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 .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on December 17th, 2025. Claims 7 and 16 have been cancelled and claims 19-22 have been added as such claims 1, 2, 5, 6, 8-11, 14, 15, and 17-22 are pending consideration in this Office Action.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews (US 20070113849) in view of Bertinetti (US 20130239960) and further in view of O’Donnell (US 20080310994) and Fukunaga (US 20020020414).
Regarding claim 1, Matthews discloses
An air purifier mask (Fig. 1; patient treatment system 10; Paragraph 0016, Lines 1-3) comprising:
a face mask (Fig. 1; patient interface assembly 28; Paragraph 0024, Lines 1-4);
a casing (Fig. 1; housing of gas delivery system 12; Paragraph 0018, Lines 1-3) connected (Fig. 1; patient circuit 30; Paragraph 0024, Lines 1-4; the patient circuit is a tube) to the face mask (Fig. 1; patient interface assembly 28; Paragraph 0024, Lines 1-4), the casing (Figs. 1 and 3; housing of gas delivery system 12; Paragraph 0018, Lines 1-3) comprising:
one or more pressure sensors (Figs. 1 and 3; pressure sensor 24; Paragraph 0021, Lines 1-2) and a pressure regulator (Figs. 1 and 3; control valve 20; Paragraph 0019, Lines 2-5 and Lines 15-16) configured to monitor and regulate pressure of the filtered air (the pressure sensor of Matthews detects pressure and the control valve of Matthews regulates the final pressure therefore it is able to monitor and regulate the pressure of the filtered air);
one or more heating elements (heater; Paragraph 0045, Lines 1-7;)
a blower (Figs. 1 and 3; pressure generator 14; Paragraph 0016, Lines 11-18) to push the pressure-regulated air at a required flow rate (this is intended use and therefore not given any patentable weight; regardless, the pressure generator of Matthews is a blower that is driven at a constant speed making it capable of pushing pressure-regulated air at a required flow rate; the pressure generator 14 draws air into system and “the pressure delivered to the patient being controlled by a pressure regulator”; Paragraph 0017); and
a tube (Fig. 1; patient circuit 30; Paragraph 0024, Lines 1-4) and an air outlet, to an external environment of the air purifier mask (fig. 1; “patient circuit 30 includes a suitable exhaust port 32 for exhausting gas from these components to ambient atmosphere”; [0025]).
It is unclear whether Matthews discloses an inlet filter configured to filter incoming air; and Matthews is silent as to one or more heating elements configured to heat the pressure-regulated air and periodically disinfect the air purifier mask; and a concentric tube having an inner tube and an outer tube, wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube, the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet, to an external environment.
Bertinetti teaches a respiratory treatment apparatus that has flow generator housing with
an inlet filter (air filter (HEPA filter); Paragraph 0052, Lines 5-8 and Lines 11-13) configured to filter incoming air (the inlet filter of Bertinetti filters the air drawn into the air inlet; Paragraph 0052, Lines 11-13);
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 gas delivery system of Matthews with the air filter of Bertinetti to remove dust or other allergens from the air drawn through the air inlet (Bertinetti: Paragraph 0052, Lines 11-13).
Matthews and Bertinetti are silent as to one or more heating elements configured to heat the pressure-regulated air and periodically disinfect the air purifier mask; and a concentric tube having an inner tube and an outer tube, wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube, the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet, to an external environment.
However, O’Donnell discloses a breathing assistance apparatus
one or more heating element (Fig. 1; heater plate 25 with humidifying chamber 5 and heating element 7, 19; Paragraph 0098 and 0099) configured to both heat pressure-regulated air (Fig. 1; blower supplies 4 supplies gas through the humidifying chamber 5 to the gas outlet 11 and patient outlet 8 where heater wires 7, 19 provide additional heat; Paragraph 0099) and periodically (the disinfecting and heating sequence preferably continues for between 30 and 120 minutes; Paragraph 0098) disinfect the air purifier mask (Fig. 1; “to disinfect the conduit 3, or both of the conduit 3 and the patient interface 2, dry heat is forced through the conduit 3 to heat and dry the conduit 3 such that bacteria and microbes are killed and cannot multiply”; Paragraph 0098).
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 heater and concentric tubing of the modified device of Matthews with the heater plate, humidifying chamber, and heating wire/element as taught in O’Donnell to increase the useable life of the breathing conduit by lowering microbial contamination on the inside surfaces the gases pass over (O’Donnell: Paragraph 0103, Lines 1-10).
The modified device of Matthews does not disclose a concentric tube having an inner tube and an outer tube, wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube, the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet.
Fukunaga discloses a ventilation system assembly with a respiration mask where
a concentric tube (fig. 1; passageway from air source to the patient mask is comprised of an inner passageway and an outer passageway) having an inner tube (fig. 1; inner conduits 65, 122, 132; [0037], [0040], and [0041]) and an outer tube (fig. 1; outer conduits 70, 124, 134; [0037], [0040], and [0041]),
wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube (figs. 1 and 3; outer filter 126 of co-axial filter 120 is positioned in outer conduit 124; [0041] and [0043]), the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet (fig. 3; filter 126 ensures that gases flowing from a patient (exhaled gases) through, the annular area between outer conduits 134, 124, 70 and inner conduits 132, 122, 65, to the exhaust port 110 are filtered prior to leaving exhaust port; [0040] and [0044]).
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 patient circuit of Matthews with the concentric tubing and filter as taught in Fukunaga to provide advantageous flow arrangement that saves space, provides filtered inspiratory gases while maintaining humidity, and filters out contaminants from the patient’s exhaust gases prior to removing expiratory gases to protect the rescuer or healthcare provider (Fukunaga: [0003], [0040], [0043], and [0044]).
Regarding claim 2, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Bertinetti: air filter) as claimed in claim 1,
wherein an inlet (Bertinetti: air inlet; Paragraph 0052, Lines 11-13) of the air purifier mask (Matthews: Fig. 1; patient treatment system 10; Paragraph 0016, Lines 1-3) is configured to filter the incoming air (Bertinetti: air filter (HEPA filter); Paragraph 0052, Lines 5-8 and Lines 11-13), wherein the inlet (Bertinetti: air inlet; Paragraph 0052, Lines 11-13) comprises the inlet filter (Bertinetti: air filter (HEPA filter); Paragraph 0052, Lines 5-8 and Lines 11-13).
Regarding claim 19, the modified device of Matthews further discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Fukunaga: concentric tubing with filter) of claim 1,
wherein the outlet filter is positioned in the annular area of the concentric tube (see figs. 1 and 3; the outer filter 126 of co-axial filter 120 is positioned in outer conduit 124, in the annular area between outer conduit 124 and inner conduit 122; [0041] and [0043]).
Regarding claim 21, Matthews further discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system) of claim 1,
wherein the casing further comprises a controller (fig. 1; processor 34 controls various operating aspects of the gas delivery system 12; [0026] and [0027]) configured to receive remote commands from a user device (fig. 1; gas deliver system 12 comprises a control interface 58 which provides a wireless connection to the processor 34 to allow for a user to input information to the gas delivery system 12 (buttons, dials, touch pad, etc.); [0042]),
the remote commands (fig. 1; a user to input information to the gas delivery system 12 where control interface 58 commands the processor; [0042]) where comprising at least one of a remote command to set an air flow speed for the blower (fig. 1; “pressure generator 14 is a blower and processor 34 controls the pressure of the breathable gas delivered to the patient by controlling the motor speed of pressure generator 14”; [0044], controller interface 58 commands processor based on user input; therefore, would be able to of control/command the speed of the motor) or a remote command to set a heater value.
Claims 5 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews (US 20070113849) in view of Bertinetti (US 20130239960) and further in view of O’Donnell (US 20080310994), Fukunaga (US 20020020414), and Leschinsky (US 20210353969).
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Bertinetti: air filter) as claimed in claim 1,
Matthews does not teach the patient treatment system being controlled and monitored by a mobile application.
Leschinsky teaches a wearable air sterilizer with a controller
wherein the air purifier mask (air handling assembly; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-12) is controlled (smartphone; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-5) and monitored (smartphone; Paragraph 0127, Lines 9-11) by a mobile application (smartphone app; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-12; Paragraph 0128, Lines 1-3; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3).
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 patient treatment system of Matthews with the smartphone app of Leschinsky as it would be advantageous to be able to wirelessly control the electrical and sensory components in the patient treatment system to increase or decrease the airflow delivered to the patient interface (Leschinsky: Paragraph 0127, Lines 9-11; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Bertinetti: air filter; Leschinsky: smartphone app) as claimed in claim 5,
wherein the mobile application (Leschinsky: smartphone app; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3) is configured to operate at modes (Leschinsky: two or more modes of operation; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3) comprising normal mode (Leschinsky: normal mode; Paragraph 0130, Lines 1-2), workout mode (Leschinsky: boost mode; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-9) and ailment mode (Leschinsky: air disinfection modes; Paragraph 0133, Lines 1-9).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews (US 20070113849) in view of Bertinetti (US 20130239960) and further in view of O’Donnell (US 20080310994), Fukunaga (US 20020020414), and Ehler (US 20160271428).
Regarding claim 8, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Bertinetti: air filter) as claimed in claim 1,
Matthews does not explicitly teach the patient treatment system configured to be powered by a chargeable or non-chargeable battery.
Ehler teaches a respiration system
wherein the air purifier mask (Fig. 1; blower filter respiration system 1; Paragraph 0028, Lines 1-4) is powered using a power source (Fig. 1; energy supply unit; Paragraph 0011, Lines 11-15) comprising a chargeable battery (Fig. 1; battery 41; Paragraph 0011, Lines 11-15 and Paragraph 0029, Lines 1-5) or a non-chargeable battery.
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 patient treatment system of Matthews to have the energy supply unit of Ehler in order to power the electric and sensory components (Ehler: Paragraph 0029, Lines 1-5).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews (US 20070113849) in view of Bertinetti (US 20130239960) and further in view of O’Donnell (US 20080310994), Fukunaga (US 20020020414), and Connor (US 20210379424).
Regarding claim 9, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; Bertinetti: air filter) as claimed in claim 1,
Matthew does not teach the face mask being configured to have an unpowered mode where the face mask comprises an air filter in said mode.
Connor teaches a smart face mask for air filtration
wherein the face mask (face mask; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) is used in an unpowered mode (first operational mode; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4), the face mask (face mask; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) comprising an air filter (low-power air filter; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) in the unpowered mode (first operational mode; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4).
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 patient interface of Matthews to have the air filter and first operational mode of Connor as it would be advantageous to filter contaminated air going to the patient interface even if the gas delivery system is not turned on.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matthews (US 20070113849) in view of Bertinetti (US 20130239960) and further in view of O’Donnell (US 20080310994), Fukunaga (US 20020020414), and Higashiyama (US 20210178108).
Regarding claim 20, the modified device of Matthews discloses
the air purifier mask (Matthews: patient treatment system; O’Donnell: heater that heats and disinfects regulated air) of claim 1,
wherein: the casing further comprises at least one air sensor comprising a temperature sensor or a humidity sensor (Matthews: gas delivery system 12 may include other conventional devices and components, such as a humidifier, heater, temperature sensor, and a humidity sensor; [0045]); and the air sensor is configured to sense a temperature or a humidity of the pressure-regulated air (a temperature sensor and a humidity sensor that may measure, monitor, and analyze the flow of gas to or from the patient; [0045])
The modified device of Matthews does not explicitly disclose the air sensor is configured to sense a temperature or a humidity of the pressure-regulated air before the pressure-regulated air is heated by the one or more heating elements.
Higashiyama discloses an analogous CPAP apparatus for delivering breathable air to a mask where
the air sensor is configured to sense a temperature or a humidity of the air (fig. 5; temperature and humidity sensors 132 and 251 measure the temperature and humidity; [0067] [0079], [0083]) before the pressure-regulated air is heated by the one or more heating elements (see fig. 5; temperature and humidity sensor 132 senses temperature and humidity of air introduced before the heater while temperature sensor 251 determines temperature of the heater; [0079]).
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 temperature and heating sensor of Matthews to be positioned before the heater and with the heater as disclosed in Higashiyama to provide efficient optimal humidification by controlling an output from the heater and maintaining a constant temperature based on detected temperatures; therefore, adjusting an amount of humidification (Higashiyama: [0003], [0009], and [0113] and claim 14).
Claims 10 , 11, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kepler (US 20170232221) in view of Liu (CN 112587775) and its translation (PE2E Translation Liu) and further in view of Fukunaga (US 20020020414).
Regarding claim 10, Kepler teaches
a method (pressure support system and method; Paragraph 0008, Lines 1-4 and Paragraph 0009, Lines 1-3; the specification describes the method of how the pressure support system is being used) comprising,
filtering incoming air (Fig. 9-10; filter media 136; Paragraph 0074, Lines 8-12), at an inlet (Fig. 2; intake 28; Paragraph 0043, Lines 3-6) of an air purifying mask (Figs. 1A and 1B; pressure support system 10; Paragraph 0038, Lines 1-3);
monitoring and regulating pressure of the filtered air (Fig. 2; pressure sensor monitors/measures pressure of pressurized flow of gas while control valve 33 and pressure generator regulate/control pressure; [0044] and [0046]-[0048]), using one or more pressure sensors (Fig. 2; pressure sensor 36; Paragraph 0052, Lines 8-13) and a pressure regulator (fig. 2; control valve 33 with pressure generator 30, controls the pressure of the breathable gas; [0044];
moving the pressure-regulated air at a required flow rate (Paragraph 0028, Lines 21-24) using a blower (Fig. 2; pressure generator 30, Paragraph 0044, Lines 1-7 and Paragraph 0055, Lines 12-20; Paragraph 0117, Lines 10-12);
a tube (fig. 1a-1b; patient circuit 22; [0041]) and exhaled air that travels through an air outlet, to an external environment of the air purifying mask (figs. 1a-1b; “patient circuit 22 includes a suitable exhaust port 26 for exhausting gas from these components to ambient atmosphere”; [0041]).
While Kepler does teach a heating element 352, it does not teach heating the pressure-regulated air, using one or more heating elements; directing the heated air to a face mask, using a concentric tube having an inner tube and an outer tube, wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube, the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet, to an external environment of the air purifying mask; and disinfecting the air purifying mask periodically using the one or more heating elements.
Liu teaches a ventilation treatment device
heating the pressure-regulated air (Page 6, Paragraph 4 after specific implementation examples, Lines 2-3), using one or more heating elements (heating unit 320; Page 6, Paragraph 4 after specific implementation examples, Lines 2-3);
disinfecting the air purifying mask (ventilation treatment device; Page 6, Paragraph 4 after specific implementation examples, Lines 1-4; Page 7, Paragraph 1; Lines 1-2) periodically using the heating element (heating unit 320; Page 6, Paragraph 4 after specific implementation examples, Lines 1-4; Page 7, Paragraph 1; Lines 1-2);
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 pressure support system of Kepler to have the heating unit of Liu to use high temperature to sterilize the airways protecting the patient against bacteria (Liu: Page 7, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-5).
It directly follows that the resultant pressure support system of Kepler combined with the heating unit of Liu would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
and directing the heated air (Liu: Lines 1-4; Page 7, Paragraph 1; Lines 1-2) to a face mask (Kepler: Figs. 1A and1B; patient interface assembly 24; Paragraph 0040; Lines 5-10), using a tube (Kepler: Figs. 1A and1B; patient circuit 22; Paragraph 0040; Lines 1-4).
The modified method of Kepler does not disclose using a concentric tube having an inner tube and an outer tube, wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube, the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet, to an external environment of the air purifying mask.
Fukunaga discloses a ventilation system assembly with a respiration mask where
using a concentric tube (fig. 1; passageway from air source to the patient mask is comprised of an inner passageway and an outer passageway) having an inner tube (fig. 1; inner conduits 65, 122, 132; [0037], [0040], and [0041]) and an outer tube (fig. 1; outer conduits 70, 124, 134; [0037], [0040], and [0041]),
wherein an outlet filter is positioned in the outer tube 9(figs. 1 and 3; outer filter 126 of co-axial filter 120 is positioned in outer conduit 124; [0041] and [0043]), the outlet filter being configured to filter exhaled air that travels through an annular area of the concentric tube before being released from the annular area, through an air outlet ((fig. 3; filter 126 ensures that gases flowing from a patient (exhaled gases) through, the annular area between outer conduits 134, 124, 70 and inner conduits 132, 122, 65, to the exhaust port 110 are filtered prior to leaving exhaust port; [0040] and [0044]).
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 method of using the patient circuit with exhaust port of Matthews with the concentric tubing and filter as taught in Fukunaga to provide an advantageous flow arrangement that saves space, provides filtered inspiratory gases while maintaining humidity, and filters out contaminants from the patient’s exhaust gases prior to removing expiratory gases to protect the rescuer or healthcare provider (Fukunaga: [0003], [0040], [0043], and [0044]).
Regarding claim 11, the modified method of Kepler further discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system; Liu: heating and purifying air using heating unit) as claimed in claim 10,
wherein filtering (Kepler: Fig. 9-10; filter media 136; Paragraph 0074, Lines 8-12) incoming air comprises filtering the incoming air (Kepler: Fig. 9-10; filter media 136; Paragraph 0074, Lines 8-12) at an inlet (Kepler: Fig. 2; intake 28; Paragraph 0043, Lines 3-6) of the air purifying mask (Kepler: Figs. 1A and 1B; pressure support system 10; Paragraph 0038, Lines 1-3) using an input filter (Kepler: Fig. 9-10; filter media 136; Paragraph 0074, Lines 8-12).
Regarding claim 22, Kepler further discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system) of claim 10,
wherein at least one of the required flow rate (figs. 2 and 3; control interface 44 has primary controls 54 to control one or more aspects of the operation of gas flow generating system 12 such as, for example, a pressure ramp function, a C-Flex.TM. function as known in the art, or another aspect of operation and ancillary controls 56 enables the individual to control one or more additional aspects of the operation of gas flow generating system 12; control unit 40 controls various operating aspects such as flow rate of the pressurized flow of gas [0050]-[0057]) or a heater value used by the one or more heating elements to heat the pressure-regulated air (figs. 1 and 18; and control unit controls an electrical current that is supplied to heating element 352 to control an amount of heat radiated from heating element 352 based on input from an individual; [0106]) is based on a wireless command received from a user device (figs. 2 and 3; control interface 44 is a device that allows a user to input information and provide wireless commands to the control unit 40; [0053]).
Claims 14-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kepler (US 20170232221) in view of Liu (CN 112587775) and its translation (PE2E Translation Liu) and further in view of Fukunaga (US 20020020414) and Leschinsky (US 20210353969).
Regarding claim 14, the modified method of Kepler discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system; Liu: heating and purifying air using heating unit) as claimed in claim 10,
Kepler does not teach the pressure support system being controlled and monitored by a remote software.
Leschinsky teaches a wearable air sterilizer with a controller
wherein the air purifier mask (air handling assembly; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-12) is controlled (smartphone; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-5) and monitored (smartphone; Paragraph 0127, Lines 9-11) by a remote software (smartphone app; Paragraph 0127, Lines 1-12; Paragraph 0128, Lines 1-3; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3; phone applications are remote software).
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 pressure support system of Kepler with the smartphone app of Leschinsky as it would be advantageous to be able to wirelessly control the electrical and sensory components in the pressure support system to increase or decrease the airflow delivered to the patient interface (Leschinsky: Paragraph 0127, Lines 9-11; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-9).
Regarding claim 15, the modified method of Kepler discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system; Liu: heating and purifying air using heating unit; Leschinsky: smartphone app) as claimed in claim 14,
wherein the remote software (Leschinsky: smartphone app; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3) is configured to operate at modes (Leschinsky: two or more modes of operation; Paragraph 0129, Lines 1-3) comprising normal mode (Leschinsky: normal mode; Paragraph 0130, Lines 1-2), workout mode (Leschinsky: boost mode; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-9) and ailment mode (Leschinsky: air disinfection modes; Paragraph 0133, Lines 1-9).
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 pressure support system of Kepler to have the modes of Leschinsky to adjust the airflow based on the situation (Leschinsky: Paragraph 0127, Lines 9-11; Paragraph 0132, Lines 1-9).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kepler (US 20170232221) in view of Liu (CN 112587775) and its translation (PE2E Translation Liu) and further in view of Fukunaga (US 20020020414) and Ehler (US 20160271428).
Regarding claim 17, the modified method of Kepler discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system; Liu: heating and purifying air using heating unit) as claimed in claim 10,
wherein the air purifier mask (Kepler: Figs. 1A and 1B; pressure support system 10; Paragraph 0038, Lines 1-3) is powered using a power source (Kepler: batteries; Paragraph 0115, Lines 13-16)
Kepler does not explicitly teach the batteries being chargeable or non-chargeable.
Ehler teaches a blower filter respirator system
comprising a chargeable battery (Fig. 1; battery 41; Paragraph 0011, Lines 11-15 and Paragraph 0029, Lines 1-5) or a non-chargeable battery.
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 pressure support system of Kepler to have the battery of Ehler as it is a known alternative to power the electric and sensory components (Ehler: Paragraph 0029, Lines 1-5).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kepler (US 20170232221) in view of Liu (CN 112587775) and its translation (PE2E Translation Liu) and further in view of Fukunaga (US 20020020414) and Connor (US 20210379429).
Regarding claim 18, the modified method of Kepler discloses
the method (Kepler: method of the pressure support system; Liu: heating and purifying air using heating unit) as claimed in claim 10,
Kepler does not teach the face mask being configured to have an unpowered mode where the face mask comprises an air filter in said mode.
Connor teaches a smart face mask for air filtration
wherein the face mask (face mask; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) is used in an unpowered mode (first operational mode; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4), the face mask (face mask; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) comprising an air filter (low-power air filter; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4) in the unpowered mode (first operational mode; Paragraph 0236, Lines 1-4).
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 patient interface of Kepler to have the air filter and first operational mode of Connor as it would be advantageous to filter contaminated air going to the patient interface even if the gas delivery system is not turned on.
Response to Arguments
On pages 9 and 10 of the remarks, Applicant argues that no prima facie case of obviousness has been established for at least the reason that the Office Action has neither properly determined the scope and content of the prior art nor properly ascertained the differences between the prior art and the claimed combinations. However, the examiner disagrees as each of the prior arts are respiration therapy devices that delivers gas/air to a mask. Additionally, each of the prior arts state reasons of obviousness for why each combination was made, see rejections above.
Applicant’s arguments regarding Watson not disclosing all the amended limitations of claims 1 and 10, see pages 10 and 11 of remarks, filed 12/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 10 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Fukunaga (US 20020020414).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pujol (US 20080308100) – An analogous respiratory treatment system to Kepler and Matthews with a humidifier and heating element
Seakins (US 20020078733) – A method for using temperature and humidity sensor to measure the temperature and humidity of the air delivered to the patient
Hill (US 6401713) – An analogous gas flow generating system with a temperature sensor, humidifier sensor, a controller, and other devices that measures, monitors, adjust, and/or controls the flow of gas to the patient; a remote control device wirelessly allows for remote operation/control of the pressure support system
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 SYDNEY REYES RUSSELL whose telephone number is (703)756-4567. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 830am -5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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.
/S.R.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/VICTORIA MURPHY/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785