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 10/22/2025. Claims 1-4 and 6-22 are pending in the application. Claims 17-18 have been withdrawn and claims 1-4, 6-16, and 19-22 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
3. The objection to the claims has been withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.
All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.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.
Drawings
4. Fig. 3-9 of Applicant’s drawings filed 09/21/2022 are objected to for the following informalities:
Instant drawings Figs. 3-9 are photographs. Black and white photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications. Photographs or photomicrograph printed on sensitized paper are acceptable as drawings, in lieu of India ink drawings, as are photographic images submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, to illustrate inventions which are incapable of being accurately or adequately depicted by India ink drawings, e.g., electrophoresis gels, blots, (e.g., immunological, western, Southern, and northern), autoradiographs, cell cultures (stained and unstained), histological tissue cross sections (stained and unstained), animals, plants, in vivo imaging, thin layer chromatography plates, crystalline structures, metallurgical microstructures, textile fabrics, grain structures and, in a design patent application, ornamental effects. The photographs or photomicrographs must show the invention more clearly than they can be done by India ink drawings and otherwise comply with the rules concerning such drawings.
Black and white photographs submitted in lieu of ink drawings must comply with 37 CFR 1.84(b). There is no requirement for a petition or petition fee, and only one set of photographs is required. See 37 CFR 1.84(b)(1).
To be acceptable, such photographs must be of sufficient quality so that all details in the photographs are reproducible in the printed patent. If several photographs are used to make one sheet of drawings, the photographs must be contained on a single sheet.
Response to Arguments
5. In the arguments presented on p.8-9 of the amendment, the Applicant argues that Wallace does not anticipate the amended claim 1 limitation of “one or more fan mounts coupling the one or more fans to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly at an oblique angle relative to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly such that the one or more fans are non-parallel with the chamber facing side of the lid assembly”.
Applicant’s arguments, see p.8-9, filed 10/22/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) and 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 Wallace (US 20210338869 A1, cited in prior office action) in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U).
Applicant also argues that Wallace does not teach or suggest the amended claim 19 limitation of “wherein the intermediate coupling substrate defines opposite recesses for receiving the interior mounting substrate and the exterior mounting substrate, such that the interior mounting substrate and the exterior mounting substrate are positioned opposite and spaced from one another via the intermediate coupling substrate”.
Applicant’s arguments, see p.8-9, filed 10/22/2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 19 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) and 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 Greuel (US 20120006995 A1), further in view of Wallace (US 20210338869 A1, cited in prior office action).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
7. Claims 1-3, 6-7, and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1), in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U).
Regarding claim 1, Wallace teaches a sterilization system (Fig. 5) comprising: a sterilization tank (body portion 90 as shown in Fig. 6 but unlabeled in Fig. 5, where Fig. 6 has identical relevant features to that of Fig. 5) comprising a closed end and an open end (base of body portion 90 as the closed end, the opening of body portion 90 as the open end, as shown in Fig. 6 but unlabeled in Fig. 5);
a lid assembly (lid 98, Fig. 11, see [0023]) comprising a chamber facing side opposite an outward facing side (interior surface of lid 98, Fig. 11), wherein the lid assembly is removably engageable with the sterilization tank at the open end of the sterilization tank thereby forming a sterilization chamber when engaged with the sterilization tank (see Fig. 6);
one or more fan mounts coupling the one or more fans to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly at an angle relative to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly
PNG
media_image1.png
320
357
media_image1.png
Greyscale
such that the one or more fans are non-parallel with the chamber facing side of the lid assembly (direction of the fan 18 is perpendicularly arranged with respect to the chamber facing side, Fig. 11);
one or more ozone sources (ozone generator 14, Fig. 11) and one or more fans coupled to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly (fan 18, Fig. 11) such that the one or more ozone sources and the one or more fans are disposed in the sterilization chamber when the lid assembly is engaged with the sterilization tank (when the lid of Fig. 11 is closed in the Fig. 5 configuration, the interior mounted fans and ozone sources are disposed in the sterilization chamber);
and a controller communicatively coupled to the one or more ozone sources and the one or more fans (controller 26 is communicatively coupled to fan 18 and ozone generator wires 50 and 54 as described in [0037-0039], Fig. 10).
Although Wallace teaches a non-parallel (perpendicular) angle of the fan relative to the chamber-facing side via the fan mounts, Wallace fails to teach an oblique angle of the fan relative to the chamber-facing side.
Dai teaches a cleaning apparatus (Fig. 7) utilizing a fan (210, Fig. 4) dispersing an atomized chemical (atomization device 120 having reservoir 124, Fig. 2) at an adjustable angle such as an oblique angle (Fig. 7) relative to its mounting surface in order to generate vortex airflow within the enclosure and thus increasing the air contact area (see p.4, 6th paragraph of English translation).
Wallace and Dai are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of sterilization systems utilizing fans to disperse a cleaning medium throughout an enclosure.
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 fan mount angle relative to the chamber-facing side of Wallace by incorporating an oblique fan mount angle relative to its mounting surface as taught by Dai in order to generate vortex airflow within the enclosure and thus increasing the air contact area (Dai, p.4, 6th paragraph of English translation).
Furthermore, it would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have positioned the fan at an oblique angle relative to the chamber-facing side because this rearrangement does not change the functionality of the fan with respect to the interior chamber (“shifting the position… would not have modified the operation of the device”, MPEP 2144.04.VI.C). The fan will still circulate air that is enclosed by the sterilization chamber; changing the angle would not impede air circulation because the mounting angle is not a critical feature of the fan. The burden is shifted to the Applicant to provide evidence on the contrary.
Regarding claim 2, modified Wallace teaches one or more ozone sensors disposed in the sterilization chamber when the lid assembly is engaged with the sterilization tank (ozone sensor 110, Fig. 11), wherein the one or more ozone sensors are communicatively coupled to the controller (Fig. 11, [0041]).
Regarding claim 3, modified Wallace teaches one or more ozone source holders (“any attachment points are sealed in place by an adhesive sealing material (e.g., adhesive-backed aluminum tape, fasteners, etc.)”, [0049]) coupling the one or more ozone sources to the chamber facing side of the lid assembly (ozone generator 14 of Fig. 11 is mounted to the frame of fan 18 in a similar configuration as shown by Figs. 7 or 9, to which the fan 18 is mounted to the chamber facing side) while spacing the one or more ozone sources away from the chamber facing side of the lid assembly (the ozone generator is spaced away from the chamber facing side because those wires are not touching the chamber facing side).
Regarding claim 6, modified Wallace teaches wherein the lid assembly comprises an interior mounting substrate (chamber-facing interior surface of lid 98, Fig. 11) coupled to an exterior mounting substrate (other side of lid 98 as shown in Fig. 5), the interior mounting substrate comprising an interior mounting surface at the chamber facing side of the lid assembly (chamber-facing interior surface of lid 98, Fig. 11) and the exterior mounting substrate comprises an exterior mounting surface at the outward facing side of the lid assembly (other side of lid 98 facing outwards as shown in Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 7, modified Wallace teaches wherein the interior mounting substrate comprise a plurality of mounting holes
PNG
media_image2.png
587
560
media_image2.png
Greyscale
and at least one bulkhead fitting (frame of fan 18, Fig. 1) disposed in at least one of the plurality of mounting holes (frame of fan 18 is attached to mounting holes above).
Regarding claim 9, modified Wallace teaches an intermediate coupling substrate
PNG
media_image3.png
535
566
media_image3.png
Greyscale
disposed between and coupled to both the interior mounting surface and the exterior mounting substrate (region in red is between the chamber exterior and interior mounting substrate/surface of the lid 98, Fig. 5 and 11).
Regarding claim 10, modified Wallace teaches wherein the intermediate coupling substrate comprises an engagement region configured to engage with the sterilization tank (interface where lid 98 touches the body portion 90, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 11, modified Wallace teaches in the embodiment of Figs. 5 and 10-11 wherein the lid assembly comprises a shared mounting substrate (lid 98, Fig. 11) having an interior mounting surface (chamber-facing interior surface of lid 98, Fig. 11) opposite an exterior mounting surface (opposite side of interior surface of lid 98, Fig. 11), wherein the one or more ozone sources (ozone generator 14, Fig. 11), the one or more fans (fan 18, Fig. 11), and the controller (controller 26, Fig. 11) are coupled to the interior mounting surface of the shared mounting substrate (Fig. 11), but fails to teach wherein the controller is coupled to the exterior mounting surface of the shared mounting substrate.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller mounted on the interior surface of the lid by instead rearranging the controller to be mounted on the exterior, outward-facing surface of the lid because the shifting the position of the controller would not have modified the operation of the apparatus (see MPEP 2144.04,VI,C).
Regarding claim 12, modified Wallace teaches wherein the sterilization tank comprises a plastic material (“The housing 80 may be formed from any suitable material (e.g., plastic)”, [0049]).
Regarding claim 13, modified Wallace teaches a controller coupled to the inward facing side of the lid assembly (controller 26, Fig. 11), but fails to teach wherein the controller is coupled to the outward facing side of the lid assembly.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller mounted on the interior surface of the lid by instead rearranging the controller to be mounted on the exterior, outward-facing surface of the lid because the shifting the position of the controller would not have modified the operation of the apparatus (see MPEP 2144.04,VI,C).
Regarding claim 14, modified Wallace teaches a power supply (power source 30, Fig. 14, where Fig. 14 is a method of using the apparatus of Fig. 11) mounted to an outward facing side of the lid assembly (step 208 shows the power source cord 30 facing an exterior direction, Fig. 14 and [0054]) and communicatively coupled to the controller (Fig. 10), but fails to teach a display with this Fig. 10-11 embodiment.
The embodiment of Fig. 13 shows an alternative ozone generation system having a printed circuit board (PCB) comprising LEDs 130 communicatively coupled to the controller 26 in order to provide “indication of the power status of the system and the ozone-generation status of the system” ([0044]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the ozone generation system of Fig. 11 by incorporating a set of display LEDs as taught in the embodiment of Fig. 13 in order to indicate both the power status and the ozone-generation of the system ([0044]).
Because the aforementioned display LED modifications are directed to them being mounted on the interior surface of the lid (as the rest of the components are, excluding the power source 30, Fig. 11), it would also have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the display LEDs mounted on the interior surface of the lid by instead rearranging the LEDs to be mounted on the exterior, outward-facing surface of the lid because the shifting the position of the display LEDs would not have modified the operation of the apparatus (see MPEP 2144.04,VI,C).
8. Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1) in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U), as applied to claim 3 above, further in view of Notaro (US 4383976 A), further in view of Boin et al. (WO 2015117233 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS filed 04/05/2023).
Regarding claim 4, modified Wallace teaches an ozone source holder (ozone generator 14 of Fig. 11 is mounted to the frame of fan 18 in a similar configuration as shown by Figs. 7 or 9, to which the fan 18 is mounted to the chamber facing side via attachment means described in [0049]), but fails to teach the holder comprising a polycarbonate rod.
Notaro teaches an ozone generating assembly (Fig. 1) having a terminal electrode (7c, Fig. 2), and electrode (4a, Fig. 2) responsible for generating ozone when electrically connected (col. 4, last paragraph to col. 5, first paragraph), where a rod supports the ozone generating components (support connector 4 and tube 1a, Fig. 2).
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 frame of the fan acting as a support for the ozone generating electrodes of modified Wallace with a rod-like tube assembly to hold and support the electrodes as taught by Notaro because the substitution of this feature would yield the predictable result of holding and supporting the ozone generating source/components [KSR Rationale B, see MPEP 2143]).
However, modified Wallace in view of Notaro fails to teach wherein the rod-like support assembly of Notaro comprises polycarbonate.
Boin teaches an ozone cleaning system (10, Fig. 2) where the cabinet (12, Fig. 2) is made of “ozone resistive plastics, such as polycarbonate” because “it reduces the overall cost of the ozone cleaning system 10 while acting to isolate ozone disposed within the cleaning space 24 from being exposed to a user located externally to the ozone cleaning system 10” ([0027]).
Modified Wallace, Notaro, and Boin are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ozone generating 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 ozone generator of modified Wallace mounted to a rod-like support structure of Notaro by incorporating polycarbonate as the material for the support structure as taught by Boin because the cost of the ozone cleaning system is reduced and the ozone is isolated to the space in which it is generated (Boin, [0027]).
9. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1) in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U), as applied to claim 6 above, further in view of Boin et al. (WO 2015117233 A1, provided in Applicant’s IDS filed 04/05/2023).
Regarding claim 8, modified Wallace teaches an interior mounting substrate being of a plastic material (The housing 80 may be formed from any suitable material (e.g., plastic)”, [0049] with respect to Fig. 5, to which the housing comprises the interior mounting substrate), but is silent to the interior mounting substrate being made of polycarbonate.
Boin teaches an ozone cleaning system (10, Fig. 2) where the cabinet (12, Fig. 2) is made of “ozone resistive plastics, such as polycarbonate” because “it reduces the overall cost of the ozone cleaning system 10 while acting to isolate ozone disposed within the cleaning space 24 from being exposed to a user located externally to the ozone cleaning system 10” ([0027]).
Modified Wallace and Boin are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ozone sterilizing systems that utilize a plastic material as the composition of the chamber/enclosure being sterilized.
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 plastic composition of the entire housing of modified Wallace by incorporating polycarbonate as the plastic as taught by Boin because the cost of the ozone cleaning system is reduced and the ozone is isolated to the space in which it is generated (Boin, [0027]).
10. Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1) in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Miller-Russell (US 10551081 B1).
Regarding claim 15, modified Wallace teaches a data storage shield (“The one or more ozone level sensors are in communication with and provide feedback to the controller 26”, to which the feedback data implies that controller 26 has a data storage component within) that is communicatively coupled to the controller (26, Fig. 11) and the individual components in Fig. 11, but fails to teach a relay shield coupled to the outward facing side of the lid assembly and communicatively coupled to the controller.
Miller-Russell teaches an air conditioner system (50, Fig. 3) having a safety device (first alert device 20, Fig. 3) comprising a controller (70, Fig. 3) communicatively coupled to a relay shield (146, Fig. 8) in order to send a termination signal to the relay shield which indirectly breaks power to the air conditioning system (col. 11, lines 41-54), the termination signal being triggered by an undesirable condition (as described in col. 9, lines 50-67).
Modified Wallace and Miller-Russell are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of controller circuits communicatively coupled to components of a larger system.
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 controller of Wallace by incorporating a relay shield communicatively coupled to the controller as taught by Miller-Russell in order to control the other components of the apparatus when an undesirable condition is reached via an indirect signal from the controller (i.e., the relay shield acts as a signal medium between the controller and the air conditioning system of Miller-Russell, see col. 9, lines 50-67 and col. 11, lines 41-54; thus the application of the relay device in Wallace would be shutting the ozone generating apparatus off when an undesirable condition is reached via detection from the controller (e.g., ozone levels are too high from ozone sensor)).
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the modified Wallace/Miller-Russell combination of a controller/data storage shield/relay shield assembly mounted on the interior surface of the lid by instead rearranging the controller/data storage shield/relay shield assembly to be mounted on the exterior, outward-facing surface of the lid because the shifting the position of the controller/data storage shield/relay shield assembly would not have modified the operation of the apparatus (see MPEP 2144.04,VI,C).
11. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1) in view of Dai et al. (CN 205079370 U), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Miller et al. (US 20070280867 A1).
Regarding claim 16, modified Wallace teaches an outward facing side of the lid assembly (opposite, outward facing side of lid 98, Fig. 11), but fails to teach a filter and a pump assembly coupled to the outward facing side of the lid assembly, wherein when the lid assembly is engaged with the sterilization tank the pump assembly is fluidly coupled to the sterilization tank and the filter is positioned such that fluid removed from the sterilization tank by the pump assembly traverses the filter.
Miller teaches a mail-sterilizing apparatus (Fig. 3) having an ozone generator (90, Fig. 3) and a filter (ozone filter 86 having non-consumable catalyst 88, Fig. 3) / pump assembly (vacuum pump 84, Fig. 3) coupled to the outward facing side of the apparatus (the filter and pump are mounted outwards to the chamber 72, Fig. 3), wherein when the filter/pump assembly (86 and 84, Fig. 3) is engaged with the sterilization tank (chamber 72, Fig. 3) the pump assembly is fluidly coupled to the sterilization tank ([0037]) and the filter is positioned such that fluid removed from the sterilization tank by the pump assembly traverses the filter ([0037]). The purpose of the filter/pump assembly is to convert the ozone in the chamber into oxygen ([0006] and abstract).
Modified Wallace and Miller are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ozone generating systems for the sterilization of enclosures and objects within the enclosure.
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 lid assembly of modified Wallace by incorporating an ozone filter/pump assembly mounted facing outward to the chamber while fluidly connected to the chamber interior as taught by Miller for the purpose of converting the ozone in the chamber into oxygen (Miller, [0006]).
12. Claims 19-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greuel (US 20120006995 A1) in view of Wallace et al. (US 20210338869 A1). Regarding claim 19, Greuel teaches a sterilization system (Fig. 3 and 6) comprising: a sterilization tank (117 and cylindrical housing 16, Fig. 6) comprising closed end (bottom end of bottom cover 117, Fig. 6) and an open end (upper opening of housing 16 when cover lid 14 is not attached to the upper opening, Fig. 6);
a lid assembly (14, Fig. 3 and 6) comprising an interior mounting substrate (black dotted line, see drawing below) coupled to an exterior mounting substrate (grey outline having circular endpoints, see drawing below), wherein:
PNG
media_image4.png
292
508
media_image4.png
Greyscale
the lid assembly is removably engageable with the sterilization tank at the open end of the sterilization tank (“the container 12 may be opened by removing the top cover 14”, Fig. 1-2, where “the top cover 14 may also in the second embodiment be detachable as described above”, second embodiment being Fig. 6, [0054]) thereby forming a sterilization chamber when engaged with the sterilization tank (Fig. 6);
the interior mounting substrate (see drawing above) comprising an interior mounting surface at a chamber facing side of the lid assembly (downward-facing external side of labeled interior mounting substrate, see drawing above);
the exterior mounting substrate (see drawing above) comprises an exterior mounting surface at an outward facing side of the lid assembly (uppermost surface facing upwards of labeled exterior mounting substrate where display 64 and user control 66 are mounted on, see drawing above of Fig. 3); and
an intermediate coupling substrate (filled black line outlining intermediate coupling substrate, see drawing above) disposed between and coupled to both the interior mounting surface and the exterior mounting substrate (labeled intermediate coupling substrate is between labeled interior and exterior mounting substrates, see drawing above), wherein the intermediate coupling substrate comprises an engagement region configured to engage with the sterilization tank (engagement region being the interface between the intermediate coupling substrate and the housing 16 when sterilization chamber is closed, Fig. 6), wherein the intermediate coupling substrate defines opposite recesses for receiving the interior mounting substrate (groove/slot holding discharge lamp 32, see drawing above of Fig. 3) and the exterior mounting substrate (mounting holes of display 64 and user control 66 in fluid connection with the labeled intermediate coupling substrate in drawing above), such that the interior mounting substrate and the exterior mounting substrate are positioned opposite (labeled interior substrate and exterior substrate are opposite, see drawing above) and spaced from one another via the intermediate coupling substrate (intermediate coupling substrate is in between the interior and exterior substrates, see drawing above);
one or more ozone sources (UV discharge lamp 32, Fig. 3, where “the ultraviolet light 46 emitted by the lamp 32 not only directly disinfects the contents of the interior volume 24, but also generates radicals, such as ozone or peroxides in the air”, Fig. 3 and [0063]) coupled to the interior mounting surface (lamp 32 is attached to surface that faces downwards, see drawing of Fig. 3 above) of the interior mounting substrate (labeled interior mounting substrate above) such that the one or more ozone sources coupled are disposed in the sterilization chamber when the lid assembly is engaged with the sterilization tank (when the cover lid 14 is closed, UV lamp 32 is disposed in the interior space of the enclosed walls, Fig. 6); and
a controller (control unit 56, Fig. 3) and a power supply (battery 54, Fig. 3), wherein the controller is communicatively coupled to the one or more ozone sources ([0041]) and the power supply is electrically coupled to the controller and the one or more ozone sources (battery 54 and ballast 48, Fig. 3 and claim 4).
Greuel fails to teach the controller and the power supply coupled to the exterior mounting surface of the exterior mounting substrate.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the controller and power supply mounted within the intermediate coupling substrate of the lid by instead rearranging both components to be mounted on the exterior, outward-facing exterior mounting substrate surface of the lid in the same manner/orientation as the display and user control is because the shifting the position of the controller and power supply would not have modified the operation of the apparatus (see MPEP 2144.04,VI,C).
Modified Greuel fails to teach one or more fans coupled to the interior mounting surface of the interior mounting substrate.
Wallace teaches an ozone sterilization chamber (Fig. 5 and 11) having a fan mounted on the interior surface of the underside (i.e., interior mounting substrate) of the lid (fan 18, Fig. 7) in order to circulate the air across the ozone generator ([0049]) and thus sterilize a space ([0011]).
Modified Greuel and Wallace are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ozone-generating sterilization chambers.
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 interior mounting substrate of modified Greuel by incorporating a fan attached/mounted to the interior mounting surface as taught by Wallace in order to circulate the air across the ozone generator (Wallace, [0049]) and thus sterilize a space (Wallace, [0011]).
Regarding claim 20, modified Greuel teaches various sensors to monitor the level of UV radiation ([0020]), but fails to teach one or more ozone sensors communicatively coupled to the controller and disposed in the sterilization chamber when the lid assembly is engaged with the sterilization tank.
Wallace teaches an ozone sterilization chamber (Fig. 5 and 11) having an ozone sensor (110, Fig. 11) in communication with the controller (26, Fig. 11) in order to measure ozone levels and provide feedback to the controller ([0042]).
Modified Greuel and Wallace are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of ozone-generating sterilization chambers.
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 interior mounting substrate of modified Greuel by incorporating an ozone sensor attached/mounted to the interior mounting surface and in communication with the controller as taught by Wallace in order to measure ozone levels and provide feedback to the controller (Wallace, [0042]).
Regarding claim 21, modified Wallace teaches wherein the sterilization tank comprises an inner shell (cylindrical side wall 16, Fig. 6) disposed in an outer shell (bottom cover 117, Fig. 6);
the outer shell comprise a base forming the closed end of the sterilization tank (floor wall of bottom cover 117, Fig. 6) and an outer opening opposite the base (cylindrical opening of bottom cover 117, Fig. 6);
the inner shell comprises an inner bottom opening (bottom cylindrical opening of sidewall 16, Fig. 6) and an inner top opening (top cylindrical opening of sidewall 16 that interfaces with lid 14, Fig. 6);
the outer opening of the outer shell (cylindrical opening of bottom cover 117, Fig. 6) and the inner top opening of the inner shell (top cylindrical opening of sidewall 16 that interfaces with lid 14, Fig. 6) collectively form the open end of the sterilization tank (walls bounding bottom cover 117 and sidewall 16 leave an open end of the sterilization tank that lid 14 attaches to, Fig. 6).
Regarding claim 22, modified Greuel teaches wherein the inner shell (top cylindrical opening of sidewall 16, Fig. 6) comprises an upper perimeter surrounding the inner top opening (circular perimeter of the top cylindrical opening of sidewall 16, Fig. 6) and engageable with the engagement region of the intermediate coupling substrate of the lid assembly (lid 14 attached to top circular perimeter of sidewall 16, Fig. 6).
Conclusion
13. 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.
14. 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
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758