DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 17 March 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3. The amendment filed 16 September 2025 has been received and considered for examination. Claims 1-20 are presently pending and being examined herein.
4. All rejections from the previous Office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant’s amendment.
5. New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 for claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are necessitated by the amendments, as detailed below.
6. New objections are raised with regard to the definition of the drive module, pertinent to claim 6 and the Drawings.
Drawings
7. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 1142, 1142a, 1142b. The resultant FIG. 11 does not detail the structure of the drive module as described in par 0050 of the Specification, and the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims per 37 CFR 1.83(a). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
9. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
10. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “drive module” in e.g., claims 1 and 6.
The amended recitation that the drive module is both “configured to rotate the cover away from the opening” and “separately rotate the ultraviolet source about one end of itself” indicates that the structure of the drive module is critical to determining the scope of the claims. Thus, the structure of the drive module is imported from the Specification, specifically par 0050 which defines the drive module to include “any necessary hardware (e.g., a motor and associated gearing) to raise and lower, and/or rotate the fixture module and associated ultraviolet source”, listed as alternatives embodied in FIG. 11 and FIG. 4. In an exemplary embodiment, the drive module is structured as “a gear box and a support fixture”. This structure supports the actuated movement of the cover when integrated with the light fixture module as defined per the embodiment of FIGS. 6, 7, and 8. This structure supports the actuated rotation of the ultraviolet source as a
Examiner notes that the structure of this drive module, is limited when describing the embodiment of FIG. 13 which appears to most nearly match the claimed embodiment, as that embodiment features a fixture module that rotates (presumably via an analog to the drive module) and appears to include a separate motor to extend the fixture module with the ultraviolet source into the space (par 0053). For purposes of examination against the prior art, the structure of the drive module is interpreted to include one motor with the associated gearing to carry out all functions recited by the claims, but the claims should be reviewed to ensure that this structure is consistent with the invention.
11. The fixture module is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), i.e., the plain language indicates that this refers to a fixture configured to hold the light source. Thus, none of the required structures to carry out rotation as described in the Specification (e.g., pars 0053 and 0058) are imported into the reading of the claims.
Claim Objections
12. Claim 6 is objected to because as detailed in the Claim Interpretation section above, the drive module is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) to include a single motor with the necessary gearing to carry out either the rotation of the cover (e.g., in FIGS. 6-8 or 11) or the downward hinging of the UV light source (e.g., in FIG. 4). The FIG. 13 embodiment appears to employ a second motor to perform the downward hinging while the fixture module is ascribed the function of rotating the cover (see Specification par 0053). The claim should be revised to clearly reflect the structure that is capable of performing the two different movements.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
13. 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.
14. Claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lytle et al (US 11,160,890 B1) in view of Leben (US 20100032589 A1) and Polidoro (US 20200289698 A1).
15. Regarding claim 1, Lytle teaches a system for disinfecting exposed surfaces (automatic disinfection workstation system utilizes a disinfecting workstation-light to disinfect surfaces within the workstation, Abstract, col 7 lines 52-67 and col 8 lines 1-28, FIGS. 1-7) and air passing through the system (airflow disinfecting system that utilizes an airflow disinfecting light to disinfect an airflow through the workstation, Abstract, col 7 lines 52-67 and col 8 lines 1-28, FIGS. 1-7), the system comprising:
a first disinfecting apparatus positioned above a space to be disinfected (workstation surface disinfecting system 122 is configured with a work-station disinfecting light 120 that is moved by an actuator 130 over the workstation, col 6 lines 22-29; FIGS. 1 and 6-7), the space comprises a workstation, i.e., surrounding area or room with exposed surfaces (disinfect surfaces within the workstation, col 1 lines 32-34), the first disinfecting apparatus comprising:
an ultraviolet source configured to emit ultraviolet light for disinfecting the exposed surfaces of the space (workstation light…emit ultraviolet light to deactivate or kill germs or viruses within the line of sight of the light, Abstract; work-station disinfecting light may also be pivoted to…more effectively disinfect the surfaces of the workstation, col 6 lines 23-29; FIG. 6, disinfecting light 120);
a fixture module configured to retain and support the ultraviolet source (workstation light may be configured on a light support, col 2 lines 33-36) within the first disinfecting apparatus (actuator 130 may move the light support, FIGS. 2-4);
an actuator i.e., drive module configured to move the fixture module and the ultraviolet source between a first ready position and a second storage position (disinfecting workstation light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140, col 8 lines 16-20; light is rotated upward or 180 degrees from a downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection, col 8, lines 20-25).
Lytle teaches that when the fixture module is positioned such that ultraviolet source is in the upward-facing storage position, disinfecting light may be within an enclosure of the interior air disinfecting apparatus and therefore concerns about this light exposure on people may be avoided (col 4 lines 27-36). Thus, the fixture module of Lytle as pictured (FIG. 7) covers the UV light from emitting into the workspace through the back side of the fixture module, the back side of the fixture module reading upon the cover in the limitation wherein the drive module is configured to move a cover between an open position and a closed position that correspond to the ready position and the storage position, respectively. Lytle teaches wherein the first disinfecting apparatus further comprises an interior chamber (conduit 158 in the ceiling 50 of the workstation, col 7 lines 52-63, FIGS. 6-7), and wherein the drive module is configured to move the ultraviolet source to face the interior chamber while in the storage position (disinfecting workstation-light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140 to direct the light toward the air disinfecting system 152, col 8 lines 7-28, FIG. 7).
Lytle further teaches wherein the ultraviolet source is configured to emit ultraviolet light onto the exposed surfaces (workstation-light may be emitted onto these surfaces as well as surfaces including but not limited to, a desk or work surface and equipment, col 1 lines 38-62) when the ultraviolet source in the ready position (workstation surface disinfecting system 122 may stop the disinfecting workstation-light at a position… over the most used area of the workstation, col 7 lines 17-24) and the cover is in the open position (FIG. 6, actuator/fixture base structure covers light from emitting upward while in open position), The limitation wherein the cover is moved from the opening when in the open position describes an intended use of the system, which does not impart patentable weight per , but as the rotating motion of FIG. 6 moves the cover from below ceiling level to above ceiling level, at least one rotational position reads upon moved from the opening to satisfy the claim.
Lytle further teaches wherein the ultraviolet source is shielded from the surrounding area or room when in the storage position i.e., airflow disinfection position (light is rotated upward, col 8, lines 16-28; FIG. 7) by the cover when the ultraviolet source is in the closed position (FIG. 7, actuator/fixture base structure acts as cover in closed position), such that emitted ultraviolet light is retained within the interior chamber and will not reach the exposed surfaces (disinfecting light may be within an enclosure of the interior air disinfecting apparatus and therefore concerns about this light exposure on people may be avoided, col 4 lines 27-36 and col 7 line 52 to col 8 line 28; FIGS. 6-7); and
wherein the first disinfecting apparatus is operable to disinfect air passing through the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus when the ultraviolet source is in the storage position (airflow may be disinfected while the workstation is occupied, col 8, lines 20-28).
Although Lytle teaches that the workstation light can be rotated upward for air disinfection (col 8 lines 7-28) and that it is advantageous to enclose the UV light source within the air disinfecting system to avoid concerns about this light exposure on people (col 4 lines 20-41), Lytle does not specifically teach that the cover would be configured to enclose the ultraviolet source within the interior chamber when the cover is in the closed position.
Leben teaches an analogous rotating UV lighting apparatus (Abstract, pars 0026-0030, FIGS. 1-4) wherein a drop ceiling 38 allows room for the UV light source 14 to be positioned in a separate unexposed area when not in active use (par 0029) as a safety precaution against a human being accidentally exposed to the UV light (par 0030). Leben additionally teaches a cover to enclose the UV lighting source (pars 0039-0040, FIG. 1, protective cover 32), wherein the light moves between the ready position and the storage position through an opening in the drop ceiling (FIG. 1, opening 40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include between the ready position and storage position of the ultraviolet source of Lytle a drop ceiling with an opening for the UV source to pass through as taught by Leben. Doing so would predictably create an interior chamber in which the ultraviolet source can be enclosed and UV radiation blocked when the cover is in the closed position i.e. the UV source points upward and the cover is configured to close the opening when in the closed position, as Leben demonstrates that such an arrangement provides safety against human exposure to UV light below the lighting system. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Lytle further teaches wherein exemplary air disinfecting system 152 moves air into or out of the work-station and utilizes an air disinfecting light to disinfect the air moving through the workstation (col 6, lines 26-41; FIGS. 6-7). Lytle also teaches wherein another disinfecting apparatus (170, FIG. 1) draws air through vents within the workspace and expels air out into the workspace (col 6, lines 42-58), demonstrating the utility of disinfecting air contained within the space. Leben teaches that a fan would circulate air above the drop ceiling when in the inactive position to sanitize the air with UV light (pars 0055-0056), but does not explicitly teach that this air is drawn and released from the space below. Thus, the combination fails to teach specifically wherein the ceiling mounted disinfecting system would be configured to draw air from the space to disinfect the drawn air and to release the drawn air after disinfection back into the space.
Polidoro teaches an analogous ceiling mounted decontamination unit with one or more internal…UV-C emitters (Abstract) wherein room air is drawn in from the room through an inlet vent (air intake aperture 2a, par 0034, FIG. 3, 11 and 19) using an internal fan (fan bank 61, par 0126), passed in direct contact with the UV-C source (par 0034), and subsequently released back into the room via an outlet vent at the opposite end of the apparatus from the inlet vent (exhaust aperture 2b, par 0034; FIG. 3, 10 and 20).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the airflow mechanism within the drop ceiling as taught by Lytle with an airflow fan and duct integrated with the UV-C luminaire as taught by Polidoro. Doing so would provide the predictable result of disinfecting air from the room when the disinfecting light is shining upward in the storage position. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
16. Regarding claim 2, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the disinfecting apparatus further comprises a pair of vents (Polidoro par 0169, intake aperture and exhaust aperture) arranged on opposite ends of the disinfecting apparatus (Polidoro FIG. 5, intake aperture 11 and exhaust aperture 10), the pair of vents comprising an inlet vent for drawing air from the space (“drawing air upward into the air intake”, Polidoro par 0104) into the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus (Lytle FIGS. 6-7, as modified above the interior chamber comprises the space above disinfection device support 132) and an exhaust vent for releasing the air from the disinfecting apparatus and into the space (“decontaminated air exits the internal decontamination chamber 15 by way of the unit's exhaust aperture 2b where the decontaminated air returns to the same room”, Polidoro par 0122).
17. Regarding claim 3, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the disinfecting apparatus comprises at least one fan (“air moving device 150, such as a fan or blower”, Lytle col 8 lines 9-16), and wherein the at least one fan is positioned within the disinfecting apparatus (air moving device 150 positioned within air disinfecting system 152, Lytle FIGS. 6-7) to mechanically draw air into the disinfecting apparatus (“moves air into and/or out of the workstation”, Lytle col 8 lines 11-12) and to force the air through the disinfecting apparatus and through the ultraviolet light emitted by the ultraviolet source when in the storage position (“disinfecting workstation-light 130, coupled with the light-angle actuator 140 to disinfect the airflow as it moves through the workstation, such as through the airflow conduit 158”, Lytle col 8 lines 9-16).
18. Regarding claim 4, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the emitted light is ultraviolet C light (“UV light with wavelengths of substantially 222 nm and/or UV light with wavelengths of substantially 254 nm”, Lytle col 4 lines 31-36).
19. Regarding claim 5, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 1, and Lytle further teaches wherein ultraviolet light may be emitted with a wavelength of substantially 222 nm, or 254 nm to disrupt the RNA of COVID-19 and the DNA of other viruses like the common cold & flu plus other pathogens (Lytle col 1 lines 63-67 and col 2 lines 1-16). Lytle as modified is silent regarding the type of emitting device would be used to achieve this UV emission requirement.
Polidoro teaches that “fluorescent-type discharge linear tubes with bi-pin or quad-pin base is the most effective decontamination system on the market with wavelengths of approximately 254 nm” (par 0118), reading upon wherein the ultraviolet light emitting device is…one or more fluorescent bulbs or light fixtures, operable to emit one of 222 nm or 254 nm ultraviolet light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the 254 nm fluorescent light fixture taught by Polidoro as the disinfecting UV light emitter in the system of Lytle. Doing so would predictably provide 254 nm UV radiation to effectively disinfect the room while in the ready position and the airflow while in the storage position. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
20. Regarding claim 7, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 1, comprising a control module (“control system 125 having a controller 127”, Lytle col 6, lines 37-41) and a proximity sensor (“occupancy sensor, such as a proximity, motion, or line of sight sensor”, Lytle col 3, lines 47-50), wherein the control module is configured to control the operation of the first disinfecting apparatus (“control system…to control the functions of the system”, Lytle col 3, lines 56-63) such that the drive module retains or returns the ultraviolet source to the storage position within the fixture module when a person is detected by the proximity sensor (“control system may stop the workstation disinfecting mode” and “the airflow disinfecting mode may be initiated when an occupant is detected in the workstation”, wherein “the disinfecting workstation-light may be rotated by the actuator 180 degrees or upward”, Lytle col 3, lines 63-67 and col 4, lines 1-8), and wherein the control module is configured to control the operation of additional disinfecting apparatuses (“control system 125” initiating “disinfecting lights” in plural, Lytle col 6, lines 37-41) arranged to emit ultraviolet light (“disinfecting light such as a UV light”, Lytle col 4, lines 20-36) on the exposed surfaces of the surrounding area or room (“more effectively disinfect the surfaces of the workstation”, Lytle col 6 lines 26-29).
21. Regarding claim 8, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 7, wherein the control module is operable to direct the drive module (“control system…may initiate the actuator”, Lytle col 6 lines 37-41) to position the ultraviolet source in the ready position (“actuator…may move the disinfecting workstation-light over the workstation during a workstation disinfection mode”, Lytle col 2 lines 29-33) for a selected period of time (“certain threshold time”, Lytle col 3 lines 51-55; dosage is a product of UV light intensity and exposure time, Lytle col 2 lines 17-28) so long as no person is detected by the proximity sensor (“control system may activate the workstation disinfecting mode when no occupants are detected in the workstation”, Lytle col 3 lines 56-61).
22. Regarding claim 9, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the apparatus and system of claim 1, wherein the drive module is configured to move the ultraviolet source between the ready position and the storage position (“disinfecting workstation light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140”, Lytle col 8 lines 16-20; “light is rotated upward or 180 degrees from a downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection”, Lytle col 8, lines 20-25) by rotating the ultraviolet source along a longitudinal axis within the fixture module (UV light 156 rotated around light angle actuator 140 within fixture module parallel to drop ceiling i.e., along longitudinal axis, Lytle FIGS. 1 and 6-7), wherein the drive module is configured to move the ultraviolet source between the ready position and the deployed position (“disinfecting workstation light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140”, Lytle col 8, lines 16-20; “light is rotated upward or 180 degrees from a downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection”, Lytle col 8, lines 20-25) by rotating the ultraviolet source about a hinge on one end of the ultraviolet source (UV light 156 rotated around light angle actuator 140 located at one end of UV light 14/mounting fixture 16, Lytle FIGS. 3-4), and wherein the fixture module is configured to move the cover to the open position by rotating the ultraviolet source such that the cover is rotated from between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces when the ultraviolet source is positioned in the ready position (Lytle FIG. 6, moving ultraviolet light 120 to ready position positions the cover side of the fixture module 122 to upper side i.e. away from between the ultraviolet source and exposed surfaces) and to move the cover to the closed position by rotating the ultraviolet source such that the cover is rotated back between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces when the ultraviolet source is positioned in the storage position (Lytle FIG. 7, moving ultraviolet light 156 to the storage i.e. closed position rotates the cover side of the fixture module 122 back between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces). As modified above, the cover rotation into the open position involves moving the cover away from the opening, as the drop ceiling from Leben would be logically positioned in the plane of the cover of Lytle (FIGS. 6-7, back side of emitter fixture 122).
23. Regarding claim 10, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the system of claim 1, and Lytle teaches wherein the first disinfecting apparatus is configured for mounting along a rail configured to retain and support the first disinfecting apparatus above the space (col 2 lines 29-45, FIGS. 6-7). While Lytle does not teach that this support mechanism would comprise a standalone housing or a troffer light fixture, Polidoro teaches that the ceiling mounted luminaire is mounted in a troffer (“troffer housing”, par 0006, FIGS. 1-5; “system and device that includes one or more UV-C emitters inside the housing”, par 0014) that is advantageous for mounting to various types of grid, T-bar or drop ceilings (pars 0022-0026).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to house the UV-C emitters and air system of Lytle within a troffer housing as taught by Polidoro. Doing so would predictably support the UV-C lighting device within any appropriate type of ceiling so that the space and its air can be disinfected. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
24. Regarding claim 11, the disinfecting device of Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro, as discussed above for claim 1, would perform, under its normal operation, the claimed method for sanitizing exposed surface and air passed through the system. Under the principles of inherency, if a prior art device, in its normal and usual operation, would necessarily perform the method claimed, then the method claimed will be considered to be anticipated by the prior art device. When the prior art device is the same as a device described in the specification for carrying out the claimed method, it can be assumed the device will inherently perform the claimed process. In re King, 801 F.2d 1324, 231 USPQ 136 (Fed. Cir. 1986), see MPEP 2112.02(I).
Lytle teaches a method for disinfecting (“ultraviolet germicidal irradiation method wherein short-wavelength UV-C ultraviolet light kills or inactivates microorganisms”, col 1 lines 63-67 and col 2 lines 1-16) exposed surfaces (“disinfect surfaces within the workstation”, Abstract, col 7 lines 52-67 and col 8 lines 1-28) and air passing through a first disinfecting apparatus (“airflow disinfecting system that utilizes an airflow disinfecting light to disinfect an airflow through the workstation”, Abstract, col 7 lines 52-67 and col 8 lines 1-28), the method comprising:
emitting ultraviolet light from an ultraviolet source (“disinfecting workstation-light…emit[s] ultraviolet light”, Abstract) of the first disinfecting apparatus mounted above a space to be disinfected (“disinfecting system 122…over the workstation”, col 6, lines 22-29; FIG. 1), wherein the ultraviolet light is operable to disinfect the exposed surfaces of the space (“disinfecting workstation-light to disinfect surfaces within the workstation”, col 1, lines 32-34 and col 6 lines 23-29), and wherein the space comprises a workstation, i.e., surrounding area or room (FIGS. 1 and 6-7);
placing the ultraviolet source (“actuates the light over the workstation”, col 1 lines 53-56) into a ready position (“downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection”, col 8 lines 20-25) with respect to a position in a plane in the first disinfecting apparatus (FIG. ) such that the emitted ultraviolet light can reach exposed surfaces of the surrounding area or room (“disinfecting workstation-light may be emitted onto these surfaces as well as surfaces including but not limited to, a desk or work surface and equipment”, col 1 lines 38-62), wherein placing the ultraviolet source into the ready position comprises moving a cover into an open position (FIG. 6, when UV light source 120 is oriented downward in ready position, the cover i.e. back side of the fixture module is open with respect to the space); and
placing the ultraviolet source into a storage position with respect to the plane (“light is rotated upward”, col 8 lines 16-28; FIG. 7) such that emitted ultraviolet light will not reach the exposed surfaces of the surrounding area or room (“disinfecting light may be within an enclosure of the interior air disinfecting apparatus and therefore concerns about this light exposure on people may be avoided”, col 4, lines 27-36), wherein placing the ultraviolet source into the storage position comprises moving the cover into a closed position (FIG. 7, when UV light source 156 is oriented upward in storage position, the cover i.e. back side of the fixture module is closed with respect to the space), wherein the first disinfecting apparatus further comprises an interior chamber (“conduit 158 in the ceiling 50 of the workstation”, col 7 lines 52-63, FIGS. 6-7), and wherein placing the ultraviolet source into the storage position further comprises moving the ultraviolet source to face the interior chamber (“disinfecting workstation-light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140 to direct the light toward the air disinfecting system 152, col 8 lines 7-28, FIG. 7); and
drawing air into the interior chamber first disinfecting apparatus while the ultraviolet source is in the storage position such that the drawn air is passed through the ultraviolet light to disinfect the air (“produce an airflow through the workstation, such as into or out of the workstation and an air disinfecting light may emit a disinfecting light onto the airflow to disinfect the airflow”, col 3 lines 7-14; storage position of UV light 156 relative to interior chamber 158 depicted in FIG. 7).
Although Lytle teaches that the workstation light can be rotated upward for air disinfection (col 8 lines 7-28) and that it is advantageous to enclose the UV light source within the air disinfecting system to avoid concerns about this light exposure on people (col 4 lines 20-41), Lytle does not specifically teach that moving the cover into the closed position encloses the ultraviolet source within the interior chamber.
Leben teaches an analogous rotating UV lighting apparatus to Lytle (Leben Abstract, pars 0026-0030, FIGS. 1-4) wherein a drop ceiling 38 allows room for the UV light source 14 to be positioned in a separate unexposed area when not in active use (Leben par 0029) as a safety precaution against a human being accidentally exposed to the UV light (Leben par 0030). Leben additionally teaches a cover to enclose the UV lighting source (Leben pars 0039-0040, FIG. 1, protective cover 32).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include between the ready position and storage position of the ultraviolet source of Lytle a drop ceiling as taught by Leben. Doing so would predictably create an interior chamber in which the ultraviolet source can be enclosed and UV radiation blocked when the cover is in the closed position i.e. the UV source points upward, as Leben demonstrates that such an arrangement provides safety against human exposure to UV light below the lighting system. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Lytle further teaches wherein “exemplary air disinfecting system 152 moves air into or out of the work-station and utilizes an air disinfecting light to disinfect the air moving through the workstation” (col 6, lines 26-41; FIGS. 6-7). Lytle also teaches wherein another disinfecting apparatus (170, FIG. 1) draws air through vents within the workspace and expels air out into the workspace (col 6, lines 42-58), demonstrating the utility of disinfecting air contained within the space. Leben teaches that a fan would circulate air above the drop ceiling when in the inactive position to sanitize the air with UV light (pars 0055-0056), but does not explicitly teach that this air is drawn and released from the space below. Thus, the combination fails to teach specifically wherein the ceiling mounted disinfecting system would be configured to draw air from the space to disinfect the drawn air and to release the drawn air after disinfection back into the space.
Polidoro teaches an analogous “ceiling mounted decontamination unit with one or more internal UV-C emitters” (Abstract) wherein room air is drawn in from the room through an inlet vent (air intake aperture 2a, par 0034, FIG. 3, 11 and 19) using an internal fan (fan bank 61, par 0126), passed in direct contact with the UV-C source (par 0034), and subsequently released back into the room via an outlet vent at the opposite end of the apparatus from the inlet vent (exhaust aperture 2b, par 0034; FIG. 3, 10 and 20), reading upon wherein the air to be disinfected is drawn from the space and the disinfected air is released into the space.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to substitute the step of flowing the air through a vent above the workstation of Lytle with flowing the air through an inlet vent from the space, past a UV-C emitter, and out through an outlet vent back into the space as taught by Polidoro. Doing so would provide the predictable result of disinfecting air from the room when the disinfecting light is shining upward in the storage position. See MPEP 2143(I)(B).
25. Regarding claim 12, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11, wherein drawing air into the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus (Lytle FIGS. 6-7, as modified above the interior chamber comprises the space above disinfection device support 132) comprises:
drawing air from the space into an inlet vent of the first disinfecting apparatus (“drawing air upward into the air intake”, Polidoro par 0104);
passing the air through the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus (“As the air passes through the unit's internal space, the air flows by one or more decontamination sources, preferably Ultraviolet-C, which destroys micro-organisms and pathogens”, Polidoro par 0034; Lytle FIG. 7, UV disinfecting light source 156); and
expelling the air from the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus through an exhaust vent of the disinfecting apparatus (“decontaminated air exits the internal decontamination chamber 15 by way of the unit's exhaust aperture 2b where the decontaminated air returns to the same room”, Polidoro par 0122).
26. Regarding claim 13, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the air is drawn into the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus (“draw air directly into the apparatus through an inlet”, Lytle col 4 lines 36-38, Lytle FIG. 7) via at least one fan (“air moving device 150, such as a fan or blower”, Lytle col 8 lines 9-16), and wherein the at least one fan is positioned within the first disinfecting apparatus (air moving device 150 positioned within air disinfecting system 152, Lytle FIGS. 6-7) to mechanically draw the air into the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus (“moves air into and/or out of the workstation”, Lytle col 8 lines 11-12; Lytle FIGS. 6-7, as modified above the interior chamber comprises the space above disinfection device support 132) and to force the air through the interior chamber of the first disinfecting apparatus and through the ultraviolet light emitted by the ultraviolet source when in the storage position (“disinfecting workstation-light 130, coupled with the light-angle actuator 140 to disinfect the airflow as it moves through the workstation, such as through the airflow conduit 158”, Lytle col 8 lines 9-16).
27. Regarding claim 14, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11, and Lytle teaches wherein the emitted light is “UV light with wavelengths of substantially 222 nm and/or UV light with wavelengths of substantially 254 nm” (Lytle col 4 lines 31-36), both within the range of ultraviolet C light.
28. Regarding claim 15, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11, and Lytle teaches wherein the ultraviolet source comprises one or more ultraviolet light emitting devices (“exemplary ultraviolet light used in the present invention emits an ultraviolet light”, Lytle col 2, lines 2-16) operable to emit light with a wavelength of substantially 222 nm, or 254 nm to disrupt the RNA of COVID-19 and the DNA of other viruses like the common cold & flu plus other pathogens (Lytle col 1 lines 63-67 and col 2 lines 1-16). Lytle as modified is silent regarding the type of emitting device would be used to achieve this UV emission requirement.
Polidoro teaches that “fluorescent-type discharge linear tubes with bi-pin or quad-pin base is the most effective decontamination system on the market with wavelengths of approximately 254 nm” (par 0118), reading upon wherein the ultraviolet light emitting device comprises…one or more fluorescent bulbs or light fixtures, operable to emit one of 222 nm or 254 nm ultraviolet light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the 254 nm fluorescent light fixture taught by Polidoro as the disinfecting UV light emitter in the system of Lytle. Doing so would predictably provide 254 nm UV radiation to effectively disinfect the room while in the ready position and the airflow while in the storage position.
29. Regarding claim 17, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11 further comprising controlling the operation of the first disinfecting apparatus with a proximity sensor (“occupancy sensor, such as a proximity, motion, or line of sight sensor”, Lytle col 3, lines 47-50; “occupancy sensor 124…may be used to activate the workstation surface and/or air disinfecting systems”, Lytle col 6 lines 32-34), such that the ultraviolet source will be retained or returned to the storage position when a person is detected by the proximity sensor (“air disinfecting system may be turned on when a person enters the workstation and the work-surface disinfecting system may be activated when a person leaves a workstation”, Lytle col 6 lines 34-37), and further comprising controlling the operation of additional second disinfecting apparatuses (“control system 125” initiating “disinfecting lights” in plural, Lytle col 6 lines 37-41) to selectively emit ultraviolet light (“disinfecting light such as a UV light”, Lytle col 4 lines 20-36) on the exposed surfaces of the surrounding area or room (“more effectively disinfect the surfaces of the workstation”, Lytle col 6 lines 26-29).
30. Regarding claim 18, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 17 further comprising directing the first disinfecting apparatus to position the ultraviolet source in the ready position (“actuator…may move the disinfecting workstation-light over the workstation during a workstation disinfection mode”, Lytle col 2 lines 29-33) for a selected period (“functions of workstation disinfection mode and airflow disinfection mode may be operated automatically based on threshold times that may be programmed”, Lytle col 4 lines 1-8) so long as no person is detected by the proximity sensor (“control system may activate the workstation disinfecting mode when no occupants are detected in the workstation…may stop the workstation disinfecting mode when motion is detected within the workstation, Lytle col 3 lines 56-66).
31. Regarding claim 19, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11, wherein moving the ultraviolet source between the ready position and the storage position comprises moving the cover to the open position while rotating the ultraviolet source (“disinfecting workstation light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140”, Lytle col 8, lines 16-20; “light is rotated upward or 180 degrees from a downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection”, Lytle col 8, lines 20-25; FIGS. 6-7, cover side of ultraviolet source 120/156 moved to open position when UV light source is rotated) along a longitudinal axis (UV light 156 rotated around light angle actuator 140 within fixture module parallel to drop ceiling i.e., along longitudinal axis, Lytle FIG. 1), wherein the first disinfecting apparatus is configured to move the ultraviolet source between the ready position and the deployed position (“disinfecting workstation light is rotated by the light angle actuator 140”, Lytle col 8, lines 16-20; “light is rotated upward or 180 degrees from a downward orientation that may be used for workstation disinfection”, Lytle col 8, lines 20-25) by rotating the ultraviolet source about a hinge on one end of the ultraviolet source (UV light 156 rotated around light angle actuator 140 located at one end of UV light 14/mounting fixture 16, Lytle FIGS. 3-4), and wherein the first disinfecting apparatus rotates the ultraviolet source such that the cover is rotated to the open position by removing the cover from between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces when the ultraviolet source is positioned in the ready position (Lytle FIG. 6, moving ultraviolet light 120 to ready position positions the cover side of the fixture module 122 to upper side i.e. away from between the ultraviolet source and exposed surfaces) and moving the cover to the closed position by rotating the ultraviolet source such that the cover is rotated back between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces when the ultraviolet source is positioned in the storage position (Lytle FIG. 7, moving ultraviolet light 156 to the storage i.e. closed position rotates the cover side of the fixture module 122 back between the ultraviolet source and the exposed surfaces). As modified above, the cover rotation into the open position involves moving the cover away from the opening and rotation back into the closed position involves moving the cover to close the opening, as the drop ceiling from Leben would be logically positioned in the plane of the cover of Lytle (FIGS. 6-7, back side of emitter fixture 122).
32. Regarding claim 20, Lytle as modified by Leben and Polidoro teaches the method of claim 11, and Lytle teaches wherein the first disinfecting apparatus is mounted along a rail configured to retain and support the first disinfecting apparatus above the space. While Lytle does not teach that this support mechanism would comprise a standalone housing or a troffer light fixture, Polidoro teaches that the ceiling mounted luminaire is mounted in a troffer (“troffer housing”, par 0006, FIGS. 1-5; “system and device that includes one or more UV-C emitters inside the housing”, par 0014) that is advantageous for mounting to various types of grid, T-bar or drop ceilings (pars 0022-0026).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to house the UV-C emitters and air system of Lytle within a troffer housing as taught by Polidoro. Doing so would predictably support the UV-C lighting device within any appropriate type of ceiling so that the space and its air can be disinfected.
Allowable Subject Matter
33. Claims 6 and 16 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
34. The prior art fails to teach or otherwise envision a disinfecting light fixture or control method thereof that includes the two distinct modes of rotation claimed, first between a storage position that blocks UV radiation from the space and a ready position that can irradiate the space, and second between the ready position and a deployed position in which the UV light source is extended through an opening into the space. Specifically, the claim 6 limitation wherein the drive module is configured to rotate the cover along a longitudinal axis and away from the opening and into the open position and to then separately rotate the ultraviolet about one end of itself when the ultraviolet source is the ready position within the fixture module, to extend the ultraviolet source through the opening and past the open cover and into the surrounding area or room is free of the prior art. Likewise, the claim 16 limitation after rotating the cover along a longitudinal axis and away from the opening and into the open position, separately rotating the ultraviolet source about one end of itself when the ultraviolet source is in the ready position, to extend the ultraviolet source through the opening and past the open cover and into the surrounding area or room is free of the prior art as follows.
35. Lytle teaches the first step of rotating the cover along a longitudinal axis and away from the opening, as the backside of the light source rotates with the light (Lytle FIGS. 6-7) and as modified with the drop ceiling of Leben to satisfy claim 1 would necessarily move away from the opening that is closed by the cover in the closed/storage position. The combination does not teach a separate rotation step that extends the ultraviolet source through the opening, as the fixture of Lytle rotates the ultraviolet source and cover integrally with one another. In fact, neither Lytle nor Leben suggests any reason for further rotating the ultraviolet source into a deployed position, as the ready position positions the ultraviolet source to fully illuminate the space (Lytle FIG. 6, col 7 line 52 to col 8 line 6; Leben par 0036, FIG. 4).
36. Polidoro teaches embodiments that include a hinged arrangement to move the UV light source perpendicularly downward from the fixture (FIGS. 16-20). However, this arrangement is taught as advantageous for maintenance of other light sources/mechanical components inside the troffer light fixture (pars 0064 and 0110), which does not make sense to combine with the rotating light source/cover of modified Lytle that has only airspace behind the light source. Likewise, Baarman et al (US 20230039310 A1) teaches an analogous dual air/surface disinfection control system (Abstract, FIGS. 1 and 24-26) that includes a hinged LED lighting module that can extend downward (FIG. 25, par 0182), but the hinge is for moving a visible light LED module to expose a UVC lamp inside the fixture to the room (pars 0180-0182). As such, neither reference provides a compelling motivation to add such a hinged arrangement to the system or method of modified Lytle.
37. Childress et al (US 20180064833 A1) teaches analogous embodiments of a deployable UV light fixture (FIGS. 1 and 3-12, Abstract) wherein the UV light assembly may be rotatably or pivotally moved between the deployed position and the stowed position (par 0013, FIGS. 9 and 11) and the UV light assembly is rotatably moved about a longitudinal axis or pivotally moved about an end in the deployed position during a sanitizing cycle (par 0014, FIGS. 5 and 8). However, the system of Lytle already provides such a rotation of the light source to focus the light on various surfaces, thus incorporating the rotational movement about an end as taught by Childress would provide a redundant capability. Conversely, the inclusion of the other structures of claim 1 including a rotatable cover and an air moving system to irradiate air in the stowed position, in the same geometry claimed would constitute a series of modifications that would not present as obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, not least because the cover of Childress is integral and moves with the UV light fixture upon deployment (FIGS. 3-4, 8-9, and 10-11).
38. Therefore, the teachings of Childress, Polidoro, and Baarman do not fully address the deficiencies of the combination of Lytle and Leben, and claims 6 and 16 are free of the prior art.
Response to Arguments
39. Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks filed 17 March 2026 pages 10-13, with respect to the rejection of claims 1, 11, and their respective dependents under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The rejections of claims 1-5, 7-15, and 17-20 are maintained but updated to address the new language describing the opening. Regarding applicant’s argument that no such opening is taught by Lytle, when combined with the drop ceiling of Leben to ensure the airspace above the light fixture is enclosed from the workspace below, the rotation of the light source necessarily would pass the light source through the opening and move the cover away from the opening/to cover the opening. Leben’s teaching of a transparent cover is not relied upon, only the teaching of a drop ceiling to complete the airflow disinfection system that does not irradiate occupants with UV as contemplated by Lytle in e.g., (col 3 lines 7-29, col 8 lines 7-28, FIG. 7).
Regarding applicant’s arguments toward the interior air disinfecting system of Lytle having its own disinfecting light 178, see Remarks page 11, Examiner points out that this feature is not relied upon in any rejection. Instead, the air moving system 152 is relied upon as an analog to the claimed system in which air is moved through the space above the ultraviolet light source to be disinfected when the ultraviolet light source is positioned in the upward-facing storage position. A point of clarification that arose in the Interview dated 13 January 2026 is that the term “cover” is interpreted broadly as any feature that covers i.e. blocks the light source, so the cover of Lytle, which is essentially the back side of the light source but reads upon the limitations requiring rotation and positioning with respect to the opening, especially when combined with the drop ceiling of Leben to meet the light blocking capabilities (Leben pars 0029-0030). As such, Applicant’s argument that the combination does not teach the combined limitations of the claim is considered unpersuasive, for reasons outlined in the rejections above.
40. The amendment to claim 6, though objected to for recited functions of the drive module, overcomes the prior art rejection of record, as does claim 16, so these rejections are withdrawn.
Conclusion
41. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Talbert whose telephone number is (703)756-5538. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 Eastern Time.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/ERIC TALBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights