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 Office Action is in response to the amendments filed on 03/16/2026, as directed by the Non-Final Rejection on 10/14/2025. Claims 1-13 and 15-16 are canceled. Claim 14 is amended. Claim 14 is the only claim pending in the instant application. The previous rejections under 35 U.S.C 103 are withdrawn as necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 03/16/2026, with respect to claim 14 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C 103 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 14 is 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.
Regarding claim 14, the phrase "such as viruses" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 14 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 14, the closest prior art is Nguyen (U.S 2013/0291877 A1) and Jo (U.S 2014/0076797 A1) and Lagaron Cabello (U.S 2021/0322907 A1) and Zussman (U.S 2023/0041267 A1) and Ramamoorthy (U.S 2023/0330585 A1) and Jones (U.S 2023/0330451 A1) and Chapel (U.S 4,128,407 A) and Conlon (U.S 2016/0015098 A1) and Huang (U.S 2017/0361254 A1) and Yung (U.S 2020/00254371 A1) and Kronzer (U.S 5,307,796 A).
However, none of the prior art teaches or suggest the specific combination of a 20 micrometer coarse fiber layer paired specifically with a 0.2 micrometer fine fiber layer. Prior art such as Chapel generally discloses alternating layers of fine/coarse fiber layers for improved filtration efficiency, but is silent regarding the particular fiber diameter sizes. The other prior art generally discusses fibers of varying sizes in wide ranges, but are not specific to any particular fiber diameter size, and do not have any teaching or suggestion in specifically pairing 0.2 micrometer fine fibers with 20 micrometer coarse fibers. It would not be obvious to arbitrarily select/narrow the range so greatly to pair specifically 20 micrometer coarse fibers with 0.2 micrometer fine fibers in an alternating manner unless through impermissible hindsight reasoning or through arbitrary reconstruction of the device.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 THOMAS WILLIAM GREIG whose telephone number is (571)272-5378. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday: 7:30AM - 5:00PM.
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, Kendra Carter can be reached at 571-272-9034. 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.
/THOMAS W GREIG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/JOSEPH D. BOECKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights