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). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the ‘excitation neutral density filter, a detection neutral density filter, or a combination of both’ of claim 5 and the ‘exit port of the integrating sphere, wherein the exit port is placed at angle from about 10 degrees to about 170 degrees with respect to a direction of the incidence of the excitation light’ of claim 10 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.
The drawings are objected to because in FIG. 3B it appears that under NiSO4 ‘1.23 M’ should read -2.23 M-. 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
4. 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.
5. Claims 14, 16, and 18 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.
The term “strong (of ‘strong light-absorbing reagents’)” in claim 14 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “strong” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. ‘Strong’ renders the degree of light-absorbing by the reagents indefinite.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the baseline sample's ISARS intensity" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The terms “pure (of ‘pure light absorbers’)” and “significant (of ‘significant scattering activity’) in claim 18 are relative terms which render the claim indefinite. The terms “pure” and “significant” are not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. ‘Pure’ renders the concentration of the light absorbers indefinite, and ‘significant’ renders the degree of scattering activity of the light absorbers indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Erostyak et al. (WO 2005/100955 A1).
As for claim 1, Erostyak in a method and apparatus for determining the absorption of weakly absorbing and/or scattering liquid samples discloses/suggests the following: an integrating-sphere-assisted resonance synchronous (ISARS) spectrophotometer (Figure 5C with page 3: lines 14-17 and page 8: line 26 to page 9: line 9), comprising: a light source (Figure 5C: L), an excitation monochromator configured to separate light from the light source and output a selected excitation wavelength (λx) of the excitation light (Figure 5C: M1), an integrating sphere having an inner surface configured to diffuse reflect light reaching the surface (Figure 5C: IS), a detection monochromator configured to receive light exiting the integrating sphere and output a selected detection wavelength (λd) of the exit light (Figure 5C: M2), wherein the excitation wavelength (λx) and the detection wavelength (λd) are substantially the same and varied simultaneously over a wavelength region (Figure 5C: Data acquisition and analysis controlling M1 and M2 with page 8: lines 27-30), and a detector configured to detect the light from the detection monochromator (Figure 5C: D).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 2-4 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erostyak et al. (WO 2005/100955 A1) in view of Darby et al. (WO 2018/070882 A1).
As for claim 2, Erostyak discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). As for ‘the integrating sphere comprises a sample positioned therein,’ Erostyak is silent concerning this with regards to the embodiment of Figure 5C which demonstrates filling the integrating sphere with a sample (see Figure 5C: IS with Figure 4 and Figure 2). Nevertheless, he teaches that a cuvette may be placed within the integrating sphere (Figure 1), and Darby in a spectrometer apparatus for measuring spectra of a liquid sample using an integrating cavity teaches having two monochromators, one for excitation and one for detection, between an integrating cavity having a sample holder/cuvette in the integrating cavity (page 18: lines 19-21 (Light sources: treating attached monochromator as an excitation monochromator); page 18: lines 7-11 (USB Spectrometer: treating scanning-monochromator as a detection monochromator); page 17: line 35 to page 18: line 1 (Integrating Cavity); page 18: lines 2-6 (Sample Holder/Cuvette); noting Figures 1, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4, 5, and 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to at least try to have ‘the integrating sphere comprises a sample positioned therein’ in order to measure the spectrum of a liquid sample within a cuvette when using an optical system using two monochromators, one before and one after an integrating sphere that holds the sample.
As for claim 3, Erostyak in view of Darby discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 2). In addition, Erostyak in view of Darby discloses/suggests the detector is configured to acquire an ISARS intensity spectrum of the sample (Erostyak: Figure 5C: D and page 8: lines 27-30 and in view of Darby: page 18: lines 7-11 (USB Spectrometer)).
As for claim 4, Erostyak discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). As for
‘the integrating sphere has an inner diameter ranging from about 4 cm to about 50 cm’ Erostyak is silent. Nevertheless, he teaches that a cuvette may be placed within the integrating sphere (Figure 1), and Darby in a spectrometer apparatus for measuring spectra of a liquid sample using an integrating cavity teaches having two monochromators, one for excitation and one for detection, between an integrating cavity having an inner diameter of 5 cm (50 mm) and having a sample holder/cuvette in the integrating cavity (page 18: lines 19-21 (Light sources: treating attached monochromator as an excitation monochromator); page 18: lines 7-11 (USB Spectrometer: treating scanning-monochromator as a detection monochromator) page 17: line 35 to page 18: line 1 (Integrating Cavity); page 18: lines 2-6 (Sample Holder/Cuvette); noting Figures 1, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4, 5, and 7).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the integrating sphere have an inner diameter ranging from about 4 cm to about 50 cm such as 5 cm (50 mm) in order to measure the spectrum of a liquid sample within a cuvette when using an optical system using two monochromators, one before and one after an integrating sphere that holds the sample.
As for claim 17, Erostyak discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). As for calibrating the ISARS spectrophotometer comprising: acquiring, with the ISARS spectrophotometer, ISARS-based absorbance spectra AISARS(A) of a series of calibration samples, wherein the calibration samples comprise a plurality of solutions of molecular chromophores. Erostyak is silent. Nevertheless, he teaches that a cuvette may be placed within the integrating sphere (Figure 1), and Darby in a spectrometer apparatus for measuring spectra of a liquid sample using an integrating cavity teaches having two monochromators, one for excitation and one for detection, between an integrating cavity having a sample holder/cuvette in the integrating cavity (page 18: lines 19-21 (Light sources: treating attached monochromator as an excitation monochromator); page 18: lines 7-11 (USB Spectrometer: treating scanning-monochromator as a detection monochromator); page 17: line 35 to page 18: line 1 (Integrating Cavity); page 18: lines 2-6 (Sample Holder/Cuvette); noting Figures 1, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4, 5, and 7). And Darby teaches a calibration procedure for combined extinction and absorbance spectrometer that includes calibrating the integrating cavity path length using a plurality of concentrations of a dye such as Eosin along with testing other dyes for recalibration (page 23: column 2 to column 26: column 1; each dye would necessarily comprise at least one chromophore for its color).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to calibrate the ISARS spectrophotometer comprising: acquiring, with the ISARS spectrophotometer, ISARS-based absorbance spectra AISARS(A) of a series of calibration samples, wherein the calibration samples comprise a plurality of solutions of molecular chromophores in order to calibrate a combined extinction and absorbance spectrometer such as by calibrating the integrating cavity’s path length using different dyes to more accurately determine extinction and absorbance of a liquid sample within a cuvette when using an optical system using two monochromators, one before and one after an integrating sphere that holds the liquid sample.
10. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Erostyak et al. (WO 2005/100955 A1).
As for claim 5, Erostyak discloses/suggests everything as above (see claim 1). As for ‘an excitation neutral density filter, a detection neutral density filter, or a combination of both for adjusting the excitation or detection light intensity,’ Erostyak is silent concerning this with regards to the embodiment of Figure 5C. Nevertheless, Erostyak teaches using a neutral density filter in a reference path before a second detector in a double-beam photometer arrangement to provide more reliable intensity measurements by having the same sensitivity range of the detectors being applied for the sample and reference beams (Figure 6: attenuator with col. 9, lines 10-23).
Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have a detection neutral density filter in a reference path to provide more reliable intensity measurements by having the same sensitivity range of the detectors being applied for the sample and reference beams when operating a double-beam photometer arrangement.
Allowable Subject Matter
11. Claims 6-12 and 21-24 are allowed.
Claims 13, 15, 19, and 20 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.
Claims 14, 16, and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: please refer to the attached PTO-892.
Fax/Telephone Numbers
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Gordon J. Stock, Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 272-2431.
The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 10:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.
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, Kara Geisel, can be reached at 571-272-2416. 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.
/GORDON J STOCK JR/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2877
Prosecution Insights