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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 6/04/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 14 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/04/2026.
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: “scenting portion” and “releasing portion” and “exhaust portion” and “scent component trap portion” in claim 1; “perfume retaining members” in claim 4; “rectifying mechanism” in claim 8; “scanning portion” in claim 9; “stirring mechanism” in claim 10.
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. The corresponding structure(s) for the “scenting portion” includes an intake fan, an air pump and/or one or more of perfume cartridges (may be arranged in a fan shape) (see published application [0063], [0102], [0207], and [0209]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “releasing portion” includes a detachable nose cover made of disposable paper, wood, coal, plastic, etc. (see published application [0065]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “exhaust portion” includes an exhaust fan (see published application [0066]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “scent component trap portion” includes a deodorant or an adsorbent, and may be one in which a gas adsorbing substance such as activated carbon is woven or kneaded or a fiber or a structure body itself has a gas adsorption structure, or a filter structure through which an air flow passes, where the material is activated carbon (palm, fir, bamboo, resin, wood, fiber, coal, etc.), zeolite, a layered compound (sheet silicate, alumina), porous silica (including mesoporous silica), and the like, and the shape/form may be powdery, granular, fibrous, molded, sheet-like (nonwoven fabric or woven fabric), bar-shaped, plate-shaped, or the like (see published application [0067]-[0068]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “perfume retaining members” include perfume cartridges (see published application [0063]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “rectifying mechanism” includes a flap (see published application [0104]). The corresponding structure(s) for the “stirring mechanism” includes a deodorizing fan in the space portion (see published application [0153]).
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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that use the word “means” or “step” but are nonetheless not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph because the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure, materials, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “space portion” in claim 1; “guide portion” in claim 3; “intake portion” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are not being interpreted to cover only the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant intends 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 remove the structure, materials, or acts that performs the claimed function; or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) does/do not recite sufficient structure, materials, or acts to perform the claimed function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Specifically, there is no written description support for a corresponding structure for “scanning portion” within the Specification..
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 9 and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim 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.
In Claim 2, it is not clear what further structural feature is being limited as the limitation is directed to a process step.
In Claim 9, it is not clear what structure corresponds to a “scanning portion”.
In Claim 12, it is not clear what the limitation “during exhaust” is attempting to set forth, whether an exhaust/exhausting operation or use of the “exhaust portion”.
In Claim 13, it is not clear what the limitation “the flowing air flow” in lines 5-6 is attempting to set forth.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3-8, and 10-11 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the primary reason for allowance of the claims is due to inclusion of limitations “a scenting portion”, “a releasing portion”, “an exhaust portion” and “a scent component trap portion” which are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. While prior art such as Brandle (WO2017103246) discloses a scenting device (12) (see Figures 1 and 25-28) comprising a scenting portion (74, 130, 132) that emits a scent-containing air flow containing a scent; a space portion (90) that causes the scent-containing air flow emitted from the scenting portion (74, 130, 132) to pass, remain, or be mixed; a releasing portion (206) that releasees the scent-containing air flow having passed through the space portion (90) to a user; an exhaust portion (22 - 88, 86) that exhausts the scent-containing air flow remaining in the space portion (90) to an outside, Brandle (‘246) does not specifically teach that the exhaust portion is same or equivalent as the disclosed corresponding structure or a scent component trap portion that traps a volatile component in the scent-containing air flow exhausted by the exhaust portion. In addition, while prior art of Manne (20020018181) discloses a scenting device (see Figure 1) comprising a scenting portion (2, 4) that emits a scent-containing air flow containing a scent; a space portion (11) that causes the scent-containing air flow emitted from the scenting portion (2, 4/4a) to pass, remain, or be mixed; a releasing portion (20) that releasees the scent-containing air flow having passed through the space portion (11) to a user; an exhaust portion (18) that exhausts the scent-containing air flow remaining in the space portion (11) to an outside, and a scent component trap portion (38, 124) that traps a volatile component in the scent-containing air flow exhausted by the releasing portion (20c) (see Figures 8-9, p. [0203]), Manne (‘181) does not specifically teach that the exhaust portion is same or equivalent as the disclosed corresponding structure or that the scent component trap portion that traps a volatile component in the scent-containing air flow exhausted by the exhaust portion. Similarly, while prior art of Yu (WO2016086273) discloses a scenting device (see Figures 1-46) comprising a scenting portion (102 – 1603, 105; 300; 3804) that emits a scent-containing air flow containing a scent; a space portion (310) that causes the scent-containing air flow emitted from the scenting portion to pass, remain, or be mixed; a releasing portion (2805; 3802) that releasees the scent-containing air flow having passed through the space portion (310) to a user (see Figures 28 and 38); an exhaust (312) that exhausts the scent-containing air flow remaining in the space portion (310) to an outside (see Figures 3A-3B), and a scent component trap portion (103) that traps a volatile component in the scent-containing air flow exhausted by the exhaust portion (see entire document, particularly [0122], [0127], [0150]), Yu (‘273) does not specifically teach that the exhaust portion is same or equivalent as the disclosed corresponding structure. It would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a scent dispensing device comprised of components in the configuration as set forth in the claims, particularly components being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) and more specifically an exhaust portion in combination with the other components.
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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references relate either to the field of the invention or subject matter of the invention, but are not relied upon in the rejection of record: JP200150888 and EP0722743 (scent supplying system), KR20020027215 (pest control device with a fan and a reservoir), BG64737 (air conditioning device), WO8806057 (air cleaning device), CN1166789 (scent/fragrance dispenser) WO2006058126 (air purification and fragrancing device), CA2212536 (device for providing a plurality of aromas), 8048370 (ozone generator), WO2009064453 (deodorizer using hydrogen peroxide and a catalyst-coated media), KR101982856 (deodorizer for enclosures), 11471551 (deodorizer with intake fan and exhaust fan along with an adsorbent).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINA M YOO whose telephone number is (571)272-6690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 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.
/REGINA M YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights