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
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2022 was considered by the examiner.
Drawings
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 feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
An airflow inlet positioned to receive airflow from the aperture of claim 1.
Airfoil blades positioned interrupting airflow through the aperture of claim 1.
Airflow from the housing then through the aperture then into the cylindrical shell per claim 4.
The ring at the gap of claim 5. Note that in Fig. 10 the gap 176 is not proximate the ring 178 as it is separated from the gap by gutter 108.
The second airfoil blade positioned to direct airflow into the gap when the cylindrical shell rotates of claims 8 and 14. Note that the airfoils of Fig. 9 are shown such that the leading and trailing edged are positioned to direct airflow radially inward. By directing airflow inward the airflow is being directed away from the gap.
The first and second motor together per claim 9. Note that it appears that Applicant has constructively reduced to practice an assembly with a singular motor (see 142 in Fig. 2 or 182 in Fig. 8) but has not show a reduction to practice of an assembly with both motors in the same assembly.
The lower edge of claim 1 suggest, in Fig. 7, that it is at the base of the wall 110. However, the lower edge of claim 15 suggests that Fig. 6 is drawn accurately.
The cylindrical portion 156 of claim 9 is missing from Figs. 7 and 10, leading to confusion about the lower edge.
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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 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 is unclear in that it recites “the aperture defining an airflow outlet” and “an airflow inlet … positioned to receive airflow from the aperture”. The flow lines of Figs. 7 and 10 show that there is no inlet that receives flow from the aperture. The air leaves the aperture and goes into the atmosphere.
Claim 1 is also unclear in that it recites that “the aperture defining an airflow outlet from the housing radially inside the aperture relative to the axis”. It is unclear how the aperture can be radially inside the aperture.
PNG
media_image1.png
674
651
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Claim 1 is unclear in that it recites that “the airfoil blade being positioned at the gap and positioned to interrupt airflow from the housing through the aperture.” It is unclear, where the gap actually is; whether a radial gap between the cylindrical shell and the opening of the housing or an axial gap equal to the wall thickness of the housing. Neither of these interpretations allow for the airfoil blades to be at those locations. Further there does not appear to be any interruption of airflow “through the aperture” as Fig. 7 shows the aperture between housing 104 and cylindrical wall 110 as being unobstructed.
As best understood the “airfoil blade” of claim 1 can only be the blades 174 as those are the only blades that are closest to the gap. It then follows that claim 5 is unclear wherein it states “a ring (178) positioned … at the gap… the airfoil blade being fixed relative to the ring.” It is unclear how the ring and its airfoils can be “at the gap” per claim 1 since the ring 178 and blades 172 are not “between the aperture and the lower edge”.
Claims 2-20 are unclear for their dependency from claim 1.
Claim 8 is unclear in that it recites a first and second airfoil blade and it is unclear which set of blades is being referenced by that designation.
Claim 8 is unclear in that it refers to “a second airfoil blade fixed relative to the cylindrical shell.” Figs. 7 and 10 show a clear disconnect between the airfoil blades 174 and the cylindrical shell 110.
Claim 16 is unclear in that it recites “the airfoil blade extends into the gutter”. Fig. 7 clearly shows that neither blade 174 or blade 172 extend “into the gutter” 108.
Claim 18 is unclear in that it recites an extension “along the axis”. The claim states that the gutter contains a channel and that the channel extends “from radially inside the lower edge to radially outside the lower edge relative to the axis. It is unclear how the channel can extend axially “along the axis” when the length of the channel is being described in terms of a radial extension.
Examiner Note
Regarding claims 1-20 which have been rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112, second paragraph: Where there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty as to the proper interpretation of the limitations of a claim, it would not be proper to reject such a claim on the basis of prior art. As stated in In re Steele, 305 F.2d 859, 134 USPQ 292 (CCPA 1962), a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 should not be based on considerable speculation about the meaning of terms employed in a claim or assumptions that must be made as to the scope of the claims.
While there is no art rejection, this should not be taken as an indication of allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Robertson Jr US 11520012, Robertson Jr US 12449513 and Robertson Jr US 12461204 for sensor assemblies.
Vitanov US 11835660 and Acharya US 11781549 for a sensor assemblies with a fan blades.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN O PETERS whose telephone number is (571)272-2662. The examiner can normally be reached Tue-Sat, 12:00pm-10pm 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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571) 270-3508. 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.
/BRIAN O PETERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745