DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Claims
1. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Turner et al. (US 2010/031194).
Claim 1. Turner et al. teach a biochip (see Fig 1A), comprising:
a plurality of nanopore cells, each nanopore cell associated with a measurement circuit configured to measure an electrical characteristic of the nanopore cell (array of nanopores, each nanopore associated with measurement electrode to measure resistance of nanopore [0014][0069][0076]);
a plurality of local event detectors, each local event detector comprising a circuit configured to receive an electrical measurement sample from a corresponding measurement circuit of a respective nanopore cell (each nanopore is associated with an electrical circuit comprised of a component configured to measure electronic signal from the measurement electrode [0076], the component reads on local event detector for each nanopore); and
an adaptive analyzer configured to periodically receive data from the plurality of local event detectors, modify the data based on state change information related to the plurality of local event detectors, and store the modified data in a buffer for output (electrical circuit comprised of component that process the measurement signal and stores data in memory for output; [0076][0069], the measurement signal is based on open or close nanopore state; [0085], thus component is capable of modifying the data based on nanopore state change and storing such data).
Claims 2-10 limitations recite functional property of the local event detector and adaptive analyzer of the biochip and does further recite structural limitations of biochip, local event detector or adaptive analyzer. The courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Furthermore, the electrical circuit which is comprised of local event detector and adaptive analyzer could be configured to perform the function of claimed limitations.
Claim 11. Turner et al. teach a method for outputting data from a biochip including a plurality of nanopore cells (method of sequencing and outputting produced data/sequence with plurality of nanopores; [0146][0076]), the method comprising:
receiving data from a plurality of local event detectors, each local event detector comprising a circuit configured to receive an electrical measurement sample from a corresponding measurement circuit of a respective nanopore cell (each nanopore is associated with an electrical circuit comprised of a component configured to measure electronic signal from the measurement electrode and electronic signal is transmitted for processing [0076], the component reads on local event detector for each nanopore);
modifying the data based on state change information determined by the plurality of local event detectors (electrical circuit comprised of component that process the measurement signal and stores data in memory for output; [0076][0069], the measurement signal is based on open or close nanopore state; [0085] and data is filtered to remove any unwanted current fluctuations; [0206][0229], thus component is capable of modifying the data based on nanopore state change and storing such data).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Turner et al. (US 2010/0331194) in view of Godin et al. (US 2015/0109008).
Claim 18. Turner et al. teach a system, comprising:
a plurality of nanopore cells, each nanopore cell comprising an electrode connected to an analog measurement circuit for measuring an electrical characteristic of the nanopore cell (array of nanopores, each nanopore associated with measurement electrode to measure resistance of nanopore [0014][0069][0076]) and a local event detector circuit configured to receive an electrical measurement sample from the analog measurement circuit (each nanopore is associated with an electrical circuit comprised of a component configured to measure electronic signal from the measurement electrode [0076], the component reads on local event detector for each nanopore);
at least one adaptive analyzer circuit configured to: periodically receive data from a plurality of local event detector circuits, wherein the data comprises at least one measurement value of an electrical measurement sample collected during a measurement period, modify the data based on state change information, and store the modified data in a buffer for output (electrical circuit comprised of component that process the measurement signal and stores data in memory for output; [0076][0069], the measurement signal is based on open or close nanopore state; [0085], thus component is capable of modifying the data based on nanopore state change and storing such data).
Turner et al. do not teach an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC) or field programmable gate array (FPGA) configured to receive the modified data from the buffer.
However, Godin et al. teach method detecting nanopore size comprised of [0035] computer program that is stored in application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) and coupled to computer bus for storing electronic instructions for performing operations and transmitting data [0058].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention in view of Godin et al. teaching to add ASIC circuit coupled to the memory of Turner et al. because it would allow to output data to the computer to display polymer sequence.
Claims 19-20 limitations recite functional property of the local event detector and adaptive analyzer of the biochip and does further recite structural limitations of biochip, local event detector or adaptive analyzer. The courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). Furthermore, the electrical circuit which is comprised of local event detector and adaptive analyzer could be configured to perform the function of claimed limitations.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-17 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GURPREET KAUR whose telephone number is (571)270-7895. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
/GURPREET KAUR/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights