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 .
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 11-12 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. Particularly, claim 11 recites “a lid is separated onto the container”. This limitation is not understood at all. Clarification of the claim is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-7 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prescott et al. (US 5503300) in view of Monti (US 2007/0081884) in view of Neil (US 3,756,371).
Claim 1, Prescott discloses a system for destacking consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising: at least one stack of consumables (fig.4), lids, or consumables with lids; a storage (201) for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism (707); a movable separator (801,802) comprising an upper part (upper portions of 801,802) configured to separate the lowest consumable from the stack of consumables by moving its upper part between the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables; and a movable consumable holder (205; 502) which is arranged below the stack of consumables.
Prescott does not explicitly disclose a storage (201) for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism (707) configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage (201).
Monti discloses a storage (30) for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism (53) configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage (30; see fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Prescott with a storage for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage because such configuration is very well-known in the art of withdrawing articles from a stack and depends greatly on how the articles are stacked and held within the storage area and such configuration does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Prescott does not disclose an upper part (upper portions of 801,802) with separator ramps.
Neil discloses an upper part (14a,18a) with separator ramps (fig.4; teeth on 14a,18a are herein construed as ramps). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Prescott with an upper part with separator ramps in order to further enhance the engagement capability of the container separator for engaging adjacent container lips.
Claim 2, Prescott discloses wherein the storage (201) is a carousel (201) with loading channel (channel that allows inventory magazine 202 to be stored inside 201; fig.5a).
Claim 3, Prescott discloses wherein the storage (201) comprises a plurality of loading channel (fig.5a; channels that allows plurality of inventory magazines 202 to be stored inside 201) each configured for receiving a stack of consumables.
Claim 4, Prescott discloses wherein the movable separator (801,802) is connected to a drive (magazine actuator motor 501 depicted in fig.8c inherently has a drive to drive the motor) configured for moving the separator (801,802) perpendicular towards the lower end of the stack of consumables.
Claim 5, Prescott discloses wherein the movable consumable holder (502) is connected to a support (511,515,702,703) which is configured for a movement in z-direction (511,515 moves up and down which is the construed as the z direction).
Claim 6, Prescott discloses wherein the support (702,703) comprises a conveyor belt (703) for moving the consumable holder (205) in X-direction and z-direction (delivery tray 205 which is construed as the consumable holder tilts in the z-direction; C18:L50-67).
Although Prescott does not disclose moving the consumable holder (205) in y-direction, it would have been very obvious to one of ordinary skill in the before the effective filing date to implement such a configuration since it requires tilting the delivery tray/consumable holder (205) as needed to receive the dispensed article from the carousel.
Claim 7, Prescott discloses wherein the consumable is a container (see fig.4).
Claims 8,10 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prescott et al. (US 5503300) in view of Monti (US 2007/0081884).
Claim 8, Prescott discloses a method for destacking a consumable from a stack of consumables, comprising the steps of: Loading at least one stack of consumables (401) to a storage (201) comprising a retaining mechanism (707); Moving a consumable holder (205) below the lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables (401); Moving a separator (801,802) perpendicular towards the stack of consumables so that an upper part (upper portions of 801,802) of the separator (801,802) engages between the lowest and second lowest consumable of the stack of consumables: Separating the lowest consumable from the stack of consumables (401); Collecting the separated consumable in the consumable holder (205).
Prescott does not disclose a storage (201) comprising a retaining mechanism (707) configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage.
Monti discloses a storage (30) comprising a retaining mechanism (53) configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage (30; see fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Prescott with a storage for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage because such configuration is very well-known in the art of withdrawing articles from a stack and depends greatly on how the articles are stacked and held within the storage area and such configuration does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 10, Prescott discloses wherein the consumable is a container (see fig.4), a cuvette, or a lid for a container.
Claims 11-12 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Prescott et al. (US 5503300) in view of Monti (US 2007/0081884) in view of Neil (US 3,756,371) in view of DesJardin et al. (US 2019/0389605).
Claim 11, Prescott discloses wherein a container is separated from the at least one stack (see figures and the rejection of claim 8).
Prescott in view of Monti in view of Neil do not disclose wherein subsequently a lid is separated onto the container.
DesJardin discloses a lid (fig.3; para.0031; lid of 200) is separated onto the container (200). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Prescott in view of Monti in view of Neil with wherein subsequently a lid is separated onto the container because the use of containers with lid arranged in a stack once a container with lid is separated from the stack is widely known in the art for stack arrangements with containers having lids as taught by DesJardin and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 12, Prescott in view of Monti in view of Neil do not disclose wherein the lid is sealed onto the container by heating the lid.
DesJardin discloses wherein the lid is sealed onto the container (200) by heating the lid (para.0031). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Prescott in view of Monti in view of Neil with wherein the lid is sealed onto the container by heating the lid because the use of containers with lid arranged in a stack once a container with lid is separated from the stack is widely known in the art for stack arrangements with containers having lids that are sealed with a heating elements as taught by DesJardin and does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claims 8-9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guggisberg (EP 3 578 485) in view of Prescott et al. (US 5503300) in view of Monti (US 2007/0081884).
Claim 8, Guggisberg discloses a method for destacking a consumable from a stack of consumables, comprising the steps of: Loading at least one stack of consumables (1) to a storage (25) comprising a retaining mechanism (70).
Guggisberg does not disclose Moving a consumable holder below the lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables; Moving a separator perpendicular towards the stack of consumables so that an upper part of the separator engages between the lowest and second lowest consumable of the stack of consumables: Separating the lowest consumable from the stack of consumables; Collecting the separated consumable in the consumable holder.
Prescott discloses moving a consumable holder (205) below the lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables (1); Moving a separator (801,802) perpendicular towards the stack of consumables so that an upper part (upper portions of 801,802) of the separator (801,802) engages between the lowest and second lowest consumable of the stack of consumables: Separating the lowest consumable from the stack of consumables (401); Collecting the separated consumable in the consumable holder (205). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the device of Guggisberg with Moving a consumable holder below the lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables; Moving a separator perpendicular towards the stack of consumables so that an upper part of the separator engages between the lowest and second lowest consumable of the stack of consumables: Separating the lowest consumable from the stack of consumables; Collecting the separated consumable in the consumable holder in order to have a more efficient grasping mechanism for extracting the individual stacked article from the plurality of stacked items contained within the stack.
Guggisberg does not explicitly disclose a storage comprising a retaining mechanism configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage.
Monti discloses a storage (30) comprising a retaining mechanism (53) configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage (30; see fig.1). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the device of Guggisberg with a storage for the at least one stack of consumables, lids, or consumables with lids comprising a retaining mechanism configured that only the lowest and second lowest consumable of the at least one stack of consumables extend over a lower end of the storage because such configuration is very well-known in the art of withdrawing articles from a stack and depends greatly on how the articles are stacked and held within the storage area and such configuration does not impart any novelty on the claim limitation.
Claim 9, Guggisberg discloses wherein the step of moving the consumable (1) to a pipetting interface (pipetting interface position at 201 of analyzer 200).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI whose telephone number is (571)272-6557. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, GENE CRAWFORD can be reached at (571) 272-6911. 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.
/AYODEJI H OJOFEITIMI/Examiner, Art Unit 3651
Prosecution Insights