DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on October 17th, 2025. Claims 2 and 29 have been canceled as such claims 1, 3-28, and 30-33 are pending consideration in this Office Action.
Response to Amendments
The objections to the disclosure are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
The objections to the drawings are not withdrawn in light of the amendments. Please see drawing objection below.
The objections to the claims are withdrawn in light of the amendments.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the external power source must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses
An apparatus (filter core structure and mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2) comprising:
a piece of personal protective equipment (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2); and
a carbon-based material (Fig. 1; carbon fiber absorption layer 4 and carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 5; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) configured to trap a pathogen (isolating viruses and microbial particles; Page 1, Paragraph 3, Lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 2, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (filter core structure and mask) of claim 1,
wherein the piece of personal protective equipment (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2) further comprises a filter (Fig. 1; filter core material structure for mask; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Line 1).
Regarding claim 3, Wang further discloses
The apparatus (filter core structure and mask) of claim 2,
wherein the piece of personal protective equipment (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2) is a mask (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2), and wherein the mask (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2) comprises:
an inner layer (Fig. 1; meltblown non-woven fabric skin-friendly layer 5; Page 3, Paragraph 17, Lines 1-2 and Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5); and
an outer layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric waterproof layer 1; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-2);
wherein the carbon-based material (Fig. 1; carbon fiber absorption layer 3 and carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) is disposed relative to the mask (mask; Page 1, Paragraph 6, Lines 1-2) at a location selected from the group consisting of
an external surface of the inner layer,
an external surface of the outer layer, and
between the inner and outer layers (see modified Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image1.png
579
1085
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Hua (CN 105457184) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Hua)
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses
the apparatus (filter core structure and mask) of claim 3,
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material is disposed adjacent to the external surface of the outer layer.
Hua discloses a mask filter element for PM2.5
wherein the carbon-based material (activated carbon layer; Page 1, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2) is disposed adjacent (Page 1, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2) to the external surface of the outer layer (outer layer cover; Page 1, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the carbon fiber absorption layer and carbon electric heating layer of Wang to be positioned on the outside of the outer layer cover as taught in Hua as such a modification would simply involve merely switching the carbon fiber absorption layer and carbon electric heating layer to be on top of the non-woven fabric waterproof layer without changing the operation of the device, a rearrangement of parts is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04)
Claims 5, 14-16, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371)
Regarding claim 5, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (filter core structure and mask) of claim 3 further comprising:
a plurality of electrodes (two electrodes; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2);
a wire (wire; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2)
a power source (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8)
wherein the plurality of electrodes (two electrodes; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2), a wire (wire; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2), power source (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8), and switch are operatively connected to the carbon-based material (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5), to form a carbon-based heater (Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 2- 6).
Wang does not disclose the wire being a plurality of wires and a switch that is operatively connected to the carbon-based material.
Sabin discloses a face mask with resistive carbon fiber tape that has
a plurality of wires (Fig. 7; two wires; Col. 10, Lines 20-26); and
a switch (Fig. 19; on/off switch 72; Col. 12, Lines 20-25) is operatively connected to the carbon-based material (Fig. 19; carbon fiber tape 7; Col. 12, Lines 20-25)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filer core structure of Wang with the switch of Sabin to be able to turn the heating mechanism on and off. Additionally, it would have been obvious to substitute the wire of Wang to instead be two separate wires as taught in Sabin as it is a known arrangement in the art to connect two separate electrodes with two separate wires to a battery.
Regarding claim 14, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5 further comprising
an insulating layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer 2, 9, and 10; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5).
Regarding claim 15, Wang further discloses
The apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer 2, 9, and 10; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) is configured to be positioned (see modified Fig. 1 below) between the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1; carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) and the face of a user (see modified Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image2.png
579
1085
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 15, wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer 2, 9, and 10) is positioned (see modified Fig. 1 below) between the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1; carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) and the outer layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric waterproof layer 1; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-2).
PNG
media_image3.png
579
1085
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 22, the modified device of Wang does not disclose
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
Wang does not disclose wherein the insulating layer is made by 3D printing.
wherein the insulating layer is made by 3D printing
However, “the insulation layer is made by 3D printing” is considered to be a product-by-process claim. The cited prior art of Wang teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed insulation layer except the process of being made by 3D printing. The determination of patentability is based upon the apparatus structure itself and the patentability of a product or apparatus does not depend on its method of production or formation. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product of the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even though the prior product was made by a different process. When the prior art discloses a product which reasonably appears to be either identical with or only slightly different than a product claimed in a product-by-process claim, a rejection based alternatively on either section 102 or section 103 of the statute is eminently fair and acceptable (MPEP 2113 III.).
Regarding claim 24, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
wherein the power source (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8) is a battery (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8).
Claims 6 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view Ma (CN 111567953) and its translation (PE2E Translation Ma)
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
wherein the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) can reach a temperature (50-60 degrees Celsius; Page 4, Paragraph 8, line 5) when a voltage (Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) is applied to the carbon- based heater (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6).
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based heater can reach a pathogen inactivation threshold temperature
Ma discloses a medical mask for killing bacteria and viruses
wherein the carbon-based heater (heating carbon fibre wire; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 2-9) can reach a pathogen inactivation threshold temperature (exceeds 50 degrees centigrade/Celsius and can be increased to 100 degrees Celsius; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 2-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1 (still in Abstract), Lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the carbon fiber fabric heating layer of Wang to be heated to a higher temperature as taught in Ma to kill or weaken the activity of virus and bacteria (Ma: Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 3-4)
Regarding claim 26, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5, wherein the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) is configured to be powered on for at least sixty seconds (Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6; on for 20-50 minutes)
Wang does not disclose the carbon-based heater configured to eradicate all pathogens trapped on the piece of personal protective equipment
Ma discloses a medical mask for killing bacteria and viruses with a heating carbon fiber wire that is used
to eradicate all pathogens (virus and bacteria; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-4) trapped on the piece of personal protective equipment (medical mask; Page 3, Paragraph 3 after content of the invention, lines 1-3 and Paragraph 4 after contents of the invention, Lines 1-12)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the carbon fiber fabric heating layer of Wang to be heated to a higher temperature as taught in Ma to kill or weaken the activity of virus and bacteria (Ma: Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 3-4)
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view Park (KR 20190065843) and its translation (PE2E Translation Park)
Regarding claim 7, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon veil
Park discloses a disposable mask
wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon veil (carbon mat; Page 4, Paragraph 2, Lines 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer of Wang to be a carbon mat as taught in Park as carbon mats are excellent in thermal conductivity (Park: Paragraph 2, Lines 3-5)
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view Park (KR 20190065843) and its translation (PE2E Translation Park), and Liu (CN 107072339) and its translation (PE2E Translation Liu)
Regarding claim 8, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask; Park: carbon mat/veil) of claim 6,
the modified device of Wang does not disclose to wherein the carbon veil has a thickness greater than or equal to 0.05 mm and less than or equal to 3.0 mm
Liu discloses a disposable mask
wherein the carbon veil (carbon filter medium 106; Page 6, Paragraph 3, Lines 2-3) has a thickness greater than or equal to 0.05 mm and less than or equal to 3.0 mm (Page 6, Paragraph 3, Lines 2-3; thickness of about 1.8 mm).
Wang is silent as to the thickness of the carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer and does not specifically disclose 0.05mm to 3.0 mm. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to cause the device taught by Wang to have a thickness of 1.8mm as taught by Liu, since it has been held that where the only difference between the prior art and the claims is a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device is not patentably distinct from the prior art device (MPEP 2144.04 IV, A).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Yu (US 20200215362)
Regarding claim 9, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon nanotube sheet.
Yu discloses a mouth mask with a heatsink
wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon nanotube sheet (Fig. 1; carbon nanotube structure 12; Paragraph 0036, Lines 1-4 and Paragraph 0062, Lines 12-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter core structure and mask of Wang with the carbon nanotube structure of Yu as carbon nanotubes possess high thermal conductivity and can help prevent overheating.
Claims 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Yu (US 20200215362) and Yildiz (Article: Aligned Carbon Nanotube Sheet High Efficiency Particulate Air Filters)
Regarding claim 10, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask and Yu: nanotube sheet) of claim 9,
the modified device of Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material comprises a plurality of carbon nanotube sheets.
Yildiz discloses an article on stacking multiple carbon nanotube sheets layered on top of each other provided an increased filtration efficiency (Figs. 5-7 on Page 301; Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-13 and Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter core structure and mask of Wank to have multiple layers of stacked carbon nanotube sheets as taught in Yildiz to provide higher filtration efficiency and capturing of particles (Yildiz: Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7).
It directly follows that the resultant modified filter core structure and mask of Wang combined with the multiple carbon nanotube stacked sheets of Yildiz would meet the claimed structural limitations since:
wherein the carbon-based material (Wang: Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) comprises a plurality of carbon nanotube sheets (Yildiz: Fig 5(a) and (b) on Page 301; 2-layer and 3-layer CNT sheet structure; Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-13 and Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 11, the modified device of Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask; Yu: nanotube sheet; Yildiz: multiple stacked carbon nanotube sheets) of claim 10,
wherein the plurality of carbon nanotube sheets (Yildiz: Fig 5(a) and (b) on Page 301; 2-layer and 3-layer CNT sheet structure; Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-13 and Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7) are oriented perpendicularly (Yildiz: Fig 5 (b) on Page301; stacked sheets are arranged perpendicularly) relative to each adjacent carbon nanotube sheet (Yildiz: Fig 5(a) and (b) on Page 301; 2-layer and 3-layer CNT sheet structure; Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-13 and Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7).
Regarding claim 12, the modified device of Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask; Yu: nanotube sheet; Yildiz: multiple stacked carbon nanotube sheets) of claim 11,
wherein the plurality of carbon nanotube sheets (Yildiz: Fig 5(a) and (b) on Page 301; 2-layer and 3-layer CNT sheet structure; Page 300, Col. 2, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-13 and Paragraph 3, Lines 1-7) are perforated (Yu: see modified Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image4.png
459
646
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Claims 13 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Shanov (Article: Rapid Design, Fabrication, and Testing a Prototype of a Heatable Face Mask for Preventing Respiratory Diseases)
Regarding claim 13, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based heater is configured to be powered on while the piece of personal protective equipment is not worn by a user, and wherein the piece of personal protective equipment is configured to be reused after heat is applied to the piece of personal protective equipment.
Shanov discloses a grant for heatable and reusable face mask
wherein the carbon-based heater (heatable porous carbon nanotube air filter; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Line 7-9 and Paragraph 2, Lines 1-6) is configured to be powered on (energized; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 11-13) while the piece of personal protective equipment is not worn by a user (Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 11-13; can be energized in storage), and
wherein the piece of personal protective equipment (heatable and reusable face mask; Page 1, paragraph 1, Lines 7-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-2) is configured to be reused after heat (Page 1, Paragraph 2, Lines 8-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-2) is applied to the piece of personal protective equipment (heatable and reusable face mask; Page 1, Paragraph 2, Lines 8-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter core structure and mask of Wang to with the heatable and reusable face mask of Shanov to be able to disinfect the mask when storing and be able to reuse the mask after each use (Shanov: Page 1, Paragraph 2, Lines 8-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-2)
Regarding claim 25, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 5,
Wang does not disclose wherein the power source is a connector configured to receive power from an external power source
Shanov discloses a grant for heatable and reusable face mask
wherein the power source (Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 11-13) is a connector configured to receive power from an external power source (portable battery or cellphone; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 11-13).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that for the filter to be connected to the portable battery or cellphone it is necessary for there to be a connector in between the filter and the portable battery or cellphone.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Duffy (US 20140182599)
Regarding claim 17, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer 2, 9, and 10; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) has a thickness greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 3 mm (Page 4, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-2; thickness is 0.3 mm), and
Wang does not disclose wherein the insulating layer comprises woven fiberglass fabric.
Duffy discloses a filtering face-piece respirator
wherein the insulating layer (particle capture filter; Paragraph 0058, Lines 13-20) comprises woven fiberglass fabric (inorganic fiber such as fiber glass; Paragraph 0058, Lines 13-20).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-woven fabric insulation barrier layers of Wang to have inorganic fibers of fiberglass as taught in Duffy to provide thermal protection and fire resistance.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Lersch (US 20040144255)
Regarding claim 18, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
Wang does not disclose wherein the insulating layer has a thickness greater than or equal to 1 mm and less than or equal to 6 mm, and wherein the insulating layer comprises a material selected from the group consisting of a polyester membrane, a silica aerogel, an alumina aerogel, polylactic acid, polyhydroxyalkanoate, cellulose, polyester, starch, polyvinyl alcohol, natural sill, and natural wood.
Lersch discloses a respirator air filter
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; separation layer 13; Paragraph 0045, Lines 1-6) has a thickness greater than or equal to 1 mm and less than or equal to 6 mm (Paragraph 0045, Lines 1-6; has a thickness of 1.0 mm), and
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; separation layer 13; Paragraph 0045, Lines 1-6) comprises a material selected from the group consisting of
a polyester membrane, a silica aerogel, an alumina aerogel, polylactic acid, polyhydroxyalkanoate, cellulose,
polyester (polyester fibers; Paragraph 0045, Lines 1-6),
starch, polyvinyl alcohol, natural sill, and natural wood.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-woven fabric insulation barriers of Wang to have a thickness of 1 mm as taught in Lersch in order to provide better temperature control and protection against environmental elements that could damage the underlying components.
Claims 19 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Qian (US 20220015470)
Regarding claim 19, Wang further discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer 2, 9, and 10; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) has a thickness greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 5 mm (Page 4, Paragraph 9, Lines 1-2; thickness is 0.3 mm), and
Wang does not disclose wherein the insulating layer comprises a material selected from the group consisting of nylon, polylactic acid, and a fiberglass screen.
Qian discloses a mask with a sterilization function
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 1; mask body 102; comprises multiple layers; Paragraph 0020, Lines 1-3) comprises a material selected from the group consisting of
nylon (nylon; Paragraph 0021, Lines 1-5),
polylactic acid, and a fiberglass screen.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-woven fabric insulation barriers of Wang to be made of nylon as taught in Qian to have a lighter material that is air-permeable (Qian: Paragraph 0021, Lines 1-2) and improve filtering capabilities.
Regarding claim 23, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based heater and the insulating layer are attached to the piece of personal protective equipment using a method of binding components together selected from a group consisting of conventional sewing, ultrasonic sewing, Velcro, and hot pressing in the presence of a polymer adhesive.
Qian discloses a mask with a sterilization function
wherein the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1; functional layer 106; Paragraph 0019, Lines 10- 14 and Paragraph 0020, Lines 1-3) and the insulating layer (Fig. 1; inner/outer layer; Paragraph 0020, Lines 1-3) are attached to the piece of personal protective equipment (Fig. 1; mask body 102; Paragraph 0020, Lines 1-3) using a method of binding components together selected from a group consisting of
conventional sewing (sewing; Paragraph 0022, Lines 1-6),
ultrasonic sewing, Velcro, and hot pressing in the presence of a polymer adhesive.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter core structure and mask of Wang to be sewed together as taught in Qian to be able to attach the filter core structure to the mask.
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) in view of Sabin (US 10772371) and further in view of Kato (WO 2010079626) and its translation (PE2E Translation Kato)
Regarding claim 20, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 14,
Wang does not disclose wherein the insulating layer comprises holes having a cross-section with a shape, wherein the diameter or side length of the shape is greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 10 mm.
Kato discloses a mask body
wherein the insulating layer (Fig. 8; aluminum plate member; Page 7, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5) comprises holes (Fig. 8; through holes 13; Page 8, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-2) having a cross-section with a shape (Fig. 8; circular cross-section), wherein the diameter or side length of the shape is greater than or equal to 0.1 mm and less than or equal to 10 mm (diameter of 1mm to 3mm; Page 8, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the non-woven fabric insulation barrier layer of Wang to with the plurality of through holes in Kato to decrease flow resistance in the surface (Kato: Page 6, Paragraph 4, Lines 1-4) and to allow for air to pass through more freely.
Regarding claim 21, the modified device of Wang discloses
the apparatus (Wang: filter core structure and mask) of claim 20,
wherein the shape (Kato: Fig. 8; through holes 13; Page 8, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-2; hole is circular in nature) is selected from the group consisting of
a circle (Fig. 8; through holes 13; Page 8, Paragraph 2, Lines 1-2; hole is circular in nature),
a semi-circle, a triangle, a square, a hexagon, and other polygons capable of being repeated over a 2D plane.
Claims 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teibel (US 20070163587) in view of Connor (US 20210339058)
Regarding claim 28, Teibel discloses
An air filtration system (Fig. 1; oral respirator device 1000; Paragraph 049, Lines 1-3) comprising:
an air flow path (Fig. 1; tubular member 1009; Paragraph 0055, Lines 13-15) comprising:
an air inlet (see modified Fig. 1 below);
a carbon-based material (Fig. 1-2A; activated carbon (filter 1004); Paragraph 0041, Lines 1-7) configured to trap a pathogen (Paragraph 0041, Lines 1-10); and
an air outlet (see modified Fig. 1 below);
wherein the carbon-based material (Fig. 1-2; activated carbon (filter 1004); Paragraph 0041, Lines 1-7) is positioned between the air inlet and the air outlet (see modified Fig. 1 below).
Teibel does not disclose an air flow controller
Conner discloses a smart mask with a
an air flow controller (cell phone or smart watch; Paragraph 0163, Lines 1-9);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the oral respirator device of Teibel with an impellor and controller as taught in Connor to be able to turn on the impellor to draw in more air through the air inlet.
Regarding claim 29, Teibel further discloses
the air filtration system (oral respirator device 1000) of claim 28 further comprising
a filter (Fig. 1; filter 1004; Paragraph 0055, Lines 13-15) positioned between the air inlet and the air outlet (see modified Fig. 1 below).
PNG
media_image5.png
564
709
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teibel (US 20070163587) in view of Connor (US 20210339058) and further in view of Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang) and Sabin (US 10772371)
Regarding claim 30, the modified device of Teibel discloses
the air filtration system (Teibel: oral respirator device 1000) of claim 29 further comprising
The modified device of Teibel does not disclose a plurality of electrodes; a plurality of wires; a power source; and a switch; wherein the plurality of electrodes, plurality of wires, power source, and switch are operatively connected to the carbon-based material, to form a carbon-based heater.
Wang discloses a filter core structure and mask
a plurality of electrodes (two electrodes; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2);
a wire (wire; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2)
a power source (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8)
wherein the plurality of electrodes (two electrodes; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2), a wire (wire; Page 2, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-2), power source (Fig. 1; battery 8; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 5-8), and switch are operatively connected to the carbon-based material (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 5, Lines 1-5), to form a carbon-based heater (Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 2- 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activated carbon of Teibel with the filter core structure of Wang in order to be able to heat the device to remove moisture and improve the breathing environment (Wang; Page 3, Paragraph 1, Lines 1-3) and remove/reduce pathogens.
Wang does not disclose the wire being a plurality of wires and a switch that is operatively connected to the carbon-based material.
Sabin discloses a face mask with resistive carbon fiber tape that has
a plurality of wires (Fig. 7; two wires; Col. 10, Lines 20-26); and
a switch (Fig. 19; on/off switch 72; Col. 12, Lines 20-25) is operatively connected to the carbon-based material (Fig. 19; carbon fiber tape 7; Col. 12, Lines 20-25)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the filter of the modified device of Teibel with the switch of Sabin to be able to turn the heating mechanism on and off. Additionally, it would have been obvious to substitute the wire of Wang to instead be two separate wires as taught in Sabin as it is a known arrangement in the art to connect two separate electrodes with two separate wires to a battery.
Claim 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teibel (US 20070163587) in view of Connor (US 20210339058) and further in view of Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang), Sabin (US 10772371), Ma (CN 111567953) and its translation (PE2E Translation Ma)
Regarding claim 31, the modified device of Teibel further discloses
the air filtration system (Teibel: oral respirator device 1000) of claim 30,
wherein the carbon-based heater (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) can reach a temperature (50-60 degrees Celsius; Page 4, Paragraph 8, line 5) when a voltage (Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6) is applied to the carbon- based heater (Fig. 1 carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer 4; Page 4, Paragraph 8, Lines 1-6).
Wang does not disclose wherein the carbon-based heater can reach a pathogen inactivation threshold temperature
Ma discloses a medical mask for killing bacteria and viruses
wherein the carbon-based heater (heating carbon fibre wire; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 2-9) can reach a pathogen inactivation threshold temperature (exceeds 50 degrees centigrade/Celsius and can be increased to 100 degrees Celsius; Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 2-9 and Page 2, Paragraph 1 (still in Abstract), Lines 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activated carbon in the filter of Teibel to be heated to a higher temperature as taught in Ma to kill or weaken the activity of virus and bacteria (Ma: Page 1, Paragraph 1, Lines 3-4)
Claim 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teibel (US 20070163587) in view of Connor (US 20210339058) and further in view of Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang), Sabin (US 10772371), Park (KR 20190065843) and its translation (PE2E Translation Park)
Regarding claim 32, the modified device of Teibel further discloses
the air filtration system (Teibel: oral respirator device 1000) of claim 30,
Teibel does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material comprises carbon veil.
Park discloses a disposable mask
wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon veil (carbon mat; Page 4, Paragraph 2, Lines 3-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activated carbon in the filter of Teibel to be a carbon mat as taught in Park as carbon mats are excellent in thermal conductivity (Park: Paragraph 2, Lines 3-5)
Claims 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Teibel (US 20070163587) in view of Connor (US 20210339058) and further in view of Wang (CN 111616443) and its translation (EspaceNet Translation Wang), Sabin (US 10772371), and Yu (US 20200215362)
Regarding claim 33, the modified device of Teibel further discloses
The air filtration system (Teibel: oral respirator device 1000) of claim 30,
Teibel does not disclose wherein the carbon-based material comprises a perforated carbon nanotube sheet
Yu discloses a mouth mask with a heatsink
wherein the carbon-based material comprises a carbon nanotube sheet (Fig. 1; carbon nanotube structure 12; Paragraph 0036, Lines 1-4 and Paragraph 0062, Lines 12-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the activated carbon in the filter of Teibel with the carbon nanotube structure of Yu as carbon nanotubes possess high thermal conductivity and can help prevent overheating.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed October 17th, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 13 of the remarks, Applicant argues that the drawing objection of the external power source not being shown in the figures is moot as the power source 128 is labeled in the Figures. However, claim 25 recites “wherein the power source is a connector configured to receive power from an external power source”. The external power source is a separate power source which is not shown in the drawings and paragraph 0050 of the specification states “In other embodiments, the power source128 may be implemented as a connector configured to receive power from an external power source (not shown) including, by way of example and not limitation, a phone or wall outlet”. As such the drawing objection above is upheld and appropriate correction is required.
On page 15-16 of the remarks, Applicant argues that “the carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer that is pointed to in claim 1 is also used to satisfy the filter limitation of claim 2. As claim 2 is moved into amended claim 1 applicant submits that a single component of Wang cannot be used to satisfy two separate limitations of claim 1. However, Examiner respectfully disagrees as Wang discloses that the composite filter core structure (which was used to cite the filter) includes a carbon fiber fabric electric heating layer and an anti-adhesive non-woven fabric insulating barrier layer (Page 1, Paragraph 8). As such, the filter core structure can be interpreted as any of the non-woven fabric insulating barrier layers 2, 9, and 10. Additionally, it is noted that any of the other insulating barrier layers not being noted as the filter can be used as the insulating layer as recited in claims 14-16. Therefore, Wang fully discloses all of the limitations for claim 1.
On page 16 of the remarks, Applicant argues that “as claim 1 is not anticipated by Wang. Applicant submits that dependent claim 3 also cannot be anticipated by Wang. As stated by reasons above, Wang discloses all the limitations of claim 1 and therefore applicant’s argument regarding dependent claim 3 is rendered moot.
On page 16 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 4 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claim 4 is allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. However, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025. For example, Claim 4 states that it would have been obvious to modify the positioning of the carbon layers of Wang as taught in Hua as a rearrangement of parts is known in the art (see MPEP 2144.04). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 17 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 5, 14-16, and 24 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 5, 14-16, and 24 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 17-18 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 6 and 26 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 6 and 26 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 18 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 7 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claim 7 is allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 19-20 of the remarks Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 9 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claim 9 is allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 20 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 10-12 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 10-12 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On pages 20-21 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 13 and 25 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 13 and 25 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On pages 21-22 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 17 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claim 17 is allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 22 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 18 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claim 18 is allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On pages 22-23 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 19 and 23 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 19 and 23 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 23 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claims 20 and 21 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 1, claims 20 and 21 are allowable as Wang does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot in view of Wang disclosing all the limitation of claim 1.
On page 24 of the remarks, Applicant argues a similar reasoning to claim 1 that amended independent claim 28 does not disclose all of the limitations of claim 28 and claim 29 (original) “where an air filtration system having a carbon-based material to trap a pathogen, and a filter”. Applicant argues that filter 1004 of Teibel has been used to disclose both the carbon-based material and the filter. However, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as the filter structure/housing 1004 which contains the filter 1003 is being denoted as the filter. Teibel states that “filter 1004 comprises activated carbon”. In other words, the activated carbon is the carbon-based material to trap a pathogen and is being interpreted as a separate component that is being used in the filter in order to satisfy the two separate limitations of amended claim 1. Therefore, the activated carbon satisfies a carbon-based material to trap a pathogen, and the filter structure/housing 1004 is being used to satisfy a filter. Therefore, Teibel in view of Connor fully discloses all of the limitations for claim 28.
On page 24 of the remarks, Applicant argues that claim 1 is not anticipated by Wang and submits claim 3 also cannot be anticipated by Wang. This appears to be a typo, regardless, please see above regarding claim 3.
On page 25 of the remarks, Applicant argues that a prima facie case of obviousness has not been shown for claim 30 and further argues that at least for the reason of being dependent on claim 28, claim 30 is allowable as Teibel and Connor does not disclose all the limitations. As stated above, each 103 rejection has a prima facie case of obviousness as stated in the Non-Final rejection filed on April 17th, 2025 (see rejections and example regarding claim 4 above). As such, Applicants argument is rendered moot over Teibel in vi