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 Amendment
This is an office action in response to Applicant's arguments and remarks filed on 6/10/2026. Claims 35-50,53 and 55-61 are pending in the application. Claims 35-49 have been withdrawn and claims 50, 53 and 55-61 are being examined herein.
Status of Objections and Rejections
The objection to the claims has been withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.
The objection of claim 54 is obviated by Applicant's cancellation.
The rejections of claims 51-52 and 54 are obviated by Applicant's cancellation.
All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of Applicant's amendment.
New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 are necessitated by the amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 50, 53-55, and 58-61 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullard et al. (US 20150306269 A1) in view of Curry (WO 0028552 A1) and Dunn (US 20170027175 A1).
Regarding claim 50, Bullard teaches a method (Fig. 9, method for using sanitation system 200, [0062]), comprising: receiving, from a liquid peracetic acid source, an amount of peracetic acid solution via a liquid inlet of a pneumatic nebulizer (Fig. 6, nebulizer 242 configured to dissociate chemical solution into mist between 4-50 microns, [0045-0046] wherein the solution may be peroxyacetic acid [0049] and may be received a liquid inlet proximal to vortex region V, Fig. 7, [0047]);
at the pneumatic nebulizer, nebulizing the peracetic acid solution to an aerosol of peracetic acid droplets (Fig. 7, [0045-0047], Fig. 9, step 904);
at the pneumatic nebulizer, evaporating the aerosol of peracetic acid droplets to peracetic acid vapour (Fig. 8b, fan 214 located downstream of nebulizer 242 and provides motive force to nebulized agent towards a desiccant subsystem = vaporization understood to occur due to the fan providing forced convection around aerosols which enhances convective mass transfer [0057]);
propelling the peracetic acid vapour away from an outlet of the pneumatic nebulizer in a predetermined direction in a closed space (Fig, 9, step 906, vapor is propelled towards desiccant subsystem and towards outlet 204, Fig. 6, [0065]); and
projecting UV radiation in the predetermined direction (Fig. 9, step 908).
While Bullard contemplates that the UV radiation should have a sufficiently low wavelength to cause water to ionize into hydroxyl radicals [0006] and can be at a specific wavelength set [0019], Bullard does not explicitly teach wherein the use of UV-C radiation.
Curry teaches a decontamination device and method [title, abstract] comprising a nebulizer (Fig. 1, 24) configured to atomize a cleaning fluid [0088], wherein the cleaning solution (Fig. 1, 20) may comprise a peracetic acid solution (page 10, para 1). Curry further teaches wherein the atomized cleaning solution may be chemically activated (page 14, para 2) by an ultraviolet light source (Fig. 1, 26) having a wavelength within the range of 200-300 nm (well understood in the art to be within the UV-C light spectrum of 100-280 nm) to yield hydroxyl radicals and oxidize organic contaminants (page 26, para 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the UV light as taught by Bullard to emit UV radiation in the UV-C spectrum of 200-300 nm since Curry teaches this wavelength to generate hydroxyl radicals when exposed to an atomized sterilant and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(A) and 2143(I)(G).
Modified Bullard does not teach wherein the pneumatic nebulizer is configured to produce a mist of peracetic acid droplets from a peracetic acid solution that is 2%w/w - 15%w/w aqueous peracetic acid.
Dunn teaches methods for sterilization comprising various fluid mixtures designed to be aerosolized [0034], comprising peroxide-peracetic acid solutions that may include peracetic acid at a concentration of 1 wt. % or higher [0050].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute the peracetic acid solution as taught by Bullard with the peracetic acid solution with a concentration greater than 1 % by wt. as taught by Dunn (understood to included peracetic acid solutions between 2-15% by wt.) since these are recognized as equivalents (sterilants) intended for the same purpose (sterilants intended to be aerosolized). See MPEP 2144.06(II).
Regarding claim 53, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, wherein the UV-C radiation has a wavelength of 100-280 nm (Curry, page 26, para 1).
Regarding claim 54, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, wherein the UV-C radiation has a wavelength of about 254 nm (Curry, page 26, para 1).
Regarding claim 55, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, wherein the aerosol of peracetic acid droplets includes a majority of droplets, by number, of size 4 m or less (Bullard, aerosolized solution can be 4 microns or less [0024-0025], [0045]).
Regarding claim 58, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, wherein a fan is used for the evaporating of the aerosol of peracetic acid droplets to peracetic acid vapour and the propelling of the peracetic acid vapour away from an outlet of the pneumatic nebulizer in the predetermined direction (Bullard, Fig. 8b, fan 214 located downstream of nebulizer 242 and provides motive force to nebulized agent towards a desiccant subsystem = vaporization initiated by forced air convection provided by fan [0057]).
Regarding claim 59, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, comprising concentrating the peracetic acid vapour propelled away from the outlet (Bullard, Fig. 8D, fan 214 located downstream of nebulizer 242 and provides motive force to nebulized agent towards a desiccant subsystem = vaporization of aerosols initiated by forced air convection provided by fan [0057] which is understood to be concentrating the peracetic acid vapor propelled away from outlet 204).
Regarding claim 60, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 59, comprising directing an air stream to propel concentrated peracetic acid vapour away from the outlet and into the closed space (Bullard, Fig, 9, step 906, vapor is propelled towards desiccant subsystem and towards outlet 204 via an air stream provided by a fan [0057], Fig. 6, [0065]).
Regarding claim 61, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 60, wherein projecting the UV-C radiation in the predetermined direction comprises projecting, with a UV radiation source facing the closed space, UV-C radiation into the closed space (Bullard, Fig. 8D, PHI tubes 206 and 208 contain UV light sources [0034], [0045] which face the outlet 204 such that reactive oxygen species are emitted at the outlet and into the closed space [0006] = understood to be projecting at least some UV radiation into enclosed space, Curry, light sources are UV-C , page 26, para 1).
Claim(s) 56 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullard et al. (US 20150306269 A1) in view of Curry (WO 0028552 A1) and Dunn (US 20170027175 A1), as applied to claim 50, further in view of Irizarry et al. (US 20210260227 A1) (eligible as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) with an effective filing date of 9/30/2019).
Regarding claim 56, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, further comprising: introducing humidity into the closed space (Bullard, Fig. 9, step 910 the airstream including the vaporized, aerosolized mist and hydroxyl radicals are introduced into an eclosed space [0040], [0067] = understood to be introducing humidity into the space) but does not teach maintaining a humidity within the closed space at or above 55% to increase biocidal efficiency of the peracetic acid vapour.
One having ordinary skill in the art would be concerned with optimizing the concentration of sterilant within the enclosed space to ensure efficient sterilization, motivating one to turn towards Irizarry.
Irizarry teaches a dry fog production method configured to disinfect an enclosed space with a dry fog delivery system designed to produce droplets of sterilant solution [0049], [0080-0081]. Irizarry teaches a method for maintaining a humidity within the enclosed space above 80% to ensure to effectiveness of the dry fog solution’s chemical makeup [0116] including measuring the humidity with a sensor and utilizing a control unit to produce more dry fog in response to the sensed reading [0120-0123].
Irizarry is considered analogous to the claimed invention since both are drawn to the sterilization arts. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method as taught by Modified Bullard to include the humidity measuring and maintaining steps as taught by Irizarry because Irizarry teaches the steps to maintain an 80% relative humidity within an enclosed space to protect the chemistry of aerosolized sterilant droplets [0116] and prevent undesired side reactions with the sterilant [0124] and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(A) and 2143(I)(G).
Claim(s) 57 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bullard et al. (US 20150306269 A1) in view of Curry (WO 0028552 A1) and Dunn (US 20170027175 A1), as applied to claim 50, further in view of Riccardi et al. (US 20110114744 A1).
Regarding claim 57, Modified Bullard teaches the method of claim 50, wherein a fan is used for the evaporating of the aerosol of peracetic acid droplets to peracetic acid vapour and the propelling of the peracetic acid vapour away from an outlet of the pneumatic nebulizer in the predetermined direction (Bullard, Fig. 8b, fan 214 located downstream of nebulizer 242 and provides motive force to nebulized agent towards a desiccant subsystem = convection of aerosols initiated by said motive force understood to be vaporizing the aerosols [0057]) but does not teach wherein compressed gas is used for the evaporating and propelling.
Riccardi teaches a method and apparatus for generating and distributing aerosols [abstract] including transducers (Fig. 6, 10) configured to generate aerosols and a pressurized air means to deliver the aerosols to a treated area [0226]. Riccardi further teaches wherein high-capacity air gas compressors can be used to move the aerosols into the treatment space [0432].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method and system as taught by Bullard to include the air compressor as taught by Riccardi to provide motive force to the aerosols generated by nebulizer to propel the aerosols (and evaporate the aerosols via convective mass transfer)) into the enclosed space and this involves the combination of elements to yield a predictable result with a reasonable expectation of success. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Response to Arguments
In the arguments presented on pages 6-7 of the amendment, filed 6/10/2026, the Applicant argues that an ordinary artesian would not be motivated to modify Bullard to include the peracetic acid solution range as taught by Burger as Bullard discloses a concentration of peracetic acid of 5000 ppm (equivalent to 0.5 wt %) that is an order of magnitude below the 2-7 wt % peracetic solution as taught by Burger and drawn to freeze-drying processes with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 50 (now incorporating the limitations of previously present claim 51, now cancelled) under 35 U.S.C. 103.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 30 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. A new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the art Dunn (US 20170027175 A1). See rejection 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 NEBYATE S SEGED whose telephone number is (703)756-4611. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-5:00 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/N.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights