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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (claims 1-8) in the reply filed on 8/31/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 9-16 are withdrawn from consideration.
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.
Claims 1 and 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 3,746,161) in view of Hacikyan (US 6,308,827).
Regarding claims 1 and 4, Jones discloses a slide tray (tray shown in Fig. 1), comprising: a planar member (at 34); and a plurality of slide receiving portions (See eight slide receiving portions extending across the tray, between partitions 44, in Fig. 1) formed on one surface of the planar member, formed as recesses for receiving slides (slides 58), wherein the plurality of slide receiving portions are formed on the planar member at predetermined intervals (as shown in Fig. 1), and wherein each of the plurality of slide receiving portions is formed as a hollow portion (at 18) at least in part.
PNG
media_image1.png
508
882
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Jones discloses the claimed invention except for the adsorbent film attached to at least a portion thereof. However, Hacikyan teaches a packaging system (shown in Fig. 6) comprising a cavity (at 50) for holding an object (30), wherein the cavity includes an adsorbent film (at 16) attached to an inner surface of the cavity, for the purpose of immobilizing any liquid within the packaging system so that liquid is prevented from leaking from the package. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the slide contact surfaces of the receiving portions of Jones with an adsorbent film as taught by Hacikyan in order to ensure that any liquid within the tray is immobilized and leakage is prevented.
Regarding claim 5, Jones-Hacikyan discloses the hollow portion comprises a first hollow portion (at 42 in Fig. 3) for lifting a slide received in the slide receiving portion from the slide receiving portion, and when the slide is received on one surface of the slide receiving portion by the adsorbent film, a first region of the first hollow portion is covered with the slide, and a second region of the first hollow portion is exposed.
Regarding claim 6, Jones-Hacikyan discloses the hollow portion comprises a second hollow portion (at 56 in Fig. 3), and when the slide is received on one surface of the slide receiving portion by the adsorbent film, an entire area of the second hollow portion is covered with the slide.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 3,746,161) in view of Hacikyan (US 6,308,827) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Okada et al. (US 7,300,500). As described above, Jones-Hacikyan discloses the claimed invention except for the express disclosure of the specifics of the adsorbent film. However, Okada teaches it is well known in the art for an adsorbent material to be formed from a porous, polymer-based material (PTFE) comprising a resin material, for the purpose of providing sufficient adsorbent properties (column 7, lines 17-58). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the tray of Jones-Hacikyan to have the adsorbent material as taught by Okada in order to have greater adsorbent properties.
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 3,746,161) in view of Hacikyan (US 6,308,827) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kanner et al. (US 7,070,051). As described above, Jones-Hacikyan discloses the claimed invention except for the identification information on the planar member. However, Kanner teaches a device holding tray (at 12 in Fig. 6) comprising a plurality of object holding locations, wherein each location is marked with identification information (at 38 in Fig. 6) for each of the plurality of object holding locations, for the purpose of providing a quick visual assist in the counting process (column 5, lines 36-56). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the tray of Jones-Hacikyan with identification information at the location of each of the slide receiving portions as taught by Kanner in order to provide a quick visual assist of the slides disposed therein.
Claims 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jones (US 3,746,161) in view of Hacikyan (US 6,308,827) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Levy (US 5,611,433). As described above, Jones-Hacikyan discloses the claimed invention except for the slides having specimen information. However, Levy teaches a slide tray (at 10 in Fig. 1) comprising a plurality of slide receiving portions (at 36a/36b in Fig. 1), wherein the slides (S) received in the slide receiving portion comprises specimen information (indicia on indicia bearing end N) corresponding to information about the specimen, for the purpose of providing information to the user. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the slides of Jones-Hacikyan with specimen as taught by Levy in order to provide the user with information about the slide contents.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN A REYNOLDS whose telephone number is (571)272-9959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Anthony Stashick can be reached at (571) 272-4561. 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.
/STEVEN A. REYNOLDS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3735
