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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 35 USC § 102 rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claims 1-15 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. Amended claim 1 recites “wherein an opening of each of the inlet and outlet apertures defines an opening plane that is substantially horizontal and parallel to a plane of the lower surface”, however, earlier in lines 2-6, the claim states “the upper surface comprising a non-planar configuration; an inlet aperture disposed in the upper surface of the housing; an outlet aperture disposed in the upper surface of the housing”. Thus, since the upper surface is disclosed as comprising a non-planar configuration, the opening of each of the inlet and outlet apertures disposed on the upper surface define a non-planar configuration as well (shown by fig. 1A and 1B on applicant’s drawings dated 06/24/2022). Therefore, the amended claim language is regarded as new matter.
Claims 3-15 are rejected based on their dependence to claim 1.
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 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(s) 1, 3-8 and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntosh (GB 2539449 A).
Regarding claim 1, McIntosh teaches
an indoor air quality monitor (air quality monitor 10) comprising:
a housing (cylindrical casing 14) comprising an upper surface (upper housing 12, fig. 1) and a lower surface (closure plate 22 on fig. 3) separated from one another by surrounding sidewalls (separated from one another by lower housing 13), the upper surface comprising a non-planar configuration (rounded shape of upper housing 12 shown on fig. 1);
an inlet aperture disposed in the upper surface of the housing (longitudinal slots 24 disposed through upper housing 12);
an outlet aperture disposed in the upper surface of the housing (chimney 28 in combination with the bell-shaped portion 18 disposed as part of upper housing 12);
an electronic board assembly vertically mounted within the housing (electronics module 25 comprising main printed circuit board 34, fig. 3-4), the electronic board assembly comprising at least one of a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, and a particulate detector connected thereto (“The electronics module 25 consists of a main printed circuit board 34 to which all the sensors are connected… a PM2.5 sensor 35… a sensor 38 for temperature and relative humidity” [page 4 lines 12-18]; and
a fan assembly disposed within the housing, the fan assembly configured to draw air from outside the housing, through the inlet aperture disposed in the upper surface of the housing into the housing over at least one of the temperature sensor, the humidity sensor, and the particulate detector (fan 26) and expel the air back outside the housing via the outlet aperture disposed on the upper surface of the housing (“The chimney 28 in combination with the bell-shaped portion 18 consequently define a smooth-walled outflow path for air from the fan 26, while the air enters the casing 14 via the airflow channel 16 and the longitudinal slots 24”) [page 4 lines 2-4], wherein the non-planar configuration of the upper surface is such that placement of a planar object on the upper surface will not block either the inlet or outlet apertures disposed in the upper surface of the housing (the placement of a planar object on top of the outlet of bell-shaped portion 18, such that the planar object is parallel to the ground, will not block longitudinal slots 24)
While McIntosh teaches the claimed inlet and outlet apertures, it does not explicitly teach “wherein an opening of each of the inlet and outlet apertures defines an opening plane that is substantially horizontal and parallel to a plane of the lower surface”. However, one of skill in the art would recognize that changes in configuration are a matter of design such that providing the planar openings of the inlet and outlet apertures as substantially horizontal and parallel to a plane of the lower surface is obvious when the particular configuration result in no change in system performance. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant; applicant has not cited mechanical significance of horizontal and parallel aperture planes to perform differently than the prior art device in the disclosure. Therefore, the claim is given no distinguishable patentability.
Regarding claim 3, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1,
further comprising a secondary inlet disposed in a sidewall of the housing (since longitudinal slots 24 comprise multiple slots as shown on fig. 3, one slot can read on the inlet aperture while another reads on the secondary inlet; longitudinal slots 24 also through lower housing 13, reading on sidewall)
Regarding claim 4, McIntosh the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1,
wherein the electronic board comprises a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, and a particulate detector connected thereto (sensors 35 and 38), the temperature sensor generating a signal indicative of the temperature of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly, the humidity sensor generating a signal indicative of the humidity of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly, the particulate detector generating a signal indicative of the particulate concentration of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly (“The printed circuit board 34 carries a processor 42 for receiving and analyzing the signals from the sensors 35, 37, 38 and 39” [page 5 lines 10-11])
Regarding claim 5, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 4,
wherein temperature sensor and the humidity sensor are upstream of the particulate detector (“The orientation of the electronics module 25 within the casing 14 is such that the sensor 38 for temperature and relative humidity and the VOCs sensor 39 are both near to the slots 24”, thus orientation of electronics module 25 disposes PM2.5 sensor 35 further from longitudinal slots 24)
Regarding claim 6, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 4, further comprising
a processor configured to receive the signals and generate an indoor air quality summary (“The printed circuit board 34 carries a processor 42 for receiving and analysing the signals from the sensors 35, 37, 38 and 39… The processor 42 is arranged to calculate an overall measure of air quality, iAQ, that takes into account the data from all of the sensors” [page 5 lines 10-15])
Regarding claim 7, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1,
wherein the upper surface comprises a plurality of apertures, wherein the fan assembly is configured to draw air from outside the housing into and also expel air from inside the housing to the outside via the apertures in the upper surface (longitudinal slots 24 partially located on upper housing 12 surface, bell shaped portion 18 located on upper housing 12 surface)
Regarding claim 8, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1, further comprising:
a Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) sensor electrically connected to the electronic board assembly (VOCs sensor 39, fig. 4), the VOC sensor generating a signal indicative of the VOC concentration of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly (“The printed circuit board 34 carries a processor 42 for receiving and analysing the signals from the sensors 35, 37, 38 and 39” [page 5 lines 10-11]), wherein temperature sensor and the humidity sensor are upstream of the VOC sensor (as shown on fig. 4, sensor 38 is disposed further outside on main printed circuit board 34 than sensor 39, thus sensor 38 is proximate longitudinal slots 24 and upstream of sensor 39)
Regarding claim 10, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1, further comprising:
a carbon-dioxide detector electrically connected to the electronic board assembly, the carbon-dioxide detector generating a signal indicative of carbon-dioxide concentration of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly (“The monitor may include sensors for other parameters, such as carbon dioxide and light intensity” [page 3 lines 4-5])
Regarding claim 11, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 6, further comprising:
a light, the light configured to display a light signal indicative of the indoor air quality summary (“Preferably the monitor also includes a display to indicate current level of air quality, for example by means of a light indicating different levels of air quality by different colours such as green, orange or red” [page 2 lines 7-9])
While McIntosh teaches a light indicative of the indoor air quality summary, it does not specifically teach the light as “a light ring disposed about a periphery of the upper surface”. However, one of skill in the art would recognize that changes in configuration are a matter of design such that providing the indication light of McIntosh as a ring shape disposed around the upper housing 12 is obvious when the particular configuration result in no change in system performance. In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966) (The court held that the configuration of the claimed disposable plastic nursing container was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant; applicant has not cited mechanical significance of the recited configuration to perform differently than the prior art device in the disclosure. Therefore, the claim is given no distinguishable patentability.
Regarding claim 12, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 6, further comprising:
a wireless transmitter (Wifi communication module 44) configured to wirelessly communicate the indoor air quality summary to a remote receiver (“This enables the data from the air quality monitor 10 to be transmitted to a router and hence to a smartphone or mobile phone 50” [page 3 lines 4-5])
Regarding claim 13, McIntosh teaches the indoor air quality monitor of claim 12,
wherein the wireless transmitter is configured to wirelessly communicate the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration to the remote receiver (“As shown in figure 5a, the data from the air quality monitor 10 may be displayed in words, as indicated at 51, representing the overall measure of air quality; the data relating to overall air quality, iAQ, and in addition the data from one or more of the individual sensors such as relative humidity, rH, and temperature, T, may be displayed graphically by means of appropriate icons, as indicated at 52” [page 5 lines 12-21])
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntosh (GB2539449A) in view of Thoni (US20200049365A1).
Regarding claim 9, McIntosh does not teach the indoor air quality monitor of claim 1, further comprising:
a radon detector electrically connected to the electronic board assembly, the radon detector generating a signal indicative of radon concentration of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly
Thoni teaches
a radon detector electrically connected to the electronic board assembly, the radon detector generating a signal indicative of radon concentration of the air drawn into the housing by the fan assembly (“The sensor unit may include one or a combination of onboard sensors including a temperature sensor, a humidity sensor, a light sensor, an occupancy sensor, and one or more air quality sensors (e.g., a carbon dioxide (CO2) sensor, a volatile organic compound (VOC) sensor, carbon monoxide sensor, a radon detection sensor, etc.) The sensor unit may be configured to automatically adjust a value reported by an onboard sensor to the thermostat based on an amount of light or other parameter measured by an onboard sensor” [0055])
The system of McIntosh can be modified to include a radon sensor in addition to the other sensors disposed on electronics module 25. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a radon sensor to the system of McIntosh in order to provide an additional environmental measurement to the system, and thus be configured to alert a user if they are exposed to harmful levels of radon.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntosh (GB2539449A) in view of Nasis (US20210018210A1).
Regarding claim 14, MacIntosh does not teach the indoor air quality monitor of claim 6,
wherein the processor further compares the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration with temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration thresholds, respectively, and if at least one of the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration is less than the respective threshold, then the processor further determines which of the temperature, humidity and particulate concentration presents the greatest air quality risk
Nasis teaches
wherein the processor further compares the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration with temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration thresholds, respectively, and if at least one of the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration is less than the respective threshold (as shown in the AQI equation on page 12, each parameter is compared to a maximum threshold by dividing the current value by the maximum value (each value cannot exceed the maximum threshold value)), then the processor further determines which of the temperature, humidity and particulate concentration presents the greatest air quality risk (“Multiple environment quality parameters may be combined into an air quality score by summing a measure of the severity of each environment quality parameter” [0104]; When multiplied by a weight factor assigned to that parameter based on its impact on air quality, the equation has determined which factor is the greatest risk (the greatest individual parameter severity) prior to adding the values to sum the AQI)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide this analysis method of Nasis to the system of McIntosh, in order to allow for an adjustable weighting factor in determining an air quality index to modify the control system to specific needs (“the set of weighting factors for calculating air quality score may be adjustable based on profile settings of the environment quality monitoring device, such as type of location or setting of the environment quality monitoring device. Certain environment quality parameters may be more or less important for different environments. For example, because sick individuals may be more vulnerable and susceptible to respiratory irritation than healthy individuals, the parameter(s) of particulate matter levels may be associated with a larger weighting factor when the sensor data measured by a device placed in a healthcare setting (e.g., patient room in a hospital or clinic) than when the sensor data measured by a device placed in an office setting”) [0106 of Nasis].
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McIntosh (GB2539449A) in view of Schoch (US20220136730A1).
Regarding claim 15, McIntosh does not teach the indoor air quality monitor of claim 6,
wherein the processor receives a signal indicative of temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration regularly from the temperature sensor, the humidity sensor, and the particulate detector, respectively, and generates the indoor air quality summary each time the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration are received (McIntosh teaches “The processor 42 is arranged to calculate an overall measure of air quality, iAQ, that takes into account the data from all of the sensors” [page 5 lines 14-15], however does not explicitly teach a regularity of signal updates)
Schoch teaches
wherein the processor receives a signal indicative of temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration regularly from the temperature sensor, the humidity sensor, and the particulate detector, respectively (“The air quality sensors 102, 104, 106, 108 110, 112, 114 communicate with the wide area network 118 to periodically or continuously transmit air quality measurement to the computer implemented airborne viral infection risk analysis and air quality calculation system 122. Preferably, the air quality sensors 102, 104, 106, 108 110, 112, 114 act autonomously to periodically push transmissions of current sensor measurements to the computer implemented airborne viral infection risk analysis and air quality calculation system 122 over the network 118. Periodic transmissions, for example, may be at 30 second, 1 minute or 5 minute intervals” [0064]), and generates the indoor air quality summary each time the temperature, humidity, and particulate concentration are received (“The computer implemented airborne viral infection risk analysis and air quality calculation system 122 includes (shown schematically) a processor including processing circuitry 124… The computer implemented airborne viral infection risk analysis and air quality calculation system 122 autonomously processes the received air quality sensor measurements, performs an analysis of the measurements to ultimately calculate the airborne virus airborne infection risk score, and the air quality index (AQI)” [0067-0068])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply the interval system of Schoch to McIntosh in order to generate air quality summaries on a basis that is frequent enough to catch air quality risks early, but also not so frequent as to use an unnecessarily amount of energy to run the system on a near continuous basis.
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 BRETT P. MALLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 8am to 5pm.
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, MICHAEL HOANG can be reached at (571)272-6460. 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.
/BRETT P. MALLON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights