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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/09/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 01/09/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-14 have been amended. Claims 1-20 remain pending in this application. Claims 15-20 are withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 01/09/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 1 has been amended to recite “wherein the base of the funnel is coupled to a lateral surface of the tube at the first end” and claim 8 has been amended to recite “wherein the base of the funnel is coupled to a lateral surface of the top end of the upper portion section of the tube via the connector”. Applicant points to fig. 4 of the present disclosure. As discussed in the rejection below, Kirschman discloses such limitations.
Applicant argues that fig. 3A of Kirschman illustrates the duct 20 being made of multiple separable components and connectors and does not appear to be a single continuous body. Applicant argues that Kirschman does not appear to disclose “wherein the tube is a single continuous body from the first end to the second end”. However, such limitation is not recited in independent claims 1 and 8. Rather, claims 1 and 8 recite that “the tube is extended in a first direction from the first end to the second end”.
Accordingly, claims 1 and 8 remain anticipated by Kirschman.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, ln. 7 should read ---and a second end of the tube is opposite to the first end of the tube,---
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 10 is 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.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the bottom end of the lower portion section" in ln. 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kirschman (Pub. No.: US 2018/0133084 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kirschman discloses (fig. 1-4) a device (air treatment system 10) comprising:
A funnel (nozzle 26) comprising an opening at an end (nozzle end 36a) and a base (section 20e) at an opposite end (fig. 3A, ¶ 0075); wherein a diameter of the opening is wider than a diameter of the base (¶ 0023); and
A tube (air hose or duct 20 comprising sections 20a, 20c and elbow 20b which form a tube); and
Wherein a first end of the tube (second male end 20c2) is coupled to the base of the funnel via a connector (elbow 20d, ¶ 0071, fig. 3A) and a second end of the tube (end 20a2) is opposite to the first end of the tube (fig. 3B),
Wherein the tube is extended in a first direction from the first end to the second end (see dashed arrow, fig. 3A), and
Wherein the base of the funnel is coupled to a lateral surface of the tube at the first end (the base of the funnel is coupled to connector 20d, connector 20d is coupled to second male end 20c2 which is received in the connector, the connector being coupled to a lateral surface of the tube, ¶ 0071).
Kirschman fails to explicitly disclose that the device is “for removing aerosols from an environment”; “wherein the funnel is configured to receive aerosols from the environment into the opening of the funnel” and “wherein the tube is configured to receive the aerosols from the funnel”, however, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The device of Kirschman is configured to remove contaminants from an environment; wherein the funnel is configured to receive contaminants from the environment into the opening of the funnel and wherein the tube is configured to receive the contaminants from the funnel (¶ 0020) and is thus capable of being used to remove aerosols from an environment. Using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Regarding claim 2, Kirschman discloses wherein the base of the funnel comprises a flexible base (air hose or duct 20 comprising base 20e may be flexible ¶ 0064).
Regarding claim 5, Kirschman discloses wherein the connector comprises a plurality of support portions (internal wall 20d1) that stabilizes the connector (¶ 0071 fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 6, Kirschman discloses wherein the tube includes an angled portion (elbows 20b, fig. 3A, ¶ 0071).
Regarding claim 7, Kirschman discloses wherein the base of the funnel comprises a rigid base (air hose or duct 20 comprising base 20e may be semi-rigid ¶ 0052).
Regarding claim 8, Kirschman discloses (fig. 1-4) a device (air treatment system 10) comprising:
A funnel (nozzle 26) comprising an opening at an end (nozzle end 36a) and a base (section 20e) at an opposite end (fig. 3A, ¶ 0075); wherein a diameter of the opening is wider than a diameter of the base (¶ 0023); and
A tube (air hose or duct 20 comprising sections 20a, 20c and elbow 20b which form a tube) comprising an upper portion section (segment 20c) and a lower portion section (segment 20a) (fig. 3A), wherein the upper portion section is configured to be coupled and decoupled from the lower portion section (¶ 0071);
Wherein a top end of the upper portion section (second male end 20c2) of the tube is coupled to the base of the funnel via a connector (elbow 20d)
Wherein a bottom end of the upper portion section of the tube (first male end 20c1) is coupled to a top end of the lower portion section (male end 20a1) of the tube (fig. 3A, coupled via elbow 20b, ¶ 0071),
Wherein the tube is extended in a first direction from the top end to the bottom end (see dashed arrow, fig. 3A), and
Wherein the base of the funnel is coupled to a lateral surface of the top end of the upper portion of the tube via the connector (the base of the funnel is coupled to connector 20d, connector 20d is coupled to second male end 20c2 which is received in the connector, the connector being coupled to a lateral surface of the tube, ¶ 0071).
Kirschman fails to explicitly disclose that the device is “for removing aerosols from an environment”; “wherein the funnel is configured to receive aerosols from the environment into the opening of the funnel” and “wherein the tube is configured to receive the aerosols from the funnel”, however, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The device of Kirschman is configured to remove contaminants from an environment; wherein the funnel is configured to receive contaminants from the environment into the opening of the funnel and wherein the tube is configured to receive the contaminants from the funnel (¶ 0020) and is thus capable of being used to remove aerosols from an environment. Using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Regarding claim 9, Kirschman discloses wherein the base of the funnel comprises a flexible base (air hose or duct 20 comprising base 20e may be flexible ¶ 0064).
Regarding claim 12, Kirschman discloses wherein the connector comprises a plurality of support portions (internal wall 20d1) that stabilizes the connector (¶ 0071, fig. 3A).
Regarding claim 13, Kirschman discloses wherein the tube includes an angled portion (elbows 20b, fig. 3A, ¶ 0071).
Regarding claim 14, Kirschman discloses wherein the base of the funnel comprises a rigid base (air hose or duct 20 comprising base 20e may be semi-rigid ¶ 0052).
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschman, as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, in view of Gee (Pub. No.: US 2021/0386506 A1).
Regarding claim 3, Kirschman discloses the device further comprising a suction motor (airflow generator 28, ¶ 0065), wherein the second end of the tube is coupled to the suction motor (¶ 0071, fig. 3A).
Kirschman fails to disclose that the suction motor is configured to generate a suction force that pulls aerosols from surrounding environment into the opening of the funnel and through the tube and into the collection reservoir for disposal, however, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The suction motor of Kirschman is configured to generate a suction force that pulls contaminants from the surrounding environment into the opening of the funnel and through the tube and into a collection reservoir (chamber 12c) for disposal (¶ 0067, ¶ 0072) and is therefore capable of being used to for aerosols. Using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Kirschman fails to disclose wherein the suction motor comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system.
Gee teaches (fig. 1) a suction device (abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor comprising a suction motor (vacuum subassembly 112), wherein the suction motor comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system (¶ 0060) in order to vent medical gas (¶ 0001).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the suction motor of Kirschman such that it comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system, as taught by Gee, as an HVAC suction system is suitable for venting medical gas (Gee ¶ 0001).
Regarding claim 10, Kirschman discloses the device further comprising a suction motor (airflow generator 28, ¶ 0065), wherein a bottom end of the lower portion section end (end 20a2) is coupled to the suction motor (¶ 0071, fig. 3A).
Kirschman fails to disclose that the suction motor is configured to generate a suction force that pulls aerosols from surrounding environment into the opening of the funnel and through the tube and into the collection reservoir for disposal, however, such limitation relates to the intended use of the system, which, in this case, imparts no further limitations on the structure of the device. The suction motor of Kirschman is configured to generate a suction force that pulls contaminants from the surrounding environment into the opening of the funnel and through the tube and into a collection reservoir (chamber 12c) for disposal (¶ 0067, ¶ 0072) and is therefore capable of being used to for aerosols. Using the device for this purpose requires only routine skill in the art (See § MPEP 2114 II).
Kirschman fails to disclose wherein the suction motor comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system.
Gee teaches (fig. 1) a suction device (abstract) and thus in the same field of endeavor comprising a suction motor (vacuum subassembly 112), wherein the suction motor comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system (¶ 0060) in order to vent medical gas (¶ 0001).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the suction motor of Kirschman such that it comprises a heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) suction system, as taught by Gee, as an HVAC suction system is suitable for venting medical gas (Gee ¶ 0001).
A suction motor (airflow generator 28, ¶ 0065),
Claims 4 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirschman, as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, in view of Chase (Pat. No.: US 10,821,202 B1).
Regarding claim 4, Kirschman fails to disclose wherein the diameter of the opening of the funnel has a range of 4 to 5 inches.
Chase teaches (fig. 1) a suction device (airborne pathogen extraction system 100A) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising an opening (16) wherein the size of the opening is configured to shape, influence and/or optimize the operation the suction device upon the air and possible pathogens in the vicinity of the suction device (col. 3, ln. 65-col. 4, ln. 2). Thus, Chase discloses that the size of the opening is a result-effective variable and discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diameter of the opening of Kirschman such that it is between 4 and 5 inches in order configure the size of the opening such that it shapes, influences and/or optimizes the operation of the suction device (Chase col. 3, ln. 65-col. 4, ln. 2).
Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious.
Regarding claim 11, Kirschman fails to disclose wherein the diameter of the opening of the funnel has a range of 4 to 5 inches.
Chase teaches (fig. 1) a suction device (airborne pathogen extraction system 100A) and thus in the same field of endeavor, comprising an opening (16) wherein the size of the opening is configured to shape, influence and/or optimize the operation the suction device upon the air and possible pathogens in the vicinity of the suction device (col. 3, ln. 65-col. 4, ln. 2). Thus, Chase discloses that the size of the opening is a result-effective variable and discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233 (See MPEP §2144.05). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diameter of the opening of Kirschman such that it is between 4 and 5 inches in order configure the size of the opening such that it shapes, influences and/or optimizes the operation of the suction device (Chase col. 3, ln. 65-col. 4, ln. 2).
Absent any showing of critical or unexpected results, such limitations appear to be routine optimization within the skill of the ordinary artisan before the effective filing date of the invention are therefore prima facie obvious.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Jeanmenne (Pub. No.: US 2021/0378802 A1) discloses a device for removing aerosols from an environment comprising a funnel. Self et al. (Pub. No.: US 2010/0280436 A1) discloses a device comprising a funnel.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MEAGAN NGO whose telephone number is (571)270-1586. The examiner can normally be reached M - TH 8:00 - 4:00 PT.
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, Sarah Al-Hashimi can be reached on (571) 272-7159. 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.
/MEAGAN NGO/Examiner, Art Unit 3781
/CATHARINE L ANDERSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3781