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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group II in the reply filed on 25 February 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the amendment to the claims joins together Group IV, claims 17-18 with provisionally elected Group II, claims 6-12. This is not found persuasive because Applicant fails to present arguments regarding the requirement for unity of invention between the other groups presented. As a result of the claim amendments, the different inventions claimed are as follows:
Group I, claims 1-5;
Group II, claims 6-12 and 17-18 (provisionally elected);
Group II, claims 13-16;
Group IV (previously Group V), claims 19-20.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-5, 13-16, and 19-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 25 February 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 6-11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Sharp et al. (US 2002/0144537 A1) (hereinafter Sharp).
Regarding claim 6, Sharp teaches an air quality measurement unit [air monitoring unit 102] (see Fig. 1) comprising: a housing [housing] having an inlet for receiving an air flow [air to be sampled is first brought into a manifold 124] and an outlet for venting said air flow [air exits the system through an exhaust port 138] (Para [0031, 0041, 0045, 0051], see Figs 1 and 3);
a plurality of sensors positioned in said housing forming an array of sensors [radon detector 128, particle detector 132, gas sensors 134], each sensor having a sensor inlet for receiving a portion of the air flow [intake port 150 via bypass 343] and a sensor outlet for venting said portion of air flow [exhaust port 152] (Para [0049-0053], see Figs. 1 and 4);
each sensor arranged to measure an air quality parameter [radon, particulate matter, specific gases, etc.] (Para [0049-0051]);
said housing including at least one port arranged to removably receive a sensor module comprising a sensor [card rack 142 used to hold sensor cards 144; sensor cards slide into rack via slots 146] (Para [0052], see Fig. 3); and
a control system arranged to interrogate said port to determine if a sensor module is present, identify a type of the sensor module present, and receive data from the sensor module [sensor interface board may recognize any sensor card that is plugged into the sensor bay; may include config information such as sensor type and calibration] (Para [0054-0055]).
Regarding claim 7, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the control system is further arranged to detect a replaced sensor module [sensor interface board may recognize any sensor card that is plugged into the sensor bay; may include config information such as sensor type and calibration] (Para [0054-0055]).
Regarding claim 8, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein said control system is arranged to calibrate said received data; said calibration based upon one or a combination of: retrieving a calibration factor from a lookup table corresponding to the type of sensor module, comparing raw data to data from a calibration cell or receive calibration information from an external source [air monitoring unit may contain sensor calibration data] (Para [0082]).
Regarding claim 9, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the at least one sensor module is arranged to measure more than one air quality parameter [multiple sensors on the card] (Para [0054]).
Regarding claim 10, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein said housing includes a plurality of ports, each arranged to receive at least one sensor module [card rack 142 used to hold sensor cards 144; sensor cards slide into rack via slots 146] (Para [0052], see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein said housing includes at least one non-removable sensor module [use of sensor bay 141 having removable cards is optional feature; radon detector 128 shown outside of sensor bay 141] (Para [0052], see Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 17, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein the control system is arranged to combine data from at least two sensors and to determine an index corresponding to said combined data [IAQ index that involves a weighted combination of more than one air quality parameter can be used] (Para [0020, 0081]).
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharp as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Kishkovich et al. (US 6,096,267) (hereinafter Kishkovich).
Regarding claim 12, Sharp as applied to claim 6 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to further including selectively removable cells [card rack 142 used to hold sensor cards 144; sensor cards slide into rack via slots 146] (Para [0052], see Fig. 3). Sharp fails to teach a selectively removable test cell, the test cell containing a known concentration of a pollutant corresponding to the sensor module, said pollutant arranged to be injected into the unit and the control system arranged to receive raw data from the sensor module and determine a calibration factor for said sensor module, based upon said known pollutant concentration. Kishkovich teaches calibration of an air quality measurement unit wherein samples of known concentration of contaminants are provided to a detector and the data is used to determine a calibration factor for the detector (Col 10, lines 29-38). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Sharp with Kishkovich such to further comprise a selectively removable test cell, the test cell containing a known concentration of a pollutant corresponding to the sensor module, said pollutant arranged to be injected into the unit and the control system arranged to receive raw data from the sensor module and determine a calibration factor for said sensor module, based upon said known pollutant concentration, in order to calibrate the sensor module(s).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sharp as applied to claim 17 above, and further in view of Desrochers et al. (US 2006/0234621 A1) (hereinafter Desrochers).
Regarding claim 18, Sharp as applied to claim 17 above teaches the claimed invention, in addition to wherein said control system is further arranged to compare said index to a threshold for said index corresponding to the air quality measurement unit [score may be compared to scores of other buildings of like type or in a similar environment] (Para [0020, 0081]). Sharp fails to teach wherein the control system is further arranged to operate external equipment to adjust environmental conditions to meet the corresponding index. Desrochers teaches an air quality measurement unit comprising a control system arranged to operate external equipment to adjust environmental conditions to meet a corresponding index (Para [0102, 0114-0120]). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the filing of the invention to modify Sharp with Desrochers such that the control system is further arranged to operate external equipment to adjust environmental conditions to meet the corresponding index, in order to automatically regulate the air quality.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID Z HUANG whose telephone number is (571)270-5360. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 AM - 5:00 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, Kristina Deherrera can be reached at 303-297-4237. 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.
/DAVID Z HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2855