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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I of Fig. 1, to cover claims 1-7, in the reply filed on 11/07/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 8-15 have been withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Interpretation
Examiner notes that claim 1 (emphasis added) recites – A construction of a containment means with an aseptic working chamber and an associated decontamination arrangement…”
“With” in the claim is being interpreted as the transitional statement that segues into the body of the claim. “With” is also being interpreted as having the same meaning as “comprising” (open ended).
Typical transitional phrases are covered in MPEP 2111.03 should the Applicant desire to replace “with” with a different transitional statement.
Claim Objections
Claim 1, and similarly claims 2 & 3, are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 recites the limitation “e) a returning air filter is fluidically connected to the returning air channel,”, to which the Examiner believes the term should be recited as “the first returning air channel”, as the first returning air channel has already been recited one line above. Appropriate correction is required. All dependent claims are similarly objected to for depending from an objected to claim.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 2 recites the limitation “wherein the returning air filter is arranged at the opening of the returning air channel”, to which the element of the opening of the returning air channel has yet to be invoked. The Examiner would suggest amending the element to be recited as “an opening of the returning air channel”. Appropriate correction is required. All dependent claims are similarly objected to for depending from an objected to claim.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6 recites the limitation “a) comprises as components a transparent front window and a transparent channel window spaced apart therefrom”, to which the phrasing of “comprises as components a transparent front window” seems to be idiomatic; To obviate the objection the Examiner would recommend the Applicant amend to something similar to “comprises of components that make up a transparent front window”, or the like. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “air guide element” in claims 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
The corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function is a laminarizer, or a mesh-like sterile air distributor, identified as element number 9 as at least illustrated in Figure 1, and at least described in Page 7, Lines 14-33 of the 06/08/2022 specification.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xiaodong (CN102090979) in view of Hunter et al (US 10,507,500).
Regarding claim 1, Xiaodong (CN102090979) shows a construction of a containment means with an aseptic working chamber and an associated decontamination arrangement, wherein:
a) the working chamber (see Annotated Figure 1) has a base (see Annotated Figure 1) at the bottom (see Annotated Figure 1);
b) above the working chamber there is a circulating air zone (see Annotated Figure 1), in which a circulating air filter (see Annotated Figure 1) with a circulating air fan (see Annotated Figure 1) is arranged (see Annotated Figure 1);
c) the circulating air zone and the working chamber are delimited towards the outside by a housing (see Annotated Figure 1);
d) at least a first returning air channel (see Annotated Figure 1) leads from the working chamber into the circulating air zone (see Annotated Figure 1); and
e) a returning air filter (see Annotated Figure 1) is fluidically connected to the returning air channel (see Annotated Figure 1), and an opening of the first returning air channel that faces the circulating air zone (see Annotated Figure 1).
However, Xiaodong lacks showing the returning air filter is arranged facing the circulating air zone.
Hunter (US 10,507,500), a ventilated workstation, is in the same field of endeavor as Xiaodong which is a ventilated workstation.
Hunter teaches showing the air filter (30, Fig. 4) is arranged facing the air zone (35, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the opening of the first returning air channel and returning air filter of Xiaodong to incorporate the teachings of the air filter of Hunter, which would ensure all air recirculated through the first returning air channel is filtered and maintains a constant inflow air volume providing safe and consistent containment of air (Col. 4, Lines 35-40).
PNG
media_image1.png
540
751
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 2, Xiaodong shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1 including the returning air filter, the opening of the returning air channel, and the circulating air zone.
However, Xiaodong lacks showing wherein the returning air filter is arranged at the opening of the returning air channel into the circulating air zone or in the returning air channel.
Hunter teaches the air filter (30, Fig. 4) is arranged at the opening of the air channel (70, Fig. 4) into the circulating air zone or in the air channel (Fig. 4 – the air filter is arranged at the opening of the air channel, in the air channel 7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the opening of the first returning air channel and returning air filter of Xiaodong to incorporate the teachings of the air filter of Hunter, which would ensure all air recirculated through the first returning air channel is filtered and maintains a constant inflow air volume providing safe and consistent containment of air (Col. 4, Lines 35-40).
Regarding claim 3, Xiaodong shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 2 including the returning air filter and wherein the opening of the returning air channel,
a) is in the form of a projection which widens the circulating air zone or projects into the circulating air zone (see Annotated Figure 1 – the opening of the first returning air channel is in the form of a projection which widens the circulating air zone as it approaches the working chamber below)
or
b) merges into the circulating air zone without a projection, virtually with a linear cross-section.
However, Xiaodong lack showing wherein the opening of the returning air channel which holds the returning air filter
However, Xiaodong lacks showing the opening of the first returning air channel holding the returning air filter.
Hunter shows showing the opening of the air channel (70, Fig. 4 – the air filter 30 is located at the opening of the air channel 70) holding the air filter (Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the opening of the first returning air channel and returning air filter of Xiaodong to incorporate the teachings of the air filter of Hunter, which would ensure all air recirculated through the first returning air channel is filtered and maintains a constant inflow air volume providing safe and consistent containment of air (Col. 4, Lines 35-40).
Regarding claim 4, Xiaodong shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 1 including a) the returning air filter (27, Fig. 4), and b) the circulating air filter (30, Fig. 4) is in the form of a plate filter (Fig. 4) or an exchangeable filter cartridge or a replaceable filter insert.
However, Xiaodong lacks showing a) the returning air filter is in the form of a plate filter or an exchangeable filter cartridge or a replaceable filter insert.
Hunter teaches a) the air filter (30, Fig. 4) is in the form of a plate filter (Fig. 4) or an exchangeable filter cartridge or a replaceable filter insert.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the returning air filter of Xiaodong to incorporate the teachings of the air filter of Hunter, which would ensure all air recirculated through the first returning air channel is filtered by a uniform filter distribution and maintains a constant inflow air volume providing safe and consistent containment of air (Col. 4, Lines 35-40).
Regarding claim 5, Xiaodong shows wherein:
a) a single returning air filter (see Annotated Figure 1) or a series of interacting returning air filters is provided (see Annotated Figure 1); and
b) a single circulating air filter (see Annotated Figure 1) or a series of interacting circulating air filters is installed (see Annotated Figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, Xiaodong shows wherein the at least a first returning air channel:
a) comprises as components a transparent front window and a transparent channel window spaced apart therefrom (Fig. 3 / see Annotated Figure 1 – the first returning air channel comprises of double glazed glass, that of a transparent front window and a transparent channel window, in which a glove opening 21 is located within both); and
b) has an inflow opening (see Annotated Figure 1) which is situated above and close to the base (see Annotated Figure 1)..
Regarding claim 7, Xiaodong shows wherein an air guide element (5, Fig. 1/4) extends between the circulating air zone and the working chamber (see Annotated Figure 1) and serves to generate a parallel displacement flow (LF) flowing downwards in the working chamber (¶0025 – more uniform and stable laminar flow (LF) occurs through the air guide element 5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN L FAULKNER whose telephone number is (469)295-9209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-7, Every other F: Flex.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/RYAN L FAULKNER/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762