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
The instant application, filed 29 March, 2021, claims priority to a total of 13 provisional applications, with provisional application 63/001,461, filed 29 March, 2020, representing the earliest filed priority application.
With respect to the instant claims, independent claim 1 requires as essential features a gravity assisted transport channel, a return region, two planes of flexible printed circuit boards on which UV-C light sources are positioned, and a UV blocking structure. Provisional application 63/023,845, filed 12 May, 2020, is the first parent application to disclose the combination of claimed features (see Figs. 4 and 13 of 63/023,845); the earlier filed parent provisional applications do not fairly disclose the claimed combination of features. Accordingly, for purposes of assessing the novelty and obviousness of the claimed invention, the claimed invention is afforded an effective filing date of 12 May, 2020, corresponding to the filing date of parent provisional application 63/012,845.
Response to Amendment
The instant application was revived after the mailing of a notice of abandonment. The amendments filed 29 June, 2025, are entered. The specification has been amended at several locations, and replacement drawings sheets are submitted for Figures 4 and 11. Claims 1-2 are amended. Claims 3-20 are new. All claims 1-20 are pending.
The adjustments to the specification and the drawings address the previously set forth objections to the specification and drawings, which are therefore withdrawn.
Similarly, the previously set forth objections to claims 1-2 are withdrawn in view of the amendments to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 29 June, 2025, have been fully considered. The applicant’s arguments are persuasive in view of the amendments, which considerably alter the scope of the claims. Accordingly, the previously set forth rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 are withdrawn. However, upon further search and consideration, a new grounds of rejection is set forth under 35 U.S.C. 103 below.
Claim Objections
Claims 5, 8-10, and 19 are objected to for the informalities set forth below.
Claim 5 is objected to because “wherein channel further comprises” (line 2) should read “wherein the channel further comprises”.
Claims 8-10 are objected to because “said first plane of UV-C light generating comprises” at lines 2-3 of each claim should read “said first plane of UV-C light generating devices comprises”.
Claim 19 is objected to because “a heat sink associated configured to remove heat” (lines 2-3) should be adjusted to read “a heat sink with said first flexible printed circuit board and configured to remove heat”. Also, it is noted that the clarify of the claim could be improved at lines 3-4 by adjusting “from at least one of said first plane of said UV-C generating devices” to read “from at least one of said UV-C generating devices of said first plane
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
Particularly, claim 1 recites “a return region operable to return said object after said object was sanitized”. The specification does not use the term “return region” or otherwise describe a function of “returning” an object. Instead, the instant application discloses the use of directional structures which direct an object to a particular destination after moving through the sanitization region (directional structures 282 and 483 of Fig. 4—see [0072]; directional device 1114 of Fig. 11—see [0097]), the destination preferably being an area that does not have any UV-C so that a user can pick up the object (see working object directing device 442 of Fig. 4, [0062]). The claimed “return region” appears to correspond to the destination that the directional devices of the instant application deliver the object to after passing through the structure, so that the object can be retrieved by a user.
The language of claim 1 should be adjusted to correspond to the language of the specification as originally filed by replacing the term “return region” with appropriate language from the specification (e.g., “directional structure”, “directional device”, or “destination”, as discussed at paragraphs [0062], [0072], and [0097]).
For purposes of examination, the term “return region” has been interpreted as referring to an exit region of the structure from which a user can retrieve the sanitized object after sanitization.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5, 8-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadlock et al. (US 2014/0245866 A1) in view of Donhowe et al. (US 2021/0213147 A1, with PCT filed 11 Dec, 2017).
Regarding claim 1, Hadlock teaches a device (100) wherein a housing (defined by front portion 101, back portion 103, left portion 105, right portion 107, top 106, and bottom 108—Fig. 1A, [0035]) defines a chamber (109) which receives an object (writing implement). The object enters the chamber (109) through a top opening (111) of the chamber and exits through a bottom opening (112) ([0035]). A tray (117) beneath the device receives and catches a writing implement exiting the device (100) ([0035]). The top opening (111) includes a shield (113) which blocks light emitted within the interior of the device from escaping, and a similar shield or light blocking configuration is provided at the bottom opening (112) ([0036]). A set of interior walls (123,133) divide the interior of the device define two compartments (125,135) and the object pass-through chamber (109) (Fig. 1B, [0037]). A holder (141) prevents the objects from falling through the chamber (109) to the exit (112) until the holder is actuated to release the object ([0038]). UV bulbs (160a-d) are positioned within the front and back compartments (125, 135) of the device (100) such that all of the peripheral surfaces of the object are irradiated with UV light ([0040]). The inner walls (123, 133) are transparent to allow the UV light to pass ([0040]).
See the device of Hadlock below.
PNG
media_image1.png
552
878
media_image1.png
Greyscale
From the above, it is evident Hadlock teaches a structure (device 100) comprising:
a first plane of UV generating devices (see arrangement of UV bulbs 160A and 160b within front compartment 125 in Fig. 1b);
a second plane of UV generating devices (see arrangement of UV bulbs 160C and 160D within BACK compartment 135 in Fig. 1b);
said first plane and said second plane being configured to be aligned generally opposite each other with a region (109) therebetween (UV sources 160a-b of compartment 125 are opposite from the UV sources 160c-d of compartment 135, and the chamber 109 is defined between them);
at least one UV-C blocking structure operable to block UV-C light from leaving said structure after an object has been placed in said region for being sanitized (shield 113, and additional [not depicted] light blocking structure of exit 112—see [0036]) ;
wherein said region comprises a gravity assisted transport channel (109) operable to sanitize said object utilizing UV light within said transport channel (writing implement 150 moves though chamber 109 by the force of gravity and is sanitized therein by UV light—see [0038], [0040], and [0053]); and
a return region (117) operable to return said object after said object was sanitized (tray 117 receives an object from the exit 112 of the chamber 109 and presents it for access by a user—see Fig. 1A-B, [0035], [0038], and the objection to the specification above regarding the interpretation of the “return region”).
Hadlock differs from the instant claim with respect to the type and arrangement of UV light source used; particularly, Hadlock does not teach that the first plane includes UV-C generating devices mounted to a first flexible printed circuit board, said first plane of UV-C generating devices being operable to generate UV-C light, and that the second plane similarly includes UV-C generating devices mounted to a second flexible printed circuit board, said second plane of UV-C generating devices being operable to generate UV-C light.
However, in the analogous art of flexible ultraviolet light generation systems (title), Donhowe teaches two flexible UV light generation sheets opposing each other ([0071]), wherein the flexible light generating sheets comprise UV LEDs (1150) supported by a substrate (1115) (Fig. 11, [0071]). The substrate (1115) of Donhowe is understood to comprise a flexible circuit board (related embodiment of a flexible UV light generation sheet of Figs. 7A-B includes UV LEDs 750 supported on a flexible circuit 715 comprising a conductive trace 712 and flexible substrate film 714—see [0061]-[0062]; Donhowe thus teaches flexible circuit boards supporting UV LEDs). Donhowe further indicates that the flexible UV light generation sheet (1100) is useful for lining walls of a container or vessel to allow objects within the container or vessel to be exposed to UV light for disinfection ([0071]). Also, Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs can include UVA, UVB, or UV-C LEDs, with exemplary LEDs emitting UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, and with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]).
See the UV light generating sheet (1100) of Donhowe below.
PNG
media_image2.png
444
754
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to substitute the UV bulbs (160) of Hadlock with a pair of opposed flexible circuit boards having UV-C LEDs mounted thereupon, as taught and suggested by Donhowe, such that the flexible circuit boards line the transparent inner walls (123, 133) of the device of Hadlock (Donhowe teaches flexible circuits 715 at [0061]-[0062], teaches lining container walls with flexible UV light generation sheets 1100 having UV LEDS 1150 at [0071], and suggests a preferred UV-C wavelength of 265 nm at [0091]). Such modification amounts to the simple substitution of one known element (UV bulbs 160 of Hadlock) with another known element (flexible UV light generating sheets of Donhowe) to achieve the predictable result of emitting light to disinfect objects within a confined area (Donhowe at [0071] suggests lining a container or vessel with light generating sheets to disinfect an object therein). Additionally, the modification provides the further benefit of using a wavelength (265 nm) of UV light that is particularly effective at eliminating E. coli bacteria (see Donhowe at [0091]).
Thus modified, each of the UV light generating sheets of Donhowe incorporated into the device of Hadlock fairly defines a plane including UV-C generating devices (LEDs) mounted to a first flexible printed circuit board, the plane of UV-C generating devices being operable to generate UV-C light (265 nm light).
It is noted that although Donhowe does not explicitly recite that the circuit board is a “printed” circuit board, it is fairly implied to a person having ordinary skill in the art that the circuit board of Donhowe is a flexible printed circuit board at least by the language used to describe the flexible circuit of Donhowe (e.g., paragraph [0061] refers to a “conductive trace 712”, which is a term that is essentially only used in reference to printed circuit boards) and the ubiquity of printed circuit boards in modern electronic devices.
Regarding claim 2, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. As modified with respect to claim 1, the device of Hadlock incorporates the flexible printed circuit boards of Donhowe which support LEDs configured to emit UV light at a wavelength of 265 nm (see rejection of claim 1 above and Donhowe at [0091] discussing the advantage of 265 nm light in destroying E. coli bacteria); accordingly, Hadlock in combination with Donhowe teaches that said UV-C light has a wavelength between 200 and 280 nanometers (265 nm lays within the claimed range).
Regarding claim 4, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. As modified with respect to claim 1 above, Haddock incorporates the flexible printed circuit board (UV light generating sheet) of Donhowe. Donhowe indicates that the flexible printed circuit board comprises a UV-C reflective material coated on at least a portion thereof to reflect UV-C light generated by said first UV-C generating devices, wherein said UV-C reflective material is at least 70% UV-C reflective (UV light generating sheet 1100 includes underlayer 1120, and underlayer 1120 is a UV diffuse reflective layer—[0071]; UV diffuse reflective layer exhibits a diffuse reflectivity of 50% or greater, 60% or greater, 70% or greater, 80% or greater, 90% or greater, 95% or greater, 97% or greater, 98% or greater, or 99% or greater for UV light, such as light having wavelengths between 200 nm and 400 nm—[0075]; viewing Fig. 11, it is evident the layer 1120 is coated on a plane with the circuit board and is positioned to reflect UV light emitted from LEDs 1150).
Regarding claim 5, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Hadlock teaches that the channel (109) further comprises a first material (123) that is UV transparent, and a second material (133) that is UV transparent (chamber 109 is defined by inner walls 123 and 133, which are transparent to UV light—see Fig. 1B, [0040]). As modified with respect to claim 1, the flexible printed circuit board (UV light generating sheet) of Donhowe are positioned to line the inner transparent walls (123, 133) of the device of Hadlock (see rejection of claim 1 above, and Donhowe at [0071]). When performing said modification, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to arrange the flexible printed circuit board along the transparent walls (123,133) at the surface of the transparent walls that is exterior to the channel (i.e., on the surfaces of the walls 123 and 133 facing the compartments 125 and 135, respectively, and exterior to the channel of chamber 109 of Hadlock) for the benefit of providing the light sources in a walled compartment (125, 135) in which they are at least partially protected from mechanical impact with the objects passing through the device (consider Hadlock at Fig. 1B, [0028]). That is, it would be obvious to arrange said first flexible printed circuit board to be mounted to a side to said first material (transparent wall 123) that is exterior to said channel (109), and to arrange said second flexible printed circuit board to be mounted to a side of said second material (transparent wall 133) that is exterior to said channel (109). Hadlock does not explicitly indicate that the material is at least 50% UV-C transparent, but it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to maximize the UV-C transparency of the transparent material (walls 123 and 133) and achieve a UV-C transparency of at least 50% for the benefit of increasing the amount of UV-C light which is delivered from the UV-C sources to the object (writing implement) for an improved disinfecting effect (consider Hadlock at [0028] and [0040] discussing how transparent walls 123 and 33 allow light to pass from the UV sources to the target object for disinfection; also Hadlock suggests the transparent window may be glass—see [0028]—wherein many types of glass would fairly be expected to have a UV-C transparency of at least 50%).
Alternatively, it is noted that the flexible printed circuit board (flexible UV light emitting sheet) of Donhowe—which is incorporated into the device of Hadlock as modified with respect to claim 1—includes an overlayer (1160) (Fig. 11, [0071]), which is a UV transparent layer ([0078]) having a transparency to UV light of 50% or greater ([0080]). Therefore, the modified device of Hadlock with respect to claim1 includes first and second materials (overlayers of the flexible UV light emitting sheets of Donhowe) which are at least 50% UV-C transparent (Donhowe at [0080]). When modifying the device of Hadlock by lining the chamber (109) of Hadlock with the flexible UV light emitting sheet of Donhowe as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above and suggested by Donhowe (see [0071]), it would be obvious to arrange the sheets so that the overlayer faces in toward the chamber for the benefit of appropriately guiding UV light toward the object to be sanitized. Thus arranged, the UV light generating sheets include the first and second flexible printed circuit boards mounted to an exterior side of the first and second UV transparent materials, respectively, with respect to the channel.
Regarding claim 8, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Initially, it is noted that Hadlock recognized that the number and arrangement of UV sources may vary as long as the UV sources are suitably positioned to irradiate the target object with a sufficient level of UV irradiation for disinfection (number and arrangement of these energy sources or bulbs 160 may vary—[0041], [0049]; a sufficient level of UV irradiation around a writing implement—[0032]). Nonetheless, Hadlock does not particularly teach said first plane of UV-C light generating comprises at least six UV-C light emitting diodes.
However, as modified with respect to claim 1, the device of Hadlock incorporates the UV light generating sheets of Donhowe, which include UV LEDs (1150) (see rejection of claim 1, and Donhowe at Fig. 11, [0071]). Donhowe indicates that the UV light generating sheet includes multiple UV LEDs ([0045]), with certain embodiments (Fig. 14, [0089]) including at least six LEDs, or at least 9 LEDs (Fig. 13B, [0074]). A person having ordinary skill in the art would recognize from the disclosure of Donhowe that any number of UV LEDs may be appropriate in order to provide sufficient UV irradiation to a target object or fluid. Furthermore, it is noted that the duplication of parts is prima facie obvious absent evidence of a new or unexpected result; see In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960) as cited in MPEP 2144.04(VI.)(B.).
From these teachings, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the modified device of Hadlock—which includes the UV light emitting sheets of Donhowe—to include any number of UV LEDs along the first plane, such as at least six UV-C light emitting diodes, for the benefit of providing a sufficient number and arrangement of LEDs to deliver a disinfecting dosage of UV irradiation to the target object (consider Hadlock at [0032] and [0041]). There is no evidence such selection otherwise yields a new or unexpected result.
Regarding claim 9, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. As substantially discussed with respect to claim 8 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the modified device of Hadlock—which includes the UV light emitting sheets of Donhowe—to include any number of UV LEDs along the first plane, such as at least twelve UV-C light emitting diodes, for the benefit of providing a sufficient number and arrangement of LEDs to deliver a disinfecting dosage of UV irradiation to the target object (consider Hadlock at [0032] and [0041]).
Regarding claim 10, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. As substantially discussed with respect to claim 8 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to configure the modified device of Hadlock—which includes the UV light emitting sheets of Donhowe—to include any number of UV LEDs along the first plane, such as at least fifteen UV-C light emitting diodes, for the benefit of providing a sufficient number and arrangement of LEDs to deliver a disinfecting dosage of UV irradiation to the target object (consider Hadlock at [0032] and [0041]).
Regarding claim 11, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 8. As discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs which emit UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]). Thus, the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches that at least one of said UV-C light emitting diodes provides UV-C light at a wavelength between 260 and 280 nanometers.
Regarding claim 12, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 8. As discussed with respect to claim 1 and 11 above, Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs which emit UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]). Thus, the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches that at least one of said UV-C light emitting diodes provides UV-C light at a wavelength between 260 and 265 nanometers.
Regarding claim 13, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 8. As discussed with respect to claims 1 and 11-12 above, Hadlock and Donhowe teach UV LEDs emitting at wavelength ranges of 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]). The disclosed range of 260-265 nm is sufficiently close to the claimed range (between 250 and 260 nm) so as to render obvious the claimed range absent evidence of criticality; see, e.g., Titanium Metals Corp. of America v. Banner, 778 F.2d 775, 783, 227 USPQ 773, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1985), as cited in MPEP 2144.05(I.). Also, Donhowe suggests a broader wavelength range of 100-280 nm (UV-LEDS useful with the flexible UV light generation sheets and treatment systems described herein include UVC LEDs exhibiting emission between wavelengths of 100 nm and 280 nm—[0091]), which encompasses the claimed range, and wherein it would be obvious to select a value within the overlapping portion of the claimed range (250-260 nm) and prior art range (100-280 nm) for the benefit of selecting a wavelength that best matches a destruction effectiveness curve for a target toxin or pathogen (Donhowe: the wavelength of UV light and the associated UV-LEDs may be selected that best matches or at least partially overlaps a destruction effectiveness curve of a target toxin or target pathogen—[0091]).
Regarding claim 14, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 8. As discussed with respect to claims 1 and 11-13 above, Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs which emit UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]). Thus, the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches that at least one of said UV-C light emitting diodes provides UV-C light at a wavelength between 200 and 280 nanometers.
Regarding claim 15, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 9. Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs, wherein the UV LEDs can be configured according to various embodiments to emit UV light at wavelengths useful destroying a target toxin or pathogen ([0091]). Although Donhowe does not explicitly recite an embedment wherein all of a plurality of at least six UV-C light emitting diodes must generate UV-C light at the same wavelength, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to arrive at such an embodiment within the modified device of Hadlock for the benefit configuring the device to maximize the amount of light emitted at a wavelength that has the best germicidal effectiveness against a target toxin or pathogen (consider Donhowe at [0091]) and for the benefit of reducing the complexity of the device (a device with a single type of LED is simpler than a device comprising multiple types of LEDs).
Regarding claim 16, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 8. Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs which emit UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, with 265 nm being recognized as a particularly advantageous wavelength for destroying E. coli bacteria ([0091]). Thus, the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches that that said plurality of UV-C light emitting diodes comprises at least two UV-C light emitting diodes that generate UV-C light at different wavelengths from each other (Donhowe fairly suggests embodiments of the UV light generating sheet comprising distinct UV LEDs for the UV-C wavelengths of 260-265 nm and the UV-C wavelengths of 270-280 nm—see [0091]; also, it is noted that selecting LEDs to target different wavelengths provides the benefit of allowing distinct toxins or pathogens to be targeted by the different wavelengths—consider Donhowe at [0091]).
Regarding claim 17, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Donhowe indicates that the UV LEDs of the flexible UV light emitting sheets (which are incorporated into the modified deice of Hadlock, as set forth with respect to claim 1 above) includes UV LEDs which emit UV light in the ranges 260-265 nm , 270-280 nm, and 305-315 nm, ([0091]), wherein the wavelengths of 305-315 nm fall within the UV-B range. Donhowe also recognized the UV-B range as useful for the UV light generation sheet (UV-LEDs useful with the flexible UV light generation sheets and treatment systems described herein include UVB LEDs, exhibiting emission between wavelengths of 280 nm and 315 nm—[0091]). Thus, the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches said flexible printed circuit board further comprises at least one UV-B light emitting diode (that is, Donhowe teaches embodiments of the UV light generating sheet comprising UV-B LEDs mounted on a flexible printed circuit board, and the UV light generating sheet of Donhowe is incorporated into the device of Hadlock as modified with respect to claim 1 above).
Regarding claim 19, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Hadlock does not teach a heat sink configured to remove heat generated from at least one of said first plane of said UV-C generating devices. As modified with respect to claim 1, the device of Hadlock incorporates the UV light emitting sheet of Donhowe (see rejection of claim 1 above). While the cited embodiment (1100) of the UV light generating sheet Donhowe is not explicitly indicated to include a heat sink ([0071] does not discuss a heat sink), Donhowe teaches a related embodiment (flexible UV light generation sheet 300—Fig. 3A) wherein the sheet includes a conductor that acts as a heat sink to flow heat generated by the one or more LEDs away from the UV-LEDs ([0058]). It is evident that such a heat sink operates to prevent the LEDs from overheating, which can worsen LED performance and lead to malfunctions. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Hadlock to include a heat sink associated with the first flexible printed circuit board and configured to remove heat generated by the UV-LEDs, as seen in embodiments of Donhowe (Fig. 3A, [0058]), for the benefit of preventing the overheating and malfunction of the LEDs.
Claims 3 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadlock et al. (US 2014/0245866 A1) in view of Donhowe et al. (US 2021/0213147 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and evidenced by Janacek (publication “Reflectivity Spectra for Commonly Used Reflectors” by Martin Janacek).
Regarding claim 3, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Hadlock suggests the use of reflective materials on inner surfaces of the device to reflect light towards the object (writing implement) to be sanitized ([0029], [0041], [0058], [0061]), but does not particularly suggest a UV-C reflect material comprising aluminum that is coated on at least a portion of said first plane.
As modified with respect to claim 1, the device of Hadlock incorporates the flexible printed circuit boards of Donhowe lining the walls of the chamber (109) of Hadlock (see rejection of claim 1 above and Donhowe at [0071] suggesting lining a container or vessel with light generating sheets to disinfect an item therein). Donhowe further suggests the flexible printed circuit board (UV light generation sheet 1100) includes a reflective material positioned underneath the UV LEDs (underlayer 1120 corresponds to a UV diffuse reflective layer—[0071]). The UV reflective material can comprise a thin metal film (In some embodiments, a UV reflective layer comprises a thin metal film –[0075]) having a reflectivity of at least 50%–and preferably greater—for UV light having wavelengths between 200 nm and 400 nm ([0075]), which includes the wavelengths of 200-280 nm that fall within the UV-C range (100-280 nm).
Furthermore, Donhowe incorporates by reference the publication “Reflectivity Spectra for Commonly Used Reflectors” by Martin Janacek, hereinafter “Janacek”, and Donhowe indicates the materials disclosed by Janacek can be used as the reflective underlayer ([0076]). Janacek discloses aluminum foil as a reflective material which shows good reflectivity (above 60%, see Fig. 8), with reflection coefficients between 70% and 80% at wavelengths above 265 nm (see Section IV.(B.), second paragraph, lines 4-5). Accordingly, Donhowe (by incorporation of Janacek) suggests that aluminum is an appropriate UV reflective material for an underlayer of a flexible UV emitting circuit, and Janacek evidences that such selection provides good (above 60%, see Fig. 8) reflectivity in the relevant portions of the UV-C range (Donhowe suggest a preferred UV-C wavelength of 265 nm at [0091], such that reflectivity of 265 nm light is most relevant when selecting a material for the reflective layer).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Haddock such that the first plane is coated with an aluminum material (i.e., the flexible printed circuit board includes an underlayer comprising aluminum foil), as suggested by Donhowe (see [0071] and [0076]), for the benefit of reflecting UV light toward the object (writing implement) to be disinfected (see Haddock at [0029], and consider Donhowe at [0011]).
Regarding claim 7, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 5. As discussed with respect to claim 5 above, the modified device of Hadlock incorporates the flexible UV light emitting sheets of Donhowe, wherein each of said flexible UV light emitting sheet includes a UV-C transparent material in an overlayer (1160) facing toward the chamber (see rejection of claim 5 above, and Donhowe at [0071], [0078], and [0080]). Additionally, as discussed with respect to claim 3 above, Donhowe indicates that the flexible UV light emitting sheet further includes a reflective underlayer (1120) configured as a thin metal layer (underlayer 1120 corresponds to a UV diffuse reflective layer—[0071]). The UV reflective material can comprise a thin metal film (In some embodiments, a UV reflective layer comprises a thin metal film –[0075]), and Donhowe further suggests—by incorporation of Janacek—that the thin metal layer comprises an aluminum foil (see Janacek at Fig. 8, and Section IV.(B.), second paragraph, lines 4-5). Viewing Fig. 11, it is clear that the reflective underlayer (1120) and transparent overlayer (1160) of Donhowe contact each other, such that the flexible UV light emitting sheet (1100) of Donhowe fairly comprises a UV-C reflective material (aluminum foil of reflective underlayer 1120) coated on at least a portion of said first and second materials (transparent overlayer 1160) to reflect UV-C light emitted from at least one of said UV-C generating devices (UV LEDs 1150; it is evident the reflective layer 1120 would reflect light from the LEDs 1150, see Fig. 11), wherein said UV-C reflective material comprises aluminum (aluminum foil). Accordingly, by incorporation of the UV light generating sheet of Donhowe into the device of Hadlock as set forth above (see rejections of claims 1 and 5), the combination of Hadlock and Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 7.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadlock et al. (US 2014/0245866 A1) in view of Donhowe et al. (US 2021/0213147 A1), and further in view of Lee et al. (US 2015/0158741 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 5. As discussed with respect to claim 5 above, the inner walls (123,133) of Hadlock fairly comprise first and second UV-C transparent materials, wherein Hadlock suggests that the transparent material may be glass ([0028]). Although glass is a similar material to quartz, Hadlock does not particularly suggest that said first and second materials are quartz.
However, the use of quartz material to provide a UV transparent barrier that protects a UV light source from a target of irradiation is conventional in the art. For example, Lee et al. (US 2015/0158741 A1) teaches a system for sterilizing a fluid with UV LEDs (title, abstract, [0010]-[0013]), wherein the UV LEDs are positioned (Fig. 7) within a protective tube (130) which is formed of a quartz material capable of transmitting UV light emitted from the UV LEDs (120) ([0066]). Accordingly, it is evident that quartz is a suitable material for protecting a UV light source while allowing transmission of UV light toward a target. Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Hadlock such that the inner walls (123, 133) are formed of a quartz material for the benefit of selecting a material capable of protecting the UV light sources while allowing the transmission of UV light toward the target object. Such modification amounts to the simple substation of one material (glass) for another (quartz) to achieve predictable results (protection of a UV light source and transmission of UV light); see MPEP 2143(I.)(B.).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadlock et al. (US 2014/0245866 A1) in view of Donhowe et al. (US 2021/0213147 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Mason et al. (US 2010/0237254 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1, wherein the modified device of Hadlock with respect to claim 1 incorporates the flexible UV light emitting sheet of Donhowe. Donhowe indicates that the UV light emitting sheet can emit UV light at a wavelength up to 400 nm (UV-LEDs useful with the flexible UV light generation sheets and treatment systems described herein include UVA LEDs, exhibiting emission between wavelengths of 315 nm and 400 nm—[0091]), wherein 400 nm overlaps with the range of visible light (the broadest ordinary definition for visible light consists of light having a wavelength between 380 nm and 750 nm). Nonetheless, in view of the small overlap (380-400 nm) between the wavelength range of Donhowe (315-400 nm) and the wavelength range of the visible light spectrum (380-750 nm), Donhowe does not fairly suggest said first flexible printed circuit board further comprises at least one visual spectrum light emitting diode. Hadlock suggests a UV filtering window that allows visible light from a UV light source to be observed by a user to assess the operational state of the device ([0075]), but Hadlock does not particularly suggest at least one visual spectrum light emitting diode on a flexible printed circuit board.
However, in the analogous art of UV disinfection devices (title, abstract, [0001]), Mason teaches a flexible printed circuit board (40) (Fig. 2, [0035]) on which LEDs (D1 to D8) are mounted ([0036]). The circuit (50) on the board (40) further includes an indictor portion (60) comprising indicator LEDs (D9 to D12) which emit visible light and are configured to provide a visual indication of when the UV LEDs are operating (Fig. 3, [0043]-[0044]), the indicator LEDs arranged to be visible to an external user ([0045]). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Hadlock such that the flexible printed circuit board (UV light generating sheet of Donhowe) of the modified invention includes at least one indicator LED which emits visible light and is positioned to be visible to a user, as suggested by Mason ([0043]-[0044]), for the benefit of providing a user with an indication of when the UV LEDs are operating properly and when the UV LEDs are malfunctioning and need replacement (see Mason at [0045]).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hadlock et al. (US 2014/0245866 A1) in view of Donhowe et al. (US 2021/0213147 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bettles (US 2015/0297768 A1).
Regarding claim 20, Hadlock in view of Donhowe teaches the structure of claim 1. Hadlock discusses a sensor for detecting the insertion of an object into the channel which functions to initiate irradiation upon detection of the object entering the channel (one or more internal sensors or switches, such as for detecting the insertion and/or presence of a writing implements inside the chamber of the device, such as to initiate irradiation of the implements—[0039]); within the context of the invention, such a sensor fairly constitutes a flow sensors as it effectively detects on object flowing through the channel. Hadlock and Donhowe do not teach a temperature and humidity sensor.
However, in the analogous art of flexible ultraviolet devices (title), Bettles an ultraviolet radiation system (10) for an enclosure (14) comprising ultraviolet radiation sources (18) mounted on a flexible substrate (2) and operated by a control system (16) based on data acquired by sensing devices (38) and transmitted by a feedback component (20) ([0043]). The sensing devise (38) include a temperature sensor and a humidity sensor, wherein the control system adjusts the ultraviolet dosage delivered by the system based on the detected temperature and humidity (embodiment of the monitoring and/or control system 16 can provide a lower ultraviolet dose as the temperature and/or humidity increases—[0047]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the device of Hadlock to include a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, and a control system for the UV generating devices—as seen in Bettles—for the benefit of enabling the control system to optimize the operation of the UV LEDs based on environmental conditions (see Bettles at [0047]); such operation can yield, for example, improved energy efficiency or an improved disinfecting effect.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Smetona et al. (US 2017/0101328 A1) teaches an ultraviolet module (130) including a flexible substrate that supports a set of ultraviolet radiation sources (124), a control unit (126), and necessary electronics (Fig. 17, [0080]). The ultraviolet radiation sources (124) comprise ultraviolet light emitting diodes ([0070]), and Smetona indicates that UV-C light having a wavelength between 250 and 280 nm provides the highest germicidal effectiveness ([0035]). The module (130) is attachable to a transparent enclosure (128) ([0080]).
Dobbins (US 2021/0330832 A1), which has priority to a provisional application filed 22 Apr, 2020—earlier than the effective filing date of 12 May, 2020 afforded to the instant claims (see priority section above)—teaches a sanitizer for payment media including bills, coins, and credit cards, wherein the payment media is sanitized in an irradiation zone between narrowly spaced support walls having associated ultraviolet lamps, and wherein a gravity approach is used to return the irradiated media item to a dispense zone (abstract). Fig. 3 shows irradiation zone 192 between UV lamps 190 as a vertically arranged shaft, such that gravity would assist the transport of payment media through the zone ([0050]: a card or coin is inserted into slot 140 along a ramp and drops down between aluminum side plates 180 until its lead edge rests on top of moveable support member 162 where it is irradiated by the UVC lamps, see Figs. 3 and 4A-B).
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached on (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797