DETAILED ACTION
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 § 103
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 1, 4, 7–9, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kim et al., KR 20160098631 A (“Kim”) in view of Kim ’163, KR 1020180043163 A (“Kim ’163”).
Regarding claim 1:
It is noted that the term “the front side” is interpreted as the side proximate “front surface.”
Kim discloses that a photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module (Kim’s photocatalytic air filter 80 as shown in Fig. 1),
which is applied to a target space (where Kim’s air filter functions, Kim Fig. 1, p. 2),
the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module 80 comprising
a first casing partition wall part (Kim’s first photo catalyst filter 80a) having a plurality of first lattice-shaped spaces (Kim’s cells 83, Kim Fig. 4, ps. 2–3),
a second casing partition wall part (Kim’s second photocatalytic filter 80b) disposed at a rear end of the first casing partition wall part 80a in a staggered manner, the second casing partition wall part having a plurality of second lattice-shaped spaces 83 (Kim’s first and second photocatalytic filters 80a and 80b are attached to each other, and 80a and 80b has different number of cells, and therefore, could interpreted as staggered because Kim’s lattice-shaped spaces 83 in 80a and 80b would not be in line because of its different size, which reads on the term “in a staggered manner”, Kim Fig. 4, p. 4).
Kim does not disclose a first single catalytic ball accommodated in each of the first lattice-shaped spaces 83, a second single photocatalytic ball accommodated in each of the second lattice-shaped spaces 83. Kim does not disclose a first cover configured to cover a front surface of the first casing partition wall part and prevent the first single photocatalytic ball from separating from the first casing partition wall part; or that a second cover configured to cover a rear surface of the second casing partition wall part and prevent the second single photocatalytic ball from separating from the second casing partition wall part. Kim also does not disclose that the first single photocatalytic ball has a size to be able to form a first available interval in at least one of a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of each of the first lattice-shaped spaces so that the first single photocatalytic ball moves correspondingly to a flow of air in the first lattice-shaped spaces, and the second single photocatalytic ball has a size to be able to form a second available interval in at least one of a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of each of the second lattice-shaped spaces so that the second single photocatalytic ball moves correspondingly to a flow of air in the second lattice-shaped spaces, and wherein the first available interval and the second available interval are configured such that the first photocatalytic ball and the second photocatalytic ball partially overlap each other when viewed from the front side or the rear side even though the first single photocatalytic ball is maximally spaced apart from an adjacent second single photocatalytic ball.
In the analogous art of photocatalytic filters, Kim ’163 discloses a casing partition wall 110 comprising partition spaces 1–9. Kim ’163 Fig. 5, p. 3. Kim ’163 discloses its casing partition wall 110 is used to accommodate photocatalyst bead 10. Kim ’163 discloses its base could also include a photocatalyst material. Additionally, Kim ’163 discloses a mesh structure 110a and 110b configured to prevent the photocatalytic beads 10 from being separated the front and back surface of the filter 100. Kim ’163 Fig. 1, p. 4. Kim ’163 discloses its photocatalytic beads could have different shape, size and type to filter different gases. Kim ’163 p. 4. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Kim ’163’s photocatalyst bead 10 and mesh structure 110a and 110b in Kim such that Kim’s filter could be used to meets different filtration needs with a strengthened photocatalyst effect.
Kim ’163 discloses its beads 10 could have an average diameter size of 0.5 to 4 mm. And Kim discloses its partition wall part 80a with a number of cells being 100 cpsi (which gives s cell dimension of 0.1 inch or 2.54 mm) and Kim’s partition wall part 80b with a number of cells being 200 cpsi (which gives a cell dimension of 0.07 inch or 1.78 mm). For the proposed modification to work, Kim ’163’s bead 10 would need a size that fits in each cell of Kim’s lattice shaped space 83, which means the diameter of Kim ’163’s bead 10 has to be smaller than 2.54 mm for first casing partition wall part and smaller than 1.78 mm for second casing partition wall part 80b in modified Kim.
Additionally, Kim ’163 teaches that “[[T]]the shape and size of the photocatalytic beads can be selected appropriately according to the type of gas to be removed, the removal rate, and the removal rate”, Kim ’163, p. 4. Additionally, Kim ’163 discloses that “[[T]]the size of the photocatalyst bead may be, for example, an average diameter of 0.5 to 4 mm, but is not limited thereto, and can be determined in consideration of various factors such as the reaction surface area and the size of the photocatalytic filter 100”, Kim p. 4. Based on those teachings, one could pick a bead size of 1.5 mm, each of Kim’s lattice shaped space would then accommodate one single bead of Kim ’163, and there would be “a first available interval in at least one of a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of each of the first lattice-shaped spaces 83 so that the first photocatalytic ball moves correspondingly to a flow of air in the first lattice-shaped spaces” because the ball is smaller than the cell size. There would also be a second photocatalyst ball 10 of Kim ’163 forming “a second available interval in at least one of a horizontal direction and a vertical direction of each of the second lattice-shaped spaces so that the second photocatalytic ball moves correspondingly to a flow of air in the second lattice-shaped spaces.” And that the first available interval and the second available interval are configured such that the first photocatalytic ball and the second photocatalytic ball partially overlap each other when viewed from the front side or the rear side even though the first photocatalytic ball is maximally spaced apart from an adjacent second photocatalytic ball because the bead 10 of Kim ’163 of a diameter of 1.5 mm, which is more than half of the cell length, and they will overlap in Kim’s configuration of Fig. 5d.
Regarding claim 4:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, wherein the first available interval and the second available interval are configured such that the first single photocatalytic ball and the second single photocatalytic ball partially overlap each other when viewed from the front side or the rear side even though no spacing distance is defined in a diagonal direction between the first single photocatalytic ball and the second single photocatalytic ball adjacent to each other (as discussed in claim 1, Kim ’163’s bead 10 is selected to have a diameter of 1.5 mm, the first interval is 2.54 mm-1.5mm=1.04 mm and the second interval is 1.78-1.5mm= 0.28 mm, since the bead has a diameter of 1.5 mm, it would necessary overlaps with each other when viewed from front or rear even when there is no spacing distance defined in a diagonal direction between the first and second photocatalytic ball as discussed in claim 1).
Regarding claim 7:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, wherein the first single photocatalytic ball and the second single photo catalytic ball 20 are a ball made of a photocatalyst or a ball formed of ceramic ball or a metal ball and photocatalyst coated on the ceramic ball or the metal ball (Kim discloses its photocatalytic ball 20 is a ceramic ball with titanium oxide coating). Kim Fig. 1, p. 2.
Regarding claim 8:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, further comprising an active light source part (Kim’s UV LED 57) configured to emit light toward the first casing partition wall part and the second casing partition wall part, wherein the active light source part is positioned forward of the first casing partition wall part or positioned rearward of the second casing partition wall part (Kim discloses its UV LED is disposed on a side of filter 80, and therefore would read on either “rearward or forward.”) Kim Fig. 1, p. 2.
Regarding claim 9:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 8, further comprising a guide frame (Kim’s structure keeping Kim’s lower substrate 55 at the shown distance as shown in Fig. 5) configured to ensure a spacing distance and an air flow path between the active light source part and the first casing partition wall part or the second casing partition wall part. Kim Fig. 5, p. 2. Modified Kim discloses a light reflection plate (Kim’s substrate 55) configured to minimize a leak of light emitted from the active light source part to outside and maximize photocatalytic activity efficiency (as shown in Kim’s Fig. 5, Kim’s substrate 55 directs U.V. light towards the filter). Kim Fig. 5, p. 2.
While modified Kim does not explicitly disclose an active light source driver a supply line configured to supply power, the instant disclosure (hereinafter “Spec.”) admits that the active light source driver and power supply line are apparent to those skill in the art. Spec. [0063]. It would have been obvious for modified Kim to include an active light source driver and a supply line for Kim’s active light source to ensure proper functioning of modified Kim’s active light source 57. Kim Fig. 1.
Regarding claim 11:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, wherein the first casing partition wall part or the second casing partition wall part is coated with a photocatalyst or made of a photocatalyst (Kim photocatalytic material is coated on portion 81). Kim Fig. 4, p. 2.
Regarding claim 13:
Kim discloses that an air purification device comprising the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module according to claim 1 (as disclosed in Kim’s Fig. 1). Kim Fig. 1, p. 3.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kim in view of Kim ’163, and in further view of Chang, KR 20150089704 A (“Chang”).
Regarding claim 5:
Modified Kim does not disclose that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, wherein the second casing partition wall part has a hole formed in a lateral side of the second lattice-shaped spaces and configured to communicate between adjacent second lattice-shaped spaces.
Similar to modified Kim, Chang discloses a ceramic filter with titanium dioxide photocatalyst. Chang Fig. 4, p. 1. Chang discloses openings 14 formed in a lateral side of the lattice-shaped space. Chang Fig. 4, p. 3. Chang discloses its opening 14 forming turbulent flow A that improves the response rate of the coated catalyst coating layer and further improve direct colliding directly to the surface of the catalyst. Chang Fig. 4, p. 3. It would have been obvious for modified Kim to include Chang’s opening 14 at a lateral side of modified Kim’s lattice-shaped space for the benefits disclosed above.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Kim in view of Kim ’163, and in further view of Sangiovanni et al., US 2002/0160913 A1 (“Sangiovanni”).
Regarding claim 6:
Modified Kim discloses that the photocatalytic air-conditioning filter module of claim 1, wherein each of the first casing partition wall part and the second casing partition wall part 80a and 80b each comprise a horizontal wall and vertical partition wall (because Kim discloses its filter 80 have a grid of checkerboard pattern). Kim Fig. 4, p. 2.
Modified Kim does not disclose that one of the horizontal wall and the vertical partition wall has a first cut-out portion recessed rearward from the front side, the other of the horizontal wall and the vertical partition wall has a second cut-out portion recessed forward from the rear side and configured to engage with the first cut-out portion, and the horizontal wall and the vertical partition wall are coupled to each other as the first cut-out portion and the second cut-out portions engage with each other.
Similar to modified Kim, Sangiovanni discloses a honeycomb photocatalyst matrix 12. Sangiovanni Fig. 6, [0021]. Sangiovanni discloses that its honeycomb matrix is formed by providing sheets 60 and 62 with slots 64 at spaced intervals along an edge thereof, where the slots are sized and positioned and spaced such that the sheets 60 and 64 may be interfitted with one another in “eggcrate” fashion and thereby forming the cells of the honeycomb core structure. It would have been obvious for modified Kim’s horizontal and vertical partition walls to have the design as shown in Sangiovanni’s Fig. 5, because such designs are known in the honeycomb structure art as being suitable to form honeycomb structures. With such modification, Sangiovanni’s slots 64 in modified Kim would read on the claimed first and second cut out portions that are recessed rearward and forward from the front and rear side respectively, and the first and second cut out portion 64 are coupled to engage with each other.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The examiner withdraws the current rejection because the applicant amends the claims to overcome the current rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The applicant amended claim 1 and argues the proposed rejection does not read on the claim. Specifically, the applicant argues that Kim ’163 be removed by the limitation “single”. Applicant Rem. dated Jan. 21, 2026 (“Applicant Rem.”) p. 9.
After thorough consideration, the examiner maintains the current rejection. The examiner points out that the term “single” changes the scope of the current invention. However, the proposed rejection still reads on the claim. As stated in the rejection above, and the examiner reiterate here, Kim ’163 teaches that “The shape and size of the photocatalytic beads can be selected appropriately according to the type of gas to be removed, the removal rate”, Kim ’163, p. 4. Additionally, Kim ’163 discloses that “The size of the photocatalyst bead may be, for example, an average diameter of 0.5 to 4 mm, but is not limited thereto, and can be determined in consideration of various factors such as the reaction surface area and the size of the photocatalytic filter 100”, Kim ’163, p. 4. Kim ’163 further discloses that the photocatalyst filter may have different area, number and composition of photocatalyst beads, depending on the field of application, p. 6. The proposed combination of modified Kim in view of Kim ’163 therefore discloses a possible embodiment, with Kim ’163’s single bead with a diameter 1.5 mm installed in Kim’s stacked first and second casing partition wall part, which reads on the amended claim 1. It is well within the ambit of one of ordinary skill in the art to use routine optimization to choose such embodiment based on factors such as field of application, reaction surface area and removal rate.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776