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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 16, 17, and 19 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 recites “comprises electrical switching arranged to switch between…”, it should read “comprises an electrical switch arranged to switch between…” for clarity.
Claim 17 and 19 recite “the electrical switching”, it should read “the electrical switch” for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-7, 9-15, 22-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eromaki (WO2022037757), hereafter Eromaki, in view of Reese (US20140360496), hererafter Reese, further in view of Keene et al. (US20210298391), hereafter Keene.
Regarding Claim 1, Eromaki discloses a head wearable air purifier (Fig. 1), comprising: a filter assembly (Fig. 4, filter elements 103c, 104c); a motor-driven impeller for creating an airflow through the filter assembly to obtain a filtered airflow downstream of the filter assembly (Fig. 4, motor operated fans 103b, 104b); an ear assembly arranged to be worn over an ear of a user (Fig. 4, ear parts 103 and 104); and, a nozzle attached to the ear assembly (Fig. 6, face protection arrangement 101), the nozzle comprising a nozzle inlet arranged to receive the filtered airflow downstream of the filter assembly (See Fig. 6, airflow 600 flows through the filter assembly into the nozzle, a nozzle inlet is defined at where the nozzle is connected to the ear assembly), and a nozzle outlet for emitting the received filtered airflow from the head wearable air purifier (See Fig. 6, center part 101d, airflow 600 is emitted at the center part of nozzle 101).
Eromaki discloses at least one light source for emitting UV light (Fig. 8, UV leds 101d), but is silent on the ear assembly comprising at least one light source for emitting light in a far UVC portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.
However, Reese teaches an air purifier (Fig. 1), comprising of a filter assembly (Fig. 4 filter 32), an impeller fan (Fig. 4, fan 60), and at least one light source for emitting UV light (Fig. 4, UV light source 420). Eromaki already teaches using UV light source to decontaminate air in the nozzle, Reese teaches having a UV light source at the assembly that comprises the impeller fan, therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known air purifier of Eromaki, with the UV light source of Reese, and have the UV light source in the ear assembly, as such modification is merely a rearrangement of parts, see MPEP 2144.04.
The modified Eromaki is still silent on the at least one light source emits light in a far UVC portion of the electromagnetic spectrum.
However, Keene teaches an air purifier (Fig. 1), comprising of at least one light source for emitting light in a far UVC portion of the electromagnetic spectrum (par. 0036, Fig. 1, “Module 110 may have a single or variable power modulator to allow a range of low dosing, for example but not limited to, 0.8-2.0 mJ/cm.sup.2 from the far UV-C light source”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known air purifier of Eromaki, with the air purifier of Keene, and have the UV light source emit lights in a far UVC portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, to prevent harm to human skin and DNA toxicity as taught by Keene (Keene, par. 0017).
The modified Eromaki further discloses wherein the at least one light source is arranged to illuminate at least part of the nozzle for the decontamination thereof (See Eromaki Fig. 8, after the modification, the light will come from the ear assembly to illuminate the hollow interior of the nozzle).
Regarding Claim 2, the modified Eromaki discloses The head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, but is silent on further comprising a light guide arranged to guide light emitted from the at least one light source to illuminate the at least part of the nozzle to be decontaminated.
However, Reese further teaches light guide arranged to guide light emitted from the at least one light source (Fig. 15, par. 0053, light guide 80). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known purifier of Eromaki, with the light guide of Reese, to help span out the light and cover the interior of the air purifier as taught by Reese (Reese, par. 0053).
Regarding Claim 3, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 2, wherein the light guide comprises at least one light pipe to guide light emitted from the at least one light source through the at least one light pipe (Reese, Fig. 15, par. 0053, the light guide transmits the light and therefore comprises a light pipe).
Regarding Claim 4, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 2, wherein at least part of the light guide is disposed in the ear assembly (Reese Fig. 15, the light guide is adjacent to the impeller fan, after the modification, the light guide would be disposed in the ear assembly to be adjacent to the impeller; Eromaki Fig. 4).
Regarding Claim 5, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 2, wherein the light guide is arranged to guide the light emitted from the at least one light source to a connection surface of the ear assembly (See Eromaki Fig. 4, the ear assembly comprises of a pivot frame, the pivot frame comprises of an attachment surface for attaching 101a, after the modification, the light guide guides light to the connection surface), the connection surface of the ear assembly being arranged to face a corresponding connection surface of the nozzle (Eromaki Fig. 4, the nozzle comprises of a corresponding connection surface defined by 101a, pg. 9 line 1-9).
Regarding Claim 6, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 5, wherein the light guide is narrower at an end adjacent to the at least one light source than at an opposite end adjacent to the connection surface of the ear assembly (Reese Fig. 15, the light guide is narrower adjacent to the light source and becomes wider to conform to the shape of the panel, after the modification the light guide will be narrower at the end adjacent to the light source to conform to the shape of the connection surface, MPEP 2144.04, such modification is change in shape).
Regarding Claim 7, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 5, but is silent on wherein the connection surface of the ear assembly is formed from a material that allows the emitted light to pass therethrough.
However, Keene further teaches a face shield (Fig. 1, face shield 400), formed from a material that allows the emitted light to pass therethrough (par. 0040, “Face shield 400 is formed of a transparent plastic or other transparent material, and includes a battery powered module 412 similar to module 110 discussed above, powering one or more far UV-C light sources directed into the interior, and optionally onto the exterior of the face shield”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known air purifier of Eromaki, with the face shield of Keene, and use a material that allows the emitted light to pass for the connection surface, to illuminate the UV-C light in the nozzle. Furthermore, the courts have held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a material that allows the emitted light to pass for the connection surface as taught by Keene.
Regarding Claim 9, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claims 5, wherein the ear assembly comprises an attachment portion that comprises the connection surface and is for attaching the ear assembly to the nozzle (Eromaki, Fig. 4, pivot frame), the attachment portion being arranged to receive the filtered airflow downstream of the filter assembly and to provide the received filtered airflow to the nozzle (Eromaki Fig. 6, the arrow indicates the direction of airflow, air flows through the filter then to the nozzle through the attachment portion), wherein the at least one light source is disposed adjacent to the attachment portion (Reese teaches the light source being adjacent to the impeller fan, the impeller fan is adjacent to the attachment portion as shown in Fig. 4 of Enomaki).
Regarding Claim 10, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 9, wherein the at least one light source is attached to the attachment portion (Eromaki Fig. 4, after the modification, the light source will be attached to the attachment portion).
Regarding Claim 11, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 2, wherein at least part of the light guide is disposed in the nozzle (Reese Fig. 15 shows the light guide extending out from the light source to direct the UV light, therefore, after the modification, the light guide will extend out from the ear assembly into the nozzle to direct the UV light).
Regarding Claim 12, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 2, wherein the light guide comprises one or more shaped features, for reflecting the emitted light, on an internal surface of the head wearable air purifier (Reese Fig. 15, Eromaki Fig. 8, the shape of the light guide reflects the emitted light on an internal surface).
Regarding Claim 13, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, wherein the nozzle is arranged to receive light from the at least one light source in the ear assembly into an internal part of the nozzle (See Eromaki Fig. 8, the UV light is illuminated in the internal part of the nozzle).
Regarding Claim 14, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 13, wherein the nozzle comprises an attachment portion that comprises the nozzle inlet and is for attaching the nozzle to the ear assembly (Eromaki, Fig. 4, ends 101a, 101b), and a visor portion comprising the nozzle outlet (Eromaki, Fig. 4, 8, central portion 101d comprises the nozzle outlet), and wherein the light from the at least one light source in the ear assembly is received into a space defined between the attachment and visor portions of the nozzle (Eromaki Fig. 8, the light is emitted along the space between the attachment and visor portion).
Regarding Claim 15, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 13, wherein light from the at least one light source in the ear assembly irradiates an internal surface of the nozzle (Eromaki Fig, 8, internal surface of 101, the light irradiates the internal surface of the nozzle).
Regarding Claim 20, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, wherein the nozzle is generally arcuate in shape (Eromaki, Fig. 1, the nozzle is arcuate).
Regarding Claim 22, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, wherein the at least one light source comprises one or more LEDs (Eromaki, pg. 12 line 15, “In particular, a set of ultraviolet light emitting diodes 101e…”).
Regarding Claim 23, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, but does not specifically disclose wherein the at least one light source is configured for emitting light having a wavelength of about 222 nm.
However, Reese teaches the at least one light source is configured for emitting light having a wavelength of 207-222 nm (Reese par. 0015, “manufactured or attenuated to emit wavelengths in the far UV-C range (currently defined as 207-222 nm)”; ). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the wavelength to about 222 nm as applicant appears to have placed no criticality on the claimed range (applicant’s specification, pg. 5 line 7-8, “The at least one light source may be configured for emitting light with a wavelength of about 222 nm”) and since it has been held that “[i]n the case where the claimed ranges ‘overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art' a prima facie case of obviousness exists”. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Regarding Claim 24, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, wherein: the ear assembly comprises a first ear assembly arranged to be worn over a first ear of the user (Eromaki Fig. 2, ear part 103); and the head wearable air purifier comprises a second ear assembly arranged to be worn over a second ear of a user (Eromaki Fig. 2, ear part 104), the second ear assembly comprising at least one second light source for emitting light in a far UVC portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the at least one second light source being arranged to illuminate at least part of the nozzle for the decontamination thereof (Eromaki Fig. 8, see rejection for Claim 1, after the modification, the light source would be adjacent to the impeller, Eromaki Fig. 4 shows an impeller disposed in each of the ear assemblies 103 and 104, therefore, there is a second light source adjacent to the second ear assembly).
Regarding Claim 25, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 23, wherein the nozzle output is arranged, in use, adjacent to a user's mouth (Eromaki Fig. 1b, the nozzle output is adjacent to a user’s mouth as shown in the figure).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eromaki, in view of Reese, in view of Keene, further in view of Vanderwoude (WO2014160149), hereafter Vanderwoude.
Regarding Claim 8, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 5, but is silent on wherein the connection surface of the ear assembly is formed from a plastics material, wherein the connection surface is formed from one or more of acrylic, polycarbonate, polypropylene or comprises the use of polylactic acid.
However, Vanderwoude teaches a wearable air purifier (Fig. 15), comprising of a light source emitting UV light (Fig. 17 and 18, UVLEDS 870), and a connecting surface (Fig. 19, an outer ultraviolet (UV) passing lens 710, par. 0116, the lens allows the UV light to pass through), wherein the connection surface is formed from a plastics material, wherein the connection surface is formed from one or more of acrylic, polycarbonate, polypropylene or comprises the use of polylactic acid (par. 0116, Fig. 19, “UV transmission lens 710 is molded or formed from a transparent plastic such as polycarbonate, acrylic or polyethylene terephthalate (PET)”). The courts have held that the selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the know air purifier of Eromaki, and use plastic material formed from acrylic for the connecting surface for the UV light to pass through as taught by Vanderwoude.
Claim(s) 16-19, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eromaki, in view of Reese, in view of Keene, further in view of Moone (WO2020120930), hereafter Moone.
Regarding Claim 16, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, but is silent on wherein the head wearable air purifier comprises electrical switching arranged to switch between a closed state, in which the at least one light source is activated to emit light, and an open state, in which the at least one light source is deactivated and does not emit light.
However, Moone teaches a wearable air purifier (Fig. 1a), comprising of a filter assembly (Fig. 4, filter 1107), an ear assembly (Fig. 1a, speaker assembly 1100) an air flow module comprising of an impeller (Fig. 4, air flow generator 1109), a nozzle attached to the ear assembly (Fig. 1a, nozzle 1300), and electrical switching arranged to switch between a closed state (Fig. 1a), in which the air flow module is activated, and an open state (Fig. 1c), in which the air flow module is deactivated (pg. 13 line 5-17, “…The purifier 1000 is therefore also provided with a sensor (not shown) that detects when the rigid outlet duct 1 1 15 of one or both of the first speaker assembly 1 100a and the second speaker assembly 1 100b is not aligned with the corresponding air outlet 1 104 and automatically turns off the motor 1110”). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the known air purifier of Eromaki, with the electrical switch of Moone, to switch between an open and closed state to control the activation of the light source only when the nozzle is aligned with the airflow channel from the ear assembly as taught by Moone (Moone, pg. 13 line 5-17).
Regarding Claim 17, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 16, wherein the electrical switching means is arranged to automatically switch from the open state to the closed state upon the nozzle being attached to the ear assembly (Moone, pg. 13 line 5-17, the sensor detects if the nozzle is aligned with the ear assembly, therefore, the modified prior art automatically switch from the open state to the closed state upon the nozzle being attached).
Regarding Claim 18, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 16, wherein in the closed state a motor of the air purifier is powered to drive the impeller to create the airflow through the filter assembly, and in the open state the motor does not drive the impeller (Moone, pg. 13 line 5-17, “In the first end position the rigid outlet duct 1 1 15 is generally aligned with the air outlet 1 104 of the speaker assembly 1 100… The purifier 1000 is therefore also provided with a sensor (not shown) that detects when the rigid outlet duct 1 1 15 of one or both of the first speaker assembly 1 100a and the second speaker assembly 1 100b is not aligned with the corresponding air outlet 1 104 and automatically turns off the motor 1 1 10.”).
Regarding Claim 19, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 16, wherein the nozzle is rotatable relative to the ear assembly when the nozzle is attached to the ear assembly (Eromaki, Fig. 1a and 1c; Moone, Fig. 1a and 1c), and wherein the electrical switching means is arranged to automatically switch from the open state to the closed state upon the nozzle being moved from a first position to a second position, different from the first position, relative to the ear assembly (Eromaki Fig. 1a and Moone Fig. 1b shows a first position where the nozzle is open, Eromaki Fig. 1b and Moone Fig. 1a shows a second position where the nozzle is closed; Moone, pg. 13 line 5-17, in the first position, the nozzle is not aligned with the ear assembly, in the second position, the nozzle is aligned with the ear assembly, the sensor detects the alignment and therefore automatically switch from the open state to the closed state).
Regarding Claim 21, the modified Eromaki discloses the head wearable air purifier according to Claim 1, wherein the filter assembly and the motor-driven impeller comprise part of the ear assembly (Eromaki Fig. 4), but is silent on wherein the filter assembly and the motor-driven impeller are generally conical or frustoconical in shape.
However, Moone further teaches wherein the filter assembly and the motor-driven impeller are generally conical or frustoconical in shape (pg. 8 line 20-22, “The impeller is a mixed flow impeller that has a generally conical or frusto-conical shape, and both the impeller and the motor are disposed within an impeller casing that is generally frusto-conical in shape.”; Fig. 4, Fig. 10a). Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skilled in the art to further modify the known air purifier of Eromaki, with the purifier of Moone, and have the filter assembly and impeller in frustoconical shape to have a raised central portion to prevent obstruction of the airflow as taught by Moone (Moone, pg. 23 line 18-22). Furthermore, the shape of the filter assembly and the impeller is considered as a design choice, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious as there is a lack of evidence that the claimed shape is significant, See In re Dailey, 357 F.2d 669, 149 USPQ 47 (CCPA 1966).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US20210316026 discloses a light guide for an UV light device;
US20220040361 discloses a UV light curtain device comprising of a light guide.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRIS HANYU GONG whose telephone number is (703)756-5898. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-4:30.
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, Brandy Lee can be reached at 571-270-7410. 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.
/KRIS HANYU GONG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights