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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed 24 October, 2025, have been entered. Claims 1, 7, and 16 are amended. All claims 1-20 are pending and have been fully considered.
Response to Arguments
The applicant’s arguments filed 24 October, 2025, have been fully considered. With respect to the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102, the applicant argues that none of the independently cited references—Subramanya et al. (US 2022/0313851 A1), Dayton (US 2016/0317687 A1), and Yongwoo Park (KR 2022 0000634 U)—teach all elements of independent claim 1 as amended, specifically with respect to the light emitting system including a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering, the first portion configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side, and a second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side, the second portion configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration (see applicant’s arguments filed 24 October, 2025, at pages 5-7). The applicant further traverses the rejections of certain independent claim 16 and certain dependent claims under 35 U.S.C. 103 on the basis that the applied primary reference—Dayton—does not teach the above stated limitations of independent claim 1 or the corresponding limitation added to independent claim 16.
The applicant’s arguments are persuasive because the cited references, as previously applied, do not teach all features of the independent claims as amended, especially with respect to a second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side, the second portion configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration. Accordingly, the previously set forth rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 are withdrawn.
However, upon further search and consideration, a modified grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 is set forth below.
With respect to the modified grounds of rejection, it is first noted that the amended claim language is not clearly supported by the specification and that claim 1 should be adjusted to clarify which structures from the written description define “first sections” and “second sections”, and claim 16 should be adjusted to clarify how light is emitted parallel to the covering. Nonetheless, the claims have been afforded their broadest reasonable interpretation for purposes of examination. Accordingly, claim 1 has been interpreted such that “a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering” that is “configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side” (as recited in claim 1) fairly includes a reflective layer along a bottom side of a covering which redirects incident UV light away from the covering. Also, a “second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side” that is “configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration” (as recited in claim 1) fairly includes any structure positioned downward and away from the bottom side of the covering which directs at least some ultraviolet light in a direction parallel to the covering.
Accordingly, the modified ground of rejection below relies on Dayton as previously applied to claim 1, and further finds that Dayton teaches a reflective inward facing surface (20) ([0021]) on a bottom side of the covering (16) (Fig. 3) which fairly defines a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering, the first portion configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side (see Dayton at Fig. 3 and [0021], reflective bottom surface 20 is stated to focus reflective UVC light toward surface 14 and it is clear the surface 20 extends along the bottom of covering 16 and the surface 14 is downward with respect to the surface 20).
The modified grounds of rejection further finds that Dayton teaches portions (spacers/supports 22; Or material 38) which are disposed downward and away from the bottom side (Fig. 3 shows spacers 22 extending downward and away from the bottom surface 20 of the covering 16—see [0021], [0025]; the spacer may be transparent to UVC light—[0026]; Fig. 4 shows material 38 extending downwardly from a bottom surface 20 of covering 16, the UV light 30 transmitting through the material 38—[0027]) and which ensure complete coverage of the surface (14) with UVC light emitted from LED sources (18) ([0027], final three lines). Nonetheless, the spacers (22) or sheet (38) of Dayton are not configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration. However, the suggestion of Dayton to completely cover the surface to be treated with UVC light ([0027], final three lines) would reasonably guide a person of ordinary skill in the art to consider arrangements for improving the distribution of UV light over the entire surface to be treated.
Furthermore, in the analogous art of flexible sanitizing apparatuses (title, abstract), Li et al. (US 2023/0089985 A1) teaches an apparatus (100) comprising a diffusing pad (102) configured to provide UV light to sanitize surfaces of a device ([0021]; 222nm UV-C light preferred—[0018]). The apparatus of Li including UV-C light sources (124) ([0037]) which deliver light into fiber optic cables placed across the diffusing pad (120), the optic cables being configured to diffuse the light from the light sources ([0040]). One side of the diffusing pad includes an opaque or reflective surface so that the light is emitted toward the target surface ([0041]). Use of the device of Li includes placing the pad over the target surface and activating the device to emit UV light toward the target surface ([0044], claim 12). Li indicates that the diffusion of the light enables emission of the ultraviolet light in a substantially uniform fashion ([0018]).
Additionally, in the analogous art of ultraviolet decontamination systems employing optical fiber/waveguides (abstract), Matsui teaches a UV light emitting sheet (12) which is attached to a surface and activated to emit UV light to decontaminate the surface (claim 8, [0054]). The sheet (12) includes an optical waveguide (15), such as an optical fiber, extending across the sheet (Figs. 1-3, [0049], [0051]), wherein the waveguide includes scattering material, gratings, or bends which lead to lateral emission of light traveling through the waveguide ([0052]; also see [0084]-[0086]).
From the above findings, the modified grounds of rejection concludes that it would be obvious to modify the device of Dayton to include fiber optic cables extending across a bottom surface of the covering, the fiber optic cables configured to laterally (i.e., radially) diffuse UV light received from a UV light source (as seen in Li at [0040] and Matsui at [0051]-[0052]) for the benefit of improving the uniformity and coverage of the UV light delivered to the surface to be treated (consider Li at [0018] and Matsui at [0052]). Such optical fibers arranged along a bottom surface of the covering of modified Dayton fairly define second portions disposed downward and away from the bottom side which project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration because the light propagating along the length of the optical fiber is moving parallel to the bottom surface, and at least some of the laterally emitted light would also be emitted parallel to the bottom surface.
The rejections of dependent claims 2-15 and method claims 16-20 have been updated to incorporate the above findings.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o).
Particularly, claim 1 has been amended to recite “a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering, the first portion configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side” and “a second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side, the second portion configured to project ultraviolet light in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration”. Similarly, claim 16 has been amended to recite “the ultraviolet light environment is defined by ultraviolet projected at least downward and away from the covering and parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration”.
The applicant indicates that “support for the claim amendments can be found…in paragraph [0038], [0040], [0045], and in Figs. 3, 4, 5 of the application” (applicant’s response filed 24 October, 2025 at page 5, first paragraph, lines 3-4), but none of the cited portions of the specification clearly identify elements which are “first portions” or “second portions” consistent with the claim, or clearly establishes how the ultraviolet light is projected “parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration”.
The application must be corrected such that the claim language of at least “a first portion”, “second portion”, and “projected…parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration” recited in claims 1 and 16 has a clear antecedent basis within the language of the specification.
Based on the applicant’s alleged support for the claim limitations, it appears that the claim language of a “second portion” is directed toward embodiments which include at least one of optical fibers (532) which propagate UV light across an area of the underside (112) of the covering (110) (specification at [0045]), a light pipe (432) which propagates UV light along an underside (112) of the covering (110) ([0040]) and which may include suspended sections (435), or suspended UV light sources (335) which project UV light in multiple directions including laterally outward ([0038]). Similarly, a “first portion” may refer to gratings (535) in the optical fiber which project UV light away from the optical fibers (532) ([0045]), portions of the light pipe (432) such as suspended sections (435) (Fig. 3, [0040]), or UV light sources directing UV light downward ([0038]).
Therefore, it is suggested that the language of claim 1 be adjusted to clearly recite at least one structure from the specification which defines “a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering…[and] configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side”, and that claim 1 further be adjusted to clearly recite at least one structure from the specification which defines “a second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side, the second portion configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration”. With respect to claim 16, it is suggested that the language be adjusted to read “the ultraviolet light environment is defined by a UV light source projecting ultraviolet light and away from the covering and laterally outward from the UV light source in a direction parallel to the covering
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.
Claims 1-12 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dayton (US 2016/0317687 A1, previously cited) in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0089985 A1, filed 16 Sep 2022) and Matsui et al. (US 20230293741 A1, filed 21 October 2020).
Regarding claim 1, Dayton teaches a disinfection system (decontamination cover or blanket 10 is draped over an object 12 having an exposed surface 14 for decontamination of said exposed surface—see [0016], [0019]), comprising: a covering (cover or blanket 10) configured for placement over an object to be decontaminated (see [0016] and [0019]), the covering comprising a light emitting system (UVC sources 18) configured to define an ultraviolet light environment beneath the covering such that the items beneath the covering are disinfected by ultraviolet light (the blanket is draped over an object 12 to be decontaminated and the UVC sources 18 are activated to deactivate pathogens on the exposed surface 14 of the object 12—see [0028] and [0029]).
See Figs. 1-3 below, which show how the covering (blanket 10) of Dayton is placed over an object (12) with the UVC LEDs (18) directed toward an outer surface (14) of the object to disinfect the object.
PNG
media_image1.png
662
410
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It is evident that the covering (10) of Dayton is capable of being placed over a medical cart having medical items thereon and disinfecting the medical cart and the medical items by emitting UVC light from UVC sources 18 towards the cart and items underneath the covering.
As amended, claim 1 requires that the light emitting system includes: a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering, the first portion configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side, and a second portion disposed downward and away from the bottom side, the second portion configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration.
With respect to the claimed first portion, Dayton teaches a reflective inward facing surface (20) ([0021]) on a bottom side of the covering (16) (Fig. 3), said reflective surfaces clearly defining a first portion extending across a bottom side of the covering (16), the first portion configured to project ultraviolet light downward and away from the bottom side (see Dayton at Fig. 3 and [0021], reflective bottom surface 20 is stated to focus reflective UVC light toward surface 14 and it is clear the surface 20 extends along the bottom of covering 16 and the surface 14 is downward with respect to the surface 20).
With respect to the claimed second portion, Dayton teaches portions (spacers/supports 22; Or material 38) which are disposed downward and away from the bottom side (Fig. 3 shows spacers 22 extending downward and away from the bottom surface 20 of the covering 16—see [0021], [0025]; the spacer may be transparent to UVC light—[0026]; Fig. 4 shows material 38 extending downwardly from a bottom surface 20 of covering 16, the UV light 30 transmitting through the material 38—[0027]) and which ensure complete coverage of the surface (14) with UVC light emitted from LED sources (18) ([0027], final three lines). Nonetheless, the spacers (22) or sheet (38) of Dayton are not clearly configured to project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration.
However, the suggestion of Dayton to completely cover the surface to be treated with UVC light ([0027], final three lines) would reasonably guide a person of ordinary skill in the art to consider different arrangements for improving the distribution of emitted UV light so that the UV light completely covers the surface to be treated.
Furthermore, in the analogous art of flexible sanitizing apparatuses (title, abstract), Li et al. (US 2023/0089985 A1) teaches an apparatus (100) comprising a diffusing pad (102) configured to provide UV light to sanitize surfaces of a device ([0021]; 222nm UV-C light preferred—[0018]), the apparatus including UV-C light sources (124) ([0037]) which emit light that is diffusely distributed by fiber optic cables placed across the diffusing pad (120) ([0040]). Li also indicates one side of the diffusing pad includes an opaque or reflecting surface so that the light is emitted toward the target surface ([0041]). Use of the device of Li includes placing the pad over the target surface and activating the device to emit UV light thereto ([0044], claim 12). Li indicates the diffusion of the light enables the ultraviolet light to be delivered to the target surface in a substantially uniform fashion ([0018]).
Additionally, in the analogous art of ultraviolet decontamination systems employing optical fiber/waveguides (abstract), Matsui teaches a UV light emitting sheet (12) which is attached to a surface and activated to emit UV light to decontaminate the surface (claim 8, [0054]). The sheet (12) includes an optical waveguide (15), such as an optical fiber, extending across the sheet (Figs. 1-3, [0049], [0051]), wherein the waveguide includes at least one of a scattering material, gratings, or bends, which cause lateral (i.e., radial) emission of light traveling through the waveguide ([0052]; also see [0084]-[0086]).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of Dayton to include fiber optic cables extending across a bottom surface of the covering, the fiber optic cables configured to laterally (i.e., radially) diffuse UV light received from a UV light source (as seen in Li at [0040] and Matsui at [0051]-[0052]); said modification provides the benefit of improving the uniformity and coverage of the UV light delivered to the surface to be treated (consider Li at [0018] and Matsui at [0052]). Such optical fibers arranged along a bottom surface of the covering of modified Dayton fairly define second portions disposed downward and away from the bottom side which project ultraviolet light at least in a direction parallel with the bottom side when the covering is disposed in a flat configuration because the light propagating inside of the optical fiber is moving along the path of the optical fiber and parallel to the bottom surface of the cover, and at least some of the laterally (i.e., radially) emitted light from the optical fiber is also emitted parallel to the bottom surface of the cover.
Regarding claim 2, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Dayton further teaches the covering further comprises an opaque layer (16) coupled with the light emitting system, the opaque layer configured to contain the ultraviolet light beneath the covering (blanket 10 includes an outward-facing surface 16 that is opaque to UVC light and serves as a shield to interfere with the transmission of UVC light emitted by UVC sources in a direction away from the object 12…so that observers will not be exposed to UVC light—[0020], see Figs. 1-4).
Regarding claim 3, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. The system of Dayton is capable of surrounding a cart (see how blanket 10 surrounds object 12 in Fig. 1; also see [0028]-[0029] discussing how the blanket is draped over or wrapped around the object 12 to be decontaminated).
Regarding claim 4, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Dayton further indicates the covering comprises a fabric panel (outward-facing surface 16 can be formed of a fabric—[0028]; the device 10 is referred to as a blanket—see [0016]-[0019]—which further suggests the device is formed of textile or fabric layers) configured to provide a mechanical structure to the covering, and the light emitting system (18) is coupled with the fabric panel (viewing Fig. 3, it is evident that the body of the blanket has sides 16 and 20 and inherently provides a mechanical structure to the covering, wherein the UVC light sources 18 are embedded in the blanket).
Regarding claim 5, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Dayton further teaches the light emitting system is integrated into the fabric panel (see Fig. 3, the UVC light sources 18 are essentially embedded in the body of the blanket between surfaces 16 and 20; as discussed with respect to claim 4 above, the blanket is indicated to include fabric layers—see [0028], and [0016]-[0019]).
Regarding claim 6, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Dayton further teaches the light emitting system includes a plurality of light emitting diodes configured to project the ultraviolet light beneath the covering (each UVC source 18 can include a UVC light emitting diode which are exposed at the inward-facing surface 20 of the blanket 10 to emit UVC light toward the exposed surface 14 of the object 12—Figs. 3-4, [0022]).
Regarding claim 7, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 6. Claim 7 indicates that at least a subset of the plurality of the light emitting diodes are disposed a distance away from the covering to extend a depth of the ultraviolet light environment. Dayton is not clear in teaching light emitting diodes deposed at a distance away from the covering.
However, Li and Matsui teach the analogous systems discussed with respect to claim 1 above, which include ultraviolet LEDs (Li at [0019], [0037]) positioned within a base unit that is disposed at a distance from a covering, the ultraviolet light sources of the base unit being optically coupled to optical fibers within the cover (Li: fiber optic cables diffuse light emitted from the light sources 124, in which case the light sources 124 can be located inside of an enclosures 110 and the fiber optic cables can be placed across the diffusing pad, with light sources 124 focusing light into the fiber optic cables—[0040]; Matsui: optical fiber 15 transmits ultraviolet light input from ultraviolet lights source unit 11—[0051], [0068]—Figs. 1-7 all show the light source unit 11 being a distinct unit positioned at a distance from sheet 12). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art further modify the system of Dayton by rearranging at least some of the ultraviolet light sources (LEDs 18) of Dayton to a base unit disposed at a distance from the covering and optically connected to the optical fibers of the modified system of Dayton for the benefit of focusing the light to be distributed by the optical fibers (consider Li at [0040], [0018] and Matsui at Figs. 1-7, [0051]). Such a base unit housing LEDs could be arranged underneath the cover and thus have the effect of extending a depth of the ultraviolet light environment.
Regarding claim 8, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Claim 8 broadly recites a “passive light projector extending across the covering”. Dayton teaches embodiments including a UV-C light transmissive sheet of material (38) coupled to the bottom surface (20) of the covering (Fig. 4, [0027]), wherein said sheet (38) fairly defines a passive light projector (38) extending across the covering because the sheet projects light from light sources (18) to the target surface (14) (see Fig. 4, [0027]).
Also, as modified with respect to claim 1, the optical fibers extending across the bottom surface of the modified cover of Dayton also define passive light projectors because they propagate and diffuse light from a UVC light source (see rejection of claim 1 above, Li at [0040], and Matsui at Figs. 1-3, [0049]-[0052]).
Regarding claim 9, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui the system according to claim 8. Dayton further teaches an ultraviolet light source (18) optically coupled with the passive light projector (38) (as identified above, the layer 38 of Dayton constitutes a passive light projector because it projects light from light sources 18 to the surface 14 being treated—see Fig. 4 and [0027]; therefore, it is evident the light source 18 is optically coupled with the passive light projector 38).
Also, as modified with respect to claim 1, the optical fibers of modified Dayton are a passive light projector (see rejection of claim 8 above) configured to propagate light from (i.e., coupled to) an ultraviolet UV light source (Matsui: ultraviolet light source 11 supplies ultraviolet light to optical waveguide 15—see [0049], [0068]; Li: fiber optic cables diffuse light emitted form light sources 124—[0040])
Regarding claim 10 Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 8. Dayton further teaches the ultraviolet light source (18) includes a light emitting diode (Each UVC source 18 can include a UVC light emitting diode—[0022]).
Also, with respect to embodiments wherein the passive light projector is the optical fibers of modified Dayton (i.e., Dayton as modified with respect to claim 1), Li suggest that the light source emitting into the optical fibers comprises light emitting diodes (Li: light sources 124 include light emitting diodes—[0037]).
Regarding claim 11, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 8. As discussed with respect to claim 8 above, the optical fibers of Li/Matsui incorporated into the device of modified Dayton with respect to claim 1 define a passive light projector. The optical fibers of the modified device are configured to propagate and diffuse ultraviolet light (see rejection of claim 1 above), and Matsui indicates that the diffusing is accomplished by the optical fiber having a plurality of fiber optic gratings configured to project the ultraviolet light away from the optical fiber (lateral radiation realized by applying a grating 38 to an optical fiber—[0084]; also see abstract, [0033], [0052], claim 6; strong radiation can be obtained int eh direction where the scratch/grating 38 exists to improve the decontamination effect of the sheet 12—[0086]). That is, it would be obvious to further modify the system of Dayton to include gratings (as seen in Matsui) in the optical fibers of the modified device for the benefit of projecting ultraviolet light away from the fiber and towards a desired direction (see Matsui at [0085]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 12, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 8. Dayton further teaches at least a portion (in the case of Dayton, an entirety of) the passive light projector (38) extends a distance away from the covering (i.e., from inward facing surface 20) to extend a depth of the ultraviolet light environment (layer of material 38 has a height H which is suitable to allow UVC light emitted by neighboring UVC sources to converge toward a common point of form an overlapping region 42 so that complete coverage of the surface 14 with UVC light can be achieved—[0027]; viewing Fig. 4, it is evident the height H of the layer 38 extends a depth of an ultralight radiation region).
Alternatively, Dayton teaches embodiments wherein supports/spacers (22), which are transparent to UV light (spacers 22 can be formed from a material that is transparent to UVC light—[0026]) are located across the bottom surface of the covering, the supports reasonably projecting at least some light from the UV LEDs (18) to the target surface (14) in view of their transparency (see Fig. 3). Such supports/spaces (22) thus define passive light projector(s) extending a distance away from the covering to extend a depth of the ultraviolet light environment (spacers 22 position the ends of each UVC light source 18 a predetermined distance away from the surface 14—see Fig. 3, [0025]—thus extending a depth of the ultraviolet light environment).
Also, the modified device of Dayton with respect to claim 1 includes optic fibers along a bottom surface which define a passive light projector, wherein the position of the fibers along the bottom surface would result in the fibers extending a distance away from the covering and extending a depth of the ultraviolet light environment (i.e., the optical fiber creates a gap between the bottom of the covering and the top of the cover surface).
Regarding claim 15, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 1. Dayton further teaches the light emitting system includes a battery power source (power supply 24 can be a rechargeable or replaceable battery which is portable, self-contained and provides electric energy to the UVC sources 18—[0023]; battery pack can be connected to the blanket—[0024]).
Claim 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dayton (US 2016/0317687 A1) in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0089985 A1) and Matsui et al. (US 20230293741 A1), as applied to claim 9 above, and in further view of Pressler et al. (US 8,246,666 B2, previously cited).
Regarding claim 13, Dayton in view of Li and Matsui teaches the system according to claim 9. Dayton does not teach that the ultraviolet light source is detachably coupled with the passive light projector via an optical connector. Li and Matsui teach the analogous systems discussed with respect to claim 1 above, wherein the ultraviolet light sources may be located in a base unit which is optically connected to the optical fibers of the cover instead of the ultraviolet light sources being positioned across the surface of the cover (Li: fiber optic cables diffuse light emitted from the light sources 124, in which case the light sources 124 can be located inside of an enclosures 110 and the fiber optic cables can be placed across the diffusing pad, with light sources 124 focusing light into the fiber optic cables—[0040]; Matsui: optical fiber transmits ultraviolet light input form ultraviolet lights source unit 11—[0051], [0068]—Figs. 1-7 all show the light source unit 11 being a distinct unit which is attached to the sheet 12). Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art further modify the system of Dayton by rearrange the ultraviolet light sources (LEDs 18) of Dayton to be housed in a base unit which is not positioned on a surface of the cover and which connects to the optical fibers of the modified cover for the benefit of focusing the light to be distributed by the optical fibers (consider Li at [0040], [0018] and Matsui at Figs. 1-7, [0051]).
Dayton, Li, and Matsui do not clearly tech that the connection between the ultraviolet light source(s) and passive light projector (optical fibers) is detachable.
However, in the analogous art of phototherapy garments, Pressler teaches a covering (bodysuit 10) comprising a flexible textile layer (shell 11 made from a stretchable material such as polyester/spandex) and a layer of cross-woven side-glow optical fibers 12 disposed within the textile layer (column 4, lines 1-9). Light is transmitted into the layer of cross-woven optical fibers (12) from light emitting diodes (14) contained within a base unit (20) that clips into a housing dock (21) of the covering (10) (column 4, lines 13-17). Light is transmitted out of the optical fibers (31) of the optical fiber layer (12) and directed toward a surface (skin) covered by the covering (column 4, lines 19-22), the light being guided by a reflective liner (32) and transparent liner (34) (column 5, lines 52-58). Fig. 4 shows how lenses (23) and ports (33) form an optic coupling between the LEDs (14) and the optical fibers (31) (column 5, lines 19-26). The lighting arrangement of Pressley does not transfer heat to the illuminated surface, reducing the risk of overheating and fire hazards (optical fibers do not transfer heat—column 5, lines 40-42; LEDs do not produce significant heat—column 5, lines 34-35; eliminating potential fire hazards or overheating of the unit—column 3, lines 3-6; fiber optic system does not transmit heat—column 2, lines 53-54).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to further modify the lighting system of Dayton such that the UV LEDs arranged in the base unit are detachably attached to the optical fibers of the covering via an optical connector which couples the UV LEDs to the optical fibers of the modified cover—as seen in Pressley (see paragraph above)—for the benefit of improving the safety of the system by reducing the risk of fire and overheating (see Pressley at: column 5, lines 34-35; column 3, lines 3-6; and column 2, lines 53-54) and enabling easy replacement of the ultraviolet light source (inherent result of detachable connection). Also see MPEP 2144.05(V.)(C.) regarding the obviousness of making parts separable.
Regarding claim 14, Dayton in view of Li, Matsui, and Pressley teaches the system according to claim 13. As modified in view of Pressley with respect to claim 13 above, the system of Dayton is configured such that the ultraviolet light source is detachably coupled with the covering (see rejection of claim 13 above).
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dayton (US 2016/0317687 A1) in view of Yuds et al. (US 20220203007 A1, previously cited), and further in view of Li et al. (US 2023/0089985 A1) and Matsui et al. (US 20230293741 A1).
Regarding claim 16, Dayton teaches the covering (blanket 10) identified with respect to claim 1 above. Regular use of the covering of Dayton defines a method including placing the covering over the object to be disinfected and defining an ultraviolet light environment beneath the covering by activating the ultraviolet light sources (in use, blanket 10 is draped over or wrapped around the object 12 to be decontaminated, with the inward-facing surface opposing the surface 14 of the object 12—[0028]; UVC sources 18 emit the UVC light to deactivate an acceptable portion of the biologically active contagions on the surfac3e 14—[0029]).
Dayton recognized the importance of disinfecting surfaces within a medical environment ([0004]-[0005]), and the blanket of Dayton is clearly capable of disinfecting the surface of any object which is it placed over.
Nonetheless, Dayton does not explicitly suggest a method step of wherein the objects to be disinfected are medical devices which have been placed on a cart, and the covering is placed over the cart.
However, in the analogous art of carts, Yuds teaches a medical cart (mobile cart for a medical device—abstract) designed to transport a medical device, wherein the cart includes UV light sterilization features (abstract). In one embodiment, a light (228) is positioned to direct UV light toward a top surface (206) of a cart on which a medical device is disposed (light 228 can include a UV light source to help sterilize the medical device or top surface 206 of the cart—[0058]; a top surface 206 of the cart 200 provides sufficient surface area to place a medical device—[0048]; see Fig. 3). Thus, Yuds essentially teaches placing a medical device on a cart ([0048]), positioning an ultraviolet light source (228) over the cart, and activating the ultraviolet light source to disinfect the medical device on the cart ([0058]). See Fig. 3 of Yuds below.
PNG
media_image2.png
394
418
media_image2.png
Greyscale
It is evident that the covering of Dayton can be used in place of the light (228) of Dayton to achieve the same result of disinfecting the top surfaces of the medical cart and the medical devices placed thereupon. Furthermore, such use of the covering of Dayton would advantageously improve the confinement of the ultraviolet light to reduce the risk of exposing persons near the cart to UV rays (Dayton at paragraph [0020] discusses how the blanket is configured so that observers will not be exposed to UVC light emitted by UVC sources 18; comparing Fig. 1 of Dayton to Fig. 3 of Yuds, it is evident that the blanket 10 of Dayton better confines UV radiation to a region where humans are not present).
Therefore, it would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to adapt the method of using the covering (10) of Dayton for disinfecting medical devices that have been placed onto a medical cart (based on the suggestion of Yuds to disinfect medical devices placed on a medical cart with UV light—see [0048] and [0058]) for the benefit of reducing the exposure of observers to UV radiation (see Dayton at [0020]).
As amended, claim 16 indicates that the ultraviolet light environment beneath the covering is defined by ultraviolet light projected at least downward away from the covering and parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in the flat configuration. Viewing, e.g., Fig. 3 of Dayton, it is evident that the ultraviolet light sources (18) project ultraviolet light (30) downward away from the covering (16) and toward the surface (14) of the object (12) to be disinfected (see Fig. 3, [0025]).
The system of Dayton would not necessarily further project ultraviolet light parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in the flat configuration.
However, as discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Li teaches a diffusing pad (102) configured to provide UV light to sanitize surfaces of a device ([0021]; 222nm UV-C light preferred—[0018]), wherein the pad is placed over a surface of the device to be treated ([0044], claim 12). The pad includes UV-C light sources (124) ([0037]) which emit light that is diffusely distributed by fiber optic cables placed across the diffusing pad (120) ([0040]), such fiber optic cables understood to propagate some of the received light along the length of the cable and parallel to the pad surface while also outwardly emitting some of the received light in substantially all radially/lateral directions. The diffusing effect enables delivery of the ultraviolet light to the target surface in a substantially uniform fashion ([0018]).
Also, as discussed with respect to claim 1 above, Matsui similarly teaches a UV light emitting sheet (12) which is attached to a surface and activated to emit UV light to decontaminate the surface (claim 8, [0054]). The sheet (12) includes an optical waveguide (15), such as an optical fiber, extending across the sheet (Figs. 1-3, [0049], [0051]), wherein the waveguide includes at least one of a scattering material, gratings, or bends, which cause lateral (i.e., radial) emission of ultraviolet light traveling through the waveguide ([0052]; also see [0084]-[0086]), the ultraviolet light received from an ultraviolet light source (11) . (Figs. 1-3, [0049], [0068]).
Therefore, as discussed with respect to claim 1 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to arrange optical fibers along a bottom surface of the cover of Dayton for the benefit of distributing and diffusing UV light received from a UV light source more uniformly across a target surface (consider Li at [0018], Matsui at [0052]). Thus modified, such optical fibers along the bottom surface would run parallel to the bottom side of the cover, such that at least the light traveling within the optical fiber and some of the light diffusely emitted portions of the optical fiber is directed parallel to the covering when the covering is disposed in the flat configuration.
Regarding claim 17, Dayton in view of Yuds, Li, and Matsui teaches the method according to claim 16. Dayton further teaches the covering (blanket 10) includes a light emitting system (UVC sources 18) disposed on an underside (inward facing surface 20) of the covering (see Fig. 3 provided with respect to claim 1 above, and paragraphs [0020]-[0022]). As discussed with respect to claim 16 above, Dayton further teaches that defining the ultraviolet light environment includes activating an ultraviolet light source of the light emitting system (UVC sources 18 emit UVC light to deactivate contagions on the surface 14—[0029]).
Regarding claim 18, Dayton in view of Yuds, Li, and Matsui teaches the method according to claim 17. Dayton teaches spacers (22) which are associated with the UVC LEDs (18) and configured to allow the LEDs to emit UV light over the entire surface (14) to be treated by creating a gap between the blanket inner surface (20) and the object (12) being treated (see Fig. 3, [0021], [0025-[0027], and [0029]). The spacers (22) extend out from an underside (20) of the covering (10) (see Fig. 3). Thus, Dayton teaches the light emitting system includes one or more suspended portions (spacers 22) extending away from the underside (inner surface 20). When placing the covering of Dayton over a plurality of medical devices in accordance with the method of Dayton as modified with respect to claims 16 and 17 above, at least some of the spacers would be positioned between medical devices (see Figs. 2-3, which imply a relatively high density of spacers 22 across the surface of the blanket, such that spacers would be expected to be dispersed all over the objects covered by the blanket, including in spaces between objects). Thus, performing the method of Dayton as modified with respect to claim 17 above necessarily includes inserting a suspended portion (spacer 22) of the light emitting system between adjacent ones of the medical devices.
Regarding claim 19, Dayton in view of Yuds, Li, and Matsui teaches the method according to claim 17. Dayton and Yuds do not teach the light emitting system includes a passive light projector optically coupled with the ultraviolet light source, and the passive light projector includes at least one of a light pipe or an optical fiber.
However, as substantially discussed with respect to claims 1 and 16 above, it would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art to modify the cover of Dayton to include optical fibers arranged along a bottom surface of the cover and configured to prorogate and diffuse light from a UV light source—as seen in Li ([0040]) and Matsui (Figs. 1-3, [0049]-[0052])—for the benefit improving the distribution and uniformity of UV light delivered to the surface (see Li at [0018],Matsui at [0052]). Thus modified, the optical fibers of the modified method of Dayton clearly define a passive light projector optically coupled with an ultraviolet light source, the passive light projector including an optical fiber.
Regarding claim 20, Dayton in view of Yuds, Li, and Matsui teaches the method according to claim 17. Dayton indicates that control circuitry of the lighting system can be configured to create a timer that terminates operation of the UVC sources 18 after a predetermined period of time elapses ([0023]—lines 20-24); the operation of the control circuitry thus defines a step of automatically deactivating the ultraviolet light source after a defined activation time period.
Examiner’s Statement
The instant disclosure includes features which appear more novel, but are not well captured by the claim language. These more novel features are best seen in Figs. 3-5.
Fig. 3 depicts a subset of UV light sources (335), e.g., LEDs, suspending down from a bottom surface a light emitting layer (221) and emitting light in multiple directions (instant specification at [0038]). A separate subset of LEDs is disposed in/at the light emitting layer (221) (Fig. 3, [0038]), the light emitting layer being beneath or integrated within a bottom side of a fabric layer (222) ([0034]). While claim 7 appears to be directed toward such an embodiment, the claim language is not clear in requiring two distinct subsets of LEDs, (the language of “at least a subset” could encompass embodiments where all LEDs are in a single set), and the claim is not clear in requiring that the distinct subsets be characterized by being disposed at different distances from a major surface of the light emitting layer (112). Also, Fig. 3 appears to depict the lower subset of LEDs (435) hanging from a bottom surface of the cover by a wire-like connection, wherein this aspect of the subset of LEDs is not clearly expressed by the language of claim 7.
Figs. 4-5 depict a light pipe (432) and optical fiber (532), respectively, the light pipe or optical fiber extending along a surface of a light emitting layer (221) and including protrusions (suspended sections 435—[0041]; suspended sections 535—[0046]) where the light pipe of optical fiber extends away from and returns to the light emitting layer to yield a u-shape protrusion. Although it appears that the claim language of a second portion “disposed downward and away from a bottom” (claim 1) may be directed toward this feature, the language is too broad to yield a patentable distinguish from the prior art as cited above. Claim 18 refers to a “suspended portion”, but does not indicate that the suspended portion is a u-shaped bend in a light pipe or optical fiber which protrudes away from a bottom surface of the cover.
The prior art does not appear to teach a cover having a hanging subset of LEDs as depicted in Fig. 3, or a cover having a light pipe or optical fiber with a u-shaped bend protruding away from a bottom surface of the cover as seen in Figs. 4-5. Accordingly, pending further search and consideration, an amendment which clearly incorporates one of the novel set of features of Figs. 3-5 discussed above would likely put the claims in condition for allowance. Generally, such an amendment should use language consistent with the written description; however, some other language describing the arrangement of claimed elements can be appropriate if the stated arrangement is clearly supported by the instant drawings. Also, such an amendment to the independent claims should be accompanied by amendments to the dependent claims which remove redundant or contradictory limitations, as appropriate.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (US 7,210,817 B2) teaches a device for delivering phototherapy to a patient (title) which includes an interface that diffuses light emitted by a plurality of light-generating sources to be diffused or directed in a desired direction, in order to provide a more uniform, constant, and intense light pattern on the contact surface (Fig. 8, column 9, lines 8-19).
Chan et al. (US 2022/0096677 A1) teaches a disinfection system comprising side emitting fibers (2) which emit light radially outward over a full 360 degrees (Fig. 1, [0042]), the fibers receiving an input light from laser diodes (4), preferably at both ends of the optical fiber to ensure a constant intensity profile of light emitted by the fiber (see Figs. 1-4, [0043]-[0045]).
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 BRADY C PILSBURY whose telephone number is (571)272-8054. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30a-5:00p.
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, MICHAEL MARCHESCHI can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/BRADY C PILSBURY/Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/JENNIFER WECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1797