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 the Rejections pending since the
Office Action mailed April 22, 2026
All of the objections to the claims are withdrawn.
Almost all of the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) are withdrawn. Two of these rejections are still maintained, though (previous items 10(a) and 10(q)). They are presented again below for Applicant’s convenience.
Response to Arguments
Although Applicant has made a good faith effort to overcome the objections to and rejections of the claims made in the previous Office Action, two of the rejections under
35 U.S.C. 112(b) have not been resolved. Also, new issues under 35 U.S.C 112(b) have arisen due to Applicant’s latest Amendment.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities
a) in claim 13, line 2, “conducting” should be – constructing --; and
b) in claim 13, line 6, “(OECT)” should be – OECT – (parentheses removed).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Note that dependent claims will have the deficiencies of base and intervening claims.
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.
Claims 1-11, 13, and 15 are 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:
a) for claims 1 and 15 Applicant is requested to clarify the scope of “Phyto-analysis” (claim 1, line 5 “in order to perform phyto-analysis of the plant; claim 15 - “. . . ., in a phyto-analysis database, . . . .”). If Applicant is being his own lexicographer, then please heed MPEP 2173.05(a).
b) claim 13 now requires “wherein said OECT is deposited on said rigid support by adding an additive electrically sensitive to said solute to at least part of the (OECT), . . . . [italicizing by the Examiner]” It does seem that adding the indicated additive to a part of the OECT can actually be an act of depositing the OECT. Perhaps Applicant means -- wherein said OECT is modified on said rigid support by adding an additive electrically sensitive to said solute to at least part of the (OECT), . . . . -- or -- wherein said depositing OECT includes adding an additive electrically sensitive to said solute to at least part of the (OECT), . . . . --
c) claim 13 now requires “. . . ., said additive that is a molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP). [italicizing by the Examiner]” This phrase may be confusing as one reading it may understand that there is an antecedent in claim 13 (or claim 12) for the MIP. The Examiner suggests instead -- . . . ., said additive being a molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP)… -- or -- . . . ., wherein said additive
d) claim 15 recites the limitation "said content of said solute" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
e) claim 15 recites the limitation "said solute content" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 2-11, 13, and 15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 12 and 14 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: see pages 15-25 (Allowable Subject Matter) of the previous Office Action.
Final Rejection
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 ALEXANDER STEPHAN NOGUEROLA whose telephone number is (571)272-1343. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:00AM-5:30 PM EST.
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, Luan Van can be reached on 571 272-8521. 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.
/ALEXANDER S NOGUEROLA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights