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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “second filtering device” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “1” has been used to designate both a ‘first filtering device’ and a ‘second filtering device’. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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) 1-9, 12, and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1433514 (hereinafter EP ‘514) in view of Kim (US 20200003440).
The abstract, and annotated figs. 4-5 of EP ‘514 discloses an air filtering device comprising structures analogous to those recited in claims 1-9, 12, and 17-18. Note that quick lock connection is in fig. 2 (no number); door shows in figs. 1-7.
PNG
media_image1.png
372
328
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
304
603
media_image2.png
Greyscale
As regarding claim 1, EP ‘514 EP ‘514 discloses the claimed invention except for at least one control unit and/or at least one sensor arrangement suitable to interconnect to a control unit of a corresponding other air filtering device arranged in the same volume of air to exchange information on the state of operation. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide at least one control unit and/or at least one sensor arrangement suitable to interconnect to a control unit of a corresponding other air filtering device arranged in the same volume of air to exchange information on the state of operation in order to enhance air filtering device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Kim (US 20200003440; [0102]-[0114] and [0116] – filter 120, sensor 710, controller 700 – “…communicator 730 for communicating with an external apparatus, a memory 720 for storing various kind of information … for filter replacement time determination…”).
Claim 14 is likewise rejected for reasons analogous to those set forth for claim 1 above.
As regarding claim 15, EP ‘514 as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. EP ‘514 as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the sensor arrangement comprises at least one physical sensor, in form of at least one out of the group of the following sensors or a combination thereof: pressure sensor, temperature sensor, humidity sensor, power sensor, dust sensor, speed sensor (Kim – [0116]).
As regarding claim 16, EP ‘514 as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. EP ‘514 as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the sensor arrangement is based on at least one calculated sensor value (Kim – [0116]).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1433514 (hereinafter EP ‘514) in view of Kim (US 20200003440), as applied supra, and further in view of Fischer (US 2339629).
As regarding claim 10, EP ‘514 discloses all of limitations as set forth above. EP ‘514 discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the at least one air vent comprises an air outlet opening with at least one first air deflector and at least one second air deflector which are arranged essentially perpendicular to each other. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the at least one air vent comprises an air outlet opening with at least one first air deflector and at least one second air deflector which are arranged essentially perpendicular to each other in order to enhance air filtering device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Fischer (11 and 17 of figs. 2-3).
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1433514 (hereinafter EP ‘514) in view of Kim (US 20200003440) and Fischer (US 2339629), as applied supra, and further in view of Himeno et al (US 4738116; hereinafter Himeno).
As regarding claim 11, EP ‘514 as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. EP ‘514 as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the at least one first and/or the at least one second air deflector are arranged adjustable by a motor. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the at least one first and/or the at least one second air deflector are arranged adjustable by a motor in order to enhance air filtering device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Himeno (claim 14).
Claim(s) 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1433514 (hereinafter EP ‘514) in view of Jeon et al (US 20200298160; hereinafter Jeon).
EP ‘514 discloses the claimed invention for a filtering device is configured to clean air in a closed volume of air, the air filtering device comprises in a direction of an air flow: a. at least one air filter unit comprising an air filter arranged in a box- shaped housing; b. an air moving unit interconnected to and arranged downstream with respect to the air filter unit comprising i. a box-shaped housing with an air inlet opening configured to receive filtered air from the closed volume of air through the air filter unit and with respect to the box- shaped housing opposite an air outlet opening comprising a constriction having a smaller diameter than the diameter of the air inlet opening; ii. a fan interconnected to the air outlet opening configured to draw in the filtered air from the air filter unit into the box-shaped housing through the air inlet opening and to push the filtered air into an air distribution unit; the air distribution unit comprising a box-shaped housing interconnected to the fan and having at least one air vent to distribute the filtered air into the closed volume of air, wherein said air filtering device are arranged in the a same volume of air in a room or a hall of a building and are in communication to each other with respect to exchange of information (annotated figs. 4-5 above).
EP ‘514 does not disclose a cluster of air filtering devices comprising at least one first air filtering device and at least one second air filtering device; wherein the first air filtering device interacts with the second air filtering device in that they exchange information received from at least one sensor arrangement arranged in or interconnected to the second air filtering device and the information exchanged between the first air filtering device and the second air filtering device is exchanged directly and/or via a proxy and compared to a corresponding value in the second air filtering device and the operation state of the at least two clustered air filtering devices is adjusted with respect to the exchanged values.
Jeon teaches a cluster of air filtering devices comprising at least one first air filtering device and at least one second air filtering device (fig. 2); wherein the first air filtering device interacts with the second air filtering device in that they exchange information received from at least one sensor arrangement ([0038], [0135]) arranged in or interconnected to the second air filtering device and the information exchanged between the first air filtering device and the second air filtering device is exchanged directly and/or via a proxy and compared to a corresponding value in the second air filtering device and the operation state of the at least two clustered air filtering devices is adjusted with respect to the exchanged values ([0133]-[0134] and [0136]-[0138]).
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over EP 1433514 (hereinafter EP ‘514) in view of Jeon et al (US 20200298160; hereinafter Jeon), as applied supra, and further in view of Paiho et al (US 20230356135; hereinafter Paiho).
As regarding claim 22, EP ‘514 as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. EP ‘514 as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the at least one first air filtering device and at least one second air filtering device are arranged hanging from a ceiling of the room or hall of the building. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the at least one first air filtering device and at least one second air filtering device are arranged hanging from a ceiling of the room or hall of the building in order to provide cooling/cleaned air from ceiling, since it was known in the art as shown in Paiho ([0068]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/03/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The rejection does not rely on EP ’514 alone to teach interconnection and exchange of operational information between multiple air filtering devices. EP ’514 is relied upon for the structural features of the air filtering device, while Kim is relied upon for networked communication and exchange of operational information among multiple air purifiers.
Kim expressly discloses multiple air purifiers (1000a, 1000b, 1000c) communicating over network 2000 and exchanging operational information, including pollution levels, operating time, and power consumption data (Kim - [0102]-[0105]). Such information reasonably constitutes “information on the state of operation” as recited in the claims.
Applicant argues that Kim only discloses communication through external servers rather than direct communication between air filtering devices. However, the claims do not require exclusive peer-to-peer communication without intermediary components. Communication through a shared network and server still constitutes devices being “in communication to each other with respect to exchange of information.” Kim therefore teaches or at least suggests the claimed communication arrangement.
Applicant’s arguments regarding local clogging, identifying the “most influenced” device, temporary fan-power redistribution, and redirected airflow are also not persuasive because such limitations are not recited in the pending claims. Limitations not appearing in the claims cannot be relied upon for patentability. See In re Self, 671 F.2d 1344, 1348 (CCPA 1982).
Further, Kim does not teach away from the claimed invention. Kim affirmatively teaches interconnected air purifiers exchanging operational information. The use of external servers merely represents one known communication architecture and would not discourage a person of ordinary skill in the art from implementing direct or localized communication between devices.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to modify the air filtering device of EP ’514 with the networked communication and operational information exchange features taught by Kim to improve coordinated monitoring and operation among multiple air filtering devices in the same environment. Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
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 DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights