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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 16 April 2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Non-Final Rejection on 28 January 2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the Examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Page 7, filed 16 April 2026, with respect to claims 1-30 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the §112(b) rejections of claims 1-30 have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-9, filed 16 April 2026, with respect to claim 1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the §102/103 rejections of claims 1-30 have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection have been made in view of the amendments to claim 1.
Applicant argues that the references of Ness, Dan Chin Yu, Stumbo, and Rulison each fail to disclose the limitation of “wherein the detection module includes a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor and an antenna layer, associated with the silicon, that allows the sensor to detect longer-wavelength light than the silicon alone” in amended claim 1.
Applicant's arguments fail to comply with 37 CFR 1.111(b) because they amount to a general allegation that the claims define a patentable invention without specifically pointing out how the language of the claims patentably distinguishes them from the references.
In regards to claim 4, which originally contains this limitation, Applicant argues that the modification of Ness’ detection module with Pohl’s sensor amounts would require impermissible hindsight. However, Pohl provides a teaching of a silicon-based sensor and an associated antenna layer [0084]. Antenna are well known across many technological fields to improve signal strength (e.g. Olson et al. (US 2018/0042516) [0002]; Kozlowski (US 2017/0291518) [0007]). Additionally, CMOS sensors, which Ness discloses the detection module (86,88) as comprising [0047], are generally known to be silicon-based (Strasfeld et al. (US 2025/0194928) [0070]; Sun et al. (US 2022/0074859) [0055]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’s detection module with a silicon-based CMOS sensor and an antenna for the purpose of improving signal strength.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 2 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which they depend, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which they depend. Applicant has amended claim 1 to include the limitations of original claims 2 and 4-6, but failed to cancel these dependent claims. Applicant may cancel the claims, amend the claims to place the claims in proper dependent form, rewrite the claims in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claims comply with the statutory requirements.
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.
Claims 1-3, 5-6, 9-13, 17, 24, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ness et al. (US), hereinafter Ness, in view of Pohl et al. (US 2021/0303813), hereinafter Pohl.
Claim 1: Ness discloses a wide-spectrum analysis system (70, Fig. 2), comprising:
a stage (channel 76) configured to support a sample holder [0044] at an examination region (92) [0051];
an illumination module (78) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample (74) positioned in the sample holder at the examination region (92) [0046];
a detection module (86,88) configured to detect output light produced by a sample (74) positioned in the sample holder [0047] at the examination region (92) [0051], wherein the detection module (86,88) detects light having wavelengths between about 200 nm and about 1400 nm (detection of visible and infrared light [0056]); and
an optical relay structure (85,90) configured to direct the output light from the examination region (92) to the detection module (86,88) [0047] and to direct illumination light from the illumination module (78) to the examination region (95) (“Light from each light source may be transmitted to channel 76 via illumination optics 85” [0046]).
Ness discloses a CMOS detector [0047], but is silent with respect to the specific configuration of the detection module.
Pohl, however, although not in the same field of endeavor, is nevertheless concerned with the same problem of providing highly-accurate sensing. Pohl discloses a detection module that includes a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor and an antenna layer, associated with the silicon (“coupling… a silicon-based area sensor to an antenna” [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’ detection module to include a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor (such as a CMOS) and an antenna for the purpose of highly accurate sensing with an increased range.
It is evident that, in Ness’ modified detection module, that allows the sensor to detect longer-wavelength light than the silicon alone (functional language, inherent result from antenna usage).
Claim 2: Ness further discloses wherein the detection module (86,88) detects light having wavelengths between about 400 nm and about 1400 nm (detection of visible and infrared light [0056]).
Claim 3: Ness further discloses wherein the detection module (86,88) detects light having wavelengths between about 400 nm and about 1300 nm (detection of visible and infrared light [0056]).
Claim 5: Ness further discloses an illumination module (78) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample (74) positioned in the sample holder at the examination region (92) [0046].
Claim 6: Ness further discloses wherein the optical relay structure (85) is further configured to direct illumination light from the illumination module (78) to the examination region (95) (“Light from each light source may be transmitted to channel 76 via illumination optics 85” [0046]).
Claim 9: Ness further discloses wherein the illumination module (78) includes at least two distinct light sources (82,84) [0046].
Claim 10: Ness further discloses wherein the illumination module (78) includes at least one of an LED light source and a laser light source (“Exemplary light sources include light-emitting diodes (LEDs), lasers” [0046]).
Claim 11: Ness further discloses wherein the illumination module (78) produces illumination light in at least two of the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared [0044].
Claim 12: Ness further discloses wherein the illumination module (78) produces illumination light in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared [0044].
Claim 13: Ness further discloses wherein the sample (74) is fluorescent (“the droplets may include an absorbing or fluorescent dye” [0056]), and the output light is fluorescence (“The signature (i.e., color) of the resulting fluorescence will depend upon which target or combination of targets was present in the droplet” [0055]).
Claim 17: Ness further discloses wherein the sample (74) is colorimetric (“FAM and VIC dyes could be used as labels for "two-color" assays in droplets” [0065]), and the output light is reflected, scattered, and/or transmitted by the sample (74) (“These mechanisms may include optical techniques (e.g., measuring absorbance, transmission, reflection, scattering…)” [0043]).
Claim 24: Ness further discloses wherein the detection module (86,88) is configured to form an image of one or more samples (74) in the sample holder (“Detection generally may be performed using… fluorescence imaging” [0043]; “each detector may be a point detector or an imaging detector” [0047]).
Claim 29: Ness further discloses wherein the sample [0074] moves while the detection module (86,88) detects the output light [0052].
Claim 30: Ness further discloses a processor (126, Fig. 3) configured to analyze the output light detected by the detection module (86,88) (“The controller may include one or more processors… for data processing” [0061]) (“FIG. 3 shows an exemplary detection system 120 including detection unit 70 of FIG. 2” [0058]).
Claims 14-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ness, in view of Pohl as applied to claims 13 and 17 above, and further in view of Butte et al. (US 2021/0015350), hereinafter Butte.
Claims 14-16: Ness discloses a sample (74) disposed in the sample holder [0044], wherein the sample (74) is labeled with dyes that produce output light in the infrared range [0056], and wherein the detection module (86,88) detects the output light (“the detection units may detect light of any suitable wavelength, such as ultraviolet radiation, visible light, and/or infrared radiation” [0056]).
Ness does not explicitly disclose also producing output light in one or both of the ultraviolet and visible ranges.
Butte, however, in the same field of endeavor of fluorescence imaging, discloses wherein a sample is labeled with at least four dyes that produce output light in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared [0094].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’s sample with dyes that produce output light in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared ranges for the purpose of fully characterizing the properties of the sample.
Claims 18-20: Ness discloses a sample (74) disposed in the sample holder [0044], wherein the sample (74) is labeled with dyes that produce output light in the infrared range [0056], and wherein the detection module (86,88) detects the output light (“the detection units may detect light of any suitable wavelength, such as ultraviolet radiation, visible light, and/or infrared radiation” [0056]).
Ness does not explicitly disclose also producing output light in one or both of the ultraviolet and visible ranges.
Butte, however, in the same field of endeavor of fluorescence imaging, discloses wherein a sample is labeled with at least four dyes that produce output light in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared [0094].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’s sample with dyes that produce output light in the ultraviolet, visible, and infrared ranges for the purpose of fully characterizing the properties of the sample.
Claims 25-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ness, in view of Pohl as applied to claim 24 above, and further in view of Che et al. (US 2018/0209908), hereinafter Che.
Claim 25: Ness is silent with respect to the detection module forming a first image corresponding to output light of a first wavelength range and a second image corresponding to output light of a second wavelength range.
Che, however, in the same field of endeavor of optical imaging, discloses an analysis system comprising a detection module configured to form a first image of a sample corresponding to output light of a first wavelength range (“an LED emitting light at 520 nm” [0102]) and a second image of the sample corresponding to output light of a second wavelength range (“a second laser emitting light at 785 nm” [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’ detection module to image the sample in various wavelength ranges for the purpose of better characterizing the properties of the sample.
Claim 26: Ness, in view of Che, further discloses wherein the system combines the first image and the second image to form a composite image (“The captured images for each of the three excitation wavelengths were combined into a single composite image” [0102]).
Claim 27: Ness, in view of Che, further discloses wherein the first image corresponds to visible output light (520-nm light is in the visible range) and the second image corresponds to infrared output light (785-nm light is in the infrared range).
Claims 1, 5-8, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dan Chin Yu et al. (US 2023/0213449), hereinafter Dan Chin Yu, in view of Pohl.
Claim 1: Dan Chin Yu discloses a wide-spectrum analysis system (10, Fig. 1), comprising:
a stage (15) configured to support a sample holder at an examination region [0039];
an illumination module (12) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample positioned in the sample holder at the examination region [0039]
a detection module (17) configured to detect output light produced by a sample positioned in the sample holder at the examination region [0039], wherein the detection module (17) detects light having wavelengths between about 200 nm and about 1400 nm (inherent since the detection module is a camera); and
an optical relay structure (14/16) configured to direct the output light from the examination region to the detection module (17) [0039] and to direct illumination light from the illumination module (12) to the examination region [0039].
Dan Chin Yu discloses a camera (17) [0039], which is typically known to be a CCD or CMOS detector, but is silent with respect to the specific configuration of the detection module.
Pohl, however, although not in the same field of endeavor, is nevertheless concerned with the same problem of providing highly-accurate sensing. Pohl discloses a detection module that includes a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor and an antenna layer, associated with the silicon (“coupling… a silicon-based area sensor to an antenna” [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dan Chin Yu’s detection module to include a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor (such as a CMOS) and an antenna for the purpose of highly accurate sensing with an increased range.
It is evident that, in Ness’ modified detection module, that allows the sensor to detect longer-wavelength light than the silicon alone (functional language, inherent result from antenna usage).
Claim 5: Dan Chin Yu further discloses an illumination module (12) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample positioned in the sample holder at the examination region [0039].
Claim 6: Dan Chin Yu further discloses wherein the optical relay structure (14/16) is further configured to direct illumination light from the illumination module (12) to the examination region [0039].
Claim 7: Dan Chin Yu further discloses wherein portions of the optical relay system (14/16) that are used to direct illumination light to the examination region and portions that are used to direct output light from the examination region overlap (evident from figure) [0039].
Claim 8: Dan Chin Yu further discloses wherein the optical relay structure (14/16) includes a filter (16) to separate illumination light and output light [0039].
Claim 28: Dan Chin Yu further discloses wherein the sample is stationary while the detection module (17) detects the output light (evident from figure) [0039].
Claims 1 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stumbo et al. (US 2001/0033381), hereinafter Stumbo, in view of Pohl.
Claim 1: Stumbo discloses a wide-spectrum analysis system (Fig. 9), comprising:
a stage (423) configured to support a sample holder (426) at an examination region [0060];
an illumination module (403a-d) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample (420) positioned in the sample holder (426) at the examination region [0047,0056];
a detection module (460) configured to detect output light produced by a sample (420) positioned in the sample holder (426) at the examination region [0084], wherein the detection module (460) detects light having wavelengths between about 200 nm and about 1400 nm (“This detector may be selected to optimize detection of blue/green light” [0084]); and
an optical relay structure (412a/412b/450/452/453/456) configured to direct the output light from the examination region to the detection module [0080-0082] and to direct illumination light from the illumination module (403a-d) to the examination region [0053].
Stumbo discloses a CCD detector [0075], but is silent with respect to the specific configuration of the detection module.
Pohl, however, although not in the same field of endeavor, is nevertheless concerned with the same problem of providing highly-accurate sensing. Pohl discloses a detection module that includes a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor and an antenna layer, associated with the silicon (“coupling… a silicon-based area sensor to an antenna” [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’ detection module to include a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor (such as a CCD) and an antenna for the purpose of highly accurate sensing with an increased range.
It is evident that, in Stumbo’s modified detection module, that allows the sensor to detect longer-wavelength light than the silicon alone (functional language, inherent result from antenna usage).
Claim 21: Stumbo further discloses wherein the sample (426) is chemiluminescent, and the output light is chemiluminescence [0079].
Claims 1 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rulison et al. (US 2006/0227325), hereinafter Rulison, in view of Pohl.
Claim 1: Rulison discloses a wide-spectrum analysis system (100, Fig. 1), comprising:
a stage (165) configured to support a sample holder at an examination region [0020];
an illumination module (110) configured to produce illumination light for irradiating a sample positioned in the sample holder at the examination region [0020];
a detection module (195) configured to detect output light produced by a sample positioned in the sample holder at the examination region [0020], wherein the detection module (195) detects light having wavelengths between about 200 nm and about 1400 nm (evident since the detection module 195 is a CCD array and the sample is irradiation by an LED light source [0020]); and
an optical relay structure (150/160/170/180/190) configured to direct the output light from the examination region to the detection module (195) [0020] (also shown in Fig. 3, [0031]) and to direct illumination light from the illumination module (110) to the examination region [0031].
Rulison discloses a CCD detector [0020], but is silent with respect to the specific configuration of the detection module.
Pohl, however, although not in the same field of endeavor, is nevertheless concerned with the same problem of providing highly-accurate sensing. Pohl discloses a detection module that includes a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor and an antenna layer, associated with the silicon (“coupling… a silicon-based area sensor to an antenna” [0084]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Ness’ detection module to include a sensor comprising a silicon-based sensor (such as a CCD) and an antenna for the purpose of highly accurate sensing with an increased range.
It is evident that, in Rulison’s modified detection module, that allows the sensor to detect longer-wavelength light than the silicon alone (functional language, inherent result from antenna usage).
Claim 22: Rulison further discloses wherein the optical relay structure (150/160/170/180/190) includes a lens (160) capable of transmitting light having wavelengths between about 200 nm and 2000 nm [0026].
Claim 23: Rulison further discloses wherein the lens (160) comprises UV fused silica [0026].
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to HINA F AYUB whose telephone number is (571)270-3171. The Examiner can normally be reached on 9am-5pm ET Mon-Fri.
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, Tarifur Chowdhury can be reached on 571-272-2287. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Hina F Ayub/
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights