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 .
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 (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 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 1-11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0220716 A1 [Childress] in view of US 2022/0096693 A1 [Parker], and further in view of US 2016/0250362 A1 [Mackin].
Regarding Claim 1:
Childress discloses a vehicle lavatory monument assembly (abstract) comprising:
an enclosure that includes a plurality of walls that cooperate to define a lavatory interior (see Figs. 2-3, wherein an entry door is positioned on one of the plurality of walls (Fig. 3 (300)), and
a UV sanitization system that includes a first light module positioned in the lavatory interior (Fig. 2 (206)), wherein the first light module includes an ultraviolet light source that emits ultraviolet light rays (paras 68, 70),
a first reflective surface ((212,214)) comprising a reflective coating thereon (paras 33, 69),
a first direct surface to be sanitized (para 70),
a first indirect surface to be sanitized (paras 32, 70),
and wherein the first reflective surface is angled to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first indirect surface to be sanitized (See Figs 2, 3 (212, 214)).
However, Childress fails to describe the UV sanitization system including a lens member, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first direct surface to be sanitized, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first reflective surface.
Parker teaches a UV disinfection system (abstract) including a UV source (e.g., Fig. 32 (256)) having a lens member, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays (para 72). Implementing such a lens in Childress would entail focusing the light onto those parts of the lavatory that Childress intends to irradiate, such as surfaces to be sanitized and reflective elements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to add the lens of Parker to the UV source of Childress. One would have been motivated to do so in order to efficiently focus the UV light onto desired locations.
Furthermore, Childress fails to teach that the reflective coating member is disposed beneath a layer of transparent material. Mackin teaches a UV sanitization system including a reflective layer, wherein the reflective layer has a protective layer of transparent material. Abstract, Para 53. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to add the transparent layer of Mackin over the reflective layer of Childress. One would have been motivated to do so in order to protect the UV reflective layer from damage.
Regarding Claim 2:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1 wherein the UV sanitization system includes a controller that is configured to activate the UV sanitization system a predetermined number of seconds after the lavatory interior has been vacated (Childress paras 42, 43, 46, 47, 50, et al).
Regarding Claim 3:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1 wherein the UV sanitization system includes a controller that is configured to activate the UV sanitization system a predetermined amount of time after a previous activation of the UV sanitization system (Childress para 73).
Regarding Claim 4:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1 wherein the first reflective surface is located adjacent to a non-reflective surface (see Childress Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 5:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 4 wherein the first reflective surface is not parallel to the non-reflective surface (see Childress Figs. 2-3).
Regarding Claim 6:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1 wherein the lens member includes a first portion with a first thickness and a second portion with a second thickness, wherein the first portion is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first direct surface to be sanitized, wherein the second portion is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first reflective surface. The lens of Parker inherently has a thickness, since all lenses do. This thickness corresponds to the first and second thicknesses as the points on the lens corresponding to the transmission of light to the first direct surface and first reflective surface.
Regarding Claim 7:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1 wherein the UV sanitization system includes a manual activation switch configured to activate the UV sanitization system (Childress para 57), and wherein the manual activation switch is located outside the lavatory interior. Childress para 55 indicates that indicators are kept on the exterior of the lavatory. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to place the manual operation switch of Childress with its indicators on the exterior of the lavatory. One would have been motivated to do so as this would allow a user to sanitize the lavatory before entering.
Regarding Claim 8:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 7 wherein the manual activation switch is part of an activation assembly (see above and Childress paras 55-57), wherein the activation assembly includes an indication system that is configured to indicate a UV sanitization status of the lavatory interior (Childress paras 55-56).
Regarding Claim 9:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 8, wherein the indication system includes a plurality of indication lights that include a first indication state and a second indication state, wherein the first indication state indicates that the vehicle interior is clean, and wherein the second indication state indicates that the vehicle interior is not clean (Childress para 55 – a digital display meets these limitations).
Regarding Claim 10:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 7 wherein the manual activation switch is disabled when the lavatory interior is occupied (Childress para 57 – “manual activation switch device that may be operable by, for example, a human when the lavatory is unoccupied or vacant.”).
Regarding Claim 11:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 7 but does not specify that the manual activation switch is disabled when the entry door is locked. However, it would have been obvious to modify the manual activation switch of Childress such that the manual activation switch is disabled when the door is locked. This is because a locked door is indicative of the lavatory being occupied, and when the lavatory is occupied, the switch is disabled. See Childress para 57.
Regarding Claim 13:
Childress discloses a vehicle lavatory monument assembly (abstract) comprising:
an enclosure that includes a plurality of walls that cooperate to define a lavatory interior (see Figs. 2-3, wherein an entry door is positioned on one of the plurality of walls (Fig. 3 (300)), wherein an entry door is positioned on one of the plurality of walls (paras 68, 70), and
a UV sanitization system that includes a first light module positioned in the lavatory interior (Fig. 2 (206)), wherein the first light module includes an ultraviolet light source that emits ultraviolet light rays (paras 68, 70),
a first reflective surface ((212,214)) that includes a reflective coating thereon (paras 33, 69),
a first direct surface to be sanitized (para 70),
a first indirect surface to be sanitized (paras 32, 70),
wherein the first reflective surface is angled to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first indirect surface to be sanitized (See Figs 2, 3 (212, 214)),
wherein the first reflective surface is located adjacent to a non-reflective surface (see Figs. 2-3),
wherein the first reflective surface is not parallel to the non-reflective surface (see Figs. 2-3 (212, 214)),
wherein the UV sanitization system includes an activation assembly that includes a manual activation switch configured to activate the UV sanitization system (para 57),
wherein the activation assembly includes an indication system that is configured to indicate a UV sanitization status of the lavatory interior (para 55 – a digital display meets these limitations),
wherein the indication system includes a plurality of indication lights that include a first indication state and a second indication state (para 55),
wherein the first indication state indicates that the vehicle interior is clean, and wherein the second indication state indicates that the vehicle interior is not clean (para 55), wherein the manual activation switch is disabled when the lavatory interior is occupied (para 55).
However, Childress fails to describe the a UV sanitization system including a lens member, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first direct surface to be sanitized, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays to the first reflective surface.
Parker teaches a UV disinfection system (abstract) including a UV source (e.g., Fig. 32 (256)) having a lens member, wherein the lens member is configured to direct ultraviolet light rays (para 72). Implementing such a lens in Childress would entail focusing the light onto those parts of the lavatory that Childress intends to irradiate, such as surfaces to be sanitized and reflective elements. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to add the lens of Parker to the UV source of Childress. One would have been motivated to do so in order to efficiently focus the UV light onto desired locations.
Furthermore, Childress does not explicitly state that the manual activation switch is located outside the lavatory interior, or that the manual activation switch is disabled when the entry door is locked.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to place the manual operation switch of Childress with its indicators on the exterior of the lavatory. One would have been motivated to do so as this would allow a user to sanitize the lavatory before entering.
Further, it would have been obvious to modify the manual activation switch of Childress such that the manual activation switch is disabled when the door is locked. This is because a locked door is indicative of the lavatory being occupied, and when the lavatory is occupied, the switch is disabled. See Childress para 57.
Finally, Childress fails to teach that the reflective coating member is disposed beneath a layer of transparent material. Mackin teaches a UV sanitization system including a reflective layer, wherein the reflective layer has a protective layer of transparent material. Abstract, Para 53. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to add the transparent layer of Mackin over the reflective layer of Childress. One would have been motivated to do so in order to protect the UV reflective layer from damage.
Regarding Claim 14:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 13 wherein the UV sanitization system includes a controller that is configured to activate the UV sanitization system a predetermined number of seconds after the lavatory interior has been vacated (Childress paras 42, 43, 46, 47, 50, et al).
Regarding Claim 15:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 13 wherein the UV sanitization system includes a controller that is configured to activate the UV sanitization system a predetermined amount of time after a previous activation of the UV sanitization system (Childress para 73).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2016/0220716 A1 [Childress] in view of US 2022/0096693 A1 [Parker] and US 2016/0250362 A1 [Mackin] as applied to claim 1, and further in view of US 2018/0369440 A1 [Dytioco].
Regarding Claim 12:
The above modified invention teaches the vehicle lavatory monument assembly of claim 1, but fails to teach that the first direct surface to be sanitized includes a first visual indication coating on an outer surface thereof, wherein the first visual indication coating includes at least a first phosphorescing additive, wherein the first phosphorescing additive is configured to illuminate when irradiated by a first light that includes light waves within a predetermined wavelength range, and wherein the first phosphorescing additive is present in the first visual indication coating in a predetermined pattern.
Dytioco teaches a cleanliness indication system for UV sanitization systems (abstract), wherein the first direct surface to be sanitized includes a first visual indication coating on an outer surface thereof (Fig.1 (114)), wherein the first visual indication coating includes at least a first phosphorescing additive (paras 34-40), wherein the first phosphorescing additive is configured to illuminate when irradiated by a first light that includes light waves within a predetermined wavelength range (paras 34-40), and wherein the first phosphorescing additive is present in the first visual indication coating in a predetermined pattern (para 39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective time of filing to add the cleanliness indication system of Dytioco to irradiated surfaces of the above modified invention. One would have been motivated to do so since this would indicate to users that a surface had been recently cleaned by presenting the words “CLEAN” or “SANITIZED” in glowing text.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 13 have been considered but are moot because the new Mackin reference is used to address the alleged shortcomings of the previously cited prior art.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WYATT A STOFFA whose telephone number is (571)270-1782. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 0700-1600 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, ROBERT KIM can be reached at 571 272 2293. 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.
WYATT STOFFA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2881
/WYATT A STOFFA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2881