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 .
Priority
Instant application has the following priority dates:
Instant application was filed on 11/17/2020.
Instant application is a continuation in part of 15/927,245, filed 03/21/2018.
15/927,245 is a continuation of 15/072,063, filed 03/16/2016.
15/072,063 is a continuation in part of 14/304,765, filed 06/13/2014.
14/304,765 claims priority from Provisional Application 61/835,383, filed 06/14/2013.
The effective filing date of claims 9–14, 17, 18, and 20–22 is 06/13/2014, because U.S. Application No. 15/072,063 provides support for all of the claimed features. Specifically, U.S. Application No. 15/072,063 describes an air diffuser 409 with the structure of the claimed “first housing element” because the diffuser 409 is a perforated sheet that can be made of metal, and which maintains a filter material 303 in a generally flat configuration. U.S. Application No. 15/072,063 Fig. 3, [0034], [0049].
Note that Provisional Application 61/835,383 and U.S. Application No. 14/304,765 each fail to provide written description support for a “first housing element [comprising] a metal sheet having a plurality of perforations therethrough.” Both Provisional Application 61/835,383 and U.S. Application No. 14/304,765 describe a perforated insert 32, but do not specify that the insert is made of metal. Also, Provisional Application 61/835,383 and U.S. Application No. 14/304,765 describe an external support frame 101 that can be made of metal, but does not say that the external support frame 101 has a plurality of perforations therethrough. Provisional Application 61/835,383, Fig. 20, [0076]; U.S. Application No. 14/304,765, Fig. 20, [0091]. Furthermore, U.S. Application No. 14/304,765 describes a wire frame 401 that can be made of metal, but the wire frame 401 is not described as comprising a plurality of perforations. U.S. Application No. 14/304,765, Fig. 31, [0095].
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 9–12, 17, 18, and 21–23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over More, US 6,293,983 B1 in view of Swierczyna et al., US 2002/0179084 A1 and in further view of Klein, US 4,627,863.
Regarding claim 9, More teaches a filter assembly 18 for use in a kitchen, which reads on the claimed “grease filter.” See More Figs. 1, 7, col. 3, ll. 14–19. The filter assembly 18 comprises:
A metal filter 15 (the claimed “external frame”) configured to be removably installed in an aperture 14 of an exhaust hood 10, as claimed. See More Figs. 1, 7, col. 3, ll. 1–3.
The metal filter 15 defines a “pathway for airflow therethrough,” as claimed, which is the pathway through the metal filter 15 into the exhaust hood 10.
The metal frame 15 at least partially defines an “upstream portion” of the filter assembly 18 (where pre-filter 17 is attached) and a “downstream portion” of the filter assembly 18 (opposite of where the pre-filter 17 is attached), as claimed. See More Figs. 1, 7, col. 3, ll. 14–19.
A flame baffle 24 (the claimed “first baffle filter”) disposed within the downstream portion of the filter assembly 18. See More Fig. 7, col. 6, ll. 13–20. The flame baffle 24 is secured within the metal filter 15, as claimed, because the metal filter 15 incorporates the flame baffle 24. Id.
A pre-filter 17 (the claimed “removable filter pad”) having a length and width (the claimed “outer dimensions”). See More Figs. 1, 7, col. 6, ll. 13–20.
PNG
media_image1.png
753
958
media_image1.png
Greyscale
More differs from claim 9 because it is silent as to the filter assembly 18 comprising a first housing element having outer dimensions and positioned within the upstream portion of the filter assembly 18, with the first housing element being configured to provide support to the pre-filter 17 to maintain it in a generally flat configuration, with the first housing element comprising a perforated metal sheet and being positioned upstream of the pre-filter 17, with the outer dimensions of the pre-filter 17 being approximately the same as the outer dimensions of the first housing element.
But More teaches that the pre-filter 17 can comprise a support element 26 provided on the downstream side of the pre-filter 17. See More col. 6, ll. 13–20.
With this in mind, Swierczyna teaches an effluent removal assembly 30 for removing cooking effluents from air in a kitchen comprising a porous web material 16 that is supported between an upstream open support structure 15 and a downstream perforated plate 17. See Swierczyna Figs. 1, 2, [0019], [0022]. The upstream open support structure 15 is disposed on the upstream face of the porous web material 16 and has outer dimensions that are approximately the same as the porous web material 16. Id. at [0019]. The upstream open support structure 15 can be a perforated plate, and is interpreted as having a similar structure as the perforated plate 17 illustrated in Fig. 2. Id.
PNG
media_image2.png
783
1056
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to modify More to include the open support structure 15 of Swierczyna on the upstream face of the pre-filter 17 of More to provide additional support for the pre-filter 17.
With this modification, the open support structure 15 reads on the “first housing element.” The open support structure 15 is capable of providing support the pre-filter 17 to maintain the pre-filter 17 in a generally flat configuration, as claimed, because the support structure 15 is a support material that is disposed on the upstream face of the pre-filter 17. The open support structure 15 is a sheet having a plurality of perforations therethrough, as claimed. The open support structure 15 is positioned upstream of the pre-filter 17, as claimed. The outer dimensions of the pre-filter 17 are approximately the same as the outer dimensions of the open support structure 15, as claimed.
More in view of Swierczyna differs from claim 1 because Swierczyna is silent as to the material used to manufacture the open support structure 15. Therefore, the reference fails to provide enough information to teach the open support structure 15 is a “metal sheet,” as claimed.
But Swierczyna suggests that metal is a suitable material to manufacture the perforated plate because it teaches that the ventilation hood can be made from sheet metal, which is suitable for withstanding high temperatures. See Swierczyna [0017]. Further, Klein teaches a filter comprising a movable filter web 22 with a perforated metal separator 16 made from a metal sheet, with the perforated metal separator 16 having a similar structure as either perforated plate 15, 17 of Swierczyna. See Klein Fig. 3, col. 2, l. 67–col. 3, l. 9. Therefore, it would have been obvious for the open support structure 15 of Swierczyna to be manufactured from a metal sheet because Swierczyna suggests that metal is a suitable high temperature material for use with its device, and Klein teaches a perforated metal separator 16 with a similar structure as the perforated plate of Swierczyna.
Regarding claim 10, More as modified teaches that the pre-filter 17 (the “removable filter pad”), when installed, is disposed within the “upstream portion” of the filter assembly 18 (the “grease filter”) adjacent to the open support structure 15 (the “first housing element”), as claimed, because the pre-filter 17 is upstream of the flame baffle 24 (see More col. 6, ll. 13–20) and adjacent to open support structure 15 of Swierczyna (seen in Fig. 2 of Swierczyna).
Regarding claim 11, More as modified teaches a support element 26 (the “second housing element”) disposed within the metal filter 15 (the “external frame”) between the flame baffle 24 and the open support structure 15 of Swierczyna (which is upstream of the pre-filter 17). See More Fig. 7, col. 6, ll. 13–20.
Regarding claim 12, More as modified teaches that the support element 26 is mounted to an L-shaped extrusion 25 on the upstream face of the metal filter 15 (the L-shaped extrusion 25 reads on the “one or more divider tabs of the external frame”). See More Fig. 7, col. 6, ll. 13–20.
Regarding claim 17, More as modified is interpreted such that the upstream, open support element 15 of Swierczyna (the “first element”) is removable from the pre-filter 17 of More because Fig. 2 of Swierczyna illustrates the opening support element 15 being removed from the web material 16. As such, the open support element 15 is configured to move from a “first position” (open support element 15 removed from the filter assembly 18 of More) to a “second position” (open support element 15 attached to the filter assembly 18). The “first position” permits installation of the pre-filter 17 within the filter assembly 18 (as open support element 15 is removed), and the “second position” not permitting installation of the pre-filter 17 within the filter assembly 18, as claimed (as the open support element 15 covers the pre-filter 17 when it is attached to the filter assembly 18).
Regarding claim 18, More as modified teaches that pre-filter 17 can be from a fibrous material (see More col. 2, ll. 7–11) with the pre-filter 17 comprising several layers of material (id. at col. 3, ll. 49–54). One layer of blanket material reads on “first fibrous mat” and another layer of blanket material reads on the “second fibrous mat.” The layers of blanket material are “coupled together” as claimed because they form the pre-filter 17 which is illustrated in Fig. 7 as an integrated structure.
Regarding claim 21, More as modified teaches that the open support structure 15 of Swierczyna (the “first housing element”) is removably secured to the metal filter 15 of More (the “external frame”), as claimed, because Fig. 2 of Swierczyna illustrates the open support structure 15 being removed from the web 16.
Regarding claim 22, More as modified teaches that the support element 26 (the “second housing element”) is positioned downstream of the pre-filter 17 (the “removable filter pad”), as claimed.
More as modified differs from claim 22 because it is silent as to the support element 26 comprising a metal sheet having a plurality of perforations therethrough.
But, as noted, Swierczyna teaches that its effluent removal assembly 30 comprises a perforated plate 17 positioned on the downstream side of the porous web material 16. See Swierczyna Fig. 2, [0019]. The perforated plate 17 is beneficial because it precludes cooking effluents from blocking or restricting exhaust gas flow through the plate 17. Id. at [0020].
It would have been obvious to use the perforated plate 17 of Swierczyna as the support element 26 of More to provide a material that precludes cooking effluents from blocking or restricting exhaust gas flow.
It is noted that Swierczyna is silent as to the material used to make the perforated plate 17. Therefore, the reference fails to provide enough information to teach the perforated plate 17 being made of metal.
But Swierczyna suggests that metal is a suitable material to manufacture the perforated plate because it teaches that the ventilation hood can be made from sheet metal, which is suitable for withstanding high temperatures. See Swierczyna [0017]. Further, Klein teaches a filter comprising a movable filter web 22 with a perforated metal separator 16 made from a metal sheet, with the perforated metal separator 16 having a similar structure as either perforated plate 15, 17 of Swierczyna. See Klein Fig. 3, col. 2, l. 67–col. 3, l. 9. Therefore, it would have been obvious for the perforated plate 17 of Swierczyna to be manufactured from a metal sheet because Swierczyna suggests that metal is a suitable high temperature material for use with its device, and Klein teaches a perforated metal separator 16 with a similar structure as the perforated plate of Swierczyna.
Regarding claim 23, More as modified teaches that the metal sheet of the open support structure 15 comprises a non-perforated perimeter, as claimed. This is because the open support structure 15 is a perforated plate (i.e., has the same structure as the perforated plate 17), with the perforated plate 17 having a non-perforated perimeter. See More Fig. 2, [0019].
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over More, US 6,293,983 B1 in view of Swierczyna et al., US 2002/0179084 A1 in view of Klein, US 4,627,863 and in further view of Feisthammel et al., US 6,833,022 B2.
Regarding claim 13, More as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as explained above.
More as modified differs from claim 13 because it is silent as to the flame baffle 24 (the “baffle filter”) comprising first and second rows of baffles being secured in staggered relation to each other.
But Feisthammel teaches a vortex baffle filter 1 used in a kitchen exhaust hood. See Feisthammel Fig. 1, col. 1, ll. 15–20, col. 3, ll. 57–61. The vortex filter 1 comprises first and second rows of baffles secured in a staggered relation to one another. Id. The vortex baffle filter 1 separates water and grease from air flowing through it. It would have been obvious to use the vortex baffle filter 1 of Feisthammel as the flame baffle 24 of More because this would merely represent substituting one known element for another to produce predictable results. See MPEP 2143, subsection I, B.
PNG
media_image3.png
308
713
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 14, Feisthammel teaches that the first and second rows of baffles include a plurality of baffles spaced apart from each other to provide openings therebetween for the flow of air therethrough, as seen in Fig. 1.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over More, US 6,293,983 B1 in view of Swierczyna et al., US 2002/0179084 A1 in view of Klein, US 4,627,863 and in further view of Aviles, US 2009/0194093 A1.
Regarding claim 20, More as modified teaches the limitations of claim 9, as explained above.
More as modified differs from claim 20 because it is silent as to one or more handles pivotably connected to the filter assembly 18 (the “grease filter”). But the filter assembly 18 is intended to be inserted and removed from the opening 14 of vent hood 10. See More Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 4–19
With this in mind, Aviles teaches a grease filter 16 for a kitchen ventilator comprising a pair of handles 62 pivotally connected to a peripheral frame 24 of the filter 16 to enable ready handling of the filter 16 during installation and removal relative to the canopy 16 of the ventilator. See Aviles Fig. 5, [0027].
It would have been obvious to provide the handles 62 of Aviles with the filter assembly 18 of More to enable ready handling of the collector 16 during installation and removal from the opening 14 of the hood 10 of More.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments filed March 23, 2026, with respect to the rejection of the elected claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Morton, US 2007/0204854 A1 as modified have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made, as explained above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reiff et al., US 8,197,568 B2 (filter element for extractor hood); Randinelli, US 7,465,332 B2 (grease filter for air filtration system); Aviles, US 2007/0056578 A1 (baffle-type grease filter for kit.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. BENNETT MCKENZIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5327. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
T. BENNETT MCKENZIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
/T. BENNETT MCKENZIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights