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 .
Specification Objections
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Pg. 8, lines 13 and 18, element number 60 refers to “tray” and “level sensor assembly” (“Disposed above this waterfall system is a tray 60…Disposed adjacent to the level sensor assembly 60,” emphasis added).
Pg. 8, lines 15 and 18, element numbers 50 and 60 both refer to the “level sensor assembly” (“Disposed adjacent to the waterfall system is a level sensor assembly 50…Disposed adjacent to the level sensor assembly 60,” emphasis added).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 1, the last line, “passed to the through the fan” should read “passed
Regarding Claim 6, the term "a predetermined level" should read "the predetermined level" (emphasis added).
Regarding Claim 16, the first and second interaction surfaces are previously mentioned in parent claim 15 so “…with a first interaction surface being slanted in a first direction off from horizontal to at least partially vertical a second interaction surface being slanted in a second direction…” should read “…with the first interaction surface being slanted in a first direction off from horizontal to at least partially vertical the second interaction surface being slanted in a second direction…” (emphasis added).
Regarding Claim 16, the third and fourth interaction surfaces have not been previously mentioned in any parent claims so “…the third interaction surface is slanted in an orientation so that it is substantially parallel to the first interaction surface, and wherein the fourth interaction surface…” should read “…a third interaction surface is slanted in an orientation so that it is substantially parallel to the first interaction surface, and wherein a fourth interaction surface …”
Appropriate correction is required. Claims 2-18 are also objected to by virtue of their dependency from claim 1.
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.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Regarding Claim 17, the term “a housing” may be confused with the housing already claimed in claim 1. Therefore, it’s unclear if “a housing” as recited in claim 17, is the same housing as recited claim 1 (“a housing” – line 2), or an entirely different one. For the purpose of examination, examiner interprets “a housing” as recited in claim 17 as a housing that only contains some of the internal structures of the air purification system, such as the plurality of interaction surfaces. To overcome this rejection, examiner suggests Claim 17 should read “wherein the plurality of different interaction surfaces are disposed in a separate housing” (emphasis added).
Claim 18 is also rejected by virtue of its dependency from claim 17.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 11 references itself instead of referencing a previous claim and thereby does not further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
For the purpose of examination, claim 11 will be examined as depending from claim 10.
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.
Claims 1-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (KR 1997-0030147 A) in view of Hoyda et al. (US 20190203960 A1), hereafter Hoyda.
Regarding claim 1, Kang discloses an air purification system (Pg. 2, Par 002, line 1, “an air purifier”) comprising:
a fan (Fig. 2, fan 18);
at least one water inlet (Fig. 2, pipe 21, water supply unit 24, water supply valve 25, water plates 15, wherein the pipe 21 performs the function of a water inlet by directing water from the water supply unit 24 through the water supply valve 25 to water pump 22 to supply pipe 23 to and water tray 13 and thereby the water plates 15 where air purification occurs) comprising a water inlet valve (Fig. 2, water supply valve 25);
at least one pump (Fig. 2, water pump 22);
at least one circulating manifold (Fig. 2, pipe 21 and unnumbered pipe to water pump 22, wherein the pipe 21 and unnumbered pipe to water pump 22 provide structure for water to flow through the system from the water supply unit 24 through the water filter 12 to the water tank 19 so contaminated air can be purified).
at least one tray (Fig. 2, water tray 13);
at least one air inlet (Fig. 2, inlet side 11, wherein arrows show air flowing into air purifier through inlet side 11);
at least one air outflow (Fig. 2, discharge port side 16, wherein arrows show air flowing out of air purifier through discharge port side 16);
a plurality of interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15, wherein the water plates 15 provide the structure for the water to interact with contaminated air so the air is cleansed by the interaction with the water. Although the transfer medium is not a biological agent as in the Applicant’s invention, the water plates 15 provide equivalent structure to the disclosed structure of the interaction surfaces (Applicant’s specification, Page 2, Par 3, lines 4-7: “the biological agent then flows from the tray to the plurality of interaction surfaces where the biological agent interacts with contaminated air…such that the air is cleansed by its interaction with the biological agent.” Examiner notes the biological agent will be addressed again later on in this rejection.) comprising a plurality of different surfaces slanted (Pg. 2, last Par, line 4, “…a plurality of water plates 15 for discharging water downward are inclinedly stacked,” wherein “inclinedly stacked” provides equivalent structure to “plurality of different surfaces slanted”)…said plurality of interaction surfaces configured to receive the agent (Examiner notes water is an agent because it physically binds to dust present in the contaminated air “to wash the dust and bacteria in the air with water to remove harmful components of the human body” (Pg. 2, last Par, lines 1-2));
at least one computer configured to control the pump (Pag. 3, Par. 009, lines 1-2: “When the water in the water tank 19 is to be replaced, the wastewater valve 27 is opened and discharged by the command of the microcomputer 29, and then the water supply valve 25 is opened according to the signal command of the microcomputer 29” which necessarily means microcomputer 29 indirectly controls water pump 22. As shown in Fig. 2, water must pass through water pump 22 to get from the water supply valve 25 to the water tank 19. Water pump 22 pumps water to the water tray 13 above water plates 15 and then the water flows through water plates 15 into the water tank 19), the fan (Fig. 2, microcomputer 29 is connected to fan 18 via motor driving circuit 30 and motor 17), the water inlet valve (Fig. 2, microcomputer 29 is connected to water supply valve 25), wherein the pump (Fig. 2, water pump 22) pumps agent through the circulating manifold (Fig. 2, pipe 21 and unnumbered pipe to water pump 22) to deliver the agent to the tray (Fig. 2, water tray 13), wherein the agent then flows from the tray to the plurality of interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15) where the agent interacts with air drawn in (Fig. 2, inlet side 16) by the fan (Fig. 2, fan 18) and the air is cleansed by its interaction with the agent (Pg. 2, last Par., lines 1-2, “to wash the dust and bacteria in the air with water to remove harmful components of the human body”) and then passed through the fan (Fig. 2, fan 18) and then out (Fig. 2, discharge port side 16).
However, Kang does not disclose a housing, at least one biological solution which when combined with water forms a biological agent, a plurality of different interaction surfaces slanted at different angles, a fan at the air inlet, and wherein the pump pumps biological agent.
Hoyda, however, discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses:
a housing (Fig. 89A, housing 712a),
a plurality of different interaction surfaces (Fig. 89A, first trays 715a and second trays 715b) slanted at different angles,
at least one biological solution which when combined with water forms a biological agent (Abstract, lines 3-6, “A solution of water and a biological reagent,” wherein examiner notes that although the agent is swapped with solution and vice versa, a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand Hoyda’s disclosure has the same structure as the present invention), and wherein the agent in the air purifier is biological (Abstract, lines 3-7, “A solution of water and a biological reagent is configured to flow around the inner and outer walls of the inner and outer chambers while air is passed adjacent to this fluid flow. This causes an interaction between the air and the fluid solution to cleanse the air.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have combined the air purifier disclosed by Kang with the housing, slanted surfaces, inlet fan, and fluid composed of water and biological reagent used to purify contaminated air disclosed by Hoyda, in order to isolate the air purifier components from the external environment and thereby prevent water from spilling onto and damaging external surfaces (by adding a housing), encourage water and air flow and thereby increase the effectiveness of the air purifier (by slanting the water plates at different angles), and increase air flow through the air purifier and thereby increase the effectiveness of the air purifier (by adding a fan to the air inlet), and to purify the air with a chemical reaction between the air and biological solution in addition to the physical reaction between the air and water disclosed by Kang, thereby increasing the effectiveness of the air purification by beneficially increasing the number of air particles that react with the agent (fluid composed of water and biological reagent used to purify contaminated air) (From Hoyda: Par 0251, “The direct interaction between the air flow and the opposite moving biological reagent results in an ion interaction between the two which results in a cleansing of the air as it passes through the housing”).
Examiner note: based on the modification above, the air would be “drawn into the housing…”and “passed… out of the housing,” as claimed.
Regarding Claim 2, Kang as modified above, discloses the air purification system as in claim 1, wherein the housing is substantially rectangular (From Hoyda: Fig. 89A, housing 712a. Kang as modified in view of Hoyda based on the rejection to claim 1 above, would have or substantially have Hoyda’s housing, which is rectangular).
Regarding Claim 3, Kang as modified above discloses the fan (Fig. 2, fan 18).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the fan is positioned on a top surface of the housing.
Hoyda additionally discloses the fan is positioned on a top surface of the housing (From Hoyda: Fig. 2, fan 225 and housing 712a, wherein fan 225 is positioned on a top surface of the housing 712a).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to move the fan to the top of the housing, since it has been held that the configuration of the claimed element was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed container was significant. MPEP 2144.04 IV-B. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation (i.e., fan at top of housing, fan at exit side of housing). One could have expected the fan to perform substantially equally well, whether at the top of the housing or in its original position.
Regarding claim 4, Kang as modified above discloses a computer (Fig. 2, microcomputer 29).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the computer comprises a touchpad.
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and further discloses a computer (Fig. 66, microprocessor 594.1) that comprises a touchpad (Fig. 66, touch screen 592).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have combined the microcomputer disclosed by Kang with the touchpad disclosed by Hoyda in order to make it easier for users to operate the computer, making the air purifier accessible to users with a wider range of abilities.
Regarding claim 5, Kang as modified above discloses a flow level sensor (Fig. 2, float switch 26).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the flow level sensor is used to control the level of biological agent.
Hoyda additionally discloses at least one flow level sensor (Fig. 70, float level sensor 572) comprising at least one of an electrical or mechanical flow level sensor (Par. 0225, “…a plurality of floats 572 which float to different levels and indicate the level of fluid inside of the container 550,” wherein using the mechanical principle of floating to indicate the level of fluid necessarily means the float level sensor 572 is mechanical) disposed in the housing (Fig. 65, float level sensor 572, wherein the float level sensor 572 is enclosed within the unlabeled lines representing the housing of the air purifier) and in communication with the computer (Par. 0265, “a microprocessor…in coordination with any one of the above fill level sensors 240, 570…” and Fig. 65 float level sensor 572 and level sensor device 570, wherein the float sensor 242 is part of the fill level sensing system 240 and the fill level sensing system 240 is in communication with a microprocessor which necessarily means the float sensor 242 is in communication with a microprocessor), wherein when the computer detects that the biological agent is below a predetermined level (Par. 0265 “the microprocessor along with the fluid level sensor can determine the water level”), the computer opens the water inlet valve to allow water to flow inside of the housing (Par. 0265, “…a microprocessor…in coordination with any one of the above fill level sensors 240, 570 or 620 determines a water or fluid level in the container. Next, in step 2 if the fluid level is determined by the microprocessor to be too low then the microprocessor can then selectively open the solenoid valves 533 and allow fluid such as water to flow into the container).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the float switch disclosed by Kang with the float sensor disclosed by Hoyda in order to be able to increase the level of the biological solution when it is running low and thereby maintain the effectiveness of the purification over time.
Regarding claim 6, Kang as modified above discloses the computer (Fig. 2, microprocessor 29) in communication with the water inlet valve (Fig. 2, water supply valve 25).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the computer closes the water inlet valve in response to the level of biological agent.
Hoyda additionally discloses when the level of biological agent is above a predetermined level inside of the housing, the computer closes the water inlet valve (Par. 0265, “If the water level has met or exceeded a predetermined level for fluid in the container, then the microprocessor can selectively close the solenoid valves in step 4,” wherein the microprocessor (i.e., computer) closes the solenoid valves (i.e., water inlet valve) controlling water flow into the container (i.e., housing) once the water is above a predetermined level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the microprocessor and water inlet valve disclosed by Kang with the water level control disclosed by Hoyda in order to prevent the water level from exceeding the volume of the container and damaging electrical components, thereby extending the time the air purifier can be used before it needs to be serviced.
Regarding claim 7, Kang as modified above discloses the computer (Fig. 2, microprocessor 29) is configured to selectively speed up the fan or slow down the fan (Fig. 2; fan 18, motor 17, and microprocessor 29; wherein microprocessor 29 controls motor 17 which controls the fan 18. Page. 3, Par 010, line 1, “When the water level in the water tank 19 falls below the proper level, the water filter 22 and the motor 17 are stopped…” which necessarily means microprocessor 29 stops motor 17. There is no method of control between the motor 17 and float sensor 26 that is independent of microprocessor 29, so a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that if the motor 17 controlling fan 18 is capable of being stopped, then the microprocessor 29 must be able to command the fan 18 from a stationary state to an accelerated one and vice versa (i.e., selectively speed up fan 18 or slow fan 18 down)).
Regarding claim 8, Kang as modified above discloses the computer (Fig. 2, microprocessor 29) is configured to selectively speed up the pump or slow down the pump (Fig. 2; water pump 22 and microprocessor 29; wherein microprocessor 29 controls water pump 22. Page. 3, Par 009, lines 1-2, “When the water in the water tank 19 is to be replaced, the wastewater valve 27 is opened and discharged by the command of the microcomputer 29, and then the water supply valve 25 is opened according to the signal command of the microcomputer 29.” which necessarily means microprocessor 29 starts water pump 22 to refill the water in water tank 19. There is no method of control between the water tank 19 and water supply valve 25 that is independent of water pump 22, so a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that if the water supply valve 25 controlling water flow to water pump 22 is capable of being stopped, then the microprocessor 29 must be able to command the water pump 22 from a stationary state to an accelerated one and vice versa (i.e., selectively speed up water pump 22 or slow water pump 22 down)).
Regarding claim 9, Kang as modified above discloses the computer is configured to selectively shut down the fan (Fig. 2, fan 18) and or the pump (Fig. 2, water pump 22). Examiner notes that if the fan and pump start (as described for fan 18 in the rejection for claim 7 above and the water pump 22 in the rejection for claim 8 above), that necessarily means they must be able to stop as well.
Regarding claim 10, Kang as modified above discloses the computer (Fig. 2, microprocessor 29) in communication with the water inlet valve (Fig. 2, water supply valve 25).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose an additional level sensor that automatically shuts down the water inlet valve when the biological agent reaches a predetermined level.
Hoyda additionally discloses at least one additional level sensor (Fig. 70, float level sensor 571, wherein float level sensor 571 comprises at least one float coupled to a lever as shown in Fig. A below) for determining a level of water in the system and then automatically shutting down the water inlet valve when the biological agent reaches a predetermined level inside of the housing (Par. 0256, with auto filling the tank selected it will only selectively open the double solenoid valves 533 if the float level sensor 570 indicates that the fill level is below a predetermined level,” wherein “the solenoid valves 533…allow fluid such as water to flow into the container,” (Par. 0265) which necessarily means they function as water inlet valves, “fluid such as water” includes a biological agent, and Par. 0232, “Fill level sensor 570 includes sensors 571 and 572…,” wherein float level sensor 571 indicates the level of the fluid to the float level sensor 570 and is thereby indirectly responsible for automatically shutting down the water inlet valve when the fluid reaches a predetermined level).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the microprocessor and water supply valve disclosed by Kang with automatic control of the water inlet valve disclosed by Hoyda in order to prevent the water level from exceeding the volume of the container and damaging electrical components within the air purifier, thereby extending the time the air purifier can be used before it needs to be serviced.
Regarding claim 11, Kang as modified above discloses the additional level sensor comprises at least one float coupled to a lever (Fig. 70, float level sensor 571, wherein float level sensor 571 comprises at least one float coupled to a lever as shown in Fig. A below).
Fig. A: Annotated copy of Fig. 70 from Hoyda showing location of prior art elements labeled with Applicant’s claim terminology.
Regarding claim 12, Kang as modified above discloses an air purification system (Pg. 2, Par 002, line 1, “The present invention relates to an air purifier”).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the housing includes a front grate.
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses the housing (Fig. 89A, housing 712a) includes a front grate (Par. 0170, “…top grill 222).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have the added the top grill disclosed by Hoyda to the combination of Kang and Kang from claim 1 above in order to protect internal components of the air purifier from large contaminants that would inflicting damage, thereby extending the time the air purifier can be used before it needs to be serviced.
Regarding claim 13, Kang as modified above discloses the tray (Fig. 2, water tray 13).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the tray includes a plurality of indents, and
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses a plurality of holes 642 on the section tray 640, as shown in Fig. 82A. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to shift the pattern of the holes 642 such that part of the hole pattern aligns with the edge of the tray, thereby forming semi-circles on the edge of the tray, since it has been held that the configuration of the claimed element was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed plurality of indents was significant. MPEP 2144.04 IV-B. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation (i.e., semi-circular indents, semi-circles).
Regarding claim 14, Kang as modified above discloses the tray (Fig. 2, water tray 13).
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the tray includes a plurality of semi-circular indents, and
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses a plurality of holes 642 on the section tray 640, as shown in Fig. 82A. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to shift the pattern of the holes 642 such that part of the hole pattern aligns with the edge of the tray, thereby forming semi-circles on the edge of the tray, since it has been held that the configuration of the claimed element was a matter of choice which a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found obvious absent persuasive evidence that the particular configuration of the claimed plurality of indents was significant. MPEP 2144.04 IV-B. Please note that in the instant application, the Applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitation (i.e., semi-circular indents, semi-circles).
Regarding claim 15, Kang as modified above discloses the plurality of interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15) comprise a plurality of different surfaces slanted off from horizontal to at least partially vertical to vertical (Fig. 2, water plates 15, wherein there are a plurality of interaction surfaces slanted at an angle other than horizontal, but less than vertical),
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose the slant angles opposite each other so that fluid placed on a first interaction surface flows down the first interaction surface towards a second interaction surface.
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses the interaction surfaces have slant angles opposite each other (Fig. 89A, first trays 715a and second trays 715b) so that fluid placed on a first interaction surface flows down the first interaction surface towards a second interaction surface (Fig. 89A, first trays 715a and second trays 715b, wherein the arrows on the same face as pump 704a show the flow of fluid down a first interaction surface towards a second interaction surface).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the water plates as disclosed by Kang with the trays oriented opposite each other as disclosed by Hoyda in order to increase the surface area between the biological reagent and contaminated air because it will take more time for the biological reagent to follow the diagonal shape of the trays from the top to the bottom of the housing as disclosed by Hoyda compared to the biological reagent falling straight down from the top to the bottom of the housing as disclosed by Kang. More time for the biological reagent to interact with the contaminated air will result in more effective cleansing of the air.
Regarding claim 16, Kang as modified above discloses the plurality of different interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15) comprise at least four different interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15, wherein there are eight repetitions of water plates 15) with a first interaction surface (Fig. 2, water plates 15, wherein the water plate 15 closest to the top of the air purifier is the first instance of the water plate 15 (i.e., first interaction surface)) being slanted in a first direction off from horizontal to at least partially vertical …wherein the third interaction surface is slanted in an orientation so that it is substantially parallel to the first interaction surface (Fig. 2, water plates 15, wherein the third water plate 15 closest to the top of the air purifier is the third instance of the water plate 15 (i.e., third interaction surface) and is parallel to the first interaction surface),
However, Kang as modified, thus far, does not disclose a second interaction surface being slanted in a second direction off from horizontal to at least partially vertical, opposite a first surface, and wherein the fourth interaction surface is slanted substantially parallel to the second interaction surface.
Hoyda additionally discloses a biological air purifying machine similar to the present invention and Hoyda further discloses a second interaction surface (Fig. B below) being slanted in a second direction off from horizontal to at least partially vertical, opposite a first surface, (Fig. B below, wherein the first interaction surface is slanted in an opposite direction to the that of the second interaction surface) and wherein the fourth interaction surface is slanted substantially parallel to the second interaction surface (Fig. B below).
Fig. B: Annotated copy of Fig. 89A from Hoyda showing location of prior art elements labeled with Applicant’s claim terminology.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the water plates as disclosed by Kang with the plurality of trays oriented opposite each other as disclosed by Hoyda in order to increase the surface area between the biological reagent and contaminated air because it will take more time for the biological reagent to follow the diagonal shape of multiple trays from the top to the bottom of the housing as disclosed by Hoyda compared to the biological reagent falling straight down from the top to the bottom of the housing as disclosed by Kang. More time for the biological reagent to interact with the contaminated air will result in more effective cleansing of the air.
Regarding claim 17, Kang as modified above discloses the plurality of different interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, water plates 15) are disposed in a housing (Fig. 2, water filter 12, wherein water filter 12 encloses and supports the water plates 15 (i.e., housing)).
Claim 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kang (KR 1997-0030147 A) in view of Hoyda et al. (US 20190203960 A1), hereafter Hoyda, as applied to claim 17, and further in view of Chang et al. (US 7112232 B2), hereafter Chang.
Regarding claim 18, Kang/Hoyda discloses the limitations of claim 17, and teaches the housing of the plurality of different interaction surfaces (From Kang: Fig. 2, water filter 12, wherein water filter 12 encloses and supports the water plates 15 (i.e., housing)).
However, Kang/Hoyda does not disclose the housing of the plurality of different interaction surfaces configured to slide in and out of the housing of the air purification system.
Chang discloses an air purification device and Chang further discloses the housing of the plurality of different interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, filter casing 31, wherein filter casing 31 houses filters such as filter 33 shown in Fig. 6) has tracks (Fig. 2, guide grooves 35, wherein the dashed lines show the path that filter casing 31 travels to slide in and out of cabinet 10. Examiner notes the guide grooves 35 receive the second guide rails 15 similar to how the tracks of the present invention receive the protrusion surfaces) and wherein said housing of the air purification system (Fig. 2, cabinet 10) has protrusion surfaces (Fig. 2, second guide rails 15) configured to receive the protrusion surface such that the housing of the plurality of different interaction surfaces (Fig. 2, filter casing 31) is slidable in and out from the housing of the air purification system (Fig. 2, filter casing 31 and cabinet 10, wherein “The guide grooves 35 of the filter casing 31 slidably engage with the second guide rails 15 of the cabinet 10 so that the filtering unit 30 is removed from or installed in the cabinet 10” (Col.4, lines 52-55)).
In addition, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to have modified the water filter disclosed by Kang and combined with the housing disclosed by Hoyda in claim 1 with the guide grooves and second guide rails disclosed by Chang in order to make it easier to clean and replace the filters and thereby increase the effectiveness of purification over time (From Chang: Col. 1, lines 65-67, “…a filtering unit and a blowing unit are easily installed in or removed from a cabinet of the air cleaning apparatus, thus making it easy to clean the air cleaning apparatus and to replace filters with new filters.”)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See attached PTO-892.
Hoyda et al. (US 20200179873 A1) teaches an air purifying machine that uses a bio reactive fluid to cleanse air.
Powell et al. (US 7722708 B2) teaches a wet air purification apparatus with a plurality of shelves that support interaction between water and contaminated air.
Moritz (DE 10100674 A1) teaches a wet air purification device that has separate containers for water and a concentrate.
Enzenhofer (WO 2004008034 A1) teaches a wet air purification device with separate containers for water and a deodorizing solution.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Elizabeth Laughlin whose telephone number is (703)756-5924. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30-6:00 ET.
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 on (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.
/E.A.L./Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762