See the membrane 352 of the transwell 350 on which the tissue construct 180 in [0071], [0082] in Fig. 10);
wherein: a. the lid frame is fixed to the bottom part; and/or b. the membrane is at least partially connected to the lid frame; and/or c. the lid frame comprises a hole wherein a part of the valve device extends through the hole and is connected with the membrane; and/or d. the lid frame comprises a hole, wherein a part of the membrane enters the hole when the valve device is arranged in the closed position; and/or e. the lid frame is stiffer than the membrane (See in [0044]-[0082] in Fig. 1-10);
wherein: a. the valve device is fixed to the lid part; and/or b. the valve device is fixed to the membrane (See the fluidic manifold assembly 120, i.e. a valve device, in [0044]-[0082] in Fig. 1-10);
wherein the valve device is movable relative to the lid part and/or the bottom part (See the fluidic manifold assembly 120, i.e. a valve device, in [0044]-[0082] in Fig. 1-11);
wherein the valve device is in contact with the lid part when the valve device is arranged in the open position and is not in contact with the lid part when the valve device is arranged in the closed position (See the fluidic manifold assembly 120, i.e. a valve device, in [0044]-[0082] in Fig. 1-11).
Thus, it would be obvious to modify the combined device of Schroeder et al. and Tsai et al. by incorporating a valve device having a magnetic element, a lid frame, and a membrane (as taught by Cambron) for the benefit of controlling pressure and fluid flow in and out of the device.
Note what is discussed in MPEP § 2144 VI. concerning the rearrangement of parts of a claimed invention in comparison to the prior art. In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (Claims to a hydraulic power press which read on the prior art except with regard to the position of the starting switch were held unpatentable because shifting the position of the starting switch would not have modified the operation of the device.); In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975) (the particular placement of a contact in a conductivity measuring device was held to be an obvious matter of design choice). The current claim limitations regarding the positioning of the valve device, the magnetic element, the lid frame, the lid part, and the membrane, does not change the function of the claimed invention in comparison to the prior art.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following prior art teaches similar devices and methods: Yung et al. (US20190247847A1), Martin et al. (US11661574B2), and Bird et al. (US20110236960A).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRITNEY N. WASHINGTON whose telephone number is (703)756-5959. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am - 5:30pm CT.
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, Lyle Alexander can be reached at (571) 272-1254. 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.
/BRITNEY N. WASHINGTON/Examiner, Art Unit 1797
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797
