DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the restriction election filed on January 26, 2026, and any subsequent filings.
Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 4-13 and 15-18 are withdrawn from consideration.
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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Claims 1-3, 14, 19, and 20 in the reply filed on January 26, 2026 is acknowledged.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because reference character 110 is referred to as the flow channel in the specification (Paragraph 59 (“Pr”)) and Claim 1 recites that the flow channel defines a sterilization area yet in Figure 1, reference character 110 is not in sterilization area S but near outlet 102 away from the sterilizing light sources 152 and 162. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the following must be shown or the features canceled from the claims:
“a length of the sterilization area is greater than a diameter of the sterilization area” as recited in Claim 1;
a light source disposed on both the “inner wall of the pipe facing the sterilization area between the inlet and the sterilization area and the inner wall of the pipe facing the sterilization area between the sterilization area, and an inner wall of the pipe facing the sterilization area between the sterilization area and the outlet” as recited in Claim 3;
“wherein the sterilization area of the pipe has a larger cross-sectional area than the inlet and the outlet of the pipe” as recited in Claim 14; and,
“a filter disposed on at least one of a front end and a rear end of the fan” as recited in Claim 20
No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 13, “of the pipe” must appear after “space” to be consistent with the prior clause. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
Claims 1-3, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, because the specification, while being enabling for liquids, does not reasonably provide enablement for all fluids which includes both liquids and gases. The specification does not enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the invention commensurate in scope with these claims.
The specification does not provide sufficient evidence to support enablement of these claims based on the In re Wands, 858 F.2d 731, 737 (Fed. Cir. 1988), factor analysis below such that undue experimentation would be required to arrive at the claimed invention. As to the breadth of the claims, the claims encompass all fluids, both liquids and gases. As to the nature of the invention and the amount of direct provided by the inventor, the invention claims all fluids, both liquids and gases. As to the state of the prior art, level of ordinary skill, and predictability in the art, no evidence supports or detracts from enablement. As to the existence of working examples, no working examples for liquids has been identified weighing against a finding of enablement. Finally, as to the quantity of experimentation required to make or use the invention, undue experimentation would be required to determine the conditions necessary to treat all fluids, both liquids and gases.
The dependent claims not specifically detailed above contain the limitations of the recited claims and thus are rejected for the same reasons.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claims 1-3, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites a fluid configured to pass through a pipe yet how a fluid which lacks a rigid structure may be configured is not clear.
Claim 1 recites a fan controlling fluid flow yet how a fan can control liquid and gas flow both is not clear.
Claim 1 recites the inlet and outlet on opposite sides of an external surface yet the claims, drawings, or specification only indicate the inlet and outlet are disclosed on the same side of the external pipe surface not on opposite sides rendering the claim indefinite for how this would be possible for both to be true at the same time. For purposes of examination, the limitation will be interpreted as requiring the inlet and outlet on any external side of the pipe.
Claim 3 recites the single light source module may be on at least one of two separate inner walls yet how the single light source module may be on two separate walls concurrently is not specified.
The term “near” in Claim 19 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Thus, the term “near” renders the limitation “disposed” indefinite.
Claim 20 recites a single filter may be on at least one of the front and rear ends of the fan yet how the single filter may be in two locations concurrently is not specified.
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.
Claims 1-3, 14, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jung, et al., Korean Publication No. 10-2018-0115978 (“Jung”) in view of Wang, Chinese Patent No. CN206320874U (“Wang”). Machine translations accompany this detailed action and the claims are mapped to those translations and the drawings in the original documents.
Applicant’s claims are directed towards a device.
Regarding Claims 1-3, 14, 19, and 20, Jung discloses a fluid treatment device comprising a pipe having an inlet and an outlet through which a fluid is configured to pass (Fig. 1, item 110, Pr35), the pipe being formed with a flow channel connecting the inlet to the outlet to define a sterilization area therein (Fig. 1 (note horizontal portion interpreted as sterilization area), Pr35-36 (note use of sterilizing UV LEDs)); at least one light source module comprising a light source configured to emit sterilizing light towards the sterilization area of the pipe, and a substrate on which the light source is mounted (Figs. 1, 3, items 122, 122_1, 122_2, Pr36,52), wherein; the inlet of the pipe is disposed adjacent to a bottom surface of an external space of the pipe (Fig. 1); the outlet of the pipe is disposed adjacent to a top surface of the external space (Fig. 1; see also 112(b) analysis above); the pipe comprises a bent portion such that a flow direction of the fluid passing through the inlet and the outlet of the pipe is different from a flow direction of the fluid passing through the sterilization area (Fig. 1 (note bends impart different flow directions); and a length of the sterilization area is greater than a diameter of the sterilization area (Fig. 1, Pr19 (note variable length), 20 (note length a result-effective variable), 103).
Jung does not disclose a fan configured to control controlling a flow of the fluid to force the fluid to flow from the inlet of the pipe to the outlet thereof.
Wang also relates to a fluid treatment device using sterilizing light and discloses a fan configured to control controlling a flow of the fluid to force the fluid to flow from the inlet of the pipe to the outlet thereof (Fig. item 23, Pr26,33).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the fluid treatment device disclosed by Jung with the fan disclosed by Wang because, according to Wang, the fan provides the motive force to move the fluid allowing for circulation, purification, and sterilization (Pr44).
Additional Disclosures Included: Claim 2: wherein the pipe is bent between the inlet and the sterilization area and between the sterilization area and the outlet (Jung, Fig. 1 (note bends on either end of sterilization area), Pr37). Claim 3: wherein the light source module is disposed on at least one of an inner wall of the pipe facing the sterilization area between the inlet and the sterilization area, and an inner wall of the pipe facing the sterilization area between the sterilization area and the outlet (Jung, Fig. 1, items 121, 122, Pr40). Claim 14: wherein the sterilization area of the pipe has a larger cross-sectional area than the inlet and the outlet of the pipe (Jung, Fig. 11, items D3, D4, Pr64). Claim 19: wherein the fan is disposed near the inlet of the pipe (Wang, Fig. (note position of fan 23 near inlet 11; see also 112(b) analysis above). Claim 20: a filter disposed on at least one of a front end and a rear end of the fan (Wang, Fig. item 21, Pr33).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK ORME whose telephone number is (408)918-7585. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30 am - 6:00 pm Pacific Time.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240.
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.
/PATRICK ORME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779