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 14-17 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.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "the structure". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This is confusing in particular because multiple “structure(s)” are listed in claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-13 allowed. Further claims 14-17 would presumably be allowed after correction of the 112 issue cited above.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: it is not known in the prior art to provide a chromatographic device for size exclusion chromatography, the chromatographic device comprising: a chromatography column including a compartment containing a stationary phase and interior walls defining a fluidic flow path having wetted surfaces; wherein the stationary phase comprises porous particles having a surface, wherein at least some portion thereof is modified with a hydroxy-terminated polyethylene glycol; and wherein at least a portion of the wetted surfaces of fluidic flow path comprises a first coating deposited thereon, and wherein at least a portion of the wetted surfaces of the fluidic flow path comprises a second coating thereon and in direct contact with the first coating; wherein the first coating comprises a structure according to Formula I: as depicted in the claim (I); wherein: R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6 are each independently OH or ORA; RA represents a point of attachment to the wetted surfaces, wherein at least one of R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, and R6 is ORA; and Z is (C1-C20)alkyl, -[O(CH2)2O]1-20-, -[(C1-C10)NH(CO)NH(C1-C10)]1-20-, or -[(C1-C10) alkylphenyl (C1-C10)alkyl]1-20; and wherein the second coating is an organosilica coating comprising a structure as depicted in the claim: wherein: R7, R8, and R9 are each independently OH or ORB; RB represents a point of attachment to the wetted surface of the fluidic flow path, or represents a point of attachment to the first coating, wherein in either instance, at least one of R7, R8, and R9 is ORB; R13 is H or CH3; m is an integer from about 1 to about 10; and n is an integer from about 2 to about 50 as in claim 1.
The most pertinent prior art (US5470463, Girot et al.) teaches that it is known to apply coating to the interior surface of fluidic system but fails to teach the coating materials of claim 1.
Another prior art (USPGPub 2015/0283307, Smith et al.) teaches that it is known to employ polymeric supply lines in fluidic systems and using composition related to Formula I but is otherwise largely unrelated to the problems solved by the current application.
Another prior art (USPGPub 2009/0206034, Nakajima et al.) teaches that it is known to coat surfaces of chromatography devices with compositions reading upon Formula II but is otherwise largely unrelated to the comprehensive invention of the current claims.
Another prior art (US6121608, Takada et al.) teaches the general structure of known chromatography devices but is otherwise largely unrelated to the invention of the current claims.
Another prior art (US4708782, Andressen et al.) teaches the general structure of known chromatography devices but is otherwise largely unrelated to the invention of the current claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW J BOWMAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5342. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Sat 5:00AM-11:00AM.
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, Dah-Wei Yuan can be reached at 571-272-1295. 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.
/ANDREW J BOWMAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1717
Prosecution Insights