DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 09/03/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
3. This is an office action in response to Applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 09/03/2026. Claims 1-3 and 5-20 are pending in the application. Claims 11-20 have been withdrawn and claims 1-3 and 5-10 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
4. All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.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.
Response to Arguments
5. In the arguments presented on p.6-8 of the amendment, the Applicant argues that Keeler, alone or in combination, fails to teach the amended claim 1 limitations.
Applicant’s arguments , with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 USC 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Keeler et al. (US 20210322914 A1, cited in prior office action), further in view of Choi et al. (US 20050287945 A1, cited in prior office action), further in view of Bohlen (US 20130052090 A1, cited in prior office action), further in view of Hirai et al. (JP 2001062228 A, cited in prior office action).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112e
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are 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 1 recites “a microcontroller configured to control an operation of the diffuser air purification unit and to automatically set an airflow speed of the blower based on a size of the external setting to maintain a target number of filtered air changes per hour within the external setting” (emphasis underlined). While there is support in Specification [0044] states that “[t]he speed controller 621 can be automated to set an airflow speed of the diffuser air purification unit 100 based on conditions like a size of the setting in which the diffuser air purification unit 100 is installed”, there is no linkage (i.e., explanation of how the microcontroller facilitates this process) between this speed setting with maintaining a target number of filtered air changes per hour within the external setting. The only mention of air changes per hour is the increased number of air changes per hour that the instant air purification device is capable of reaching (see [0015]).
8. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
9. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 6’s recitation of “wherein the filtration chamber comprises a lower cavity, a filter, and an upper cavity, wherein the filtration of the air that flows through the filtration chamber is caused when the air flows from the lower cavity, through the filter, and into the upper cavity” is already stated in the following claim 1 portion below:
“a filtration chamber… comprising a lower cavity, a filter, and an upper cavity… the filter configured to create filtered air upon filtration of the air when the air flows through the filtration chamber… the air further being pulled from the lower cavity, upwards through the filter, and into the upper cavity to create the filtered air”.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
10. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
11. Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keeler et al. (US 20210322914 A1), further in view of Choi et al. (US 20050287945 A1), further in view of Bohlen (US 20130052090 A1, cited in prior office action), further in view of Hirai et al. (JP 2001062228 A, cited in prior office action), further in view of Prigge et al. (US 20210379524 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Keeler teaches an air purification unit (Fig. 1-7) having a shape and sized to fit within a cell of a suspension grid drop ceiling (“The ceiling air purifier can be installed in replace of a ceiling tile or into the ceiling drywall”, [0030]);
a first chamber (Fig. 6) configured to receive air from an external setting (airflow from environment denoted by arrows, Fig. 6) in which the air purification unit is installed (ceiling, [0030]),
a separator piece (baffle 15A, Fig. 5) laterally separating only the first chamber (Fig. 6) from a purification chamber (see drawing below), the separator piece extending from a bottom portion of the housing (baffle 15A extends from the bottom surface of housing 10, Fig. 3) to an upper surface of the housing (to the top surface of housing 10, Fig. 3) to define a full lateral boundary between the first chamber and the purification chamber (see drawing below);
PNG
media_image1.png
367
462
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the purification chamber further comprising an ultraviolet lamp (lamps 24, Fig. 5) positioned upstream of an intake of the blower (blower 18, Fig. 5), the purification chamber configured to receive the air from the first chamber (see arrows denoting airflow above, moving air from first chamber to the purification chamber) and to cause a purification of the air when the air flows through the purification chamber to create filtered and purified air ([0030]), wherein a first lateral boundary of the first chamber is defined by a first side of the housing (first lateral boundary, see drawing above) and a second lateral boundary of the purification chamber is defined by an opposing side of the housing relative to the first side (second lateral boundary, see drawing above);
a blower configured to pull the air from the external setting (fans 16 or 18, Fig. 5) and into the first chamber (arrows denoting airflow, Fig. 5), the air being contained within the first chamber and separated from the purification chamber by the separator piece (baffle 15A, Fig. 5), , the blower further expelling the filtered and purified air into the external setting (filtered and purified air denoted by arrows, Fig. 7); a housing at least partially enclosing the first chamber and the purification chamber (housing 10, Fig. 1-7);
While Keeler teaches the air purification unit having a shape and sized to fit within a cell of a suspension grid drop ceiling, Keeler fails to teach a diffuser placed upstream of the first chamber and downstream of the fan expelling the filtered and purified air.
Choi teaches a ceiling-mounted ventilation system (100, Fig. 2-3) having a louver (111 and 131, Fig. 3) mounted on the cabinet/housing (100, Fig. 2), positioned upstream of a first filtration chamber (filter 160, Fig. 2), and downstream of the fan expelling the filtered and purified air (150, Fig. 2), all in order to control the inflow/direction of air ([0063]).
Keeler and Choi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ceiling-mounted air filtration and purification systems.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling mounted air purification unit of Keeler by incorporating a louver mounted to the housing as taught by Choi in order to control the inflow/direction of air (Choi, [0063]).
Modified Keeler, while teaching a chamber configured to receive air through the diffuser from an external setting (Fig. 6), fails to teach a filtration chamber comprising a lower cavity, a filter, and an upper cavity, wherein the filter is recessed from the diffuser to form the lower cavity and recessed from the upper surface of the housing to form the upper cavity, the filter configured to create filtered air upon filtration of the air when the air flows through the filtration chamber.
Bohlen teaches an air purification unit (Fig. 2) with a diffuser (210, Fig. 2) and a prefilter (222, Fig. 2) located fluidly downstream of the diffuser, thus defining a filtration chamber portion adjacent to the prefilter (“lower”/upstream cavity of prefilter and “upper”/downstream cavity of prefilter) in order to filter impurities that are in the incoming airflow ([0036]).
Modified Keeler and Bohlen are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of air purification systems utilizing filtration and purification chambers to produce filtered and purified air.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the Fig. 6 chamber of modified Keeler by incorporating a particulate prefilter within the chamber cavity as taught by Bohlen, because doing so would filter impurities that are in the incoming airflow ([0036]) with a reasonable expectation of success.
With this modification, the Keeler/Choi/Bohlen combination teaches a filtration chamber (Keeler, Fig. 6) comprising a filter (Bohlen, prefilter 222, Fig. 2), a lower cavity, and an upper cavity, wherein the filter is recessed from the diffuser to form the lower cavity and recessed from the upper surface of the housing to form the upper cavity (Keeler, lower/upstream and upper/downstream airflow cavity partitioned by Bohlen’s prefilter, Fig. 6), the filter configured to create filtered air upon filtration of the air when the air flows through the filtration chamber (filtered air is produced downstream of Bohlen’s prefilter), the air further being pulled through the filter to create the filtered air (Bohlen, prefilter 222, Fig. 2), the blower further pulling the filtered air from the filtration chamber into the purification chamber (airflow denoted by arrows, see drawing above).
Modified Keeler teaches the purification chamber comprising an ultraviolet lamp positioned upstream of an intake of the blower, but fails to teach a bipolar ionization unit.
Bohlen further teaches an air purifier (200, Fig. 2) having a filtration chamber (pre-filter 222 and its adjacent airflow cavities/spaces, Fig. 2) and a purification chamber configured to cause a purification of the air when the air flows through the purification chamber to create purified air (electrostatic precipitator cell 224 and photo-catalytic oxidizing assembly 230 containing UV LEDs 530, Fig. 2-3 and 5, see [0023], [0068], and [0078]), where the purification chamber components are upstream of the blower (fans 234, Fig. 2), the electrostatic precipitator serving the added purpose of ionizing and collecting air particulates ([0041]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the purification chamber of modified Keeler by incorporating an electrostatic precipitator as taught by Bohlen in order to ionize and collect air particulates (Bohlen, [0041]), thus further purifying the air.
Modified Keeler mentions how its ceiling air purification unit is “safe to be operated while persons in the same room going about their daily activities” ([0005]), but is silent to the limitations of:
an occupancy sensor secured at a central location on an external surface; and
a control module secured to the housing in communication with the occupancy sensor, the control module comprising a microcontroller configured to control an operation of the diffuser air purification unit and to activate the blower in response to detecting an occupant in the external setting or deactivate the blower in response to failing to detect an occupant in the external setting following a predetermined period of time that is programmable via the control module. Hirai teaches an air purifier (Fig. 2a, 2b) having a control panel (circuit board 40, Fig. 1a) communicating with an occupancy sensor secured at a central location on an external surface (occupancy sensor 7 is on a central, external surface of the air purifier, Fig. 1a, in order to detect a human and consequently start operation of the air purifier and stop operation when the sensor no longer senses a human, see p.5, 2nd paragraph of English translation, via “controlling an operation state of the fan block 5”, [0008]) secured to the housing (outer housing 4, Fig. 2b).
Modified Keeler and Hirai are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of air purification units that are safely operable even when humans are in the vicinity.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the ceiling-mounted air purifier of modified Keeler by incorporating a control panel and an occupancy sensor in communication with the control panel as taught by Hirai for the detection of a user in proximity to the air purifying device and accordingly activating/deactivating the device (e.g., turning on/off the fan) when the user is/is not detected (Hirai, p.5, 2nd paragraph of English translation).
Modified Keeler comprising Hirai’s control circuit board and occupancy sensor fails to teach wherein the microcontroller is configured to automatically set an airflow speed of the blower based on a size of the external setting to maintain a target number of filtered air changes per hour (ACH) within the external setting.
Hirai provides a plurality of air volume-based operating modes, such as “automatic mode, silent operation mode, weak operation mode, standard operation mode, rapid operation mode, and off” via an air volume switching button (29, Fig. 1a) in communication with the control panel (“the air volume switching button 29 is connected to the microcomputer 8”, see p.6, 3rd to last paragraph of English translation, Fig. 6), which imply that a target number of filtered air changes per hour (which is a proxy parameter for air volume that depends on the room size) within the external setting is possible to multiple degrees, but does not explicitly state the linkage between airflow speed of the blower based on an environment size to maintain a specific ACH value within the control circuit board.
Prigge teaches a control system in an air purification system (abstract, Fig. 1-3) comprising a microcontroller (AQI controller and TTC controller, Fig. 1), wherein the microcontroller is configured to automatically set an airflow speed of the blower (“The Peak AQI Controller increases fan angular velocity proportionally to AQI units above the threshold of 50 (or other pre-determined value) until an inflection point in AQI is reached at which the AQI begins to decrease. The fan angular velocity is then held constant until the AQI decreases below 50 (or other pre-determined value). The TTC Controller is programmed to minimize the long term particle concentration in the room by determining the baseline fan angular velocity such that the instantaneous TTC estimate in automatic mode to be maintained at a desired target”, [0019]) based on a size of the external setting ([0007]) to maintain a target number of filtered air changes per hour within the external setting ([0008]), collectively in order to predict air quality levels and time to achieve air quality levels and associated hardware for improving the air quality index within the external setting ([0001]).
The instant combination and Prigge are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of air purification systems with controller-based variable fan speeds.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the control circuit board/panel of the instant combination by incorporating the controller logic and structure of the collective control system (comprising AQI and TTC controllers) as taught by Prigge, because doing so would predict air quality levels and time to achieve air quality levels and associated hardware for improving the air quality index within the external setting (Prigge, [0001]) with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, the instant combination teaches wherein the diffuser comprises a permeable cover (Choi’s louvers 111 and 131 are permeable to air, Fig. 3) secured to a lower portion of the housing (modification onto Keeler would require the louvers of Choi to be secured to a lower portion of the housing as Choi’s louvers are in Fig. 3), for the same modification purpose as stated in the claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 3, the modification of Choi onto Keeler would necessarily mean that the diffuser/louver is removable because the modification is an addition to Keeler’s air purification device/housing, thus reading on “wherein the diffuser is removable from the housing”.
Assuming arguendo, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Choi’s louver mounted onto the Keeler’s device/housing of the instant combination by making separable the louver and Keeler’s device/housing for cleaning or replacement purposes.
Regarding claim 5, the instant combination teaches a diffuser (Choi, louvers 111 and 131, Fig. 3), but fails to teach a status indicator secured to the diffuser, the status indicator configured to provide an indication of a status of the diffuser air purification unit.
Bohlen further teaches a status indicator secured to a diffuser (LED lenses 282 as indicator lights on outer top housing 252 that is secured to diffuser/inlet grill 210, Fig. 2 and [0030]), the status indicator configured to provide an indication of a status of the diffuser air purification unit (indicator lights show status of a multitude of components in the air cleaner 100 of Fig. 1, where Fig. 1 is an assembled view of the exploded air cleaner view of Fig. 2, see [0085] and [0087]).
The instant combination and Bohlen are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of diffuser air purification units.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the diffuser of the instant combination by incorporating a status indicator secured to the diffuser further taught by Bohlen in order to show status of a multitude of components in the air cleaner (Bohlen, [0085] and [0087]).
Regarding claim 6, the instant combination teaches wherein the filtration chamber (Keeler, Fig. 6) comprises a lower cavity, and an upper cavity, wherein the filtration of the air that flows through the filtration chamber is caused when the air flows from the lower cavity, through the filter, and into the upper cavity (Keeler, lower/upstream and upper/downstream airflow cavity partitioned by Bohlen’s prefilter modification, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 7, the instant combination teaches wherein the purification chamber comprises an ultraviolet lamp (Keeler, UV lamps 24, Fig. 5) and a bipolar ionization unit (Bohlen, electrostatic precipitator 224, Fig. 2) wherein the purification of the air that flows through the purification chamber is caused by the ultraviolet lamp (Keeler, [0006] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 8, modified Keeler teaches wherein the purification chamber comprises an ultraviolet lamp (UV lamps 24, Fig. 5), wherein the purification of the air that flows through the purification chamber is caused by the ultraviolet lamp ([0006] and [0030]).
Regarding claim 9, the instant combination teaches wherein the purification chamber comprises a bipolar ionization unit (Bohlen, electrostatic precipitator 224, Fig. 2), wherein the purification of the air that flows through the purification chamber is caused by the bipolar ionization unit (Bohlen, [0041]).
Regarding claim 10, modified Keeler teaches wherein the blower comprises an axial fan (fan 18, Fig. 3).
Conclusion
12. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aham Lee whose telephone number is (703)756-5622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 10:00 AM - 8:00 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 R. 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.
/Aham Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights