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 .
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 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.
DETAILED ACTION
Priority
This application claims priority to provisional 63/567,989, filed on March 21, 2024.
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.
Claims 1, 3-10, 12-19, 21-27 are rejected under 35 USC 102 as being unpatentable over scCatch: Automatic Annotation on Cell Types of Clusters from Single-Cell RNA Sequencing Data, Shao, et al. March 27, 2020 (hereafter scCatch)
1. A method implemented on a device comprising:
receiving a description of an expected event type and/or a target event type; (scCatch page 2 each cluster, cell types were scored on the basis of validated marker genes; the validated marker genes are receipt of an expected event type/target event type)
receiving clustering results and extracted feature information; and (scCatch page 3, clustering results)
performing automatic annotation using the description of the expected event type and/or the target event type and the clustering results and extracted feature information. (scCatch page 2-3 automated annotation)
3. The method of claim 1 further comprising training a neural network to extract features from cell images, wherein the features comprise: a number of cells in a carrier, secretion cells, target cells, amount of a secretion, and location of the secretion. (scCatch page 3, target cell types)
4. The method of claim 3 wherein the neural network is configured for performing automatic annotation. (scCatch page 1, automatic annotation)
5. The method of claim 1 wherein the clustering results include images clustered based on the extracted feature information. (scCatch page 3 clustering images)
6. The method of claim 1 wherein the clustering results include clusters selected from zero cells, a single cell, two or more cells, no secretion, low secretion or high secretion, or a combination thereof. (note this is not further limiting as the options encompass all possibilities)
7. The method of claim 1 wherein performing the automatic annotation includes matching extracted features in the clusters to identify which of clusters contain a target event and annotate the clusters based on the identification. (scCatch page 3 matching features to clusters and annotation)
8. The method of claim 1 further comprising displaying the annotation for a user. (scCatch see page 3 displaying various annotations for the user)
9. The method of claim 8 wherein the annotation includes a prediction of what the event type would be. (scCatch page 6, identifies cell type)
Claims 10, 12-19, 21-27 recite similar limitations in other classes of invention (e.g. apparatus and system) and are rejected for reasons similar to their corresponding claims.
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 of this title, 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 2, 11, 20, are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over scCatch in view of US 2022/0156482, Zordan et al. (hereafter Zordan)
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the target event type includes cell marker fluorescence channels, secretion fluorescence channels, how many cells in a target event, cell marker fluorescence expression in target event, intensity of secretion fluorescence, secretion fluorescence morphology, and/or co-localization with cell marker fluorescence.
Zordan ¶27 describes the use of fluorescence intensity for determining values of the clusters. It would have been obvious to modify the system of scCatch to include the use of fluorescence intensity for the purposes of providing additional sorting of clusters based on other characteristics as taught by Zordan.
Claims 11 and 20 recite similar limitations in other classes of invention (e.g. apparatus and system) and are rejected for reasons similar to their corresponding claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
The examiner finds that cell secretion fluoresce would be allowable and suggests that applicant amend independent claims 1-3 as follows. The other independent claim sets, if similarly amended would also be allowable.
1. A method implemented on a device comprising:
receiving a description of an expected event type and/or a target event type;
receiving clustering results and extracted feature information; and
performing automatic annotation using the description of the expected event type and/or the target event type and the clustering results and extracted feature information; and
training a neural network to extract features from cell images, wherein the features comprise: secretion cells, amount of a secretion, and location of the secretion;
wherein the target event type includes cell marker fluorescence channels, secretion fluorescence channels, cell marker fluorescence expression in target event, intensity of secretion fluorescence, and/or secretion fluorescence morphology.
2-3. (cancelled)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ming Shui whose telephone number is (303)297-4247. The examiner can normally be reached on 7-5 Pacific Time, M-Th.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Greg Morse can be reached on 571-272-3838. 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.
/Ming Shui/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2663
Prosecution Insights