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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Claims 1-7 and 9 in the reply filed on 12/30/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that all species are based on same core configuration of air heating apparatus. This is not found persuasive because an expansion tank designs of figs. 5 and 4 are both distinct from the expansion tank of the air heating apparatus of fig. 2 (species I), and not required for the function of air heating apparatus of species I (elected species); similarly, fan and assembly details of a humidifier of figures 3 and 6 are distinct from the air heating apparatus of species I.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "humidity measurement device" in claim 5 .
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
The “humidity measurement device” is disclosed in the specification as a humidity sensor (see paragraph 69).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang (KR 101931975 B1) and in view of Hyunah Kim (KR 20230100906 A) hereinafter referred to as Kim.
In regards to claim 1, Hwang discloses an air heating apparatus (see heating conditioned air, fig. 1 and paragraph 1) comprising:
an expansion tank (expansion tank 23) configured to store water (see fig. 1); a water heater (water heating burner 22 and exchanger 21, see fig. 1) configured to receive heat from a combustion gas generated by a combustion reaction (burner 22 burning combustion gas, see paragraph 50) and heat the water (fig. 1 and paragraph 50); a heating heat exchanger (heating heat exchanger 150, see fig. 1) configured to receive the water heated by the water heater and exchange the heat with air to be discharged for heating (see fig. 1 and paragraphs 32, 34 and 53-55); a fan (blower 160, see fig. 1) configured to deliver the air to the heating heat exchanger (air blower 160 bringing air from inlet 110a to the heating heat exchanger 150, see fig. 1); and a vapor supply flow path (humidified air 540) configured to supply vapor in a water tank (530) to the fan (moisture supplied to fan 160 via rotor member 300, see paragraphs 42, 46 and fig. 1).
However, Hwang does not explicitly teach that the supplied vapor to the fan is steam.
Kim discloses a humidifying apparatus (see figs. 5, 11-12; and abstract) including an expansion tank (water tank with steam generation, see page 4, paragraphs 3-6), and a steam supply flow path (guide chamber 300 and plate 420, see figs. 5-7) configured to supply steam in the expansion tank to the fan (fans 600 supplied with steam from expansion tank 100 via chambers 300 and plate 420, see figs. 5-7).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air heating apparatus of Hwang by providing a steam supply flow path, configured to supply steam in the expansion tank to the fan, between the expansion tank and the fan of the air heating apparatus of Hwang based on the teachings of Kim in order to prevent a risk of burns due to high-temperature steam by allowing the steam to pass through a steam/airflow path before supplying to the indoor space (see figs. 11-12, Kim).
In regards to claim 6, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1 and further discloses a heating water supply flow path (heating water supply path 6d) configured to supply external water to the expansion tank (water supplied to the expansion tank 23 via 6d, see fig. 1 and paragraph 15); and a heating water supplement valve (valve 4) configured to open or close the heating water supply flow path (see fig. 1 and paragraphs 11-13).
In regards to claim 9, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6 and further discloses a circulation supply flow path (at least water path connected between pump 24 and expansion tank 23, see fig. 1) formed to connect the expansion tank (see fig. 1), the water heater (27c), and the heating heat exchanger (via path 6b and valve 151) and configured to guide the water in the expansion tank (23) to the heating heat exchanger (water from expansion tank 23 guided to heat exchangers 150 via 6a, 6b and valve 151, fig. 1) via the water heater (via water heater 21); a circulation recovery flow path (see 6c, 6d and 27b, fig. 1) formed to connect the heating heat exchanger (150) and the expansion tank (23) and configured to guide the water heat-exchanged with the air to the expansion tank (water heat exchanged with the air at heat exchanger 150, returned to expansion tank via 27b, see fig. 1); and a circulation pump (pump 24) disposed downstream of the expansion tank (see fig. 1) and upstream of the water heater in the circulation supply flow path (24 between 23 and 21, see fig. 1) and configured to pump the water in the circulation supply flow path (see fig. 1 and paragraphs 50, 51, 57 and 59).
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of Hosoda (US 4135370 A).
In regards to claim 2, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1 except an air supply flow path connected to water tank to supply a portion of air to the tank by fan.
However, Hosoda discloses a humidity control apparatus (fig. 1), with an air supply flow path (26) having one end connected to the expansion tank (water vapor chamber 28 of tank 32, 29, see fig. 1) and configured to supply, to the expansion tank (via duct 26), a portion of the air delivered by the fan (by fan 5, see fig. 1).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air delivery path to the heating heat exchanger of the heating apparatus of Hwang by providing an air supply flow path having one end connected to the expansion tank and configured to supply, to the expansion tank, a portion of the air delivered to the heating heat exchanger by the fan based on the teachings of Hosoda in order to provide an additional path to capture water vapor by the air stream that is being supplied to the indoor space to improve the humidity condition within the indoor space during a heating/cooling operation.
In regards to claim 3, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 2 and further discloses that when a direction in which the fan faces the heating heat exchanger refers to a reference direction (heating heat exchanger 150 positioned relative to fan 160, see fig. 1), an air flow path is disposed in the heating heat exchanger in the reference direction (airflow of path 110b, passing through heat exchanger 150 in the same direction as the heat exchanger from the fan 160, see fig. 1).
However, Hwang does not explicitly teach that the other end of the supply flow path with respect to the fan in the airflow direction.
Hosoda teaches that the other end of the air supply flow path (top of the airflow path 26 near fan 5, see fig. 1) is disposed in the reference direction (in the direction of airflow) with respect to the fan (see fig. 1).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air delivery path to and from the heating heat exchanger of the heating apparatus of Hwang as modified by providing the other end of the air supply flow path disposed in the heating heat exchanger in the reference airflow direction with respect to the fan when a direction in which the fan faces the heating heat exchanger refers to a reference direction based on the teachings of Hosoda in order to circulate air from the fan to the expansion tank to increase supply of moisture laden air to the suction side of the fan to supply humid air to the indoor space to expeditiously increase the indoor humidity.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Kim and Hosoda as applied to claim 3 above and further in view of Sieradski (US 4478210 A).
In regards to claim 4, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1 except a damper in the air flow path.
However, Sieradski discloses a damper disposed in the air supply flow path and configured to open or close the air supply flow path (dampers MD2, 4, 5, 6, on the discharge flow path of the blower 56, see figs. 2-5).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the air delivery path to and from the heating heat exchanger of the heating apparatus of Hwang as modified by providing a damper disposed in the air supply flow path and configured to open or close the air supply flow path based on the teachings of Sieradski in order to control the circulation of air from the fan to the expansion tank to adjust the moisture content of the steam/air being supplied to indoor space through the fan.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hwang in view of Kim as applied to claim 1 above and further in view of McFadden (US 5286942 A).
In regards to claim 7, Hwang as modified teaches the limitations of claim 6 except a water level detection sensor configured to detect a water level inside the expansion tank; and a controller configured to control an operation of the heating water supplement valve based on the water level measured by the water level detection sensor.
However, McFadden discloses a steam humidified (see fig. 1 and abstract) including a water level detection sensor (sensors 27a, 27b) configured to detect a water level inside the expansion tank (see col. 5, lines 5-22); and a controller (controller 80, fig. 4) configured to control an operation of the heating water supplement valve (water supply valve 29) based on the water level measured by the water level detection sensor (see figs. 4-5 and col. 5, lines 5-22).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the expansion tank of the heating apparatus of Hwang as modified by providing a water level detection sensor configured to detect a water level inside the expansion tank; and a controller configured to control an operation of the heating water supplement valve based on the water level measured by the water level detection sensor as taught by McFadden in order to regulate the flow of water to avoid the situations where indoor space lacks humidity due to drop in water level and where water continuously overflows from the expansion tank.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 5 would be allowable because the prior art of record when considered as a whole, alone or in combination, neither anticipates nor renders obvious: the air heating apparatus with all the limitations of claims 1-4 and a controller configured to control operation of a humidifying damper within the air supply flow path based on a humidity measured by humidity measurement sensor within the suction duct communicating with room and guiding air to the fan (claim 5 and paragraphs 68-71).
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MERAJ A SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-3027. The examiner can normally be reached on M-R 9:00-1:00 pm.
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, Jianying Atkisson can be reached on 571-270-7740. The fax phone number 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/MERAJ A SHAIKH/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/JIANYING C ATKISSON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3763