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 .
Response to Amendments
The amendments filed on 03/17/2026 have been received, to which the Applicant is thanked. The Applicant has overcome the Drawing objection of record, and it has been withdrawn. The Applicant has overcome the 112(b) rejection of record, and it has been withdrawn.
Response to Arguments
The arguments have been fully considered, but have not been found to be persuasive.
In response to Applicants argument on pages 13-17 regarding the subject matter of the rejection of claim 1 and Okada not suggesting: a proper orientation of what is constitutes as a top or bottom of an object, and a configuration in which a rotational shaft of a filter moves,
The examiner respectfully responds the Applicants arguments and observations are directed to their own fabrication of the rejection of record, of which the Examiner understands that MPEP 2115 says material or article worked on does not limit an apparatus claim provided the apparatus is capable of performing the claimed function. Related to the Applicants arguments revolving around the orientation of Annotated Figure 1 and a configuration in which a rotational shaft of the filter moves, the prior art is capable of performing the currently claimed functions and structural limitations, with respect the literal claim language, as there currently exists no requirement for orientation to be critical (like any limitation pertaining to a ceiling), and the Examiner finds no reason that the electronic device of Okada to operate mechanically or functionally different while being inverted, as indicated in the Non-Final rejection issued 12/17/2025, and as seen below, for Okada to show the according argued limitations pertaining to claim 1 and as represented in Annotated Figure 1 below showing Okada meets MPEP 2115, as currently constructed; if the Applicant still contends, the Applicant is invited to amend the claims, all of which overcomes the Applicants current arguments, as the remainder of the arguments are derived from the Applicants same arguments and observations of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1-2 & 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okada et al (EP2924363), hereinafter referred to as Okada.
Regarding claim 1, Okada (EP2924363) shows an air conditioner, comprising:
a case (2, Fig. 3);
a base panel (Fig. 4, see Annotated Figure 1 – the base panel can be seen as the structure on the case directly below where element 14B is positioned in the Figure) that is disposed at a first side of the case (Fig. 4) and has an inlet (6, Fig. 4) into which air flows (Fig. 4 – element 6 is an inlet to which air flows);
an inlet grill (7, Fig. 4) that is rotatably disposed in the base panel based on a first rotational shaft (8, Fig. 3/4); and
a first filter (9, Fig. 4) that is movably or rotatably disposed in the base panel based on a second rotational shaft (18, Fig. 4) and removes foreign substances in the air flowing into the inlet (¶0026 – element 9 is a pre filter which removes foreign substances in the airflow), wherein the inlet grill is disposed below the first filter (see Annotated Figure 1, Fig. 4 – by inversing the Figure the inlet grill is below the first filter), wherein the second rotational shaft of the first filter is movably disposed in a frontward-rearward direction at an upper side of the first rotational shaft of the inlet grill (Fig. 3/4).
PNG
media_image1.png
467
1239
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 1
Regarding claim 2, Okada shows wherein the first rotational shaft and the second rotational shaft are disposed in parallel (Fig. 3 – the first and second rotational shafts are both arranged in the same parallel plane), the first rotational shaft is disposed in front of the inlet in a frontward-rearward direction of the air conditioner (Fig. 4 – the first rotational shaft 8 is disposed in a front of the inlet, in a forward-rearward direction of the air conditioner, just as the Applicant states the first rotational shaft A1 is disposed in front of the inlet in a frontward-rearward direction, as the shaft extends from one side of the device to another, perpendicular to the movement of the grill), and the second rotational shaft is disposed above the first rotational shaft (see Annotated Figure 1), and is disposed to be movable more rearward than the first rotational shaft (Fig. 3/4 – the second rotational shaft 18 is disposed to be moveable more rearward motion than the first rotational shaft (which does not reposition), as can be seen by its displacement in Figures 3 & 4).
Regarding claim 14, Okada shows a second filter (14, Fig. 4) that is movably or rotatably disposed on the base panel or an upper side of the base panel (Fig. 4, see Annotated Figure 1 – the second filter 14 is movably disposed on the structure of the base panel) based on a third rotational shaft (19, Fig. 4) and removes foreign substances in the air passed through the first filter (Fig. 4 element 14 is filter for removing foreign substances in the air that have passed through the first filter).
Regarding claim 15, Okada shows wherein the third rotational shaft (19, Fig. 3) is disposed parallel to the first rotational shaft or the second rotational shaft (Fig. 4 – the third rotational shaft 19 is disposed in parallel to the first rotational shaft), wherein the first rotational shaft is disposed in front of the inlet (Fig. 4), and the third rotational shaft is disposed above the first rotational shaft and is movable more rearward than the first rotational shaft (Fig. 3/4 – the third rotational shaft 19 is disposed to be moveable in a more rearward motion than the first rotational shaft (which does not reposition), as can be seen by its displacement in Figures 3 & 4).
Regarding claim 16, Okada shows wherein the third rotational shaft (19, Fig. 3) is disposed above the second rotational shaft (see Annotated Figure 1) and is movable more rearward than the second rotational shaft (see Annotated Figure 1 – the third rotational shaft 19 is movable more rearward than the second rotational shaft 18).
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.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Okada et al (EP2924363) hereinafter referred to as Okada, in further view of Ito (JP2019135433).
Regarding claim 10, Okada shows wherein the inlet grill comprises: a cover plate (Fig. 1/ 3 – the inlet grille 7 comprises of a cover plate) which is disposed at a lower side of the inlet (Fig. 3/4) and has a plurality of suction holes (Fig. 1 – the grill comprises of a plurality of suction holes);
at least one grill holder (Fig. 4 – the at least one grill holder can be seen as the structure surrounding the first rotational shaft 8) that is disposed at a first side of the cover plate (Fig. 3), and disposes the cover plate at one side of the base panel (Fig. 3); and
wherein the at least one grill holder comprises a shaft that extends along the first rotational shaft (Fig. 4 – as the Applicant states the at least one grill holder 90 is to comprise of a shaft 92 that extends along the first rotational shaft A1, by showing that the shaft 92 is to be identified as the same physical structure of the first rotational shaft A1, as does Okada show with the at least one grill holder comprising a shaft that extends along the first rotational shaft 8).
However, Okada lacks showing a panel hook that fixes the cover plate to the base panel.
Ito (JP2019135433), and air conditioner with a filter, is in the same field of endeavor as Okada which is an air conditioner with a filter.
Ito teaches a panel hook (see Annotated Figure 2) that fixes the cover plate to the base panel (see Annotated Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the inlet grill of Okada to incorporate the teachings of the inlet grill of Ito, which would provide an inlet grill in which the air filter can be efficiently attached to the intake grille (¶0007).
PNG
media_image2.png
665
1405
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Figure 2
Regarding claim 11, Okada shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 10 including the grill holder and the shaft.
However, Okada lacks showing wherein the at least one grill holder further comprises: a first vertical rib that protrudes upward from a first side of the cover plate; a horizontal rib that is bent at an upper end portion of the first vertical rib and extends in a direction away from the cover plate; and a second vertical rib that is bent at a distal end portion of the horizontal rib and extends downward, wherein the shaft is disposed at a lower end portion of the second vertical rib and extends in a lateral direction.
Ito teaches at least one grill holder (see Annotated Figure 2) further comprises: a first vertical rib (see Annotated Figure 2) that protrudes upward from a first side of the cover plate (11, see Annotated Figure 2); a horizontal rib (see Annotated Figure 2) that is bent at an upper end portion of the first vertical rib (see Annotated Figure 2) and extends in a direction away from the cover plate (13, see Annotated Figure 2); and a second vertical rib (see Annotated Figure 2) that is bent at a distal end portion of the horizontal rib and extends downward (see Annotated Figure 2), wherein the rotation point (18, Fig. 3) is disposed at a lower end portion of the second vertical rib and extends in a lateral direction (see Annotated Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the inlet grill and shaft of Okada to incorporate the teachings of the inlet grill and rotation point of Ito, which would provide an inlet grill in which the air filter can be efficiently attached to the intake grille (¶0007).
Regarding claim 12, Okada shows elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 11 including the shaft, and wherein a grill hanger in which the at least one grill holder is seated in front of the inlet is disposed in the base panel (see Annotated Figure 1).
However, Okada lacks showing wherein the grill hanger comprises: a bottom plate in which the shaft is seated; a first stopper that restricts movement at a first side of the shaft; and a second stopper that restricts movement of at second side of the shaft.
Ito teaches wherein the grill hanger comprises: a bottom plate (16, Fig. 6) in which the rotation point is seated (Fig. 6); a first stopper (see Annotated Figure 2) that restricts movement at a first side of the rotation point (see Annotated Figure 2); and a second stopper (see Annotated Figure 2 – the Examiner is taking the broadest reasonable interpretation to understand the second stopper is any structure that could impede movement by binding or contact; the end of the structure of the second vertical rib is the second stopper as it can impede further movement once contacting the bottom plate 16) that restricts movement of at second side of the rotation point (see Annotated Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the grill holder and shaft of Okada to incorporate the teachings of the grill holder and rotation point of Ito, which would provide an inlet grill in which the air filter can be efficiently attached to the intake grille (¶0007).
Regarding claim 13, Okada elements of the claimed invention as stated above in claim 12 including the grill holder.
However, Okada lacks showing wherein a length of the first vertical rib or the second vertical rib is longer than a length of the second stopper.
Ito teaches wherein a length of the first vertical rib or the second vertical rib is longer than a length of the second stopper (see Annotated Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the grill holder and shaft of Okada to incorporate the teachings of the grill holder, grill hanger, and rotation point of Ito, which would provide an inlet grill in which the air filter can be efficiently attached to the intake grille (¶0007).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okada et al (EP2924363), hereinafter referred to as Okada.
Regarding claim 21, Okada (EP2924363) shows an air conditioner, comprising:
a case (2, Fig. 3);
a base panel (Fig. 4 – the base panel can be seen as the structure on the case directly below where element 14B is positioned in the Figure) that is disposed at a first side of the case (Fig. 4) and has an inlet (6, Fig. 4) into which air flows (Fig. 4 – element 6 is an inlet to which air flows);
an inlet grill (7, Fig. 4) that is rotatably coupled to the base panel based on a first rotational shaft (8, Fig. 3/4);
a first filter (9, Fig. 3/4) that is movably or rotatably coupled to the base panel based on a second rotational shaft (18, Fig. 4) and removes foreign substances in the air flowing into the inlet (¶0026 – element 9 is a pre filter which removes foreign substances in the airflow),
wherein the inlet grill is disposed below the first filter (see Annotated Figure 1),
wherein the second rotational shaft of the first filter is movably disposed in a frontward-rearward direction at an upper side of the first rotational shaft of the inlet grill (Fig. ¾, see Annotated Figure 1); and
a second filter (14, Fig. 3) that is movably or rotatably coupled to the base panel or an upper side of the base panel based on a third rotational shaft (19, Fig. 3) and removes foreign substances in the air passed through the first filter (Fig. 4 - element 14 is filter for removing foreign substances in the air that have passed through the first filter),
wherein the first rotational shaft is disposed in front of the inlet (see Annotated Figure 1), and the third rotational shaft is disposed above the first rotational shaft and is movable more rearward than the first rotational shaft (see Annotated Figure 1 - the third rotational shaft 19 is disposed to be moveable in a more rearward motion than the first rotational shaft (which does not reposition), as can be seen by its displacement in Figures 3 & 4).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Okada et al (EP2924363), hereinafter referred to as Okada.
Regarding claim 22, Okada (EP2924363) shows an air conditioner, comprising:
a case (2, Fig. 3);
a base panel (Fig. 4 – the base panel can be seen as the structure on the case directly below where element 14B is positioned in the Figure) that is disposed at a first side of the case (Fig. 4) and has an inlet (6, Fig. 4) into which air flows (Fig. 4 – element 6 is an inlet to which air flows);
an inlet grill (7, Fig. 4) that is rotatably coupled to the base panel based on a first rotational shaft (8, Fig. 3/4);
a first filter (9, Fig. 3/4) that is rotatably coupled to the base panel based on a second rotational shaft (18, Fig. 4) and removes foreign substances in the air flowing into the inlet (¶0026 – element 9 is a pre filter which removes foreign substances in the airflow), wherein the inlet grill is disposed below the first filter (see Annotated Figure 1),
wherein the second rotational shaft of the first filter is movably disposed in a frontward-rearward direction at an upper side of the first rotational shaft of the inlet grill (Fig. 3/4); and
a second filter (14, Fig. 3.4) that is rotatably coupled to the base panel or an upper side of the base panel based on a third rotational shaft (19, Fig. 3/4) and removes foreign substances in the air passed through the first filter (Fig. 4 - element 14 is filter for removing foreign substances in the air that have passed through the first filter),
wherein the inlet grill, the first filter, and the second filter are each rotatable between a first horizontally extending position and a second vertically extending position (Fig. 3/4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art is Okada (EP2924363) and Oishi (US 2018/0038603), however, the combination of Okada or/and Oishi fails to show or teach a first guide groove that guides movement of the second rotational shaft of the first filter is formed in the base panel, and wherein the first guide groove is inclined downward as the first guide groove extends toward a rear side from a front end portion. The Examiner finds no reasonable rationale that would have made it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Okada as it would employ hindsight reasoning and compromise the mechanical continuity of Okada.
Claim 17 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The closest prior art is Okada (EP2924363) and Oishi (US 2018/0038603), however, the combination of Okada or/and Oishi fails to show or teach a second guide groove that guides movement of the third rotational shaft of the second filter is formed in both sidewalls of the filter housing. The Examiner finds no reasonable rationale that would have made it obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Okada as it would employ hindsight reasoning and compromise the mechanical continuity of Okada.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 RYAN L FAULKNER whose telephone number is (469)295-9209. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9-7, Every other F: Flex.
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 Hoang can be reached at 571-272-6460. 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.
/RYAN L FAULKNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/AVINASH A SAVANI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights