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
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 11/25/2025 has been received and claims 1-4 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
in line 1 of Claim 2, insert --the-- before “ultraviolet”;
in line 1 of Claim 3, insert --the-- before “ultraviolet”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-4 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 the limitation "the surface" in line 14. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
In Claim 1, it is not clear what specific configuration the limitation “the plasma actuator is arranged so that the induced flow is supplied to the surface of the object to be sterilized” is attempting to set forth.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 1 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the primary reason for indicating allowable subject matter is due to inclusion of limitations that the sterilization device comprises “a sterilization container…comprises, inside thereof, a plasma generator, an ultraviolet light source, and a mounting table mounting an object to be sterilized”, wherein the plasma generator is a plasma actuator that is comprised of “a dielectric”, a first electrode “provided on a first surface of the dielectric” and a second electrode “provided on a second opposite to the first surface of the dielectric and arranged obliquely with a shift across the dielectric to the first electrode” in a configuration wherein an “induced flow is supplied to a surface of the object to be sterilized” and “the ultraviolet light source is arranged so as to be capable of irradiating the surface of the object to be sterilized and irradiates the induced flow with ultraviolet light…”. While prior art such as Harada (20050099134) teaches a plasma generator/actuator for air containing harmful substances (see entire document, particularly p.2 [0037]) comprises of a dielectric (20), a first electrode (11) provided on a first surface of the dielectric (20) and a second electrode (12) provided on a second opposite to the first surface of the dielectric (20) and arranged obliquely with a shift across the dielectric (20) to the first electrode (11) (see Figures 1-4), there is no motivation to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide such a plasma generator/actuator within a sterilization container along with an ultraviolet light source and a mounting table for an object to be sterilized in a configuration wherein “when a voltage is applied between the first electrode and the second electrode, the plasma actuator generates an induced flow including ozone from an edge of the first electrode along an exposed portion of the first surface of the dielectric that is not covered by the first electrode” and “the induced flow is supplied to a surface of the object to be sterilized” that is mounted on the mounting table and “the ultraviolet light source … [being] arranged so as to be capable of irradiating the surface of the object to be sterilized and irradiates the induced flow with ultraviolet light”. It would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a sterilization device comprised of components in the configuration as set forth in the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 REGINA M YOO whose telephone number is (571)272-6690. 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571)270-7698. 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.
/REGINA M YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758