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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 11/24/25, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-18 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 Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.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 as noted in the rejection below.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6, 12-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE3127749 to Wenselau (Wenselau) in view of U.S. Patent 4569208 to Villa (Villa) and PGPUB 20160327328 to Jeong (Jeong).
Regarding claim 1, Wenselau teaches a tube-shaped base body (shown in the Figure), an inlet side end with an inlet opening (lower side in Figure 1) and an outlet side end with an outlet opening (left side in Figure 1), wherein the base body has a tapered form such that the inlet opening has a greater area than the outlet opening (shown in Figure 1), wherein the inlet opening is disposed in a first front side plane and the outlet opening is disposed in a second front side plane (shown in Figure 1) and wherein the base body has a mechanical valve which is configured such that when a specified pressure difference between the inlet side end and the outlet side end is exceeded with an underpressure at the outlet side end, the valve opens under pressure induction while preventing an air stream from the outlet side end to the inlet side end (shown at the flap in Figure 2).
Wenselau is silent on a tube-shaped base body comprising a heating element, wherein the first front side plane and the second front side plane are disposed substantially parallel offset with respect to one another, and wherein at a perpendicular projection of the first front side plane onto the second front side plane, and the inlet opening and the outlet opening are disposed offset with respect to one another.
Villa teaches a tube-shaped base body comprising a heating element (70, Figures 1-4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Villa to provide a tube-shaped base body comprising a heating element. Doing so would prevent frost build up in the tube allowing the device to operate properly.
Jeong teaches wherein the first front side plane and the second front side plane are disposed substantially parallel offset with respect to one another (300, Figures 4 and 5), and wherein at a perpendicular projection of the first front side plane onto the second front side plane, and the inlet opening and the outlet opening are disposed offset with respect to one another (300, Figures 4 and 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Jeong to provide wherein the first front side plane and the second front side plane are disposed substantially parallel offset with respect to one another, and wherein at a perpendicular projection of the first front side plane onto the second front side plane, and the inlet opening and the outlet opening are disposed offset with respect to one another. Doing so would prevent frost from dropping outside of the cabinet.
Regarding claim 2, the modified device of Wenselau teaches the perpendicular projection of the first front side plane onto the second front side plane, the inlet opening and the outlet opening are disposed offset with respect to one another such that no overlap of the inlet opening and the outlet opening is formed (300, Figures 4 and 5 of Jeong).
Regarding claim 3, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the valve comprises a valve seat and a disk-shaped valve body (shown in Figure 2 of Wenselau).
Regarding claim 6, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the disk-shaped valve body is mounted so as to be supported under pre-stress in a closed position (the valve of Wenselau has some stress applied at least due to gravity in the closed position).
Regarding claim 12, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the base body further comprises an outer side and a heating element disposed thereon (70, Figures 1-4 of Villa).
Regarding claim 13, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the outer side of the base body comprises grooves and/or projections to which the heating element is fixed (Figure 2 of Villa).
Regarding claim 14, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the heating element is a heating filament (70, Figures 1-4, Col. 3 lines 20-24 of Villa).
Regarding claim 17, the modified device of Wenselau teaches a low temperature chamber (prior art devices are connected to a refrigerator, the interior of the tube of Wenselau could be a considered a low temperature chamber as well as the freezer or refrigerator it is attached to).
Regarding claim 18, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the ventilation unit is installed in a wall of the low temperature chamber such that the inlet opening is directed toward the outer side and the outlet opening is directed toward the inner side of the low temperature chamber, wherein the outlet opening is disposed further down in the vertical direction than the inlet opening (300, Figures 4 and 5 of Jeong).
Claim(s) 4-5, 10-11, and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenselau in view of Villa, Jeong, and U.S. Patent 10145574 to Graham (Graham).
Regarding claim 4, Wenselau is silent on wherein the disk-shaped valve body is disposed at an inclination toward the first front side plane.
Graham teaches wherein the disk-shaped valve body is disposed at an inclination toward the first front side plane (21, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Graham to provide wherein the disk-shaped valve body is disposed at an inclination toward the first front side plane. Doing so would increase the surface area to improve the flow rate of the air passing through the base body.
Regarding claim 5, the modified device of Wenselau teaches wherein the base body comprises a longitudinal axis and the disk-shaped valve body is disposed substantially perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis (Wenselau, Figure 2).
Regarding claim 10, Wenselau is silent on wherein the base body comprises a second disk-shaped valve body.
Graham teaches wherein the base body comprises a second disk-shaped valve body (21, Figure 1). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Graham to provide wherein the base body comprises a second disk-shaped valve body. Doing so would allow increased passage of air through the inlet side by increasing the available surface area that air would be able to pass through the valves while maintaining the same surface area of the opening at the inlet portion of the base body (Col. 2 lines 42-48).
Regarding claim 11 Wenselau is silent on wherein rotational axes of the disk-shaped valve body and the second disk-shaped valve body have rotational axes with an angle with respect to each other of between 15 and 35 degrees.
Graham teaches wherein rotational axes of the disk-shaped valve body and the second disk-shaped valve body have rotational axes with an angle with respect to each other of between 15 and 35 degrees (Claim 11). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Graham to provide wherein rotational axes of the disk-shaped valve body and the second disk-shaped valve body have rotational axes with an angle with respect to each other of between 15 and 35 degrees. Doing so would increase the surface area to improve the flow rate of the air passing through the base body. Since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller 105 USPQ 233.
Regarding claim 16, Wenselau is silent on wherein the base body comprises two half- shells.
Graham teaches wherein the base body comprises two half- shells (13, 16, and 19, Figures 2 and 3). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Graham to provide wherein the base body comprises two half- shells. Doing so would allow parts to be mated together (Col. 3 lines 21-23) and/or allow for maintenance to be performed easily.
Claim(s) 7, 9, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenselau in view of Villa, Jeong, and U.S. PGPUB 20050081555 to Seiss (Seiss).
Regarding claim 7, Wenselau is silent on wherein the disk-shaped valve body is an umbrella valve.
Seiss teaches wherein the disk-shaped valve body is an umbrella valve (Paragraph 0016). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Seiss to provide wherein the disk-shaped valve body is an umbrella valve. Doing so would be a simple substitution of parts and/or allow the device to close more securely.
Regarding claim 9, Wenselau is silent on wherein the disk-shaped valve body comprises a rotational axis oriented substantially parallel to a direction of air flow through the base body.
Seiss teaches wherein the disk-shaped valve body comprises a rotational axis oriented substantially parallel to a direction of air flow through the base body (Figure 5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Seiss to provide wherein the disk-shaped valve body comprises a rotational axis oriented substantially parallel to a direction of air flow through the base body. Doing so would be a simple substitution of parts and/or allow the device to close more securely.
Regarding claim 15, Wenselau is silent on wherein the base body is fabricated of a thermoplastic synthetic material by an injection molding process.
Seiss teaches wherein the base body is fabricated of a thermoplastic synthetic material by an injection molding process (Paragraph 0013 discloses plastic, the injection molding limitation is considered a product by process). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Seiss to provide wherein the base body is fabricated of a thermoplastic synthetic material by an injection molding process. Doing so would be a simple change in material and/or would allow for use with a variety of processes while still operating satisfactoriy.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wenselau in view of Villa, Jeong, and U.S. PGPUB 20050145284 to Sarajian (Sarajian).
Regarding claim 8, Wenselau is silent on wherein the disk-shaped valve body is fabricated of silicone.
Sarajian teaches wherein the disk-shaped valve body is fabricated of silicone (Paragraph 0043). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Wenselau with the teachings of Sarajian to provide wherein the disk-shaped valve body is fabricated of silicone. Doing so would be a simple change in material and/or would allow for use with a variety of processes while still operating satisfactoriy (Paragraph 0048).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)272-2055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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 574-272-6460. 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.
/STEVEN S ANDERSON II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights