DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to the amendment filed on May 29th, 2026. Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 § 112(a)
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Regarding claim 17, the claim requires the controller to “apply the voltage to different emitter stripes of the plurality of emitter stripes.” However, the parent claim, claim 16 requires the plurality of emitter stripes to comprise a “single, continuous metal layer” which means a voltage applied is applied to all the emitter stripes together. Therefore, it is impossible to apply a voltage to different emitter stripes.
Regarding claim 18, the claim requires the controller to “apply the voltage to the redundant emitter stripe upon failure of another emitter stripe of the plurality of emitter stripes.” However, the parent claim, claim 16 requires the plurality of emitter stripes to comprise a “single, continuous metal layer” which means a voltage applied is applied to all the emitter stripes together. Therefore, it is impossible to apply a voltage to a redundant emitter stripe separate from the other emitter stripe(s).
Regarding claim 19, the claim requires the controller to apply “the voltage to a different number of emitter elements based upon a desired rate of air flow.” However, the parent claim, claim 16 requires the plurality of emitter stripes to comprise a “single, continuous metal layer” which means a voltage applied is applied to all the emitter stripes together. Therefore, it is impossible to apply a voltage to different numbers of elements, voltage can only be applied to all of them or none of them.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “wherein the dielectric substrate comprises one or more removed portions”. It is unclear what comprises a removed portion. Examiner’s best guess is that the removed portions are a hole or aperture in the dielectric substrate, however this is already claimed and it is clear the limitation does not refer to an additional aperture because it is followed up with “wherein the aperture is created by removing the one or more removed portions”. Therefore, examiner’s tentative interpretation that the removed portion is an aperture would boil down to a limitation that states, in essence, the aperture is created by creating an aperture. While a tautologically true statement is in unclear what this would add as a limitation. For the purposes of comparison to the prior art this is the interpretation examiner will take, since it the is only apparent meaning.
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2011/0261499 (Hizer et al.) in view of US 2012/0008249 (Sawyer et al.) and US 2010/0116363 (Jewell-Larsen et al.).
The following annotated figure from Hizer et al. is referenced;
PNG
media_image1.png
602
870
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Hizer et al. discloses an ionic air flow generator comprising:
a dielectric substrate (fig. 2A-B, element 34, wherein ‘The isolator is made of a dielectric material, such as plastic, ceramic, and the like.’ P 37) having:
a first side (as annotated above, note that element 38 is a portion of element 34, “The emitter supports 38 are the portions of the isolator 34 that define the physical spatial relationship between the emitter electrodes 34 and other components of the ion wind fan 30.” P 44);
an opposing second side (as annotated above); and
an aperture separating at least a portion of the first side from at least a portion of the second side (as annotated above);
a first conductor comprising one or more emitter stripes, wherein each emitter stripe of the one or more emitter stripes is suspended across the aperture and has two ends disposed on and supported by a side of the dielectric substrate (fig. 2A-B, element 36, wherein ‘However, in a real-world ion wind fan 10, the emitter electrodes 12 can be implemented as wires, shims, blades, pins, and numerous other geometries.’ P 29); and
a second conductor comprising a single, continuous metal layer deposited directly onto the second side of the dielectric substrate, wherein the second conductor comprises multiple collector portions and one or more holes between the multiple collector portions from the single, continuous metal layer, wherein each collector portion of the multiple collector portions is suspended across the aperture and has two ends disposed on and supported by the opposing second side of the dielectric substrate (fig. 2A-B, element 32, ‘The collector electrode 32 is essentially a plate with rows of oval holes lined up along the length of each emitter electrode 36.’ P 47, where etching forms holes);
wherein the dielectric substrate maintains an air gap between the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector portions (‘The emitter electrodes 36 are suspended in air, and held a substantially constant air gap 39 distance away from the collector electrode 32.’ P 45), and wherein ionized air is drawn to the collector portions (‘As described partially above, ion wind is generated by the ion wind fan 10 by applying a high voltage potential across the emitter 12 and collector 14 electrodes.’ P 35).
Hizer does not disclose the first conductor comprises a single, continuous metal layer disposed directly onto the first side of the substrate with holes between the one or more emitter stripes. Sawyer et al. discloses an ionic flow generator wherein the emitter comprises a single, continuous metal layer disposed directly onto the first side of the substrate with holes between the one or more emitter stripes (“One or more wire emitter electrodes are welded to the emitter bus plate at a first end of the emitter wires and to the emitter attachment plate at a second end of the emitter wires.” Abstract, wherein welding of the metal wires to the metal bus plates creates a single continuous metal layer with holes or spaces between the emitter stripes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the ionic air flow generator of Hizer to include the bus plate and welding of Sawyer et al. so that only a single connection to voltage is needed, disclosed by Sawyer et al. (“The emitter electrodes 65, in one embodiment, are bused together and the bus is connected to or includes an emitter prong 62 that protrudes from the isolator 40.” P 58)
Hizer also does not disclose the collector portions comprising stripes, instead leaving a middle section portion of the plate whole so that the collector portions all connect at the middle. Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses an ionic air flow generator comprising such collector stripes (fig. 5-9C, element 120 comprising multiple stripes 121). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the multiple collector stripes of Jewell-Larsen for the plate collector of Hizer et al. to increase electric field uniformity, a problem with the plate design acknowledged by Hizer et al. (‘The collector electrode 32 is essentially a plate with rows of oval holes lined up along the length of each emitter electrode 36. This results in a non-uniform electric field along the length of the emitter electrode 36, since some portions above the wire 36 have an air passage opening 33 and some have the portions between the openings 33.’ P 47).
Regarding claim 2, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the dielectric substrate comprises a ceramic substrate or a glass substrate (‘The isolator is made of a dielectric material, such as plastic, ceramic, and the like.’ P 37).
Regarding claim 3, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the dielectric substrate comprises one or more removed portions, wherein the aperture is created by removing the one or more removed portions (as annotated above).
Regarding claim 4, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the one or more emitter stripes and multiple collector stripes form a regular pattern (Hizer fig. 2A-B, Sawyer fig. 3A-4B, and Jewell-Larsen fig. 5-7).
Regarding claim 5, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the one or more emitter stripes have cross sections with corners (Hizer ‘In the descriptions and Figures above, the emitter electrodes have been represented by wire electrodes. However, other embodiments of the present invention can use different emitter geometries, such as shim emitters, bar emitters, pin emitters, and other such emitter electrodes.’ P 94 or Jewell-Larson et al., ‘corona discharge electrode 110 may take the shape of barbed wire, a band, blade or place that, in some embodiments, may present a knife- or serrated-edge.’).
Regarding claim 6, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the claimed invention except for at least one of the corners having a radius of curvature not greater than 30 micrometers (um). Emitter electrodes with a radius of curvature less than 30 um are known in the art. It would have been obvious to use an emitter with such a radius of curvature because this would increase ion production, as disclosed in Jewell-larsen et al. ‘Typically, a small radius of curvature or sharp point tends to facilitate ion production at an appropriate point when high voltage is applied.’ P 60) and the specific value of 30 um is not disclosed to be critical.
Regarding claim 7, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the multiple collector stripes have cross sections without corners (‘For example, utilizing a generally curved leading surface 136 for instances of collector electrode 120 may allow for a shorter distance, d, between corona electrode 110 and collector electrode 121, while at the same time increasing ion production and assisting in preventing sparks and arcing.’ P 85).
Regarding claim 8, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the one or more emitter stripes are oriented perpendicular to the collector stripes (Hizer et al., all figures, Sawyer et al., fig. 3A-4B, also Jewell-Larsen et al., all figures).
Regarding claim 9, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 8, wherein:
the ends of the one or more emitter stripes comprise emitter patches that are disposed on and are supported by the first side of the dielectric substrate on opposite sides of the aperture, wherein the emitter patches of the one or more emitter stripes are electrically connected to each other and to an emitter electrode of the one or more emitter stripes (Sawyer, fig. 3A-4B, emitter patches are equivalent to buses 66, 68); and
the ends of the collector stripes comprise collector patches that are disposed on and supported by the second side of the dielectric substrate on opposite sides of the aperture, wherein the collector patches of the multiple collector stripes are electrically connected to each other and to a collector electrode (Hizer et al., fig. 2A-B, portion of collector electrode on the dielectric, also Jewell-Larsen et al., element 132, wherein ‘additional structures (such as support members 132) may be electrically conductive and act as part of an overall "collector electrode."’ P 82).
Regarding claim 10, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses the claimed invention except for isolation notches at the corners of the aperture that increase a creep distance between the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector stripes. Such isolation notches are generally known in the art and it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the air flow generator of Hizer to include such notches to increase creep distance.
Regarding claim 11, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the dielectric substrate maintains a consistent spacing for the air gap between the emitter stripes and the collector stripes (‘substantially constant air gap’ P 45).
Regarding claim 12, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein the dielectric substrate encompasses the aperture, thereby creating a flow area between the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector stripes for the flow of air (fig. 2A-B).
Regarding claim 13, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the claimed invention except Hizer is silent as to whether a flow area between the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector stripes for the flow of air is not more than 50mm2. Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses a flow area between the emitter and the collector for the flow of air as small as 2.5mm2 (‘corona discharge electrode assembly 1210 (see FIG. 19A) may have a height, H, in the range of 0.5 mm to 30 mm, and a length, L, chosen to meet the needs of the particular enclosure within which the EHD device will operate.’ P 132 wherein L is constrained by equation 3, such that for a height of 0.5 mm length is between 5mm and 20mm). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use the small flow area of Jewell-Larsen et al. to provide a compact fluid path allowing for more collisions between the air molecules and the ions, thereby increasing flow rate, where the specific area of 50mm2 is not disclosed to be critical.
Regarding claim 14, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the ionic air flow generator of claim 1, wherein a flow of ionized air through the aperture has flow rate not less than 2 liters per minute through each cm2 of flow area (intended use, non-limiting).
Regarding claim 15, Hizer et al. in view of Sawyer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. disclose the claimed invention except Hizer is silent as to whether the air gap between the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector stripes is not more than 2 mm. Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses air gaps of not more than 2 mm (‘the distance, d, between corona discharge electrode 110 and collector electrodes 121 is approximately 1.6 mm.’ P 84). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to design the ionic air flow generator of Hizer et al. to use air gaps of not greater than 2 mm as done in Jewell-Larsen et al. to increase the electric field, where the specific value of 2 mm is not disclosed to be critical.
Regarding claim 16, Hizer discloses an air flow system comprising: an ionic air flow generator comprising:
a dielectric substrate having a first side an opposing second side, and an aperture separating at least a portion of the first side from at least a portion of the second side (fig. 2A-B, element 34, wherein ‘The isolator is made of a dielectric material, such as plastic, ceramic, and the like.’ P 37, see annotated figure for first and opposing second sides and aperture);
a first conductor, wherein the first conductor comprises one or more emitter stripes and one or more first holes between the one or more emitter stripes, wherein each emitter stripe of the one or more emitter stripes is suspended across the aperture and has two ends deposed on and supported by the first side of the dielectric substrate (fig. 2A-B, element 36, wherein ‘However, in a real-world ion wind fan 10, the emitter electrodes 12 can be implemented as wires, shims, blades, pins, and numerous other geometries.’ P 29); and
a second conductor comprising a second single, continuous metal layer deposited directly onto the second side of the dielectric substrate, wherein the second conductor comprises multiple collector portions and one or more second holes between the multiple collector portions formed from the second single, continuous metal layer, wherein each collector portion of the multiple collector portions is suspended across the aperture and has two ends disposed on and supported by the opposing second side of the dielectric substrate (fig. 2A-B, element 32, ‘The collector electrode 32 is essentially a plate with rows of oval holes lined up along the length of each emitter electrode 36.’ P 47, where etching forms holes);
wherein the dielectric substrate maintains an air gap between the emitter stripes and the collector portions, and a controller configured to apply a voltage to the one or more emitter stripes and the multiple collector portions (‘The emitter electrodes 36 are suspended in air, and held a substantially constant air gap 39 distance away from the collector electrode 32.’ P 45), wherein applied voltage ionizes air at the one or more emitter stripes and the ionized air is drawn to the multiple collector portions (‘As described partially above, ion wind is generated by the ion wind fan 10 by applying a high voltage potential across the emitter 12 and collector 14 electrodes.’ P 35).
Hizer does not disclose the first conductor comprises a single, continuous metal layer disposed directly onto the first side of the substrate with holes between the one or more emitter stripes. Sawyer et al. discloses an ionic flow generator wherein the emitter comprises a single, continuous metal layer disposed directly onto the first side of the substrate with holes between the one or more emitter stripes (“One or more wire emitter electrodes are welded to the emitter bus plate at a first end of the emitter wires and to the emitter attachment plate at a second end of the emitter wires.” Abstract, wherein welding of the metal wires to the metal bus plates creates a single continuous metal layer with holes or spaces between the emitter stripes).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to modify the ionic air flow generator of Hizer to include the bus plate and welding of Sawyer et al. so that only a single connection to voltage is needed, disclosed by Sawyer et al. (“The emitter electrodes 65, in one embodiment, are bused together and the bus is connected to or includes an emitter prong 62 that protrudes from the isolator 40.” P 58)
Hizer also does not disclose the collector portions comprising stripes, instead leaving a middle section portion of the plate whole so that the collector portions all connect at the middle. Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses an ionic air flow generator comprising such collector stripes (fig. 5-9C, element 120 comprising multiple stripes 121). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to substitute the multiple collector stripes of Jewell-Larsen for the plate collector of Hizer et al. to increase electric field uniformity, a problem with the plate design acknowledged by Hizer et al. (‘The collector electrode 32 is essentially a plate with rows of oval holes lined up along the length of each emitter electrode 36. This results in a non-uniform electric field along the length of the emitter electrode 36, since some portions above the wire 36 have an air passage opening 33 and some have the portions between the openings 33.’ P 47).
Regarding claim 20, Hizer et al. in view of Sayer et al. and Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses the claimed invention except Hizer et al. is silent as to whether an applied voltage does not exceed 2kV. Jewell-Larsen et al. discloses an air flow system using such an applied voltage (‘The voltage applied across the air gap between corona discharge electrode 110 and collector electrodes 121 may be in the range of 1.5 kV to 4 kV.’ P 84). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the application was filed to use a voltage that does not exceed 2kV as done in Jewell-Larsen et al. to reduce power consumption, wherein it is not disclosed that the particular value of 2kV is critical.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed May 29th, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that neither Hizer nor Jewell-Larsen disclose first and second continuous metal layers. Regarding the first continuous metal layer that forms the emitter, examiner relies on newly cited art Sawyer et al. to teach this newly claimed limitation. Regarding the second continuous metal layer, Hizer very clearly discloses a collector electrode comprising a single, continuous metal layer with holes (see for example, fig. 2A, element 32). It is unclear to examiner why applicant believes Hizer does not teach this, and applicant does not elaborate in their arguments.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART whose telephone number is (571)270-5782. The examiner can normally be reached 10am - 6pm Pacific Time M-F.
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, Robert Kim can be reached at 571-272-2293. 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.
/ELIZA W OSENBAUGH-STEWART/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881
Prosecution Insights