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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
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.
Claim 32 is 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.
Regarding claim 32, the claim states: “… the optical sensing unit…” Since claim 32 depend from claim 27, it is not clear if optical sensing unit is the same or different from optic sensing unit.
For examination purposes, the examiner is taking a position that optical sensing unit is the same as optic sensing unit.
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.
Claim(s) 22-25, 27-29, 32-33 and 36-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zhang et al (CN 110320250 A ) [translation provided by applicant].
PNG
media_image1.png
398
554
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
479
566
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, Zhang et al disclose [see Figs 1-2 above] a device (capacitive marine microplastic detecting device) for detecting at least one analyte (microplastic) in a sample fluid (seawater), the device comprising: a fluid channel (flow passage 2) having a longitudinal channel axis and structured to allow the sample fluid containing at least one analyte to pass through the fluid channel (2); at least one pair of electrodes (arc shaped electrode plates 7 & 8) ; an electric field generator [not shown but see translation pg. 4, lines 6-8 for excitation detecting unit for details] for generating an electric field between the at least one pair of electrodes [7 & 8); and a detector (capacitance detection unit 6) for detecting the at least one analyte in the sample fluid based on passage through the electric field; wherein each electrode (7 & 8) of the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8) has a three- dimensionally structured electrode surface that is curved about the longitudinal channel axis.
Regarding claim 23, Zhang et al disclose wherein the curved electrode surface of each electrode (7 & 8) of the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8) has a concave shaped electrode surface [prior art called the electrodes arc-shaped].
Regarding claim 24, Zhang et al disclose wherein the at least one pair of electrodes (7&8) inherently has an arc length between 10° and 135°.
Regarding claim 25, Zhang et al disclose wherein the fluid channel (2) has a cross section comprising a circular segment [see Fig. 2 where item flow passage 2 is circular].
Regarding claim 27, Zhang et al disclose an optic sensing unit [not shown but see translation pg. 4, lines 2-5] configured to optically sense a sensing region of the fluid channel (2) between the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8).
Regarding claim 28, Zhang et al disclose wherein the optic sensing unit [not shown but see translation pg. 4, lines 2-5] has an optical sensing axis extending perpendicular to the longitudinal channel axis and at a mid- plane of the fluid channel (2).
Regarding claim 29, Zhang et al disclose wherein the optic sensing unit further comprises at least one light detector positioned offset from the mid-plane of the fluid channel (2).
Regarding claim 32, Zhang et al disclose wherein the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8) does not obstruct optical paths of the optical sensing unit in terms of illumination and sensing.
Regarding claim 33, Zhang et al disclose wherein the device comprises a first substrate and a second substrate (both part of substrate 5), the first and second substrates (5) at least partially forming the fluid channel (2).
Regarding claim 36, Zhang et al disclose wherein the first substrate (part of item 5) has a first recess and the second substrate (part of item 5) has a second recess, the first and second recesses at least partially forming the fluid channel (2).
Regarding claim 37, Zhang et al disclose wherein the first and second recesses have the same shape [see Figs. 1-2].
Regarding claim 38, Zhang et al disclose wherein the first and second recesses each comprise one electrode (7 or 8) of the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8).
Regarding claim 39, Zhang et al disclose wherein each electrode (7 & 8) of the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8) has the same shape.
Regarding claim 40, Zhang et al disclose wherein at least one electrode (7 or 8) of the at least one pair of electrodes (7 & 8) has a surface having a cross section comprising a circular segment [see Fig. 2 where item 2 is circular] or an elliptical segment.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang et al (CN 110320250 A ).
Regarding claim 22, Zhang et al disclose wherein the fluid channel (2) has a cross section. However, the cross section does not comprising an ellipsoid segment. It is well known to have different shapes segment where is needed by a user [see MPEP 2144.04 In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966)]. It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have different shape segment such as ellipsoid since it was held that shape was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular shape was significant.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 for details.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 30-31, 34-35 and 41 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: regarding claim 30, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the optic sensing unit comprises a waveguide unit.
Regarding claim 31, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to the optic sensing unit comprises a laser device.
Regarding claim 34, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to at least one integrated waveguide unit optically coupled to a sensing region of the fluid channel between the at least one pair of electrodes. Since claim 35 depends from claim 34, it also has allowable subject matter.
Regarding claim 41, the primary reason for the allowance of the claim is due to wherein the detector is configured to detect the at least one analyte in the sample fluid at a voltage drop between the at least one pair of electrodes ranging from 0.1 to 0.5 V.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JERMELE M HOLLINGTON whose telephone number is (571)272-1960. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00am-3:30pm.
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, Lee E Rodak can be reached at 571-270-5628. 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.
/JERMELE M HOLLINGTON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2858
Prosecution Insights