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 .
Response to Amendment
2. This is an office action in response to Applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 11/17/2025. Claims 1-7 and 9-17 are pending in the application. Claims 12-17 have been withdrawn and claims 1-7 and 9-11 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
3. All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.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
4. In the arguments presented on p.7-8 of the amendment, the Applicant argues that Ranta’s keyboard cleaning system applied to a location such as a hospital or library would make the system unusable. Specifically, one of ordinary skill would not modify Ranta such that the amended claim 1 limitation of the UV system works when the area is empty, simply because the environment that the keyboard sterilizer is placed in would have to be empty (thus, unusable).
Applicant’s arguments, see p.7-8, filed 11/17/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 Hatti et al. (US 20190030195 A1), further in view of Ranta et al. (US 20090218512 A1).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
6. Claims 1-4, 6, and 9-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatti et al. (US 20190030195 A1), further in view of Ranta et al. (US 20090218512 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Hatti teaches a UV disinfection system for providing and monitoring UV illumination in an interior of an aircraft (UVC unit 9, Fig. 1, with intensity sensors, [0006-0007]) with at least one switchable UV light source (UVC lamps 4, Fig. 1); a controller (33, Fig. 1),
wherein the system is configured for controlling the at least one switchable UV light source based on said determining by the controller of the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source (controller 33 monitors the state of UVC units via UVC measurements and has the ability to control the operational status by changing intensity or turning on/off the UVC units, Fig. 1, 5, and [0042]);
wherein the controller is configured such that it does not operate the switchable UV light source until after the aircraft passengers and crew have disembarked after a flight (“The system uses motion sensors to detect the presence of personnel in the affected area of the cabin and only disinfect when no personnel are detected”, [0003]).
Hatti fails to teach the limitations of:
a light detector, responsive to visible light and configured for providing sensor outputs regarding detected light; and
a controller for monitoring an operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source,
wherein the controller is configured to determine the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source by comparing a first sensor output, provided by the light detector when the at least one switchable UV light source is activated, with a second sensor output, provided by the light detector when the at least one switchable UV light source is deactivated; and
wherein controlling the at least one switchable UV light source includes adjusting an intensity of UV light emitted by the at least one switchable UV light source when it is determined by the controller that the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source is diminished, or increasing a period of time for which the at least one switchable UV light source is activated when it is determined by the controller that the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source is diminished.
Ranta teaches a system for providing and monitoring UV illumination in an interior of a housing (Fig. 1-4, 5A), the system comprising:
at least one switchable UV light source (germicidal lamp 114, Fig. 3-4);
a light detector, responsive to visible light and configured for providing sensor outputs regarding detected light (cap 140 and sensor 141, Fig. 5A, where the UV light emitted by UV light source is converted into visible light via phosphor mixed in cap 140 and picked up by visible light sensor 141, see [0041]); and
a controller for monitoring an operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source (“The output from the sensor is coupled to the microcontroller so that stored programming logic can measure the UV dosage as a function of the intensity of the received visible light over time”, [0041]),
wherein the controller is configured to determine the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source by comparing a first sensor output, provided by the light detector when the at least one switchable UV light source is activated (“The output from the sensor is coupled to the microcontroller so that stored programming logic can measure the UV dosage as a function of the intensity of the received visible light over time”, [0041]), with a second sensor output, provided by the light detector when the at least one switchable UV light source is deactivated (“The output from the sensor is coupled to the microcontroller so that stored programming logic can measure the UV dosage as a function of the intensity of the received visible light over time”, [0041], to which “When a desired dosage has been reached, the microcontroller can cause the light to shut off”, [0043]; i.e., the sensor is still receiving visible light at the time at which the UV light source is deactivated – the calculated dosage of UV radiation is what determines the deactivation of the UV light source); and
wherein the system (Fig. 1-4, 5A) is configured for controlling the at least one switchable UV light source (UV light source, Fig. 5A) based on said determining by the controller of the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source (“the best implementations of the invention will be able to detect the intensity of UVC light in order to determine whether the UVC light source is functioning properly and in the range of its normal output”, [0039]);
wherein controlling the at least one switchable UV light source includes increasing a period of time for which the at least one switchable UV light source is activated when it is determined by the controller that the operational status of the at least one switchable UV light source is diminished (“the microcontroller and optical sensor determine the proper exposure time to compensate for lamp aging and variations in lamp output”, abstract and see [0037]).
Hatti and Ranta are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of UV disinfection and monitoring systems for enclosed spaces.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the UVC unit of Hatti with the UV disinfection system as taught by Ranta, because the substitution of the UVC unit of Hatti for Ranta’s UV-C disinfection system would yield the predictable result of disinfecting/sterilizing pathogens/contaminants present within the enclosure exposed to UV radiation (MPEP 2143), with an added benefit of determining “the proper exposure time to compensate for lamp aging and variations in lamp output” (Ranta, abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the light detector includes a photo sensor, which is sensitive to visible light (Ranta, sensor 141, Fig. 5A and [0039-0043]), and
a wavelength converter (Ranta, “phosphor is integrated into a clear material such as silicone rubber” on cap 140, Fig. 5A and [0041]), with the wavelength converter emitting visible light when being excited by UV light (Ranta, “UV energy is sensed and measured using a UV-excitable phosphor which re-radiates visible light and a visible light sensor”, [0039]), for the same modification purpose as stated in the claim 1 rejection above. However, Ranta’s Fig. 5A embodiment fails to teach the wavelength converter being a wavelength converting coating, to which the separate embodiment of Fig. 5B teaches wherein the “phosphor may be mixed with a suitable paint and applied to a surface 151 near the detector” (Fig. 5B and [0042]), where the phosphor/paint coating is the wavelength converter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ranta’s Fig. 5A embodiment in the Hatti/Ranta combination of a silicone rubber cap having mixed-in phosphors with Ranta’s Fig. 5B embodiment of a phosphor/paint coating adhered on the surface because the combination of this feature would yield the predictable result of converting UV light into visible light (KSR Rationale A, see MPEP 2143). Specifically, further coating the exterior surface would expectedly increase the conversion efficiency of the UV light to visible light (simply because there is more of the wavelength-converting substance).
Regarding claim 3, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the photo sensor (Ranta, visible light sensor 141, Fig. 5A) comprises a plurality of detection channels (Ranta, “measuring the intensity of one or more spurious spectral lines of the lamp in the visible region of approximately 380-750 nm as a proxy for the UV lamp output”, [0018]), with the plurality of detection channels having different sensitivities to different ranges of electromagnetic radiation (Ranta, “The visible light detector will then output an electrical signal proportional to the incident intensity of UVC light, multiplied by the conversion efficiency of the phosphor”, [0042], to which conversion efficiency is a sensitivity calculation for the UV radiation at the emitted wavelength of visible light), for the same modification purpose as stated in claim 2 rejection above).
Regarding claim 4, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the wavelength converting coating comprises a light transmissive adhesive (Ranta, phosphor/paint coating on cap 140 as discussed in claim 2 combination rejection comprises the paint which is inherently light transmissive, otherwise the phosphors in the coating would not be able to convert UV light), and
wherein a wavelength converting substance is adhered to the photo sensor via the light transmissive adhesive (Ranta, wavelength converting phosphors are adhered to cap 140 via the paint, Fig. 5A), for the same modification purpose as stated in claim 2 rejection above.
Regarding claim 6, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the wavelength converting substance (Ranta, phosphors of cap 140), when excited with UV light, emits visible light in the range of between 600 nm and 650 nm (Ranta, “measuring the intensity of one or more spurious spectral lines of the lamp in the visible region of approximately 380-750 nm as a proxy for the UV lamp output”, [0018]), for the modification purposes stated in claim 4 rejection above.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrive at the range of 600-650 nm from the 380-750 nm range as taught by Ranta because claimed ranges that "overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art" have a prima facie case of obviousness (see MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 9, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the system is configured for calculating an indication regarding a total amount of UV light, emitted by the at least one switchable UV light source over time, by accumulating the sensor outputs over time (Ranta, “The output from the sensor is coupled to the microcontroller so that stored programming logic can measure the UV dosage as a function of the intensity of the received visible light over time”, [0041]), and
wherein the system is configured for providing a confirmation signal, when the indication regarding the total amount of UV light exceeds a predefined threshold (Ranta, “a standard default cycle length is provided in the control logic, with the default cycle length being set to a dosage that is great enough to sanitize germs most likely to be present on the keyboard. As noted above, the dosage is preferably measured in terms of actual UV light emitted… when the cycle is complete, status indicators 106 will indicate the sanitization is complete”, Fig. 1 and [0030]);
wherein the confirmation signal is a visual confirmation signal (Ranta, status indicator light 105, Fig. 1), for the same modification purposes as stated in claim 1 rejection above.
Regarding claim 10, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches an aircraft (Hatti, [0002]) comprising: at least one system for providing and monitoring UV illumination according to claim 1 (Ranta’s UV disinfection system substituted for Hatti’s UVC unit, see claim 1 rejection above), wherein the at least one system is located in at least one of a cockpit and a passenger cabin of the aircraft (Hatti, [0002]).
Regarding claim 11, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches wherein the at least one system is located in a lavatory or in a galley provided within the passenger cabin of the aircraft (“One or more zones in the aircraft cabin may be selected from seating areas, subsets of seating areas, galleys, lavatories, social areas such as bars, staircases and crew rest areas. Also, the cabin may include the cockpit”, [0013]).
7. Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatti et al. (US 20190030195 A1), further in view of Ranta et al. (US 20090218512 A1), as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Cherepy et al. (US 20160071718 A1).
Hatti in view of Ranta teaches a wavelength converting substance being a phosphor (Ranta, [0039-0042], for the same modification purposes as stated in claim 4 rejection above), but fails to specifically teach a phosphor material being at least one of Y2O3:Eu3+, Sr2AL6O11:Eu2+, BaMgAlioO17:Eu2+, and LaPO4:Ce3+,TB3+.
Cherepy teaches how a fluorescent lamp uses phosphors such as red-emitting phosphor, europium-activated yttrium oxide phosphor to convert UV light at 254 nm into visible light ([0008]).
The Hatti/Ranta combination and Cherepy are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of utilizing phosphors to convert UV light into visible light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the phosphors found in the coating and cap of the Hatti/Ranta combination with a phosphor such as europium-activated yttrium oxide (Y2O3:Eu3--) as taught by Cherepy because the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supports a prima facie obviousness determination (MPEP 2144.07).
8. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hatti et al. (US 20190030195 A1), further in view of Ranta et al. (US 20090218512 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al. (US 20210013378 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Hatti in view of Ranta teaches a light detector having a wavelength converter (Ranta, cap 140 and sensor 141, Fig. 5A, where the UV light emitted by UV light source is converted into visible light via phosphor mixed in cap 140 and picked up by visible light sensor 141, see [0041], for the same modification purposes as stated in claim 1 rejection above), but fails to teach quantum dots as being part of the light detector.
Lee teaches a semiconductor device package (Fig. 1) that has an assembly (Fig. 2) that converts UV light into visible light (abstract), to which the wavelength converting particles (62, Fig. 2) “include one or more among a phosphor, a quantum dot (QD), and a fluorescent dye” ([0090]).
The Hatti/Ranta combination and Lee are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of utilizing phosphors to convert UV light into visible light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the wavelength converting phosphors in the cap of the Hatti/Ranta combination with quantum dots as suggested by Lee because the combination of this feature would yield the predictable result of converting UV light into visible light (KSR Rationale A, see MPEP 2143).
Conclusion
9. 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.
10. 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