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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
“retaining means” in claims 15-17 and 22.
“aligning means” in claims 15-17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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, 3-7, 9-11, 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ranftl teaches a flow cell for optical spectroscopy (Abstract), comprising a housing (1) having a cavity (fig. 1, [0064] interior of the Sensor component 1 a tube shaped body for the measurement sensor ) that forms a measurement chamber, a feed channel, a drain channel ([0064], fig. 1: 7.1 and 7.2 represent a feed channel, a drain channel) and an optical window (3.1) that closes an opening in the measurement chamber (22) ([0064]-[0066]), where the optical window is bonded to the housing by fusion of a glass bonding element, wherein a depression (recess 50.1) is formed around the opening and a contact surface (receiving component) for the optical window is formed around the opening and is where the optical window makes contact with the housing ([0064][0073],[0080]).
Regarding claim 3, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1 wherein the glass bonding element fills a clearance between the optical window and a wall of the depression, such that no gap remains between the wall of the depression and the glass bonding element ([0023], [0081]-[0082])
Regarding claim 4, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the glass bonding element comprises a glass material having a glass transition temperature Tg of more than 470°C ([0080]).
Regarding claim 5, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the optical window (sight glass) is bonded to the housing, especially to a wall of a depression in the housing that adjoins the opening, via a glass bonding element that consists of a glass solder or takes the form of a shaped glass body ([0020], [0064])
Regarding claim 6, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 5, wherein the glass solder or the glass material of the shaped glass body is a borosilicate glass ([0049]-[0050]).
Regarding claim 7, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein a component of the housing that forms the cavity with the measurement chamber is in one-piece form ([0064] Sensor component 1 for the optical flow rate sensor is, for example, a tube shaped body having a cross section, such as a circular cross section. The tube shaped body may, for example, be a high grade steel pipe).
Regarding claim 9, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the material of the housing is selected from a metal (steel) or metal alloy ([0064]).
Regarding claim 10, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the material of the optical window is selected from a glass, a crystal, a ceramic, or a glass ceramic ([0031], [0064]: sight glass)
Regarding claim 11, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein a first coefficient of thermal expansion of the housing is greater than a second coefficient of thermal expansion of the glass bonding element ([0024]).
Regarding claim 13, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the shapes of the surfaces of the optical window are selected from a planar surface ([0066]), a convex surface, a concave surface and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 19, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, wherein the feed channel and the drain channel (7.1 and 7.2)l are arranged opposite one another on a common axis (fig.1), such that a laminar flow forms within the measurement chamber when a liquid medium flows through ([0035], [0064]-[0065] there is a continuous flow path along the one axis, and only a small flow resistance occurs at the transition from the line components to the sensor segment, therefore there is a laminar flow), or in that the feed channel and the drain channel are arranged on different axes from one another, such that a turbulent flow forms within the measuring chamber when a liquid medium flows through.
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 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1).
Regarding claim 2, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the width of the contact surface of the optical window is narrower than 0.3 mm.
However, Ranftl teaches that the dimensional relationship between the receiving component (contact surface) and the sight glass is a recognized controllable, result-effective design parameter. ([0075]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ranftl by incorporating wherein the width of the contact surface of the optical window is narrower than 0.3 mm as result-effective variable for reducing dead volume.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1) in view of Lankers (US 20200116624 A1).
Regarding claim 8, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the average roughness Ra of the inner walls of the measurement chamber is less than 0.8 μm.
However, Lankers, which relates to flow cell and is thus from the same field of endeavor teaches wherein the average roughness Ra of the inner walls of the measurement chamber is less than 0.8 μm ([0021], [0090] Lankers uses Rz instead of Ra. A person of ordinary skill would understand that the average distance( Rz) between the peak and the valley would be greater than Ra).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ranftl by incorporating wherein the average roughness Ra of the inner walls of the measurement chamber is less than 0.8 μm in order avoid optical noise.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1) in view of Ott (US 20200384587 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the housing has an anisotropic thermal expansion, where the first coefficient of thermal expansion is in a direction at right angles to a longitudinal axis of the opening and a further coefficient of thermal expansion of the housing in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis of the opening has a magnitude of below 1.10-6 K.
However, Ott, which relates to flow cell ([0064]) and is thus from the same field of endeavor, teaches disclose wherein the housing has an anisotropic thermal expansion ([0008]-[0010]), where the first coefficient of thermal expansion is in a direction (the first spatial direction) at right angles to a longitudinal axis of the opening and a further coefficient of thermal expansion of the housing in a direction parallel (third spatial direction) to the longitudinal axis of the opening has a magnitude of below 1.10-6 K ([0015], [0045]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ranftl by incorporating wherein the housing has an anisotropic thermal expansion, where the first coefficient of thermal expansion is in a direction at right angles to a longitudinal axis of the opening and a further coefficient of thermal expansion of the housing in a direction parallel to the longitudinal axis of the opening has a magnitude of below 1.10-6 K in order to minimize or prevent shear stresses (Ott [0045])
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1) in view of Paterek (US20120034403A1).
Regarding claim 14, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose wherein the flow cell comprises a shell that at least partly surrounds the housing.
However, Paterek, which relates to flow cell and is thus from the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the flow cell comprises a shell (14) that at least partly surrounds the housing ([0029], fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ranftl by incorporating wherein the flow cell comprises a shell that at least partly surrounds the housing in order to enhance compressive sealing.
Claims 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1) in view of Beltz (US20220205925A1).
Regarding claim 15, Ranftl teaches the flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose further comprising retaining means for retention of a spectrometer or a sensor head of a spectrometer and/or aligning means for alignment of a spectrometer or a sensor head.
However, Beltz, which relates to flow cell and is thus from the same field of endeavor teaches retaining means (attachment elements or holders) for retention of a spectrometer or a sensor head of a spectrometer and/or aligning means for alignment of a spectrometer or a sensor head ([0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ranftl by incorporating further comprising retaining means for retention of a spectrometer or a sensor head of a spectrometer and/or aligning means for alignment of a spectrometer or a sensor head for reproducible and precise alignment.
Regarding claim 16, Ranftl, when modified by Beltz teaches the flow cell of claim 15, wherein the flow cell and the retaining means and/or the aligning means are configured such that the spectrometer or sensor head is mountable on the flow cell such that there are no components disposed between the optical window and a first optical element of the spectrometer or sensor head (Beltz: [0010]).
Regarding claim 17, Ranftl, when modified by Beltz teaches the flow cell of claim 15, wherein the retaining means and/or the aligning means are set up to interact with a counterpart on the spectrometer or sensor head for a releasable snap-fit connection (plugged in) (Beltz: [0010]).
Regarding claim 18, Ranftl, when modified by Beltz teaches the flow cell of claim 15, wherein the retaining means and/or the means of alignment are designed as a flange, as depressions (recess), as elevations, as threaded holes, as a groove and combinations of these means (Beltz: [0010])
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ranftl (US 20140152977 A1) in view of Beltz (US20220205925A1).
Ranftl teaches a flow cell of claim 1, but fails to disclose a method of monitoring a biotechnological process, where the process comprises circulation of a medium for culturing of cells and flow through a vessel for accommodation of the cell culture, wherein the flowing medium is divided into a main stream and a secondary stream, the secondary stream is conducted through a flow cell, spectroscopic analysis is effected within the flow cell, and then the secondary stream is fed back to the main stream.
However, Beltz teaches a method of monitoring a biotechnological process ([0001]), where the process comprises circulation of a medium for culturing of cells and flow through a vessel (4) for accommodation of the cell culture ([0041]-[0042]), wherein the flowing medium is divided into a main stream (fluid circulating in the bioreactor 4) and a secondary stream (first bypass line 16), the secondary stream is conducted through a flow cell (8) ([0041]-[0042]), spectroscopic analysis is effected within the flow cell ([0011], 0041]-[0042]), and then the secondary stream is fed back to the main stream ([0042] fluid from the bioreactor 4 is guided into the disposable flow cell 8 and back into the bioreactor 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ranfl by incorporating a method of monitoring a biotechnological process, where the process comprises circulation of a medium for culturing of cells and flow through a vessel for accommodation of the cell culture, wherein the flowing medium is divided into a main stream and a secondary stream, the secondary stream is conducted through a flow cell, spectroscopic analysis is effected within the flow cell, and then the secondary stream is fed back to the main stream in order to preserve sterility within the chamber.
Regarding claim 22, Beltz, when modified by Ranftl teaches the method of monitoring a biotechnological process of claim 21, wherein the monitoring comprises using multiple measurement devices (26, 28) for detection of parameters of the medium in the measurement chamber of the flow cell (Beltz: [0044]), and these are connected by a retaining means ([0010] attachment elements or holders) of the flow cell without impairing sterile integrity of the medium ([0010], [0043] since the detection devices are external and optical coupling is through the windows, the sterile interior of the measurement chamber is not breached).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOHAMED DOUMBIA whose telephone number is (571)272-8266. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 PM ET.
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, Michelle Iacoletti can be reached at 571-272-3995. 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.
/MOHAMED DOUMBIA/Examiner, Art Unit 2877
/MICHELLE M IACOLETTI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights