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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because the limitation of “the filter is a continuous filter” is redundant as the limitation is already recited in claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
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.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claim 1–6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hasama et al., US 6,162,286 A (“Hasama”).
Regarding claim 1:
Hasama discloses that a cleanable filtration system (Hasama’s exhaust system 6, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 10, ll. 62–68) for an air conditioning system (intended use, and Hasama’s exhaust system 6 is capable to be used in an air conditioning system because it filters exhaust air, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 9, ll. 13–14) comprising:
a continuous filter (Hasama’s endless-belt-shaped filter 33 is a continuous filter as shown in Fig. 19, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12. Ll. 12–18) positionable adjacent to an inlet opening (Hasama’s inlet 19, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 11, ll. 21–40) in the air conditioning system (intended use);
a drive system (Hasama’s motor 26, rotary shafts 25a, 25b, gears 30, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 12–16) operably coupled to the continuous filter (33 of Hasama) to move the continuous filter relative to the inlet opening (19 of Hasama, Hasama Fig. 19), the drive system including at least one support (Hasama’s rotary shaft 25a, 25b or gears 30) mounted within an interior area defined by the continuous filter (33 of Hasama, Hasama Fig. 19); and
a cleaning jet (Hasama’s nozzle 132, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 25, ll. 26–33) positioned to spray a cleaning fluid (Hasama’s cleaning liquid 40, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 25, ll. 20–25) on an adjacent portion of the continuous filter (as shown in Hasama Fig. 19), wherein the cleaning jet (132 of Hasama) is positioned to spray the cleaning fluid (40 of Hasama) at a bend in the continuous filter arranged at the at least one support (Hasama’s nozzle 132 is arranged at a bend at the support 25b, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 25, ll. 20–35).
Regarding claim 2:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 1, wherein the drive system further comprises: a drive mechanism (Hasama’s motor 26, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 12–16), wherein the at least one support (25a, 25b and 30) is operably coupled to the drive mechanism (Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 12–18).
Regarding claim 3:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 2, wherein the at least one support (25a, 25b and 30 of Hasama) is frictionally engaged (via interaction between gear 30 and chain 31, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 12–16) with the continuous filter (33 of Hasama).
Regarding claim 4:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 2, wherein the at least one support (25a, 25b and 30 of Hasama) includes a first support (25a of Hasama) and a second support (25b of Hasama), and the first support is operably coupled to the drive mechanism (Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 12–16).
Regarding claim 5:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 4, wherein the second support (25b of Hasama) is a passive support (because Hasama discloses its motor 26 is connected to an output shaft 27, which is connected to rotary shafts 25a, Hasama Fig. 2, col. 12, ll. 1–18).
Regarding claim 6:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 1, further comprising a housing (Hasama’s cleaning liquid tank 22, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 19–35) having a hollow interior (as shown in Hasama Fig. 19) and a hole formed at a side of the housing (top of Hasama’s liquid tank 22 is open, and could be interpreted as a hole, Hasama Fig. 19) such that the continuous filter (33 of Hasama) extends through the hole (as shown in Hasama Fig. 19), wherein the cleaning jet (132 of Hasama) is positioned to spray the cleaning fluid on the continuous filter within the housing (as shown in Fig. 19 of Hasama).
Regarding claim 12:
Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 1, wherein the continuous filter is formed from a mesh material (Hasama discloses its filter 33 is a mesh, Hasama Fig. 19, col. 12, ll. 19–24.
Claims 13–15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by Park ’301 et al., KR 100212301 B1 (“Park ’301”)1.
Regarding claim 13:
Park ’301 discloses an air conditioning system (Park ’301’s filter as shown in Fig. 2, Park discloses its filter could be used in air conditioners and exhaust gas purifiers, Park ’301 Fig. 2, p. 2) comprising:
a cabinet (rectangular case as shown in Park ’301’s Fig. 2) having an inlet opening (where air enters Park ’301’s casing as indicated by arrow in Fig. 2, Park ’301 Fig. 2);
a continuous filter (Park ’301’s filter 100, Park ’301 Fig. 2, p. 3) mounted in overlapping arrangement with the inlet opening (Park ’301’s Fig. 2 shows filter overlapping with air inlet arrow, Park ’301 Fig. 2);
and a system (Park ’301’s cleaning liquid injection 42 and compressed air injection nozzle 53, Park ’301 Fig. 2, ps. 3–4) for automatically cleaning the filter while the filter is mounted to the cabinet (Park ’301 discloses its system is powered by gear motor, Park ’301 p. 2, and therefore it is capable of performing “automatic cleaning”);
wherein the system for automatically cleaning the filter is operable intermittently (intended use, and Park ’301’s system for automatically cleaning the filter is capable of operable intermittently by controlling its motor) and the filter (Park ’301’s filter 100, Park ’301 Fig. 2) remains in overlapping arrangement with the inlet opening during operation of the system for automatically cleaning the filter (as shown in Fig. 2 of Park ’301, air inlet is where arrow enters Park ’301’s casing shown in Fig. 2 and arrow is overlapping with the filter 100, Park ’301 Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 14:
Park ’301 discloses that the air conditioning system of claim 13, wherein the system for automatically cleaning the filter includes a housing (Park ’301’s cleaning liquid tank 31) mounted to the cabinet (Park ’301’s liquid tank 31 is installed at a lower end of the housing as shown in Park ’301 Fig. 2, p. 4).
Regarding claim 15:
Park ’301 discloses that the air conditioning system of claim 13, wherein the filter is a continuous filter (Park ’301’s filter 100 is continuous as shown in Park ’301 Fig. 2) and the system for automatically cleaning the filter further comprises:
a drive system (Park ’301’s power transmission means or drive means configure to rotate and move filter, Park ’301 p. 5) operably coupled to the continuous filter (100 of Park ’301) to move the continuous filter relative to the inlet opening (as shown in Park ’301 Fig. 2); and
a cleaning jet (Park ’301’s cleaning liquid injection nozzle 43, Park ’301 Fig. 2, p. 5) positioned to spray a cleaning fluid (cleaning liquid, Park ’301 p. 5) on an adjacent portion of the continuous filter (100 of Park ’301).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 7–11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Hasama in view of Park et al., WO 2010/056001 A1 (“Park”).
Regarding claim 7:
Hasama does not disclose that the cleanable filtration system of claim 1, further comprising a cleaning brush positioned downstream from the cleaning jet relative to a path of movement of the continuous filter, wherein the cleaning brush is arranged in engagement with a surface of the continuous filter.
In the analogous art of continuous filter cleaning system comprising injection nozzles, Park discloses a pair of brushes 242 and 244 positioned downstream from Park’s cleaning jets 210 relative to a path of movement of the continuous filter, wherein the cleaning brush is arranged in engagement with a surface of the continuous filter 130, Park Fig. 3, [33]. Park discloses its brushes 242 and 244 are configured to remove moisture from the surface of filter 130, Park Fig. 3, [33]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Park’s brushes 242 and 244 downstream of Hasama’s cleaning jet 132 to remove moisture.
Regarding claim 8:
Modified Hasama does not disclose that the cleanable filtration system of claim 7, further comprising another cleaning brush positioned upstream from the cleaning jet relative to the path of movement of the continuous filter, wherein the another cleaning brush is arranged in engagement with the surface of the continuous filter.
In the analogous art of continuous filter cleaning system comprising injection nozzles, Park discloses a pair of brushes 232 and 234 positioned upstream from Park’s cleaning jets 210 relative to a path of movement of the continuous filter, wherein the cleaning brush is arranged in engagement with a surface of the continuous filter 130, Park Fig. 3, [33]. Park discloses its brushes 232 and 234 are configured to clean the surfaces of the filter 130 before it moves to the cleaning region 172, Park Fig. 3, [33]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Park’s brushes 232 and 234 upstream of Hasama’s cleaning jet 132 to preclean the filter 130 before jet cleaning.
Regarding claim 9:
Modified Hasama does not disclose that the cleanable filtration system of claim 8, further comprising a housing, wherein at least one of the cleaning brush and the another cleaning brush being arranged within an interior of the housing.
However, Park discloses a housing (outer case of Park’s filter cleaning unit 200), wherein at least one of the cleaning brush 242 and the another cleaning brush 234 being arranged within an interior of the housing of unit 200. Park Figs. 2 and 3, [32]–[33]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include a housing similar to that shown in Park to accommodate Park’s brushes in modified Hasama.
Regarding claim 10:
Modified Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 8, wherein the cleaning brush and another cleaning brush are axially aligned (as shown in Fig. 3, they are aligned via a vertical axis). Park Figs. 2 and 3, [32]–[33].
Regarding claim 11:
Modified Hasama discloses that the cleanable filtration system of claim 8, wherein the cleaning brush and another cleaning brush are axially offset (as clearly shown in Fig. 3). Park Fig. 3, [33].
Response to Arguments
The applicant amends the claims to include further limitations and argues that Park and Wang as discussed in the Non-Final Rejection dated Sep. 23, 2025 does not read on the further limitations, Applicant Rem. dated Jan. 23, 2026 (hereinafter “Applicant Rem.”) ps. 6–10.
In response, the examiner points out that the current rejection relies on Hasama and Park ’301 and therefore, applicant’s argument regarding Park and Wang is moot. Details are provided above.
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 QIANPING HE whose telephone nµmber is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. The fax phone nµmber for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
1 A copy of Park ’301’s original document and machine translation are provided with the office action. The examiner relies on the original document for the figure and machine translation for the text.