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 Group I, claims 1-11, in the reply filed on 10/17/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the search and examination of the withdrawn claims could be made without a serious burden. This is not found persuasive because as outlined in the restriction requirement filed on 08/20/2025, each of the groups possess divergent scopes and as such would require the employment of a variety of different search terms and strategies. Such differences are recited in the restriction requirement and applicant has not pointed to any particular rationale utilized in the restriction requirement as to why it would be improper.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Jang (KR 102289453 B1).
Regarding claim 1, Jang teaches of:
An air purifier comprising:
a first body having an inlet (Fig. 3, 110 and 210 make up the first body and have an inlet 112a), and an outlet that is open upward (Fig. 5, outlet of the first body is at the top of 152);
a fan provided inside the first body and below the outlet (Fig. 3, 140 is positioned below the outlet of 211); and
a second body coupled to the first body and provided above the outlet (Fig. 5, 260 is coupled to the first body and is at the highest point of the system),
wherein the second body includes:
a post connected to the first body (Fig. 6, 260 is connected to the first body via 252); and
a lower wall located above the outlet and extending outward toward an outside edge of the second body (see annotated version of Fig. 5 below, the lower wall is above the outlet and extends toward an outside edge of the second body).
Regarding claim 2, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, and Jang further teaches of:
wherein the lower wall is spaced apart upward from the outlet and extends upward toward the outside edge of the second body (See annotated Fig. 5 below, the lower wall is spaced apart from the outlet at the top portion of 152 and extends to the outside edge of the second body)
Regarding claim 3, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, and Jang further teaches of:
wherein the lower wall is inclined upward toward the outside edge of the second body, and
wherein an angle at which the lower wall is inclined with respect to a horizontal direction increases toward the outside edge of the second body (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the lower wall is inclined with respect to a horizontal direction and the angle increases as it approaches the outside edge of the second body).
Regarding claim 5, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, and Jang further teaches of:
wherein the lower wall includes:
a first lower wall region facing the outlet in a vertical direction (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the first lower wall faces the outlet of 152); and
a second lower wall region extending toward the outside edge of the second body from the first lower wall region and located outside of the outlet in a radial direction (Annotated Fig. 5, the second lower wall extends toward the outside edge of the second body from the first lower wall region and is outside the outlet of 152 radially).
Regarding claim 6, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, and Jang further teaches of:
wherein the lower wall extends curvedly toward the outside edge of the second body (annotated Fig. 5 below, the lower wall extends curvedly to the outside edge of the second body), and
wherein a radius of curvature of the lower wall decreases toward the outside edge of the second body (the lower wall forms an S-shape and as its angle increases toward the outside edge of the second body, the radius of curvature decreases from the dividing line between the first and second lower walls).
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.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (KR 102289453 B1).
Regarding claim 4, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, and Jang further teaches of:
wherein the lower wall is inclined upward toward the outside edge of the second body (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the lower wall is inclined upward to the outside edge of the second body)
Jang fails to explicitly teach:
wherein an angle at which the lower wall is inclined with respect to a horizontal direction is within a range of 30 degrees to 35 degrees.
However, it would have been obvious to modify the inclination angle of the lower wall of Jang to be in a range of 30 to 35 degrees based on the following rationale:
It has been held that “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device” Gardner v. TEC Syst., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 225 SPQ 232 (1984). In the instant case, the apparatus of Jang would not operate differently with an inclination angle ad claimed and since the lower wall is supposed to have an upward inclination angle, the lower wall would function appropriately within the claimed range. Further, applicant places no criticality on the range claimed, indicating simply that the inclination angle “may” be within the claimed range (see ¶ [0083] of applicant’s specification)
Claim(s) 7-8 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (KR 102289453 B1) as presented in claim 1, and in further view of Hwang (KR 20180065164 A).
Regarding claim 7, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, however, Jang fails to explicitly teach:
further comprising a button configured to control operation of the fan and protruding toward a lower side of the lower wall.
Hwang teaches of:
further comprising a button configured to control operation of the fan and protruding toward a lower side of the lower wall (Fig. 3c, see buttons 134a and 134b that control operation of the system)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add the power button 134b to the outer edge of 261 as it is shown in Fig. 3c of Hwang and connect it to a PCB module disposed within the second body so that 134b protrudes downward and toward the lower side of the lower wall and further connect 134b to the controller of Jang so that the operation of the button turns the system on or off and thus controls the fan
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
Jang is silent as to how to power on and off apparatus of Jang, a modification of Jang to include an on/off button as is done above with Hwang allows a user to turn on and off the system of Jang as needed
Regarding claim 8, the combined teachings teach of the air purifier of claim 7, however, the combined teachings fail to explicitly teach of:
wherein the button is located between an outer wall of the first body and the outside edge of the second body.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the diameter of the second body so that its outer edge, which carries the button as described above, extends beyond the outer wall of the first body based on the following rationale:
it has been found that when the only difference between the prior art and the claimed invention is the relative size of the structure, applicant has placed no criticality on the size of the structure and a modification of the corresponding structure in the prior art would not adversely affect the operation of the prior art, then such a modification would be obvious (see MPEP 2144.04.IV.A). In the instant case, with the claim language utilized in claim 8, applicant claims that outside edge of the second body is beyond the outer wall of the first body, therefore it would have been obvious to modify the second body of Jang so that its outer edge of the second body, as shown in the annotated version of Fig. 5 below, is outside the outer wall of the first body, and as such the button of Hwang added to the second body of Jang would be between the outer wall of the first body and the outside edge of the second body. Such a modification would not adversely affect the intended operation of Jang and no criticality has been placed by applicant on such a feature.
Regarding claim 11, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, Jang further teaches of:
the lower wall being inclined upward in a direction away from the center axis of the first body (see annotated Fig. 5 below, the lower wall is inclined upward and away from the center axis of the first body)
Jang fails to explicitly teach:
further comprising an outlet grille provided below the lower wall and at the outlet, the outlet grille being inclined downward in a direction away from a center axis of the first body
Hwang teaches of:
further comprising an outlet grille provided below the lower wall and at the outlet (Fig. 4, see 92 that is below the second body 102 and at an outlet)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add a grill in line with 261 shown in Fig. 5 of Jang so that it is below the lower wall of Jang but at the outlet of 152
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would prevent objects from falling into the outlet of Jang
Further, it would be obvious to modify the 92 so that it is inclined downward and away from the center axis based on the following rationale:
It has been found that when the only difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is the rearrangement of parts, and the rearrangement of the parts in the prior art would not adversely affect the intended operation of the part, then such a rearrangement would be obvious (see MPEP 2144.04.VI.C). In the instant case, the only difference between the combined teachings and the claimed invention is the inclination angle of the outlet grille. However, rearranging the outlet grill within the combined teachings so that it is inclined down an away from the center axis would not adversely affect the intended operation of the system of the combined teachings, the operation being the facilitation of clean air flow out of the outlet and the prevention of objects from falling into the outlet via the grille. Therefore, it would have been obvious to modify the orientation of the grill so that it is inclined down and away from the central axis of the system.
Claim(s) 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jang (KR 102289453 B1) as presented in claim 1, and in further view of Wennerstrom (US 20150231542 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Jang teaches of the air purifier of claim 1, however, Jang fails to explicitly teach:
further comprising:
a coupler provided inside the second body and configured to connect the first body and the second body; and
a coupling device button configured to operate the coupling device and protruding toward a lower side of the lower wall.
Wennerstrom teaches of:
further comprising:
a coupler provided inside the second body and configured to connect the first body and the second body; and
a coupling device button configured to operate the coupling device and protruding toward a lower side of the lower wall (Figs. 6-7, a coupler 12 connects a first body 6 to a second body 5, the coupler 12 has a button 11 that operates the coupler to facilitate the detachment of the two bodies)
The primary reference can be modified to meet this/these limitation(s) as follows:
add the coupler with its corresponding button of Wennerstrom to the bottom portion of the lower wall of Jang that abuts 251 and provide a corresponding receiver for the coupler on 251 so that in operation the second body can be lowered and coupled onto the first body via the positive connection at 251 and can further be detached from the first body be operation of the button that would be provided on the outside surface of the lower wall adjacent to 251
A person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make the above modification(s) because:
it would allow for the first and second body 260 to be detachably connected to one another, allowing for easy assembly and disassembly
Regarding claim 10, the combined teachings teach of the air purifier of claim 9, and the combined teachings further teach of:
wherein the second body includes a boundary region located inward of the outlet in a radial direction and spaced apart from an outer wall of the first body, and
wherein the coupling device button is located between the outer wall of the first body and the boundary region (Jang, see annotated Fig. 5 below, the coupling device button would be located between the boundary region and the outer wall of the first body)
Annotated Figures
PNG
media_image1.png
918
1114
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig. 5 of Jang
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL J GIORDANO whose telephone number is (571)272-8940. The examiner can normally be reached M-Fr 8 AM - 5 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Steve McAllister can be reached at (571) 272-6785. 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.
/M.J.G./Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/STEVEN B MCALLISTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762