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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “slide button 14” as described in para. 0061 of the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “the calibration solution holding portion is stacked on top of the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion” (as recited in claim 3). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “the calibration solution holding portion is stacked on top of the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion” (as recited in claim 3) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: Due to drawing objection, the instant specification is also objected because the instant specification does not consistently reflect what being claimed i.e. “the calibration solution holding portion is stacked on top of the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion” (as recited in claim 3) in the instant specification.
Note that the instant specification must consistently reflect claimed limitations.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
As to claim 3, limitations of “the calibration solution holding portion is stacked on top of the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion” in lines 4-5 of claim 3 render the claim indefinite. Fig.3b of the instant specification shows that the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion 122 is stacked on top of the calibration solution holding portion 121. Fig.3b of the instant specification did not show the calibration solution holding portion 121 is stacked on top of the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion 122. Hence, it is unclear.
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 1-2 and 4-9 are rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by Hideyuki – WO2023084980A1 and further in view of Kohno – EP0192794B1.
As to claim 1, Hideyuki teaches a calibration mechanism for an electrochemical measurement device 90 (pages 5 and 23 and fig. 20: calibration operation is performed while electrochemical sensor head is in contact with calibration agent; thus “a calibration mechanism for an electrochemical measurement device”) comprising:
a calibration solution holding portion 250 that holds a fluid and a calibration component forming a calibration solution 63b that is used to calibrate an electrochemical measurement device 90 that is provided with an ion-selective electrode 41,42 (note that gels are formed from liquids; see described fig.20; page 27: calibration gel 63b have been described as examples of the proofreading agent, which includes an absorber impregnated with a liquid; page 23: calibration gel 63b is an example of a calibration agent having a known concentration ratio of sodium ions and potassium ions; page 8: The sensor head 30 has a sodium ion selective electrode 41 that selectively reacts with sodium ions and a potassium ion selective electrode 42 that selectively reacts with potassium ions at the tip; thus “a calibration solution holding portion that holds a fluid and a calibration component forming a calibration solution that is used to calibrate an electrochemical measurement device that is provided with an ion-selective electrode”); and
PNG
media_image1.png
540
265
media_image1.png
Greyscale
a fluid portion 250 that contains the fluid from the calibration solution holding portion (fig.20: calibration cap or calibration solution holding portion 250 also corresponds to and serves as “a fluid portion”), wherein
the calibration solution holding portion is able to be detached from and reattached to the ion-selective electrode 41,42 (page 6 and described fig.20: measurement operation is restricted by holding the electrochemical sensor in the calibration holder, and the calibration operation is restricted by removing the electrochemical sensor from the calibration holder after the calibration operation; thus “a calibration mechanism for an electrochemical measurement device; the calibration solution holding portion is able to be detached from and reattached to the ion-selective electrode”), and the fluid portion 250 is able to be detached from and reattached to the ion-selective electrode 41,42 of sensor head 30 together with the calibration solution holding portion (fig.20).
Hideyuki further teaches an attachment/detachment component 211, 212 that is used to detach fluid portion and the calibration solution holding portion 250 from the ion-selective electrode 41,42, and to reattach the fluid portion and the calibration solution holding portion 250 to the ion-selective electrode 41,42 (page 25 and abstract and fig.20).
Hideyuki does not explicitly teach a fluid evaporation inhibiting portion that inhibits evaporation of the fluid from the calibration solution holding portion.
Kohno teaches a concept of: a vessel for preserving liquids for use in analyzers for liquid samples formed of membrane members including a four-layer laminated membrane, respectively, consisting of an outermost polyester layer (a), an aluminum layer (b), a nylon layer (c) and an innermost plastic foil (d); fig.4 shows no gap between these layers, hence, these layers are mutually adhered/bonded (abstract and fig.4: aluminum layer corresponds to “solid form”; [0016,0019]: the vessel contains calibrating solution for calibrating of analyzers, and the vessel can be very effectively used for calibration purposes and the like; thus “calibration solution holding portion is in solid form, and the calibration solution holding portion and the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion are mutually adhered to each other”).
It would thus have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify fluid portion or calibration cap and calibration solution holding portion 250 of Hideyuki with concept teachings of Kohno to include a fluid evaporation inhibiting portion that inhibits evaporation of the fluid from the calibration solution holding portion; the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion is able to be detached from and reattached to the ion-selective electrode of sensor head together with the calibration solution holding portion (as recited in claim 1); an attachment/detachment component that is used to detach the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion and the calibration solution holding portion from the ion-selective electrode, and to reattach the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion and the calibration solution holding portion to the ion-selective electrode (as recited in claim 2), because intrusion of air from the outside as well as the evaporation and penetration of water vapour can be satisfactorily prevented, and therefore, composition and concentration of liquid contained in the vessel can be held constant for a long time. Therefore, the vessel can be very effectively used for calibration purposes and the like ([0019] and abstract).
As to claims 2 and 6-9, claims 2 and 6-9 are rejected as reasons stated in the rejection of claim 1.
As to claim 4, Hideyuki teaches the calibration solution holding portion is in gel form (calibration gel 63b also corresponds to “calibration solution holding portion”).
While Hideyuki teaches a housing or calibration cap 250 that internally houses the calibration solution holding portion 63b, it does not explicitly teach fluid evaporation inhibiting portion is a housing that internally houses the calibration solution holding portion 63b.
Kohno teaches a concept of: a vessel for preserving liquids for use in analyzers for liquid samples formed of membrane members including a four-layer laminated membrane, respectively, consisting of an outermost polyester layer (a), an aluminum layer (b), a nylon layer (c) and an innermost plastic foil (d); fig.4 shows no gap between these layers, hence, these layers are mutually adhered/bonded (abstract and fig.4: aluminum layer corresponds to “solid form”; [0016,0019]: the vessel contains calibrating solution for calibrating of analyzers, and the vessel can be very effectively used for calibration purposes and the like).
It would thus have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify housing or calibration cap 250 of Hideyuki with concept teachings of Kohno to include fluid evaporation inhibiting portion is a housing that internally houses the calibration solution holding portion (as recited in claim 4); the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion is formed so as to be able to internally house the ion-selective electrodes in a state in which the ion-selective electrodes are in contact with the calibration solution holding portion (as recited in claim 5), because intrusion of air from the outside as well as the evaporation and penetration of water vapour can be satisfactorily prevented, and therefore, composition and concentration of liquid contained in the vessel can be held constant for a long time. Therefore, the vessel can be very effectively used for calibration purposes and the like ([0019] and abstract).
As to claim 5, claim 5 is rejected as reasons stated in the rejection of claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable once drawing and specification objections and 122b rejection is corrected and if rewritten in independent form including 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:
As to claim 3, claim 3 includes a sensor adhering portion that fixes the fluid evaporation inhibiting portion and the calibration solution holding portion to the ion-selective electrodes is formed in at least a portion of the outer edge portion, when in combination with all other elements in the claim 3 distinguish the present invention from the prior arts.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant is invited to review PTO form 892 accompanying this Office Action listing Prior Art relevant to the instant invention cited by the Examiner.
Applicant is invited to review JP3046992U teaches a concept of: calibration liquid container 105 is formed of a material such as aluminum having low gas permeability, and contains therein a calibration liquid for performing a calibration process on the sensor of the sensor device 103. In this case, the container may have a thickness and strength capable of preventing gas components vaporized from the calibration liquid contained therein from passing through and preventing the gas from leaking to the outside (page 2).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TRUONG D PHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8883. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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, John Breene can be reached on 571-272-4107. 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.
/TRUONG D PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2855
/JOHN E BREENE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2855
Prosecution Insights