DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the amendments and remarks filed 09/25/2025, in which claim 8 has been amended and claims 8 and 10-15 are pending and ready for examination.
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 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.
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.
Claims 8, 10 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 5,919,365 (hereinafter “Collette”) in view of US 2002/0331719 A1 (hereinafter “Stehle”).
Regarding Claim 8 Collette discloses a water purifying member to be attached to a water storage portion 12 having an opening at an upper portion thereof, comprising:
a lid 16 that has an outlet 24 for discharging water stored in the water storage portion and is configured to close the opening of the water storage portion;
a support 46 including a circumferential wall portion formed in a cylindrical shape, a closing portion 60 that closes one end portion in an axial direction of the circumferential wall portion and in which an air hole 58 is formed, another end portion 41 in the axial direction of the circumferential wall portion being open; and
a cylindrical filter member 50/61/90 that is detachably attached to the support so as to cover an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion (note: the surface of support 46 facing the filter 90 may be considered an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion because it is closest to the outlet, i.e. the downstream side of water flow out of the bottle/water storage portion),
wherein the another end portion 41 of the support is configured to be detachably attached to the lid (via lip 43), and
when the support is attached to the lid, a closed space is formed between an inner space of the support and the lid (i.e. where the filter media reside or space 24), and the water in the water storage portion flows into the inner space via the filter member and is dischargeable from the outlet via the inner space,
wherein
a flange portion (i.e. bottom 60 around hole 58) is formed on the one end portion side of the support;
the filter member 50/61/90 is supported between the flange portion and the lid;
the lid has a cylindrical attachment portion 20 and a disk-shaped lid body (top surface of lid 16) that closes the upper portion of the attachment portion;
the outlet 24 is a circular outlet and formed in the center of the lid body 16;
at the lower portion of the inner wall surface of the outlet, ring-shaped protrusions 42/44 are formed;
an engaging portion 43 is formed the circumferential direction on the upper end of the circumferential wall portion of the support;
the engaging portion 43 is engaged with the ring-shaped protrusions 42/44; and
the upper end surface of the filter member comes into contact with the lower surface of the lid body (when inverted as in Fig. 1); see Figs. 1-3, C2/L41-C3/L63.
Collette does not disclose at the lower portion of the inner wall surface of the outlet, a plurality of arc-shaped protrusions protruding inward in the radial direction are formed with gaps in the circumferential direction; a notch extending in the circumferential direction is formed in a portion adjacent to each of the gaps at one end portion in the circumferential direction of each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions; a plurality of engaging portions are formed with the gaps in the circumferential direction on the upper end of the circumferential wall portion of the support; each of the plurality of engaging portions has a first portion extending upward and a second portion protruding outward in the radial direction from the first portion; the first portion of the each of the plurality of engaging portions is engaged with the notch of the each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions, and the second portion of the each of the plurality of engaging portions is engaged with the upper surface of the each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions.
However Stehle discloses a similar filter device comprising a filter housing/support 14 which is inside a tank 10 having an opening and has a filter head 26 (lid) for securing the filter to and closing the tank opening, wherein the filter housing is secured to the filter head via a plurality of protrusions 104 on the filter housing top circumferential wall and a polarity of arc-shaped protrusions on the disc shaped filter head lid surrounding an outlet 100 of the filter head. Specifically: the head/lid comprises, at the lower portion of an inner wall surface of the disc part of the lid 16, a plurality of arc-shaped protrusions 104/98 protruding inward in the radial direction are formed with gaps in the circumferential direction;
a notch (i.e. the rounded corner of part 04/98, i.e. the corner is removed to form the notch, seen in Figs. 4-5) extending in the circumferential direction is formed in a portion adjacent to each of the gaps at one end portion in the circumferential direction of each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions 104/98;
a plurality of engaging portions 102/96 are formed with the gaps in the circumferential direction on the upper end of the circumferential wall portion of the housing/support;
each of the plurality of engaging portions 102/96 has a first portion extending upward (either of the upwardly extending portions of “z”-shaped engaging portions 102/96 may be this first portion) and a second portion (the middle of the “z” shape) protruding outward in the radial direction from the first portion (seen in Fig. 3);
the first portion of the each of the plurality of engaging portions is engaged with the notch of the each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions (seen by the interaction of 102/104 in Fig. 6-7), and the second portion of the each of the plurality of engaging portions is engaged with the upper surface of the each of the plurality of arc-shaped protrusions (seen by the interaction of 102/104 in Figs. 6-7); see Figs. 1-7, [0025]-[0035].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the water purifying member of Collette by substituting for the projections on the lid and the projections on the support/housing which interact to secure the support/housing to the lid those as disclosed by Stehle as detailed above, because this involves the simple substitution of known means of using mutually engaging projections for securing a filter housing/support to a filter lid in order to obtain the predictable result of forming a successful filtration assembly/water purifying member.
The combination thus results in the structure as claimed.
Regarding Claim 10 Collette in view of Stehle discloses the water purifying member according to claim 8, wherein a gap 54 is formed between the outer surface of the circumferential wall portion 46 and an inner circumferential surface of the filter member 61 (see Fig. 2).
Regarding Claims 12-13 Collette in view of Stehle discloses the water purifying member according to claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the thickness of the filter member is 3 to 12 mm or (claim 13) wherein the thickness of the filter member is 5 to 9 mm. However, this would involve merely scaling of the disclosed bottle and filter assembly to a desired size, where mere changes of size have been held to be obvious; see MPEP 2144.04(IV)(A).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collette in view of Stehle further in view of US 2014/0339177 Al (hereinafter “Lane”) and US 2006/0157398 A1 (hereinafter “Nohren, JR.”).
Regarding Claim 11 Collette in view of Stehle discloses the water purifying member according to claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the filter member is formed by laminating a plurality of layers of sheet-like felt.
However, with regard to the filter material of Collette it is disclosed that “other filter mediums or other substances for treating water could be substituted” (C3/L38-45). Further Lane discloses a similar water bottle filter having an axial flow filtration element housed in a support, wherein the filter material 58 may be carbon or alternatively a non-woven web (i.e. sheet like felt) of filtering material, Fig. 1, [0102], [0175].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the water purifying member of Collette in view of Stehle by using a filter member of non-woven fiber web as disclosed by Lane because this involves the simple substitution of water bottle axial-flow filtration media, which are disclosed as known alternatives, in order to obtain the predictable result of forming a successful filtration assembly/water purifying member.
While it is not disclosed that the web is formed by laminating a plurality of layers of nonwoven/sheet-like felt, nonwoven filter are often made from multiple layers of nonwoven laminated together, such as in Nohren, JR. who discloses a similar water bottle filter wherein it is disclosed that a bundle 21 of nonwoven filter pads having progressively smaller pore sizes may optionally replace a single layer nonwoven filter pad of practically any reasonable thickness, wherein the layered nonwovens are thus “laminated”.
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the water purifying member of Collette in view of Stehle and Lane by substituting for the single nonwoven filter a bundle of laminated nonwovens as disclosed by Nohren, JR. because a bundle of laminated nonwovens is disclosed to be a known alternative to a single layer non-woven filter material in similar filters for water bottles.
Claims 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Collette in view of Stehle further in view of US 2010/0326921 Al (hereinafter “Elizalde Gonzalez”).
Regarding Claim 14 Collette in view of Stehle discloses the water purifying member according to claim 8, but does not disclose wherein the apparent density of the filter member is 0.10 to 0.40 g/cm3 or (claim 15) wherein the apparent density of the filter member is 0.10 to 0.20 g/cm3.
However, the filter material of Collette comprises activated carbon, and while it is disclosed to be mixed with an ion exchange resin, the ratio is not disclosed and further it is disclosed that “other filter mediums or other substances for treating water could be substituted” (C3/L38-45), and therefore use of a substantially majority or all activated carbon media would have been obvious to use. Where Elizalde Gonzalez further discloses an activated carbon for water filtration which has a density of 0.2-0.3 g/cm3 [0010], [0028].
Therefore, before the effective filing date, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the water purifying member of Collette in view of Stehle by using a filter member of activated carbon having a density of 0.2-0.3 g/cm3 as disclosed by Stehle because this involves the use of a known working density of activated carbon used for water filtration to obtain the predictable result of forming a functional water purifying member.
Response to Amendment
The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of claims 8 and 10-15 are withdrawn in view of the Applicants’ arguments and amendments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 09/25/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to Applicants’ argument that Collette in view of Stehle does not disclose A) a cylindrical filter member that is detachably attached to the support SO as to cover an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion, and B) the water in the water storage portion flows into an inner space of the support via the filter member and is dischargeable from the outlet via the inner space; the Examiner disagrees. As noted in the rejection the cylindrical filter member 50/61/90 that is detachably attached to the support so as to cover an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion because the surface of support 46 facing the filter 90 may be considered an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion because it is closest to the outlet of the water purifying member, i.e. the downstream side of water flow out of the bottle/water storage portion). Additionally, the water in the water storage portion flows into an inner space of the support via the filter member and is dischargeable from the outlet via the inner space, i.e. because the filter member occupies the inner space of the support and thus water entering the filer member is also entering the inner space of the support.
The Examiner notes that amending claim 8 to recite “a cylindrical filter member that is detachably attached to the support so as to cover an outer surface of the circumferential wall portion, the outer surface of the circumferential wall portion being convex” would overcome the rejections and claim 8 and its dependents would be allowable over the prior art, as the prior art does not disclose a filter as claimed wherein the cylindrical filter member covers an outer surface of a circumferential wall portion, wherein said outer surface of the circumferential wall portion is convex
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 Eric J. McCullough whose telephone number is (571)272-8885. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00-6:00.
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, Benjamin L Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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.
/ERIC J MCCULLOUGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773