Detailed Notice
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 1/30/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Amendment filed on 1/30/2026 has been entered into prosecution.
Claims 1-16, 19-22 are pending with claims 16 and 19-22 withdrawn from examination. Claims 1-15 are pending consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taghipour (US20160256590) in view of Ehlers (US 20060131511 A1) further in view of Onaizi (US 20210260520 A1) in view of Taghipour (US20150114912A1).
Regarding Claim 1-6, Taghipour (‘590) discloses an air filtration and VOC removal unit (i.e., system 211; see FIG. 13; paragraphs [0046]-[0047]) that can be used as an aircraft air filtration and VOC removal unit (i.e., “the system is an airplane cabin air cleaning system”, see claim 3), said unit comprising:
an air duct having a longitudinal axis, an air inlet at one end, and air outlet at the other end (i.e., an air duct defined by the housing of the system 211, with an air inlet at the bottom and an air outlet at the top according to the illustrated direction of air flow);
a filter proximate to the air inlet (i.e. 174, see Fig. 13; paragraph [0047]; claim 13 discloses that the filter referred to may be a HEPA filter);
a plurality of baffles (i.e., the three upper most perforated boards 172 [0047]) each having a plurality of airflow spaces (i.e., perforations) allowing airflow therethrough, disposed at spaced locations within the duct between the air inlet and air outlet, the baffles 172 being generally transverse to the longitudinal axis;
a plurality of ultraviolet light emitting diodes mounted on each baffle (i.e., a series of UV-LEDs 171 are mounted on the perforated boards 172, see [0047]); and
a porous and permeable photocatalytic oxidation (PCO) filter module (i.e., a series of photocatalyst structures 173; as previously described, the photocatalyst structure may be a photocatalyst immobilized on a porous substrate (such as metal foam) or a perforated substrate (such as mesh), see paragraph [0031]) disposed between each pair of baffles, generally transverse to the longitudinal axis, such that air flows through the PCO filter module;
wherein each PCO filter module 173 contains one or more catalysts, including titanium dioxide (i.e., “The photocatalyst may be titanium dioxide TiO2, or other photocatalysts. It may also be any combination of photocatalysts and catalyst supports, and co-catalysts (such as metals and metal oxides,” see paragraph [0026]).
Taghipour (‘590) at paragraph [0049]) further discloses, “In both air purification system configurations presented in FIG. 13 and FIG. 14, the photocatalyst structures may be irradiated by UV-LEDs from one side or both sides.” Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to mount UV LEDs on interior sides of the baffles adjacent to the air inlet and outlet and on both sides of all other baffles (i.e., of the three uppermost perforated boards 172, FIG. 13) in the modified unit/method of Taghipour (‘590) because it was disclosed that the PCO filter units 173 can be irradiated by UV LEDs from both sides, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such UV LED arrangement would have enabled each of the PCO filter units 173 to be irradiated by the UV LEDs 171 on both sides of the PCO filter units 173.
However, Taghipour (‘590) does not teach: an airflow controller in communication with the air inlet; a carbon dioxide sensor in communication with the airflow controller; nor a nitrous-oxide adsorbing filter disposed downstream of the UV reactor. Nor that there are a plurality of the baffles disposed between the photocatalytic oxidation filters, such that there are at least one more baffle than there are photocatalytic oxidation filters.
Ehlers teaches an inline air handling system for an air filtration unit for the remediation of substances like carbon dioxide, flammable vapors, and nitrogen oxide species (abstract and paragraph [0005]-[0007]). Ehlers teaches that an improved method for sensing flammable vapors, carbon dioxide, pressure, and nitrogen oxide species in a building by incorporating these sensors into an HVAC system (see Fig. 1; element 10 and [0005-0007]).
Ehlers teaches that an HVAC system (see Fig. 1; element 10 and [0032-48]) with a chamber (see Fig. 1; element 14) with a plurality of sensors including (1) a carbon dioxide and (2) pressure sensors ( see Fig. 1 and 2; element 36 and paragraph [0043]) and with an air filtration unit (see Fig. 1 and 2; element 38 and paragraph [0043]). The sensors are mounted on a member, such as a frame, which are proximate to the inlet, understood to be upstream of the ultraviolet reactor [0039]. The sensors are in communication with a control unit (paragraph [0042]), which is understood to be an equivalent to an air flow controller. The control unit includes a wireless communication mechanism for the transmission of data and commands [0048]. Ehlers discloses that before air is processed in other parts of the HVAC system, the air is filtered and sensed [0032]. It is understood that Ehlers teaches then that as the sensors are in communication with the control unit, and the sensors are used with the intake air, that the control unit is in communication with the inlet.
Prior to the filing of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the air filtration system of Taghipour was ready for improvement by the incorporation of the carbon dioxide and pressure sensors in communication with a controller unit in communication with the inlet in order, as per Ehlers, that one would arrive at an economically and functionally improved air filtration system equipped for sensing characteristics of the air being treated.
Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Taghipour teaches an air purification system which includes a first filter.
However, Tahgipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers does not teach a nitrous-oxide adsorbing filter downstream of the ultraviolet light reactor.
Onaizi teaches a mesporous aminated magnesium oxide adsorbent for capturing carbon dioxide from a gas mixture (abstract).
Onaizi teaches that in addition to pre- and post-combustion carbon dioxide capture technologies, the disclosed aminated magnesium oxide adsorbent are useful for air purifiers [0164]. Onaizi teaches that the aminated magnesium oxide adsorbent may also be used for capturing nitrogen oxides, including nitrous oxide [0112]. Onaizi teaches that the aminated MgO adsorbent may be supported in a fixed-bed column [0119]. In the instant application specification applicant teaches that complete oxidation (that is, the photo-oxidation via the PCO) of VOCs/organic compounds produces carbon dioxide and water (page 16-17).
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the air purification system per Taghipour as modified by Ehlers, was ready for improvement by the incorporation of the aminated magnesium oxide adsorbent, as per Onaizi, in order that one would arrive at an air purification system in which an aminated MgO adsorbent was downstream of a photocatalyst reactor in order that the air would be scrubbed of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide.
However, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers and Onaizi do not teach that there are a plurality of baffles and PCO media wherein there is at least one more baffle than PCO media panels.
Taghipour (‘912) teaches a UV-LED collimated photoreactor in the same field of endeavour as the present invention (abstract). Taghipour (‘912) teaches a photoreactor according to Fig. 9B, shown below.
PNG
media_image1.png
214
608
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Taghipour (‘912) teaches that a plurality of baffles 156 are arranged in sequence with a plurality of photocatalytic oxidation filters 157, such that there is at least one more baffles 156 than there are photocatalytic oxidation filters 157 [0066]. Taghipour (‘912) teaches that this arrangement allows for photoreactions and photocatalytic reactions in the fluid flowing through the photoreactor [0066].
Prior to the filing of the effective filing date it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the air filtration system of Taghipour (‘590) was ready for improvement by the incorporation of the at least one more baffles than photocatalytic oxidation filters in a photoreactor, as per Taghipour (‘912), in order that one would arrive at an air filtration apparatus with improved photocatalytic reactivity.
Regarding Claim 7-9, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers, Onaizi and Taghipour (‘912) teaches to claim 1 above.
However, modified Taghipour does not teach the air filtration unit is removable for replacement.
Ehlers teaches that the air filtration unit can be either disposable or reusable [0044]. It is understood that Ehlers teaches that the air filtration unit can be replaced or removed from the duct system.
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the modified air purification system of Taghipour could be further improved by incorporation of the modular removability of the air purification unit, as per Ehlers, in order that one would arrive at an air purification system that could be iteratively maintained.
Regarding Claim 10, Taghipour (‘590) (at paragraph [0027]) further discloses,
“The air purifying system may contain baffles or static mixers to alter the hydrodynamics of the airflow. This may be applied to provide a better distribution of the air through or over the photocatalyst and to enhance mass transfer of chemical contaminants to and from the photocatalyst surface. This may also be applied to provide a better thermal management of the system by transferring heat from the UV-LED and other parts of the air purifying system. Other material such as a heat sink or thermal conductive plates may also be applied to better transfer heat from the system.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide one or more heat sinks disposed within the duct and adapted to conduct heat away from the UV LEDs in the unit of Taghipour (‘590).
Claims 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taghipour (US20160256590) in view of Ehlers (US 20060131511 A1) further in view of Onaizi (US 20210260520 A1) in view of Taghipour (US20150114912A1), as applied above in Claim 1, further in view of Qi (CN 107308483 A).
Regarding claim 11, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour (‘912) teaches to claim 1 above.
However, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour (‘912) (FIG. 13) fails to disclose that the UV LEDs 171 are disposed both around a periphery of each baffle 172 and between the airflow spaces so as to maximize UV illumination of an adjacent PCO filter module 173.
Qi discloses an air filtration and VOC removal unit (see FIG. 1-2, abstract, and machine translation) comprising: an air duct (i.e., a housing 1 defining a vent, such as elongated vents, square vents, or circular vents; see translation at page 2, lines 73-74) having a longitudinal axis, an air inlet at one end, and an air outlet at the other end (i.e., as shown in FIG. 1, the air flows from a left-side air inlet to right-side air outlet; see also translation at page 2, lines 59-63); a plurality of baffles (i.e., ultraviolet LED light boards 2, 3), each having a plurality of airflow spaces (i.e., ventilation holes 6) allowing airflow therethrough, disposed at spaced locations within the duct 1 between the air inlet and the air outlet; the baffles 2,3 being generally transverse to the longitudinal axis; a plurality of ultraviolet (UV) light emitting diodes (LED) (i.e., ultraviolet LED array 5) mounted on each baffle 2,3; and a porous and permeable photocatalytic oxidation (PCO) filter module (i.e., a plate-shaped catalyst 4 comprising a TiO2 fiberboard; see translation at page 4, lines 129-133) disposed between the pair of baffles 2,3, generally transverse to the longitudinal axis, such that air flow through the PCO filter module 4; wherein the PCO filter module 4 contains a catalyst comprising titanium dioxide (TiO2) (see page 4, lines 129-133) which, when illuminated by UV light, is operative to chemically reduce VOCs to non-VOC molecules. Specifically, Qi discloses that UV LEDs 5 are disposed both around a perimeter of each baffle 2,3 and between the airflow spaces 6 so as to maximize UV illumination of an adjacent PCO filter module 4 (see FIG. 1-2; see also translation at page 2, lines 68-72).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to dispose UV LEDs both around a periphery and between air flow spaces of the baffles in the air filtration and VOC removal unit/method of Taghipour because such arrangement of the UV LEDs with respect to the periphery and the airflow spaces would improve the air purification efficiency of the unit by effectively illuminating the surface of the photocatalyst while also facilitating air flow through the unit, as taught by Qi (see, e.g., FIG. 1; translation at page 3, lines 84-91; page 4, lines 134-141).
Regarding claim 12, Taghipour (‘590) (at paragraph [0049]) further discloses, “In both air purification system configurations presented in FIG. 13 and FIG. 14, the photocatalyst structures may be irradiated by UV-LEDs from one side or both sides.” Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to mount UV LEDs on interior sides of the baffles adjacent to the air inlet and outlet and on both sides of all other baffles (i.e., of the three uppermost perforated boards 172, FIG. 13) in the modified unit/method of Taghipour (‘590) because it was disclosed that the PCO filter units 173 can be irradiated by UV LEDs from both sides, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that such UV LED arrangement would have enabled each of the PCO filter units 173 to be irradiated by the UV LEDs 171 on both sides of the PCO filter units 173.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable as being unpatentable over Taghipour (US20160256590) in view of Ehlers (US 20060131511 A1) further in view of Onaizi (US 20210260520 A1) in view of Taghipour (US20150114912A1), as applied above in Claim 1, further in view of Asano et al. (US 2020/0268927).
Regarding Claim 13, Taghipour (‘590) discloses that the PCO filter module (i.e., the photocatalyst structures 173, FIG. 13) may comprise, “a photocatalyst immobilized on a porous substrate (such as metal foam),” (see paragraph [0031]), wherein the photocatalyst can be selected from titanium dioxide TiO2 or other photocatalysts, as well as any combination of photocatalysts and catalyst supports, and co-catalysts (such as metals and metal oxides) (see paragraph [0026]). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select a coarse or fine foam for forming the filter of the PCO filter module in the unit of Taghipour (‘590), where the foam is loaded with a catalyst including pure TiO2.
Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour (‘912), however, fails to disclose that each PCO filter module 173 comprises a plurality of filters loaded with catalyst.
Asano et al. discloses an air filtration and VOC removal unit (see FIG. 2; paragraphs [0064]-[0077]) comprising: an air duct (i.e., a casing 10) having a longitudinal axis, an air inlet at one end (i.e., via an inlet coarse filter 21 disposed at the air inlet), and air outlet at the other end (i.e., via an outlet coarse filter 22 disposed at the air outlet); a first ultraviolet light emitter 60A and a second ultraviolet light emitter 60B, wherein the ultraviolet light emitter can comprise, for example, an LED (see paragraph [0045]); and a porous and permeable photocatalytic oxidation filter module (i.e., a photocatalyst supporting filter 51) disposed between the first and second ultraviolet light emitters 60A,60B; wherein, specifically, the PCO filter module 51 comprises a plurality of filters (i.e., a first photocatalyst supporting filter 51A and a second photocatalyst supporting filter 51B), and wherein each filter 51A,51B can be loaded with a catalyst including pure titanium dioxide (see paragraph [0069]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a plurality of filters loaded with catalyst including pure titanium dioxide for the PCO filter module in the unit/method of Taghipour (‘590) because the degree of freedom in the design of the PCO filter module would be improved since it is possible to individually select a combination of a UV light having a first wavelength and a photocatalyst supported on the side irradiated with the UV light having the first wavelength, and a combination of a UV light having the second wavelength and a photocatalyst supported on the side irradiated with the UV light having the second wavelength, so that the PCO filter module is able to efficiently inactivate bacteria and viruses using a combination of UV light wavelengths that provide both a high photocatalytic activity and a high inactivation ability, as taught by Asano et al. (see paragraphs [0017], [0021]).
Claims 14 are rejected as being unpatentable over Taghipour (US20160256590) in view of Ehlers (US 20060131511 A1) further in view of Onaizi (US 20210260520 A1) in view of Taghipour (US20150114912A1), as applied above in Claim 1, further in view of Trent (US20200122078A1).
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2).
This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C.102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B); or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement. See generally MPEP § 717.02.
Regarding Claim 14, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour (‘912) teaches to claim 1 above.
However, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour (‘912) does not teach that the UV reactor comprises four baffles and three PCO filter modules, and the PCO filter modules comprise, in order from air inlet to air outlet, the modules 1), 2), and 3) with the recited arrangements including a coarse foam loaded with pure TiO2 (R25), a fused quartz filament felt loaded with pure TiO2 (Q25), a coarse foam loaded with C-TiO2 (CTR), a fine foam loaded with pure TiO2 (TA), and/or a coarse foam loaded with Fe-TiO2 (FTR).
Trent teaches a compact aircraft air filtration system for VOC removal (abstract).
Trent teaches that the PCO filter modules 30 comprise, in order from air inlet 12 to air outlet 16,
R25-CTR-TA-R25;
CTR-TA-Q25-R25-R25;
R25-CTR-TA-R25;
Where R25 is a coarse foam loaded with pure TiO2; Q25 is a fused quartz filament felt loaded with pure TiO2; CTR is a coarse foam loaded with C—TiO2 and TA is a fine foam loaded with pure TiO2 [0044-0045].
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the photocatalytic oxidation filter of modified Taghipour could be substituted with the specifically plurality, enumeration, and structural identity of the filters elements and their sequences disclosed by Trent in order to obtain the predictable result of an air purifying system for remediation of volatile organic carbon materials (see MPEP 2143 I B).
Claims 15 are rejected as being unpatentable over Taghipour (US20160256590) in view of Ehlers (US 20060131511 A1) further in view of Onaizi (US 20210260520 A1) in view of Taghipour (US20150114912A1) and Qi, as applied above in Claim 11, further in view of Trent (US20200122078A1).
Regarding Claim 15, Taghipour (‘590) in view of Ehlers in view of Onaizi in view of Taghipour and Qi teaches to claim 14 above.
However modified Taghipour fails to disclose that the UV light reactor comprises four baffles and three PCO filter modules, and the PCO filter modules comprise, in order from air inlet to air outlet, the modules 1), 2), and 3) with the recited arrangements including a coarse foam loaded with pure TiO2 (R25), a fused quartz filament felt loaded with pure TiO2 (Q25), a coarse foam loaded with C-TiO2 (CTR), a fine foam loaded with pure TiO2 (TA), and/or a coarse foam loaded with Fe-TiO2 (FTR).
Trent teaches a compact aircraft air filtration system for VOC removal (abstract).
Trent teaches that a UV light reactor can comprise four baffles and PCO filter modules 30, the PCO filter modules 30 comprise, in order from air inlet 12 to air outlet 16,
R25-TA-FTR-CTR;
R25-CTA-FTR-Q25-R25;
R25-TA-FTR-CTR;
Where R25 is a coarse foam loaded with pure TiO2; Q25 is a fused quartz filament felt loaded with pure TiO2; CTR is a coarse foam loaded with C—TiO2 and FTR is a coarse foam loaded with Fe—TiO2.
Prior to the effective filing date of the present invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill that the photocatalytic oxidation filter of modified Taghipour could be substituted with the specifically plurality, enumeration, and structural identity of the filters elements and their sequences disclosed by Trent in order to obtain the predictable result of an air purifying system for remediation of volatile organic carbon materials (see MPEP 2143 I B).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments are all towards the new amendment, thus are moot in view of the new art applied.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATHANAEL J DOWNES whose telephone number is (571)272-1141. The examiner can normally be reached 8am to 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, James Lin can be reached at (571) 272-8902. 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.
NATHANAEL JASON. DOWNES
Examiner
Art Unit 1794
/NATHANAEL JASON DOWNES/Examiner, Art Unit 1794
/BRIAN W COHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759