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
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.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
claim 29 lines 3-4 recites a new limitation “a germicidal light source in the chamber operable to emit radiation through plasma discharge”, but the disclosure does not support plasma discharge.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Claim 6 recites “the fan is configured to provide an air pressure in the chamber between 20 pounds per square inch (psi) and 40 psi” and is unclear to whether the fan has a static pressure 20-40 psi or if the fan is used to pressurize the chamber between 20-40 psi. For prosecution the limitation is interpreted as the fan is used to pressurize the chamber between 20-40 psi.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 1-8, 10, 19-26, 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim (US20180303984A1 published 10/25/2018).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches an apparatus for drying biological specimens comprising:
a chamber for receiving a biological specimen (an accommodation part 210 capable of receiving a biological specimen – paragraph 63);
a germicidal light source in the chamber (an ultraviolet lamps 214 in the accommodation part 210 above a shelf 211 – paragraph 70);
a heating element located in the chamber for heating the chamber (a different ultraviolet lamp 214, hereinafter ultraviolet lamp 214’, in the accommodation part 210 below the shelf 211 – paragraph 70), the heating element being distinct and different in structure from the germicidal light source (the ultraviolet lamps 214 and the ultraviolet lamps 214’ are distinct and different in structure because they are separate structures and attached to different places locations of the body 200 – Fig. 6A); and
a fan for forcing air through the chamber (an exhauster 213 is connected to a fan 340 – paragraph 69 and Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 2, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a panel forming the bottom of the chamber (a shelf 211 at the bottom of the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 66 and Figs. 1-2), wherein the panel is horizontally slidable between a first position in which it forms a bottom of the enclosed chamber and a second position in which it is substantially outside of the chamber (the shelf 211 is capable of being slid in and out of the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 66 and Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 3, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 2 further comprising a vertical door (a cap 100 – Figs. 1-2) operable between an open position, in which the chamber is exposed and a closed position in which the chamber is closed (the cap 100 operable between an open position and closed position – Figs. 1-2), the chamber being enclosed by at least the slidable bottom panel and the door (the accommodation part 210 being enclosed by the shelf 211 and the cap 100 – Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 4, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 wherein the heating element comprises at least one light bulb located within the chamber (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is located within the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 67 and Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 wherein the germicidal light comprises at least one ultraviolet light source located within the chamber (the ultraviolet lamps 214 in the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 70).
Regarding claim 6, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 wherein the fan is configured to provide an air pressure in the chamber between 20 pounds per square inch (psi) and 40 psi (the fan 340 is capable providing between 20-40 psi to the accommodation part 210 when the device is used in a pressure chamber – Fig. 4 and paragraph 69) and the heating element is configured to maintain an internal temperature in the chamber of between 70 degrees Fahrenheit and 80 degrees Fahrenheit (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is capable of maintaining an internal temperature in the accommodation part 210 of between 70-80F when the device is used a room temperature environment – paragraph 67).
Regarding claim 7, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a timer circuit (timer – Fig. 5) configured to permit an operator to set a duration of a drying cycle and to control the fan, germicidal light source, and heating element to operate for the set duration (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 and the ultraviolet lamp 214 for 40 or 60 minutes – paragraph 77) (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is the heater and the ultraviolet lamp 214 is the germicidal light source; therefore, the ability to control the ultraviolet lamp 214 means that the sterilizer control buttons 421 are capable of controlling both the heating element and the germicidal light).
Regarding claim 8, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 further comprising at least one control circuit (a sterilizer control buttons 421 – Fig. 5) configured to permit an operator to selectively set at least a temperature and a time duration (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 and the ultraviolet lamp 214 under an automatic course during a given period of time – paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 10, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a user interface that permits a user to selectively enable the fan, the germicidal light, and the heating element independently from each other (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 or the ultraviolet lamp 214, independently of each other – paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 19, Kim teaches an apparatus for drying biological specimens comprising:
a chamber for receiving a biological specimen (an accommodation part 210 capable of receiving a biological specimen – paragraph 63);
a germicidal light source in the chamber operable to irradiate the chamber with a germicidal light (an ultraviolet lamps 214 in the accommodation part 210 above a shelf 211 – paragraph 70);
a heating element distinct and different in structure from the germicidal light source located in the chamber (a different ultraviolet lamp 214, hereinafter ultraviolet lamp 214’, in the accommodation part 210 below the shelf 211 – paragraph 70) and operable to heat the chamber (the ultraviolet lamps 214 and the ultraviolet lamps 214’ are distinct and different in structure because they are separate structures and located in different places – Fig. 6A);
a fan (a fan 340 – paragraph 69 and Fig. 4) for forcing air through the chamber and to exit the chamber via an outlet (the fan 340 is capable of moving air through an exhauster 213 – paragraph 69 and Fig. 4); and
a filter positioned to filter air existing the chamber via the outlet (a filter 320 is capable of filtering air exiting through the exhauster 213– Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 20, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, further comprising a panel forming the bottom of the chamber (a shelf 211 at the bottom of the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 66 and Figs. 1-2), wherein the panel is horizontally slidable between a first position in which it forms a bottom of the enclosed chamber and a second position in which it is substantially outside of the chamber (the shelf 211 is capable of being slid in and out of the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 66 and Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 21, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 20, further comprising a vertical door (a cap 100 – Figs. 1-2) operable between an open position, in which the chamber is exposed and a closed position in which the chamber is closed (the cap 100 operable between an open position and closed position – Figs. 1-2), the chamber being enclosed by at least the slidable bottom panel and the door (the accommodation part 210 being enclosed by the shelf 211 and the cap 100 – Figs. 1-2).
Regarding claim 22, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the heating element comprises at least one light bulb located within the chamber (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is located within the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 67 and Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 23, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the germicidal light source comprises at least one ultraviolet light located within the chamber (the ultraviolet lamps 214 in the accommodation part 210 – paragraph 70).
Regarding claim 24, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, wherein the fan is configured to provide an air pressure in the chamber between 20 pounds per square inch (psi) and 40 psi (the fan 340 is capable providing between 20-40 psi to the accommodation part 210 when the device is used in a pressure chamber – Fig. 4 and paragraph 69) and the heating element is configured to maintain an internal temperature in the chamber of between 70 degrees Fahrenheit and 80 degrees Fahrenheit (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is capable of maintaining an internal temperature in the accommodation part 210 of between 70-80F when the device is used a room temperature environment – paragraph 67).
Regarding claim 25, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, further comprising a timer circuit (timer – Fig. 5) configured to permit an operator to set a duration of a drying cycle and to control the fan, germicidal light source, and heating element to operate for the set duration (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 and the ultraviolet lamp 214 for 40 or 60 minutes – paragraph 77) (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is the heater and the ultraviolet lamp 214 is the germicidal light source; therefore, the ability to control the ultraviolet lamp 214 means that the sterilizer control buttons 421 are capable of controlling both the heating element and the germicidal light).
Regarding claim 26, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, further comprising at least one control circuit (a sterilizer control buttons 421 – Fig. 5) configured to permit an operator to selectively set at least a temperature within the chamber and a time duration (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 and the ultraviolet lamp 214 under an automatic course during a given period of time – paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 28, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 19, further comprising a user interface that permits a user to selectively enable the fan, the germicidal light, and the heating element independently from each other (the sterilizer control buttons 421 operate the fan 340 or the ultraviolet lamp 214, independently of each other – paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 29, Kim teaches an apparatus for drying biological specimens comprising:
a chamber for receiving a biological specimen (an accommodation part 210 capable of receiving a biological specimen – paragraph 63);
a germicidal light source in the chamber (an ultraviolet lamps 214 in the accommodation part 210 above a shelf 211 – paragraph 70) operable to emit radiation through plasma discharge (the ultraviolet lamps 214 is capable of being used for to emit radiation through plasma discharge – Fig. 6A);
a resistive heating element located in the chamber (a different ultraviolet lamp 214, hereinafter ultraviolet lamp 214’, in the accommodation part 210 below the shelf 211 – paragraph 70) and operable to convert current into heat through resistive dissipation (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is capable of converting current into heat through resistive dissipation – paragraph 77) (the ultraviolet lamp 214’ is deemed to convert current into heat because all UV lamps have at least some electrical resistance and would generate heat from an input current); and
a fan for circulating air through the chamber (a fan 340 – paragraph 69 and Fig. 4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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 9 and 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim in view of Campalans et al (US20180098559A1 published 04/12/2018; hereinafter Campalans).
Regarding claim 9, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 8.
However, Kim does not teach a temperature sensor and an air pressure sensor located within the chamber.
Campalans teaches a sanitation device with a drying unit comprising a temperature sensor and an air pressure sensor located within the chamber (one or more sensors in the drying unit relay data measured from the atmosphere within the drying unit, such as temperature, humidity, pressure – paragraph 10). Campalans teaches using the sensors to enable drying and/or curing for perishable items that degrade in the presence of oxygen and/or humidity (paragraph 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the accommodation part 210, as taught by Kim, with the temperature, humidity, pressure sensors, taught by Campalans, to process perishable items that degrade in the presence of oxygen and/or humidity. One of ordinary skill would have expected that this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success because Kim and Campalans teach devices for sterilization and drying.
Regarding claim 27, Kim teaches the apparatus of claim 26,
However, Kim does not teach a temperature sensor and an air pressure sensor located within the chamber.
Campalans teaches a sanitation device with a drying unit comprising a temperature sensor and an air pressure sensor located within the chamber (one or more sensors in the drying unit relay data measured from the atmosphere within the drying unit, such as temperature, humidity, pressure – paragraph 10). Campalans teaches using the sensors to enable drying and/or curing for perishable items that degrade in the presence of oxygen and/or humidity (paragraph 10).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the accommodation part 210, as taught by Kim, with the temperature, humidity, pressure sensors, taught by Campalans, to process perishable items that degrade in the presence of oxygen and/or humidity. One of ordinary skill would have expected that this modification could have been performed with a reasonable expectation of success because Kim and Campalans teach devices for sterilization and drying.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Point 1: The applicant’s argument that “the separate and distinct nature of the heating elements and germicidal light source is emphasized in the specification by the use of separate and distinct reference numerals in the specification” is not persuasive.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., “a heating element 128 comprised of four 20W light bulbs, and Fig. 5B shows a germicidal light source 126”) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Point 2: The applicant’s argument that “even if two separate UV light sources 214 of Kim as considered to be distinct elements, they are not different in structure as required by amended claim 1- rather, they are two instances of identical UV light sources with the same reference numeral” is not persuasive.
The examiner points out that Kim teaches that the ultraviolet lamps 214 and the ultraviolet lamps 214’ are distinct and different because they are separate structures and attached to different places locations of the body 200 (Fig. 6A). Furthermore, the examiner points out that the body 200 is not rotationally symmetrically; therefore, the different locations of the ultraviolet lamps 214 and ultraviolet lamps 214’ is deemed to read on different in structure.
Point 3: The applicant’s argument that “Kim is devoid of any disclosure of an air filter for filtering air exiting the chamber” is not persuasive.
The examiner points out that Kim teaches that the air is capable of exiting the accommodation part 210 through the exhauster 213 (Fig. 6A), and a filter 320 is mounted on the cover 300 behind the exhauster 213 (paragraph 60 and Fig. 4). Therefore, the filter 320 is deemed positioned to filter air exiting through the exhauster 213.
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 TINGCHEN SHI whose telephone number is (571)272-2538. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, Elizabeth Robinson can be reached at 5712727129. 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.
/T.C.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1796
/MATTHEW D KRCHA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1796