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 .
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.
Claims 8, 10, 14-17 and 19 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.
Regarding claims 8, 10, 14, 17 and 19, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 15 and 16 are indefinite because of their dependence on claim 14.
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.
(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) 1, 2, 6, 8, 13, 14, 17, 19 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Bajic et al. (US 2021/016692).
Regarding claim 1, Bajic et al. disclose a detector inlet for providing a sample to an analytical apparatus (part of analyzer such as ion mobility spectrometer and/or mass spectrometer, see pars. 0133-0135) for detecting a substance of interest, the detector inlet comprising: a first sampling pathway 8 configured to receive a first flow of air comprising a vapor for sampling by the analytical apparatus (see Fig. 8, path 8 is path controlled by valve 30; or see Fig. 7, path with valve 3); and a second sampling pathway configured to receive a second flow of air (see Fig. 8, path controlled through valve 31; or see Fig. 7, path with valves 1 and 2 and oven 6), the second sampling pathway comprising a heater (oven 6) configured to heat an aerosol, present in the second flow of air, to vaporize the aerosol for sampling by the analytical apparatus (pars. 0177-0182); wherein the detector inlet is operable to open and close each of the first and second sampling pathways to enable at least one of the first flow of air and the second flow of air (Id. and par. 0183 and Table 4).
Regarding claim 2, Bajic et al. disclose that the detector inlet is operable to open and close each of the first and second sampling pathways to open the first sampling pathway only, open the second sampling pathway only, open both the first sampling pathway and the second sampling pathway, and to close both of the first and second sampling pathways (see Fig. 8, pathways are opened and closed by separated dedicated valves 30,31 so valves can be operated such that they are each closed, each open, or one open and one closed).
Regarding claim 6, Bajic et al. disclose that the first and second sampling pathways are configured to provide vapor or vaporized aerosols to a common sampling volume 11 from which the analytical apparatus draws samples for analysis through one or more sampling ports (cone 18), and wherein the one or more sampling ports comprise one or more capillary inlets, membrane inlets, or pinhole inlets (par. 0148, ion inlet cone for a mass spectrometer includes very small “pinhole” inlet).
Regarding claim 8, Bajic et al. disclose that the detector inlet is configured to receive a sample swab 9 to provide a sample desorbed from the sample swab to the analytical apparatus, and wherein the detector inlet comprises a swab heater (oven 6) configured to heat a sample swab to desorb a sample present on the swab (pars. 0155-0159).
Regarding claim 13, Bajic et al. disclose a detector comprising a detector inlet according to claim 1, as set forth above (see rejection of claim 1) and an analytical apparatus (analyzer such as ion mobility spectrometer and/or mass spectrometer, see pars. 0133-0135) configured to receive a sample from the detector inlet (analyzer receives sample through line 11).
Regarding claim 14, Bajic et al. disclose a controller 50 configured to control operation of the detector based on the open sampling pathways (see par. 0198), for example wherein the controller is configured to receive an indication of which of the first and second sampling pathways are open, and to control operation of the heater based on whether the second sampling pathway is open (see e.g. pars. 0177-0184, operations coordinate heater on and off with when pathways are open and closed; par. 0198, controller controls operation including all necessary operations and processing).
Regarding claim 17, Bajic et al. disclose that the second sampling pathway comprises a trap 25 for collecting aerosols when the heater is off, and wherein the detector is operable to draw air past the trap, for example through the trap, while the heater is off to collect aerosols on the trap and then to heat the trap to vaporize collected aerosols (pars. 0177-0183).
Regarding claim 19, Bajic et al. disclose the detector comprising a flow provider (flow controller 10 and pressurized gas supply) configured to draw air through the first and second sampling pathways and past one or more sampling ports of the analytical apparatus (see par. 0146).
Regarding claim 20, Bajic et al. disclose that the analytical apparatus comprises at least one of an ion mobility spectrometer, a differential mobility spectrometer, a mass spectrometer, a chromatography apparatus or an optical spectrometer (see pars. 0135-0137).
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) 3, 4 and 21-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bajic et al. (US 20210166929).
Regarding claim 3, Bajic et al. do not disclose explicitly that that the detector inlet is configured to provide a signal for activating the analytical apparatus in response to the first or second sampling pathway being opened, and/or to provide a signal for deactivating the analytical apparatus in response to the first and second sampling pathways being closed. Bajic et al. do disclose generally performing all operations using control circuitry 50 (par. 0198). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have configured the control circuitry to provide signals for activating and deactivating the analytical apparatus in response to the first or second pathway being open because it would have ensured that he analytical apparatus is operational when there is gas flowing through to it.
Regarding claim 4, Bajic et al. do not disclose a cap configured to cover respective entrances to the first and second sampling pathways, wherein the cap is user-actuatable by rotation of the cap to control opening of the first and second sampling pathways. A threaded cap for flow tubing or piping has been known in the art for covering the opening end of a tubular flow path. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have included a conventional threaded cap for cover the opening entrance to the flow path network, such as the opening to flow controller 10, thereby covering respective entrances to the first and second sampling pathways, so that the cap is user-actuatable by rotation of the cap to control opening of the first and second sampling pathways; this would have been obvious because it would have provided a simple way to cover an protect the entrance to the flow paths.
Regarding claim 21, Bajic et al. disclose a method of operating a detector for detecting a substance of interest in a sample, the detector comprising a plurality of sampling pathways for providing the sample to an analytical apparatus (see Fig. 7, path with valve 3, and other path with valves 1 and 2), the method comprising: selecting a sampling pathway; drawing one or more respective flows of air through only the selected sampling pathways to provide a sample in the one or more respective flows of air for sampling by the analytical apparatus (see pars. 0177-0184 and Table 4, pathways are selected and valves operated accordingly).
Bajic et al. do not explicitly disclose receiving a signal to operate the detector and receiving an indication of which of the plurality of sampling pathways are selected. However, Bajic et al. do disclose the use of a controller and control circuitry for all operations of the detector and valves (par. 0198). One of ordinary skill in the art would have known that receiving signals that operate the detector, indicate and select pathways, and operate appropriate valves for the different operating states, such as those in Table 4, are part of the normal and routine techniques for controlling operations with control circuitry. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have included the steps of receiving signals and indications as part of operating the system with the control circuitry in Bajic et al. because it is the most efficient way of performing operations with a controller.
Regarding claim 22, Bajic et al. disclose operating the detector to open selected sampling pathways and to close non-selected sampling pathways (see pars. 0177-1084 and Table 4, valves 1 and 2 and 3 are operated to open and close the pathways).
Regarding claim 23, Bajic et al. disclose controlling operation of the detector according to one or more detection protocols, wherein the one or more detection protocols are selected based on the selected sampling pathways (see Table 4 showing different protocols with different selected sampling pathway open or closed).
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bajic et al. (US 20210166929) in view of Jenkins et al. (US 4,019,863).
Regarding claim 12, Bajic et al. do not disclose that the heater comprises wire arranged in the path of the second flow of air so that the second flow of air must pass the wire to reach the analytical apparatus. Jenkins et al. disclose a detector inlet system wherein a flow pathway includes a heater, and wherein the heater comprises wire arranged in the path of the flow of gas so that the flow of gas must pass the wire to flow to a detector (col. 4 lines 11-17). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have used a wire heater as taught by Jenkins et al. in the apparatus of Bajic et al. because it would have provided an efficient way to directly heat the air flow in the oven of Bajic et al.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24 and 25 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.
Claims 10, 15 and 16 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
With regard to claim 10, Bajic et al. fail to disclose or suggest the detector inlet comprising one or more additional sampling pathways for receiving a respective additional flow of air for sampling by the analytical apparatus, wherein the detector inlet is operable to open and close the one or more additional sampling pathways, and wherein the one or more additional sampling pathways comprises a third sampling pathway for receiving a sample swab.
With regard to claim 15, Bajic et al. fail to disclose or suggest the controller being configured to provide power to the heater for heating an aerosol only in the event that the second sampling pathway is opened.
With regard to claim 16, Bajic et al. fail to disclose or suggest that the controller is configured to activate the heater for a first time period whilst drawing air through the second sampling pathway to enable substances desorbed from the second sampling pathway to leave the detector inlet, and after the first time period to draw the second flow of air through the second sampling pathway past the heater to vaporize aerosols in the second flow of air for sampling by the analytical apparatus.
With regard to claim 24, Bajic et al. do disclose that the plurality of sampling pathways comprises a first sampling pathway configured to receive a first flow of air comprising a vapour for sampling by the analytical apparatus, and a second sampling pathway configured to receive a second flow of air, the second sampling pathway comprising a heater configured to heat an aerosol, present in the second flow of air, to vaporise the aerosol for sampling by the analytical apparatus. Bajic et al. fail to disclose or suggest providing power to the heater only in the event that the second sampling pathway is selected.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PAUL M WEST whose telephone number is (571)272-2139. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am - 5:30 pm (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, Kristina DeHerrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/PAUL M. WEST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
