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 .
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 factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 21–23, 25 and 27–30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hladik, US 3,884,662 in view of Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Hladik teaches a bank of air filter cartridges 10, 30, which reads on the “filter system.” See Hladik Fig. 1, col. 2, ll. 36–39. Note that the preamble limitation that the filter system is “of a heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning (HVAC) system” fails to further limit the scope of the claim because it describes the intended use rather than the structure of the system. See MPEP 2111.02, subsection II (the preamble is not considered a limitation and is of no significance to claim construction if the preamble merely states the purpose or intended use of the invention).
The bank of air filters comprises a frame, which reads on the “frame.” See Hladik Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 1–17.
PNG
media_image1.png
646
827
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The bank further comprises horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18 mounted to the frame, which collectively read on the “filter track system.” See Hladik Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 1–17. Each horizontal channel member 12, 14, 16, 18, seen in Fig. 1, can have the structure of the horizontal channel member 42, seen in Fig. 4. Id. at Figs. 1, 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10.
The lower horizonal channel member 14 with the structure of the horizontal channel member 42 reads on “filter track.” The horizontal channel member 42 comprises a bottom, which reads on the “base segment” and two vertical segments at the front and back, which read on the “first bracket extending crosswise to the base segment” and the “second backet extending crosswise to the base segment,” respectively. Id. The horizontal channel member 42 also comprises two tabs 44 formed in the bottom, one of which reads on the “tab formed in the base segment.” See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10. The bottom, two vertical segments and tabs 44 are integrally formed as a single piece component, because the vertical segments are shown as being bent upward from the horizontal bottom, while the tabs 44 are formed by making three-sided cuts in the channel member 42 and bending the cut section upward to form the tab 44. Id.
PNG
media_image2.png
933
1903
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The tabs 44 are capable of being in a downward position so that they lay flat against the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 because the tabs 44 can be bent upward. See Hladik col. 4, ll. 1–10. Also, the horizontal channel member 42 is configured to receive at least one filter cartridge in the space between the front and back vertical segments. Id. at col. 3, ll. 28–38. Therefore, the horizontal channel member 42 is capable of capturing a “first filter” disposed within the air flow path via the front vertical segment and the back vertical segment when the tabs 44 are downward so that they lay flat against the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42. This configuration reads on the “first configuration of the filter track.” Also, the horizontal channel member 42 is capable of capturing a “second filter” disposed within the air flow path via the tabs 44 and the front vertical segment when the tabs 44 are bent upward. This configuration reads on the “second configuration of the filter track.” See MPEP 2114, subsection IV (Functional claim language that is not limited to a specific structure covers all devices that are capable of performing the recited function).
The tabs 44 are configured to pivot about a rotational axis extending along the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 to transition between the “first configuration” an the “second configuration” because the tabs 44 can be bent upward from the flat, downward position. See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10.
The bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 comprises three cuts to form each tab 44, which reads on the “plurality of cuts.” See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10. The cut running from left-to-right in Fig. 4 reads on the “first cut extending along and offset from the rotational axis.” Id. The two cuts running from front-to-back read on the “second plurality of cuts extending crosswise to the rotational axis.” Id.
Hladik differs from claim 1 because it is silent as to the frame being disposed in a housing of an HVAC system and extending about an air flow path through the housing.
But the frame forms a filter track system intended to hold multiple air filter cartridges that are inserted into the horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18.
With this in mind, Salunkhe teaches a filter track system provided to hold multiple filters 406 so that the filters 406 can be positioned within the air flow path of a housing in an HVAC unit 12. See Salunkhe Figs. 2, 22, [0068], [0101].
PNG
media_image3.png
605
843
media_image3.png
Greyscale
A person of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that the frame of Hladik is suitable for use in an HVAC housing because the frame of Hladik has a similar structure and function as the filter track system 100 of Salunkhe. Therefore, it would have been obvious for the frame of Hladik to be disposed within a housing of an HVAC system with the frame extending about an air flow path through the housing, because the frame of Hladik is suitable for use in an HVAC housing.
Regarding claim 3, Hladik teaches that the tabs 44 are aligned with the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 (the “base segment”) in the “first configuration” where the tabs 44 are downward so that they lay flat against the bottom. Also, the tabs 44 extend crosswise to the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 in the “second configuration” where the tabs 44 are bent upward, in the position seen in Fig. 4.
Regarding claim 5, Hladik teaches that the horizontal channel member 42 (the “filter track”) comprises two tabs 44. See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10. The left-hand tab 44 in Fig. 4 reads on the “first tab” and the right-hand tab 44 reads on the “second tab.” The horizontal channel member 42 is capable of capturing a “third filter” via the right-hand tab 44 and the front vertical segment (the “first bracket”) in the “second configuration” (tabs 44 bent upward) because a filter could be inserted into the space between right-hand tab 44 and the front vertical segment. See MPEP 2114, subsection IV.
Regarding claim 21, Hladik teaches that the tabs 44 are disposed between the front and back vertical segments (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”), as seen in Fig. 4.
Regarding claim 22, Hladik teaches that the tabs 44 and the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42 (the “base segment”) are capable of abutting a common side of the “first filter” in when the tabs 44 are in the “first configuration” because the tabs 44 are flat against the bottom in the “first configuration.” Also, the front and back vertical segments (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”) are capable of abutting opposite sides of the “first filter” in the “first configuration” because the first filter would be inserted into the space between the front and back vertical segments.
Regarding claim 23, Hladik teaches that the tabs 44 and the front vertical segment (the “first bracket”) are capable of abutting opposite sides of the “second filter” in the “second configuration” because the tabs 44 are bent upward in the “second configuration” and the second filter could be inserted into the space between the front vertical segment and the tabs 44.
Regarding claim 25, Hladik teaches that the horizontal channel member 44 (the “filter track”) could be formed from a sheet of material that is then bent and cut to form the structure seen in Fig. 4. Hladik also teaches that the tracks 48, 50, 52 of an embodiment are made of aluminum (see Hladik col. 4, ll. 25–44), and it would have been obvious for the horizontal channel member 42 to be made of aluminum because this would merely represent the selection of a known material based on the suitability of its intended use. See MPEP 2144.07. Note that the limitation describing the filter track is “formed of sheet metal” describes the process of manufacturing the filter track, and there appears to be no structural difference between the end product of the horizontal channel member 42 of Hladik and the filter track of claim 25. See MPEP 2113, subsection I (the patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production unless the process steps impart structure).
Regarding claim 27, Hladik teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Hladik differs from claim 27 because it is silent as to the frame comprising one or more mounting flanges extending from the frame with the mounting flanges being coupled to the housing of the HVAC system.
But Salunkhe teaches a lock plate 434 (a “mounting flange”) to couple to a structural component 492 of the HVAC system (i.e., the housing). See Salunkhe Fig. 29, [0110]. It would have been obvious for the frame of Hladik to comprise the lock plate 434 of Salunkhe to allow the frame to be coupled to the housing of the HVAC system.
Regarding claim 28, Hladik teaches that the rotational axis of each tab 44 extends between the front and back vertical segments (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”), as seen in Fig. 4.
Hladik differs from claim 28 because it is silent as to the distance from the front vertical segment to the rotational axis, and the distance from the back vertical segment to the rotational axis.
Hladik illustrates that a filter cartridge 10 is inserted into the space between the front vertical segment and the tabs 44 and that another filter cartridge 30 is inserted into the space between the back vertical segment and the tabs 44, as seen in Fig. 2. The filter cartridges 10, 30 are shown as having equal thickness, and it would have been obvious for the two filter cartridges to have equal thickness to simplify manufacturing. When the two filter cartridges 10, 30 have equal thickness the distance from the front vertical segment to the rotational axis of each tab 44 (the “first distance”) would be equal to the distance from the back vertical segment to the rotational axis of each tab 44 (the “second distance”).
Regarding claims 29 and 30, Hladik teaches that the system comprises multiple horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18, as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above. The channel member 14 (having the structure of channel member 42) reads on the “first filter track” and the “base segment” of this channel member 14 reads on the “first base segment.”
Also, the horizontal channel member 16 (having the structure of channel member 42) reads on the “second filter track.” The bottom of this horizontal channel member 16 (seen in Fig. 4) reads on the “second base segment.” The front and back vertical segments of this horizontal channel member 16 read on the “third bracket” and the “fourth bracket,” respectively, as seen in Fig. 4. The horizontal channel member 16 is configured to capture two filter cartridges 10, 30, as seen in Fig. 2. One of the filter cartridges 10, 30 reads on the “third filter.” The “first base segment” abuts the “second base segment,” as seen in Fig. 2 where the two channel members 14, 16 are welded in back-to-back relationship. See Hladik Fig. 2, col. 4, ll. 1–10. Also, the front and back vertical segments of the channel member 14 (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”) extend in a direction (the “first direction”) opposite to the front and back vertical segments of the channel member 16 (the “second direction”).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hladik, US 3,884,662 in view of Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 and in further view of Taft, US 5,342,423.
Regarding claim 6, Hladik as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Hladik differs from claim 6 because it is silent as to the filter system comprising the “first filter” and the “second filter” with the first filter having a greater thickness than the second filter.
But Salunkhe teaches that its filter track system comprises a plurality of filter tracks 104 (similar to the horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18 of Hladik), with teach filter track 104 comprising at least one insert 404 (similar to the tabs 44 of Hladik) that can be inserted or removed from the track 104 to allow it to accommodate a wide filter 412 (Figs. 23 and 25) or a narrow filter 406 (Figs. 22 and 24). See Salunkhe Figs. 22–25, [0101]–[0105]. This configuration is beneficial because it allows the filter system to receive filters of different thicknesses, depending on the needs of the system. Id. at [0115].
Note that the filter system of Hladik is interpreted as the location comprising the HVAC system. Because Salunkhe recognizes that HVAC systems can use filters of different thickness, it would have been obvious for this location to have the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) and the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) of Salunkhe. It is noted that claim 6 does not require that the “first filter” and the “second filter” actually be inserted into the filter track, only that the first and second filter be part of the system.
Even if the claim required that the “first filter” and the “second filter” be inserted into the filter track, it would have been obvious for the filter system of Hladik to comprise the wide filter 412 (to be inserted in the horizontal channel member 42 when the tabs 44 are flat) and the narrow filter 406 (to be inserted in the horizontal channel member 42 when the tabs 44 are bent up) to allow the filter system to function with different types of filters, depending on the needed application.
Also, it is noted that Hladik illustrates that the horizonal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18 comprise gaskets 34, 36 to seal the filter cartridges 10, 30 when they are inserted into the filter system. See Hladik Fig. 2, col. 3, ll. 39–45. But it would have been obvious to eliminate the gaskets 34, 36 to simplify the filter system in view of Salunkhe, which teaches that the filters 412, 406 are inserted into the filter tracks 104 with there being no gasket in the tracks 104. See Salunkhe Figs. 22–25, [0101]–[0105]. Alternatively, Taft describes an air filter 10 for an HVAC system comprising a frame 12 having a bead of silicone 62 along the periphery on either side of the frame 12 to ensure that no air can flow around the frame when the filter 10 is inserted into the housing. See Taft Figs. 1, 2, col. 5, ll. 47–67. As such, it would have been obvious to eliminate the gaskets 34, 36 from the horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18 of Hladik with the filters themselves comprising a gasket, because providing a gasket on the filter itself (instead of the housing receiving the filter) is an alternative way of sealing a filter in an HVAC system.
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hladik, US 3,884,662 in view of Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 and in further view of Kilian et al., US 2017/0073968 A1.
Regarding claim 24, Hladik as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Hladik as modified differs from claim 1 because it is silent as to the plurality of cuts to form each tab 44 comprising a third plurality of cuts extending aligned with the rotational axis.
But Hladik teaches that the each tab 44 is a piece of sheet metal that can be bent upwardly at the junction with the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42. See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–44.
With this in mind, Kilian teaches that it is beneficial to provide perforation lines in a metallic sheet to assist in bending. See Kilian [0042]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide perforation lines along the junction line of each tab 44 of Hladik to make it easier to bend. With this modification, the perforation lines would read on the “third plurality of cuts extending aligned with the rotational axis.”
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hladik, US 3,884,662 in view of Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 in view of Taft, US 5,342,423 and in further view of Conrad, US 2019/0145655 A1.
Regarding claim 26, Hladik as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Hladik as modified differs from claim 26 because it is silent as to the filter system comprising the first and second filter, with teach the first and second filter comprising a HEPA filter, a ULPA filter or a combination.
But it would have been obvious for the filter system of Hladik to comprise the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) and the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) of Salunkhe, with any necessary modifications to the gasket structure in the horizontal channel member 42 of Hladik in view of Taft, for the reasons explained in the rejection of claim 6 above.
Also, Conrad teaches that a typical HVAC physical filter has a HEPA rating. See Conrad [0009]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) and the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) of Salunkhe to each be a HEPA filter because this is conventional for an air filter in an HVAC system.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 21–23, 25 and 27–30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 in view of Hladik, US 3,884,662.
Regarding claim 1, Salunkhe teaches a filter system for an HVAC unit 12, which reads on the claimed “filter system.” See Salunkhe Fig. 2, [0047].
The filter system comprises a frame 105 (the “frame”) disposed within a housing of the HVAC system (the “housing”) and extending about an air flow path through the housing. See Salunkhe Fig. 5, [0068].
The filter system also comprises a plurality of filter tracks 104 (the “filter track system”) mounted to the frame 105. See Salunkhe Figs. 5, 22, [0068], [0101].
One of the filter tracks 104 reads on the “filter track.” See Salunkhe Fig. 22, [0101]. The filter track 104 comprises a “base segment” which is the horizontal structure in the middle of the track 104 and two vertical segments on either end, which read on the “first bracket extending crosswise to the base segment” and the “second bracket extending crosswise to the base segment.” Id. at Fig. 24, [0101]. The filter track 104 also comprises inserts 404 spaced along the length of the track 104. Id. One of the inserts 404 reads on the “tab.” Id.
The filter track 104 is configured to capture a wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) disposed within the air flow path via the two vertical segments in the configuration 410 seen in Figs. 23 and 25. See Salunkhe Figs. 23, 25, [0105].
The filter track 104 is also configured to capture a narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) disposed within the air flow path via the insert 404 and the front vertical segment in the configuration 402 seen in Figs. 22 and 24 (the “second configuration”). See Salunkhe Figs. 22, 24, [0102].
PNG
media_image4.png
944
836
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Salunkhe differs from claim 1 because it is silent as to the horizontal structure in the middle of the track 104 (the “base segment”) and two vertical segments on either end (the “first backet” and the “second bracket”) and the insert 404 (the “tab”) being integrally formed as a single piece component. Salunkhe also differs from claim 1 because it is silent as to the insert 404 being configured to rotate about a rotational axis extending along the “base segment” to transition between the “first configuration” 410 (Fig. 25) and the “second configuration” 402 (Fig. 24), with the base segment comprising a plurality of cuts formed therethrough to form the insert 404.
But the insert 404 is a piece of material that can be inserted or removed from the track 104 to accommodate different sized filter elements within the track 104. When the insert 404 is provide in the track 104, it extends vertically to be perpendicular to the horizontal structure in the middle of the track 104 (the “base segment”). When the insert 404 is removed, it has to be stored in a location so that it can be reinserted into the track 104 when desired.
With this in mind, Hladik teaches a filter system comprising horizontal channel members 12, 14, 16, 18 that form a track system to receive filter cartridges 10, 30 inserted into the channel formed by each member 12, 14, 16, 18. See Hladik Figs. 1, 2, col. 2, ll. 16–25, col. 3, ll. 1–17. Each horizontal channel member 12, 14, 16, 18 can have the structure 42 seen in Fig. 4. Id. at Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–10. The horizontal channel member 42 has a similar structure to the track 104 of Salunkhe because it has a horizontal structure in the middle with two vertical segments on either end, while also having tabs 44 that can be bent up to accommodate filters that are inserted into the channel member 42. Id. The horizontal channel member 42 and the tabs 44 are integrally formed as a single piece component. Id. Also, each tab 44 is capable of pivoting about a rotational axis extending along the horizontal structure to transition between a wide configuration of the channel member 42 (where each tab 44 lays flat) and a narrow configuration (where each tab 44 is bent upward, as seen in Fig. 4), because tabs 44 can be bent up. Id. Further, the horizontal structure in the middle of the channel member 42 comprises a plurality of cuts, including a first cut extending along and offset from the rotational axis and a second plurality of cuts extending crosswise to the rotational axis. Id.
PNG
media_image5.png
492
762
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for each 404 of Salunkhe to be formed in the same way as each tab 44 of Hladik so that the insert 404 is not required to be removed and stored when the track 104 is in the “first configuration” of Figs. 23 and 25.
Regarding claim 3, Salunkhe teaches that the insert 404 (the “tab”) would be aligned with the “base segment” of the track 104 in the “first configuration” 410 (Fig. 25) when modified in view of Hladik because the insert 404 would lay flat. Also, the insert 404 would extend crosswise to the “base segment” in the “second configuration” (Fig. 24) because the insert 404 would extend upwardly.
Regarding claim 5, Salunkhe teaches that the track 104 comprises multiple inserts 404 spaced along its length. See Salunkhe Fig. 22, [0101]. One of the inserts 404 reads on the “first tab” and another insert 404 reads on the “second tab.” The track 104 is shown as capturing three filters 406 via the insert 404 and the “first bracket.” One of the three filters reads on the “third filter.”
Regarding claim 6, Salunkhe teaches that the filter system comprises the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) and the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”), wherein the wide filter 412 comprises a thickness greater than the narrow filter 406. See Salunkhe Figs. 24, 25, [0101].
Regarding claim 21, Salunkhe teaches that the inert 404 (the “tab”) is disposed between the two vertical segments on either end of the track 104 (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”), as seen in Fig. 24.
Regarding claim 22, Salunkhe teaches that the insert 404 (the “tab”) and the horizontal structure in the middle of the track 104 (the “base segment”) are capable of abutting a common side of the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) in the “first configuration” (Fig. 25) because the insert 404 would lay flat. Also, the two vertical segments on either end of the track 104 (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”) are capable of abutting opposite sides of the wide filter 412 in the “first configuration,” as seen in Fig. 25.
Regarding claim 23, Salunkhe teaches that the insert 404 (the “tab”) and the back vertical segment seen in Fig. 24 (the “first bracket”) are configured to abut opposite sides of the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) in the “second configuration,” as seen in Fig. 24.
Regarding claim 25, Salunkhe teaches that the filter track 104 is formed from sheet metal. See Salunkhe [0068].
Regarding claim 27, Salunkhe teaches a lock plate 434 (a “mounting flange”) to couple to a structural component 492 of the HVAC system (i.e., the housing). See Salunkhe Fig. 29, [0110].
Regarding claim 28, Salunkhe illustrates that the distance from the insert 404 to each vertical segment (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”) is approximately equal (Fig. 24) meaning that the thickness of the wide filter 412 is about twice the narrow filter 406. It would have been obvious for the thickness of the wide filter 412 to be twice that of the narrow filter 406 because the wide filter 412 is thicker than the narrow filter 406, and selecting the appropriate dimensions is an obvious design choice. When the wide filter 412 to be twice that of the narrow filter 406, the distance from the “first bracket” to the rotational axis (i.e., to the insert 404) would be equal to the distance from the “second bracket” to the rotational insert 404.
Regarding claims 29 and 30, Salunkhe teaches that the filter track 104 (extending up in the middle track seen in Fig. 24) reads on the “first filter track” and the horizontal segment is the “first base segment.”
Also the track system comprises a “second filter track” (extending downward in the middle track seen in Fig. 24) comprising a second horizontal segment (the “second base segment”) and two vertical segments (the “third bracket” and the “fourth bracket”). The “second filter track” is configured to capture a filter 406 (the “third filter”), as seen in Fig. 24. The “first base segment” abuts the “second base segment,” as seen in Fig. 24. Further, the two vertical segments of the “first filter track” (the “first bracket” and the “second bracket”) extend upward (the “first direction”) while the two vertical segments of the “second filter track” (the “third bracket” and the “fourth bracket”) extend downward (the “second direction, opposite the first direction), as seen in Fig. 24.
PNG
media_image6.png
1028
1187
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claim 24 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 in view of Hladik, US 3,884,662 and in further view of Kilian et al., US 2017/0073968 A1.
Regarding claim 24, Salunkhe in view of Hladik teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Salunkhe in view of Hladik differs from claim 1 because it is silent as to the plurality of cuts to form each tab 44 comprising a third plurality of cuts extending aligned with the rotational axis.
But Hladik teaches that the each tab 44 is a piece of sheet metal that can be bent upwardly at the junction with the bottom of the horizontal channel member 42. See Hladik Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 1–44.
With this in mind, Kilian teaches that it is beneficial to provide perforation lines in a metallic sheet to assist in bending. See Kilian [0042]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to provide perforation lines along the junction line of each tab 44 of Hladik to make it easier to bend. With this modification, the perforation lines would read on the “third plurality of cuts extending aligned with the rotational axis.”
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Salunkhe et al., US 2020/0269173 A1 in view of Hladik, US 3,884,662 and in further view of Conrad, US 2019/0145655 A1.
Regarding claim 26, Salunkhe as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Salunkhe as modified differs from claim 26 because it is silent as to the wide and narrow filters 412, 406 (the “first filter” and the “second filter”) being a HEPA and/or ULPA filter.
But Conrad teaches that a typical HVAC physical filter has a HEPA rating. See Conrad [0009]. Therefore, it would have been obvious for the wide filter 412 (the “first filter”) and the narrow filter 406 (the “second filter”) of Salunkhe to each be a HEPA filter because this is conventional for an air filter in an HVAC system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the elected claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. BENNETT MCKENZIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5327. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
T. BENNETT MCKENZIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
/T. BENNETT MCKENZIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776