DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
This is an office action in response to Applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 01/24/2026. Claims 1, 3-10, and 12-20 are pending in the application. Claims 3-6, 17 and 19 have been withdrawn and claims 1, 7-10, 12-16, 18, and 20 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.
New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are necessitated by the amendments.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 1/24/2026 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-10, 12-13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Adkins (US 20210348783) in view of Barron et al. (US 20230001029) (prior art eligible under 102(a)(2) with an effectively filed date of 7/1/21).
Regarding claim 1, Adkins teaches an air sterilization box for treating room air (Fig. 16, device 100 [abstract]), the sterilization box comprising:
an intake chamber configured to receive room air drawn into the sterilization box (Fig. 16, chamber 110 [0089]),
a first plurality of first ultraviolet (UV) light emitting diodes (LEDs) within the intake chamber configured to irradiate air drawn into the intake chamber with UV radiation having a first wavelength (Fig. 16, plurality of LEDs 140 configured to emit UV radiation into chamber 110 within 200-300 nm, adjacent to first opening 114a [0041]),
one or more flow paths configured to receive air from the intake chamber (Fig. 16, flow path 117 receives air from intake chamber 110), and
a second plurality of second UV LEDs within the one or more flow paths configured to irradiate air drawn through the flow paths to produce treated air, wherein the second UV LEDs provide radiation (Fig. 16, second plurality of LEDs 140 configured to emit UV radiation into chamber 110 within 200-300 nm, adjacent to second opening 114b [0041]).
However, Adkins does not teach wherein the first plurality of UV LEDs and are configured to radiate at a first peak wavelength at 405 nm, wherein the second UV LEDs provide radiation having a second peak wavelength at 470 nm, and wherein the first and second UV LEDs comprise a broad spectrum that in sum produces white light.
One having ordinary skill in the art would be concerned with the effectiveness of using ultraviolet light for lighting a space, motivating one to turn towards Barron. Barron teaches a combined light disinfection device (abstract) comprising a first light and second light source configured to combine and form a white, disinfecting light [0008] for general illumination and sterilization purposes [0003]. Barron teaches wherein the first light source may have a peak wavelength of 405 nm and the second light source may have a peak wavelength of 470 nm [0046].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first and second plurality of LED lights as taught by Adkins to emit at a peak wavelength of 405 and 470 nm, respectively, since Barron teaches these wavelengths to provide sterilizing light suitable for both disinfection [0022] and general illumination [0024] and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(A) and 2143(I)(G).
Regarding claim 7, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, wherein each of the one or more flow paths are non-linear (Adkins, Fig. 16, flow path 117 is non-linear [0089]).
Regarding claim 8, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 7, wherein each of the flow paths are serpentine or spiral along at least a portion of their lengths (Adkins, Fig. 16, flow path 117 is serpentine [0089]).
Regarding claim 9, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 8, wherein each of the flow paths are defined by one or more baffles (Adkins, Fig. 16, flow path 117 is serpentine and defined by fins 1670 = baffles [0089]).
Regarding claim 10, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 9, wherein each of the flow paths have widths that change over the length of the flow path (Adkins, Fig. 16, flow path 117 changes width over the length due to blinders 1618).
Regarding claim 12, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, wherein the second UV LEDs are configured to produce the UV radiation capable of sterilizing biological pathogens in the air (Adkins, [0041-0042]).
Regarding claim 13, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, wherein the sterilization box comprises an interior comprising a reflective coating (Adkins, Fig. 1, chamber 110 coated with reflective material 120).
Regarding claim 18, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, comprising four flow paths (Adkins, Fig. 16, flow path 117 is defined by fins 1670 into what is understood to be four flow paths, additionally, Fig. 15B shows another embodiment of the device shows flow path 117 is defined by fins 1570 into what is understood to be four flow paths [0089]).
Claim(s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Adkins (US 20210348783) in view of Barron et al. (US 20230001029), as applied to claim 1, further in view of Dassanayake (US 20220118149).
Regarding claim 14, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 13, including a reflective coating (Adkins, Fig. 1, 120) for the interior wherein but does not teach wherein the reflective coating is photocatalytically active.
Dassanayake teaches a purification system [abstract] comprising UVC lights (Fig. 1, 44a) for irradiating air within a reaction chamber [0041], wherein the reaction chamber may be coated with titanium dioxide, a photocatalyst, to produce hydroxyl radicals to kill pathogens in the air when exposed to UV light [0042-0043].
Dassanayake and Adkins are considered analogous to the claimed invention since both are drawn to devices for sterilizing air with ultraviolet light. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the reflective chamber walls as taught by Adkins with the titanium dioxide coating as taught by Dassanayake since Dassanayake teaches the titanium dioxide coating to generate hydroxyl radicals and kill pathogens in air when activated by UV light [0043] and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP § 2143(I)(A) and 2143(I)(G).
Regarding claim 15, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 14, wherein the reflective coating comprises Ti02 crystals (Dassanayake, [0042-0043]).
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Adkins (US 20210348783) in view of Barron et al. (US 20230001029), as applied to claim 1, further in view of McMillan (US 11402073).
Regarding claim 16, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, including an alternative embodiments configured to connect to a light fixture (Figs. 4 and 11, device 100 is incorporated into an overhead light fixture [Adkins, 0036, 0060-0061]). However, Modified Adkins does not explicitly teach wherein the bottom is configured to connect to an existing light fixture. One having ordinary skill in the art would be concerned with how to mechanically couple the device 100 into an already existing light fixture, motivating one to turn towards McMillan.
McMillan teaches a UV light assembly configured to be retrofitted onto an existing light assembly [abstract] wherein the retrofitting assembly (Fig. 1, 100) comprises a frame (102) with a plurality of clips (104) for mounting the bottom of the UV light assembly to the light fixture (Figs. 3A-3B).
McMillan is considered analogous to the claimed invention since both are drawn to UV light assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the sterilizing device of Modified Adkins (Adkins, Fig. 4, 100) with the mounting clips as taught by McMillan since McMillan teaches the clips to allow for the retrofitting of a UV sterilization assembly to an existing light assembly and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP § 2143(I)(A) and 2143(I)(G).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Adkins (US 20210348783) in view of Barron et al. (US 20230001029), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Engelhard (US 20170080373).
Regarding claim 20, Modified Adkins teaches the sterilization box of claim 1, including an exit port (Adkins, Fig. 16, 1616) but does not teach wherein the exit port further comprises a filter configured to filter the treated air as it exits the sterilization box.
Engelhard teaches an air purification system (Fig. 1, 100 [abstract]) comprising a photocatalytic element 114 adjacent to the outlet 118 of the device wherein the element is a filter coated with a catalyst to decompose ozone in the air stream formed as a byproduct from UV sterilization [0038].
Engelhard and Modified Adkins are considered analogous to the claimed invention since both are drawn to air sterilization devices. Therefore, it would have bene obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outlet as taught by Modified Adkins to include the coated filter as taught by Englehard since Englehard teaches the filter to decompose ozone in the treated air that was formed during UV sterilization [0038] and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP § 2143(I)(A).
Response to Arguments
In the arguments presented on pages 6-7 of the amendment, filed 1/24/2026, the Applicant argues that neither Adkins nor Allen teach a first plurality of UV lights that emit at a peak wavelength of 405 nm, a second plurality of UV lights that emit at a second peak of 470 nm, wherein the first and second UV LEDs comprise a broad spectrum that in sum produces white light with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103.
This argument has been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Barron et al. (US 20230001029). See rejection above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20190247528 A1 teaches the combined use of ultraviolet lights to generate sterilizing, white light.
US 20220288253 teaches the combined use of 405 nm light and 470 nm light to generate sterilizing, white light.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Nebyate Seged whose telephone number is (703)756-4611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00 pm (EST).
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.
/N.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758