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
Claim 2,5 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.
As to claim 2, this claim is not consistent with the specification/drawings. The claimed “fluorescence” data/steps of this claim are employed in validating/validation (Paragraphs 51-55 of Publication) the disclosed method of steps 101-105, and are not employed in characterizing “charged/polarizable organic live particle type” (lines 1-2, claim 1).1
As to claim 2, lines 2-3 are confusing because “said predetermined data set further” (italics added, lines 1-2) comprising fluorescence data is NOT that of “a predetermined data set comprising characteristic kinetic motion data … ion characteristic” (lines 2 lines, claim 1). The “characteristic fluorescence data” (line 2) is employed/related to validating that which was previously characterized (“characterizing”, line 1, claim 1) in claim 1. Claim 2 is not consistent with both the preamble and body of claim 1.
As to claim 2, “fluorescence data of said captured particles in said sample of water” is problematic because that step is employed/related in validating that which was previously characterized (“characterizing”, line 1, claim 1) in claim 1. Claim 2 is not consistent with the preamble.
As to claim 5, “preferably” is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 10,11 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 it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. As to claim 10, the system effectively removes all of the steps of claim 1. As to claim 11, the storage medium effectively removes all of the steps of claim 1. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
References not Applied
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Reference Nakada et al CN 101622339 teach (ABSTRACT) use of a laser and fluorescence to test living cells. light to test living cells
Reference Ryo et al GB 2479687 teach a method for characterizing charged/polarizable organic live particle types (microorganisms, in water) cells, in water comprising:
applying a second time-dependent electric bias across at least a second pair of electrodes to generate at least one particle-specific space-time-dependent electric field in said sample of water
and
determining a presence/identity of a charged/polarizable organic live particle type
Reference Michihiko et al JP 2016024014 teach a method for characterizing charged/polarizable organic live particle (bacterial) types, in fluid sample that passes between 2 electrodes 15, 16 (Figure 2). However, does not extend to employing multiple pairs of electrodes, one pair of which is employed for background measuring of water.
Reference Gabriel 20050250095 teaches (Para 16) identifying a biological particle in water by employing spectrometer, comparing (Pars 18) measurements thereof with a reference data base. Such measuring takes place while an electric field moves sample 20.
Reference Lau 20070095669 teach identifying stem cells in water by imparting motion via electric field, with measurement of motion. Such motion is compared with stored information.
Reference Li 20110089328 teach (Figure 12) identifying moving particles (blood cells) that are passing through a test region by way of electric field
“Electroosmotic flow however can generate desired fluid flow rates in very small microchannels without any externally applied pressure difference by controlling the applied electrical fields via electrodes are inserted in different wells at the ends of the microchannels. Electroosmotic flow can thereby be used to transport liquids through the microchannels without employing external mechanical pumps, tubing and valves. The fluid flow rate can be controlled by regulating strength of the applied electrical fields.”;
a differential amplifier 230 is connected to electrodes located in a detecting channel 210B and noise channel 210 for comparison of signals to provide sense particles (Figure 2). However, there is no suggestion of 2 separate pairs of electrodes (one for particles another for pair for noise), the particles are not captured between the pair of electrodes associated with particle displacement, and comparison by the amplifier is not comparing “motion” with the noise.
Reference Marziali et al 20120329064 teach use of electrodes 42a,42b (Figure 7A) to apply an electric field to organic particle to provide capturing, and comparing of a measured result with a reference sample.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT R RAEVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-2204. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon to Friday from 8am to 4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kristina DeHerrera, can be reached at telephone number 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 an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center to authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the USPTO patent electronic filing system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
Examiner interviews are available via a variety of formats. See MPEP § 713.01. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/InterviewPractice.
/ROBERT R RAEVIS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855
1 Paragraph 56 seems to suggest that kinetic motion is determined by “microscope (optical device/imaging device)” (Step 104 of Figure 1), while fluorescent relates to validating (Step 106 of Figure 1).
Prosecution Insights