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 .
Priority
2. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
3. The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because
Figure 2 is missing reference character 37
4. 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.
Specification
5. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
6. The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it uses inclusion of legalese "heating means". A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
7. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 19 line 12 “heating member 4” should read “heating member 34”.
Page 20 line 15 “temperature/ humidity sensor” should read “temperature and humidity sensor”.
Page 21, line 2 “water storage part 12” should read “water storage part 14”.
Appropriate correction is required.
8. The use of the term Teflon, which is a trade name or a mark used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore, the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM, or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
Claim Objections
9. Claim 2 objected to because of the following informalities:
lacks clarity with "thereof, therein”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
10. 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.
11. 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.
13. The following limitations are interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
Claim 1, line 5 recites, “parts for providing moisture”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for the parts providing moisture are a fan assembly (5) and the heating means (3). (Page 3 lines 17-18 to page 4 lines 1-2 of the specification).
Claim 1, line 6 recites, “heating means”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for the heating means (3) is a heating member (34) with the lower portion immersed in water and a heater member (32) in a compressed state in the upper portion of the heating member (34). (Page 4, lines 3-7 of the specification).
Claim 1, line 12 recites, “heating member”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for heating member (34) is an inverted U-shaped side section and also have at least one rib connecting both sides. (Page 10, lines 10-12 of the specification).
Claim 1, line 14 recites, “heater member”. The corresponding structure in the disclosure for the heater member (32) is one of a positive temperature coefficient (PTC) heater, a resistance heater, and a ceramic heater. (Page 4, lines 13-14 of the specification).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
14. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. —The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
15. Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
16. In claim 1 line 14, it is unclear what is meant by “a heater member provided in a compressed state”. For the purposes of examination, the Examiner will treat as being compressed on the uppermost rib of the heating member and the heating means frame.
17. In claim 2 lines 4-5, it is unclear if the “uppermost rib” is part of the “at least one rib”. For the purpose of examination will treat as the uppermost rib is part of at least one rib.
In claim 2 line 4, “a compressed state” should be “the compressed state”. It is unclear if the compressed states of claims 1 and 2 are the same compressed state. For the purpose of examination will treat “a compressed state” of claimed 2 as the same as “a compressed state” of claim 1.
18. Claims 2 through 5 are dependent on claim 1, are similarly rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
19. 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.
20. Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gloyd et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,616,115) hereinafter Gloyd, in further view of Ouyang et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0003303) hereinafter Ouyang, and Hidehiko (WO No. 2021145430A1) hereinafter Hidehiko.
21. Regarding claim 1, Gloyd discloses a humidification apparatus (humidifier, figure 3, #44) comprising:
a frame (mounting plate, figure 3, #76) installed inside a water storage part (water reservoir, figure 3, #52) in which water is stored, a heating means mounting hole (openings, figure 3, #80);
a heating means (heat exchanger, figure 3, #64) inserted into and mounted in the heating means mounting hole (openings, figure 3, #80) of the frame (mounting plate, figure 3, #76), and configured to heat the water stored in the water storage part (Col 4, lines 32-39), further the heat exchanger of Gloyd has the same structure as the claimed heating means and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed; and
a fan assembly mounted vertically (fan, figure 8, #102) and configured to transfer or discharge water vapor, generated from the water heated by the heating means, to a space requiring humidification (Col. 6, lines 52-62) further the fan assembly of Gloyd has the same structure as the claimed fan assembly and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed;
wherein the heating means (heat exchanger, figure 3, #64) includes:
a heating member (plurality of fins, figure 3, #68) configured such that a lower portion thereof is immersed in the water stored in the water storage part (water reservoir, figure 3, #52) and heats the water (Col. 4, lines 34-37) further the heating member of Gloyd has the same structure as the claimed heating member and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed;
a heater member (electric heater, figure 3, #70) provided in a compressed state in an upper portion of the heating member to be spaced apart from the water and configured to generate heat to be transferred to the heating member (Col. 4, lines 40-48) further the heater member of Gloyd has the same structure as the claimed heater member and is capable of functioning in the manner claimed. As best understood, see 112b rejections above.
Gloyd fails to teach a frame with a fan mounting depression and the fan vertically mounted in the fan mounting depression.
Ouyang teaches of a frame (cover, figure 2, #102) which has a fan mounting depression (mist accelerator holder, figure 2, #206) which a fan (mist accelerator, figure 2, #204) is mounted to. Additionally, the mist accelerator holder is configured to rotate to the vertical position (figure 2, Paragraph 0028).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the frame of Gloyd to include a fan mounting depression and to mount vertically the fan of Gloyd in the fan mounting depression as taught by Ouyang. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it allows air flow to pass through while providing support (Page 3, paragraph 0027).
Gloyd as modified fails to teach a heating means frame which covers the top of the heating member, expose both outer surfaces, and to fill the inside of the heating member.
Hidehiko teaches a heating means frame (blower guide, figure 5, #26) which covers heating member (lower heat sink, figure 5, #19) and to fill the inside of the heating member (Pages 10-11, paragraphs 46-48, lines 433-459).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the heating means disclosed by Gloyd as modified to include a heating means frame as taught by Hidehiko. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because having the heating means frame attached to the heating member allows for ease of installation and improved operability (page 3, paragraph 0015, lines 116-118).
22. Regarding claim 2, Gloyd as modified disclose the humidification apparatus of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above), wherein:
the heating member has an inverted U-shaped side section (Gloyd, plurality of fins, figure 5, #68), and also has at least one rib (Gloyd, flat plate, figure 4, #66), connecting both sides thereof (figure 3A of Gloyd depicts flat plate 66 to connect both sides of the plurality of fins 68), therein; and
the heater member (Gloyd, electric heater, figure 5, #70), is provided in a compressed state on an uppermost rib (Gloyd, flat plate, figure 4, #66) of the heating member. (Fig.4 of Gloyd depicts electric heater 70 to be compressed between flat plate 66 and cover 54); as best understood, see 112b rejections above.
23. Regarding claim 3, Gloyd as modified teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Additionally, Gloyd teaches the heater member (electric heater, figure 5, #70), is a resistance heater (Col. 4, line 42).
24. Regarding claim 4, Gloyd as modified teaches the subject matter of claim 1. Additionally, Gloyd teaches the heating means (Gloyd, heat exchanger, figure 3, #64) includes connecting lines (Gloyd, electrical connector, figure 3A, #74) that are connected to the heater member (Gloyd, electric heater, figure 5, #70), and protrude from one side of an upper portion of the heating means frame (Gloyd, mounting plate, figure 3, #76). The recitation “connecting lines” is not a patentably distinct feature of the claims as the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144, Section VI, Paragraph B).
25. Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gloyd et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,616,115) as modified by Ouyang et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2021/0003303) and Hidehiko (WO No. 2021145430A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Schafka (U.S. Patent No. 6,129,285) hereinafter Schafka, and Darwinkel et al. (U.S. Patent No. 9,587,844) hereinafter Darwinkel.
Regarding claim 5, Gloyd as modified disclose the humidification apparatus of claim 1 (see the combination of references used in the rejection of claim 1 above).
Additionally, Gloyd teaches a space requiring humidification (Gloyd, Col 2, lines
14-15) and a control panel (Gloyd, control panel, figure 2, #50) which would indicate humidity levels as well as contain a low-level indication (Gloyd, Col. 3, lines 46-61).
Gloyd as modified, does not disclose a humidity and temperature sensor that is provided to be spaced apart from the fan assembly to a space requiring humidification, and detects a temperature and humidity between the fan assembly and the space requiring humidification.
Schafka teaches a temperature and humidity sensor (downstream air temperature and humidity sensor, figure 2, #38) that is provided to be spaced apart from the fan assembly to a space requiring humidification (spray paint booth, figure 1, #10), detects a temperature and humidity between the fan assembly (conditioned air fan, figure 2, #36) and the space requiring humidification (spray paint booth, figure 1, #10), and sends a signal that there is insufficient water to produce the desired humidity (Col. 7, lines 10-24).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the control panel of Gloyd as modified to utilize the downstream temperature and humidity sensor to obtain water level information as taught by Schafka. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because it delivers more stable and accurate levels of humidity and temperature (Col 2, lines 54-59).
Gloyd as modified does not teach the sensor to send a signal providing notification that there is no water in the water storage part when a set humidity is not reached even after a set temperature was reached and then a predetermined period has elapsed.
Darwinkel teaches the method of evaluating for sufficient water levels using temperature changes over a period of time (Col 3, lines 46-51).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reprogramed the control panel of Gloyd as modified to evaluate for sufficient water levels using temperature changes over a period of time as taught by Darwinkel. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because if there is not enough water in the humidifier, the humidifying function will stop working, the supply power is wasted, and continued use can lead to a fire hazard (Col 1, lines 31-35).
Conclusion
26. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Follette (U.S.
Takahashi et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,598,502) teaches PTC heater which can be used as a heat source in a humidifier.
Koch Et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,936,824) teaches the inspiration for the incubator design for Gloyd et al. (U.S. Patent No. 5,616,115).
27. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLEN H GRZEGORZEWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-5263. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 730 a.m. - 5 p.m. ET.
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, Gautam Ubale can be reached on 571-272-9861. 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.
/E.H.G./
Examiner, Art Unit 4167
/YASHITA SHARMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 4100