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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged that application claims priority to foreign application with application number DE10 2023 122 213.9 dated 8/18/2023. Copies of certified papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 have been received. Priority is acknowledged under 35 USC 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS dated 11/04/2024 has been considered and placed in the application file.
Objection - Specification - Abstract
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should not contain legal language such as comprising. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The sheet or sheets presenting the abstract may not include other parts of the application or other material.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b), as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
According to MPEP 2143.03 (I), “If a claim is subject to more than one interpretation, at least one of which would render the claim unpatentable over the prior art, the examiner should reject the claim as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph (see MPEP § 2175) and should reject the claim over the prior art based on the interpretation of the claim that renders the prior art applicable. (Ex parte Ionescu, 222 USPQ 537 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1984)”
Claim 7 recites the phrase "for example" which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP §2173.05(d).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 and 8-20 are allowed.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art of record does not teach certain distinguishing features as described below in reference to independent claim 1.
Regarding claim 1, the prior art Marks et al. teaches a method for providing source data for training or validating a processing model for processing analyte image sequences, wherein an analyte image sequence is generated by labeling analytes with markers in a plurality of coloring rounds and detecting the markers with a camera, the markers are selected based on a codebook such that signal sequences of analytes in an image region over the analyte image sequence comprise colored signals and uncolored signals, the camera captures an image of the analyte image sequence in each coloring round, the method comprising: - capturing a spot analyte image sequence of a sample, - providing an evaluation of image regions based on image signals of the image regions, - identifying one or more spot image regions in the spot images from the evaluation of the image regions, wherein the evaluation of spot image regions of spot images for colored signals has a spot evaluation.
Cai et al shows a similar system which also includes adjusting the contrast to maximize labeling visibility.
None teaches:
- capturing one or more source analyte image sequences comprising source images registered to the spot images, comprising reducing a scene contrast in order to record the source images registered to the spot images with a scene contrast reduced compared to the spot images, such that the evaluation of the spot image regions based on the image signals of the spot image regions for the source images of at least one of the source analyte image sequences for colored signals has a non-spot evaluation, and
- providing the at least one of the source analyte image sequences as source data.
Further, none of the reference teaches or fairly suggests the combination of claimed elements. The Examiner finds no reason or motivation to combine the above references in an obviousness rejection thus placing the application in condition for allowance.
Claims 2-6 and 8-20 are allowable as depending on an allowable independent claim.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARSTEN F LANTZ whose telephone number is (571) 272-4564. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, Ms. Jennifer Mehmood can be reached on 571-272-2976. 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.
/Karsten F. Lantz/Examiner, Art Unit 2664
Date: 7/01/2026
/JENNIFER MEHMOOD/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2664
Prosecution Insights