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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5, 7-9, 17, 20, 23-26, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2015/0283282) in view of Nakano (US 2021/0199104).
Regarding claim 1, Kim (US 2015/0283282) discloses –
An odor presentation module (Title, Abstract; Figs. 1-2, 5-6, and 21) comprising:
a first opening configured to pass first airflow containing an odor (see fig. 21, display 10 has a first opening, emission port 16, from which fragrance is emitted; par. 117); and
a second opening configured to pass second airflow (the second of the plurality of emission ports 16, shown in fig. 21; pars. 119-120 disclose air being discharged through the emission ports 16), wherein
based on an arrangement of the first opening and the second opening, movement of the first airflow that exits the first opening is controllable by the second airflow (the air out of any of the ports 16 would affect and therefore reasonably be said to at least in part control the air out of any of the other respective ports 16; par. 123 discloses a mixing outside of the housing 20, and the device disclosed by Kim is well capable of performing this function and is reasonably expected to do so, see MPEP 2114, II). Kim appears to be silent with regards to the claimed configuration of opening surface areas.
Nakano (US 2021/0199104) teaches an odor presentation module (title, abstract) including first and second openings where an area of an opening of an open surface of the second opening is greater than an area of an open surface of the first opening (Fig. 7 shows the air passages 384 having a large opening surface and the top of device 50 has opening section 64 that is smaller). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kim such that an area of an opening surface of the second opening is greater than an area of an opening surface of the first opening as taught by Nakano to arrive at the claimed invention. One would have been motivated to do so to optimize the delivery characteristics and thus mixing of the odors, which is a stated goal of Kim (see pars. 91 and 93), to arrive at an improved device. Furthermore, the modification of the surface areas of these openings is nothing more than the routine optimization of the outlet size of a nozzle, which would achieve nothing more than predictable results with experimentation that is only ordinary, se MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 2, Kim further teaches the odor presentation module includes a first airflow generation device (open air inlet 82 receives air from nozzle 52 to create the airflow, par. 91), and an odor carrying portion configured to carry the odor (fig. 21, the solid fragrance sources 90 in container main body 80 both read on an odor carrying portion; par. 87), wherein
the odor presentation module is configured such that airflow generated by the first airflow generation device and the odor included in the odor carrying portion form the first airflow (par. 91).
Regarding claim 3, Kim further teaches a second airflow generation device, configured to generate the second airflow (each of the cartridges 14 is provided with an open air inlet 82 from which air is delivered from a source).
Regarding claim 4, Kim further teaches the first opening is configured to inject that the first airflow (an airflow is created at the outlet of port 16, par. 123).
Regarding claim 5, Kim further teaches the first airflow is in contact with the second airflow other outside the odor presentation module (par. 21 and par. 123 disclose that mixing of the airflows outside the housing is a function of the device).
Regarding claim 7, Kim further teaches the first opening is in front of the second airflow generation device in a traveling direction of the second airflow (the opening 16 is ahead of the air supply port 54 and therefore is in front of it in that direction, see fig. 4 and 21).
Regarding claim 8, Kim further teaches the first airflow generation device is further configured to change a flow velocity of the first airflow and the second airflow device is further configured to change a flow velocity of the second airflow (pars. 91 and 93 disclose an adjusting of the drive rate of the airflow source 26, and the airflow velocities would interact and change one another by coming into contact with each other).
Regarding claim 9, Kim further teaches the second airflow generation device is further configured to change a direction of the second airflow to a direction into the second opening (Fig. 21, the airflow must enter into the second opening 16 from the direction of air discharge port 50, reading on this limitation).
Regarding claim 17, Kim discloses –
An odor presentation device (Title, Abstract; Figs. 1-2, 5-6, and 21) comprising:
an odor presentation module (main body 20 and the interior components thereof) including
a first opening configured to pass a first airflow containing an odor (first of the plurality of emission ports 16),
a second opening configured to pass a second airflow (second of the plurality of emission ports 16), wherein
based on an arrangement of the first opening and the second opening, movement of the first airflow that exits the first opening is controllable by the second airflow (the air out of any of the ports 16 would affect and therefore reasonably be said to at least in part control the air out of any of the other respective ports 16; par. 123 discloses a mixing outside of the housing 20 - the device disclosed by Kim is well capable of performing this function and is reasonably expected to do so, see MPEP 2114, II); and
a housing configured to hold the odor presentation module (housing 20). Kim appears to be silent with regards to the claimed configuration of opening surface areas.
Nakano (US 2021/0199104) teaches an odor presentation module (title, abstract) including first and second openings where an area of an opening of an open surface of the second opening is greater than an area of an open surface of the first opening (Fig. 7 shows the air passages 384 having a large opening surface and the top of device 50 has opening section 64 that is smaller). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kim such that an area of an opening surface of the second opening is greater than an area of an opening surface of the first opening as taught by Nakano to arrive at the claimed invention. One would have been motivated to do so to optimize the delivery characteristics and thus mixing of the odors, which is a stated goal of Kim (see pars. 91 and 93), to arrive at an improved device. Furthermore, the modification of the surface areas of these openings is nothing more than the routine optimization of the outlet size of a nozzle, which would achieve nothing more than predictable results with experimentation that is only ordinary, se MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 20, Kim further teaches a third opening configured to pass a third airflow containing an odor; and
a fourth opening configured to pass a fourth airflow (figs. 21-22 show a plurality of openings that are equivalent to the first and second as set forth above and would further read on the claimed limitation of a third and fourth), wherein
based on an arrangement of the third opening and the fourth opening, movement of the third airflow exiting the third opening is controllable by the fourth airflow, (similar to the first and second openings, the airflow out of any of the openings 16 would mix with and dictate the flow characteristics of the airflow out of any of the other openings; par. 123),
the third opening and the first opening are arranged symmetrically,
the a fourth opening and the second opening are arranged symmetrically (Fig. 22 shows symmetrically placed openings on a hexagonally shaped plate, reading on 1st through 4th opening that are symmetrically disposed on the device as claimed).
Regarding claim 23, Kim further teaches the first opening is outside the second opening (Figs. 21 and 22 best show the openings 16 as distinct from one another).
Regarding claim 24, Kim further teaches the odor carrying portion is further configured to spray a plurality of scents and each scent of the plurality of scents matches a scene of a plurality of scenes of while the video (par. 67 disclose the emission is intended to match with audio-visual experiences such as a video or video game; pars. 41 and 94 disclose that at least 6 scents are individually released).
Regarding claim 25, Kim further teaches the odor carrying portion is configured to generate wind (the outlets 16 produce a flow of air which would read on the limitation of generating wind, par. 123).
Regarding claim 26, Kim further teaches the odor presentation module further includes a plurality of odor carrying portions configured to carry the odor (fig. 21, there are a plurality of fragrance source cartridges 14 that carry fragrance; par. 69), wherein the plurality of odor carrying portions includes the odor carrying portion (the solid fragrance sources 90 and main body 80 are located within the plurality of fragrance source cartridges 14).
Regarding claim 28, Kim further teaches at least one connection terminal configured to connect to a smartphone (pars. 67 and 91 disclose the device operates in tandem with a mobile phone that sends instructions to the device, which would require at least one wired or wireless connection for interfacing with said mobile device which would read on the limitation of a terminal).
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (US 2015/0283282) in view of Nakano (US 2021/0199104) as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Edwards (US 2015/0048178)
Regarding claim 21, Kim is set forth above with regards to claim 1 but appears to be silent with regards to a strap or headband part.
Edwards (US 2015/0048178) discloses an olfactory sensation system (title) including a strap or headband part (Figs. 2a-b cables 118a, 118b; par. 134). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kim such that it includes some strap or headband part as disclosed by Edwards to arrive at the claimed invention. One would have been motivated to do so to conveniently allow for portable olfactory experiences that are synced to audio-visual presentations from devices like smartphones as disclosed as desirable by Kim (par. 67) to arrive at an improved device.
Regarding claim 22, Kim is silent with regards to a headband or strap part, but Edwards (US 2015/0048178) further discloses an olfactory sensation system (title) including a strap or headband part (Figs. 2a-b cables 118a, 118b; par. 134). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device disclosed by Kim such that it includes a strap or headband part as disclosed by Edwards to arrive at the claimed invention. One would have been motivated to do so to conveniently allow for portable olfactory experiences that are synced to audio-visual presentations from devices like smartphones as disclosed as desirable by Kim (par. 67) to arrive at an improved device.
Regarding the limitation that the second opening is at a first distance from the strap part or the headband part and the first opening is at a second distance from the at least one of the strap part or headband part and the first distance is less than the second distance: both the emission portions 16 disclosed by Kim are identical in structure and function and as shown in Edwards (see figs. 1a-b and 4a-b) one of the openings that reads on the second opening is closer to the strap 118 than another different opening that can read on the first opening, therefore meeting the claimed limitation.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/7/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The amendments have obviated the 112(b) rejection.
Applicant’s remarks directed towards Kim arguing the reference does not teach all of the limitations of claims 1 and 17 are not persuasive as Kim is not relied upon for teaching the contested limitations. The newly cited Nakano is relied upon as necessitated by Applicant’s amendment to the claims.
Claims 1, 17 and their dependents remain rejected.
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 BRENDAN A HENSEL whose telephone number is (571)272-6615. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thu 8:30 - 7pm;.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/BRENDAN A HENSEL/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights