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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Amendment
Amendments to the claims, filed on 08/04/2025, are accepted and do not introduce new matter.
Claims 1-18 are pending; claims 19-34 are cancelled; claims 2-7 and 9-18 are withdrawn; claims 1 and 8 are examined hereafter.
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stouffer (U.S. 5,749,525) in view of Gopalan et al (U.S. 2008/0011868).
Regarding claim 1, Stouffer teaches a feedback type fluidic oscillator device (seen in Figs 5A-5B) with three-dimensional output (as seen below, fluid exits the outlet three dimensions, length-wise, width-wise, and height-wise), the device comprising:
a body (shown below) having a first surface (shown below) and a second surface (shown below) spaced apart from the first surface (as seen below, the two surfaces are spaced apart), wherein the first surface and the second surface at least partially define an inner channel (shown below), the inner channel comprising:
an interaction chamber (show below) having a first attachment wall (shown below) and a second attachment wall (shown below) extending between the first surface and the second surface (the attachment walls are disclosed as sidewalls that cause a fluid jet to sweep back and forth therebetween, disclosed in the abstract; as such they must extend between the first and second surfaces in order to retain the fluid sweeping between the two attachment walls), the first attachment wall and the second attachment wall being opposite and spaced apart from each other (as seen below, the two attachment walls are opposite and spaced apart from each other),
a fluid supply inlet (shown below) configured to introduce a fluid stream into the interaction chamber (as seen below, the supply inlet is upstream of the interaction chamber, thus feeding the chamber a fluid stream),
an outlet nozzle (disclosed as OL, and shown below) downstream of the fluid supply inlet (as seen below, the outlet nozzle is downstream of the inlet), wherein the fluid stream exits the interaction chamber through the outlet nozzle (as seen below, the fluid exits the interaction chamber at the only exit point, the outlet nozzle), and
a first feedback channel (shown below) coupled to the first attachment wall (as seen below) and a second feedback channel (shown below) coupled to the second attachment wall (as seen below), the first feedback channel and second feedback channel being in fluid communication with the interaction chamber (as seen below, the two feedback channels have first and second ends for fluid communication with the interaction chamber), each of the first feedback channel and second feedback channel having a first end (shown below) and a second end (shown below) opposite and spaced apart from the first end (as seen below, each of the first ends are opposite and spaced apart from respective second ends), wherein the first end is adjacent the outlet nozzle and the second end is adjacent the fluid supply inlet (as seen below, the first ends are adjacent to the outlet nozzle, and the second ends are adjacent to the inlet), wherein the first attachment wall and second attachment wall of the interaction chamber are configured to allow fluid from the fluid stream to flow into the first end of the first feedback channel and the first end of the second feedback channel and to cause the fluid stream to sweep between the first attachment wall and second attachment wall of the interaction chamber (as disclosed in abstract the attachment walls, disclosed as sidewalls, cause fluid to sweep between them, as disclosed in abstract; Moreover, the oscillator of Stouffer has all the claimed structural features and the interaction chamber and attachment walls look the same as Applicant’s drawings, as such their device is further deemed capable of performing this function); wherein the sweeping of the fluid stream between the first attachment wall and second attachment wall of the interaction chamber causes the fluid stream exiting the outlet nozzle to sweep (see Fig 1B, which shows an exit fluid stream with a fan angle “FA” that sweeps back and forth; see col 4, lines 46-64, which discloses the embodiment of Figs 5A-5B also having a fan angle, i.e. the features of Fig 1B are incorporated into the embodiment of Figs 5A-5B); and
wherein a portion (shown below) of the inner channel has a maximum thickness (as shown below), as measured from between the first surface and the second surface (as shown below), that is thicker than another portion of the inner channel such (the portion of the inner channel with maximum thickness is thicker than another portion, for example thicker than the thickness of the inner channel adjacent to the supply inlet) that the fluid stream exiting the outlet nozzle sweeps three-dimensionally (the shape of the inner channel allows for a deflection angle “DA”, as disclosed in col 4 line 46 to col 5 line 4, wherein this angle adds a three-dimensional sweep to the exiting stream; the first dimension corresponds to the fluid exiting length-wise, the second corresponds to the fan angle “FA”, and the third corresponds to the deflection angled “DA”).
However, Stouffer does not teach the oscillator wherein the fluid stream exiting the outlet nozzle comprises two or more fluid streams, and the outlet nozzle is angled such that the two or more fluid streams exiting the outlet nozzle collide with each other.
Gopalan teaches a fluidic oscillator (1) wherein the fluid stream exiting an outlet nozzle comprises two or more fluid streams (as shown in Fig 5, outlets 16 and 18 each produce a fluid stream), and the outlet nozzle is angled such that the two or more fluid streams exiting the outlet nozzle collide with each other (as seen in Fig 5 and disclosed in Par 0047, the two fluid streams collide with each other).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stouffer to incorporate the teachings of Gopalan to provide two fluid streams that intersect in order to yield desired three-dimensionality and strength to the resulting spray (as disclosed in Pars 0021 and 0040 of Gopalan).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stouffer (U.S. 5,749,525) in view of Gopalan et al (U.S. 2008/0011868); further in view of Gopalan et al (U.S. 8,172,162), hereafter referred to as Gopalan 162.
Regarding claim 8, Stouffer and Gopalan teach the device of claim 1, wherein each of the two or more exiting fluid streams sweep in a separate sweeping plane (as seen in Fig 5 of Gopalan, the two fluid streams sweep in independent planes). However, they do not teach the device wherein the outlet nozzle includes one or more dividers configured to divide the fluid stream exiting the outlet nozzle into said two or more exiting fluid streams.
Gopalan 162 teaches a fluidic oscillator (2) wherein an outlet nozzle (shown below) includes one or more dividers (shown below) configured to divide the fluid stream exiting the outlet nozzle into two or more exiting fluid streams (as shown below).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Stouffer and Gopalan to incorporate the teachings of Gopalan 162 to provide a divider on the outlet nozzle as this set up allows for better spray distribution without the need to include two inserts into the nozzle, and instead just use one insert with a divider that provides wide coverage (as taught by Gopalan in col 8, lines 41-64). One of ordinary skill would utilize this in the device of Stouffer since it teaches a single insert structure in the nozzle whilst taking advantage of the two fluid streams as taught by Gopalan.
Stouffer annotated figure:
PNG
media_image1.png
833
1024
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Gopalan 162 annotated figure:
PNG
media_image2.png
355
569
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 8 have been considered but are moot because the arguments do not apply in view of new grounds of rejection. Applicant's amendments filed on 08/04/2025 have resulted in the new grounds of rejection found above.
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 JUAN C BARRERA whose telephone number is (571)272-6284. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F Generally 10am-4pm and 6-8pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, ARTHUR O. HALL can be reached on 571-270-1814. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
If there are any inquiries that are not being addressed by first contacting the Examiner or the Supervisor, you may send an email inquiry to TC3700_Workgroup_D_Inquiries@uspto.gov.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUAN C BARRERA/
Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/ARTHUR O. HALL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3752