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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 13 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.
Claim 13 recites:
13. The electronic air cleaner of claim 12, wherein the control housing further comprises at least one connector having an opening formed therein and the at least one brush array further comprises at least one engagement post, the at least one engagement post being receivable within the opening to couple the brush array to the control housing. Emphasis added.
Claim 13 is indefinite because it is unclear if the “at least one connector” and “the at least one engagement post” refer to the “at least one connector” and “at least one engagement post” of claim 1. To overcome this rejection, claim 13 could be amended to read:
13. The electronic air cleaner of claim 12, wherein the has at least one is receivable within the at least one opening to couple the brush array to the control housing.
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.
Claims 1–6, 8, 9, 11, and 14–18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waddell, US 2017/0232131 A1 in view of Correnti, US 5,382,755.
Regarding claim 1, Waddell teaches an air treatment device, which reads on the claimed “electronic air cleaner.” See Waddell [0002].
The air treatment device comprises a power supply that is detachably connected to connectors 18 of flexible ion electrode 10 to supply power to the electrode 10. See Waddell Fig. 4, [0035]. The housing of the power supply reads on the “control housing” and the structure of the power supply that supplies power reads on the “ion generation device.”
The flexible ion electrode 10 comprises an array of emitters 20 with brushes 32 engaged with each emitter 20. See Waddell Fig. 4, [0036], [0052]. The electrode 10 reads on the “brush array” and each emitter 20 with a brush 32 reads on the “brush assembly.”
The limitation requiring that—“the brush array is connectable to the control housing in both a first configuration and a second configuration”—is now addressed with two interpretations of Waddell.
In the first interpretation, it is noted that a first ion electrode 10 can be connected to the power supply and a second ion electrode 10 can optionally be connected to the first ion electrode 10. See Waddell [0051]. The configuration where the first ion electrode 10 is connected to the power supply with the second ion electrode 10 being disconnected from the first ion electrode 10 reads on the “first configuration.” The configuration where the first ion electrode 10 is connected to the power supply with the second ion electrode 10 being connected to the first ion electrode 10 reads on the “second configuration.”
In the second interpretation, it is noted that the ion electrode 10 seen in Fig. 4 is symmetrical. Also, the ion electrode 10 comprises two traces 16, 28 (which are conductive elements that supply power to the emitters 20) with each trace 16, 28 having a series of emitters 20. See Waddell Fig. 4, [0049], [0051]. Each trace 16, 28 also has a connector 18 on either end, with the connectors 18 for engagement with the power supply (in Fig. 4, the left-hand connector 18 for each trace 16, 28 is connected to the power supply). Id. at Fig. 4, [0051]. The configuration seen in Fig. 4 where the first trace 16 is oriented on top and the second trace 28 is oriented on bottom with the left-hand connector 18 for each trace 16, 28 being connected to the power supply reads on the “first configuration.” Also, the ion electrode 10 is capable of being rotated 180° about a longitudinal axis (relative to the orientation of Fig. 4) such that the second trace 28 is on top and the first trace 16 is on bottom, with the left-hand connector 18 for each trace 28, 16 being connected to the power supply, due to the symmetry of the ion electrode 10. This configuration reads on the “second configuration.” Note that the limitation of—“the brush array is connectable to the control housing in both a first configuration and a second configuration”—describes the function of the claimed device. The prior art reads on this functional limitation because its structure allows it to perform the claimed function. See MPEP 2114(IV) (Functional claim language that is not limited to a specific structure covers all devices that are capable of performing the recited function).
PNG
media_image1.png
724
1142
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Waddell differs from claim 1 because it is non-specific about the structure used to secure the connectors 18 of the ion electrode 10 (the “brush array”) to the housing of the power supply (the “control housing”). Therefore, the reference fails to provide enough information to teach that the ion electrode 10 includes a cover operatable to seal the housing of the power supply when connectors 18 of the electrode 10 are connected to the housing of the power supply.
But Correnti teaches a protective cover 15 (the claimed “cover”) for a cover of an electrical outlet 10 (the claimed “control housing”—referenced as the “electrical outlet 10” for convenience). See Correnti Fig. 3, col. 5, ll. 1–11. The cover 15 is “operable to seal” the electrical outlet 10, as claimed, because the covers 15 forms a protective cover over the outlet. Id. The cover 15 comprises second flanges 22 (the “plurality of flanges”) extending perpendicularly from a back surface of the cover 15 (the “first surface”). Id. The electrical outlet 10 is receivable within an area formed between the second flanges 22 such that the second flanges 22 are arranged at an exterior surface of the electrical outlet 22, as claimed, as seen in Fig. 4 where the covers 15 is positioned so that electrical outlet 10 is between the flanges 22 with the flanges 22 on an exterior surface of the outlet 10. This configuration would exist when the outlet 10 has a wire plugged into it (i.e., “coupled to the brush array”), because the cover 15 has an opening 23 through which an electrical cord can pass. Id. at Figs. 3, 4, col. 5, ll. 33–37. The cover 15 also has first flanges 21 (the “at least one engagement post”) extending from the back surface of the cover 15 at a position offset from the area formed between the second flanges 22. Id. at Figs. 3, 4, col. 5, ll. 12–20. The first flanges 21 are removably couplable to cavities 14 (the “at least one connector”) of the outlet 10. Id.
PNG
media_image2.png
755
649
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The cover 15 and outlet 10 are beneficial because it improves the safety of the electrical outlet 10. See Correnti col. 1, l. 62–col. 2, l. 2. It would have been obvious to use the outlet 10 of Correnti as the power supply of Waddell, with the cover 15 being used to cover the connection between the connectors 18 and the power supply to improve the safety of the device. With this modification, the cover 15 (the “cover”) would be operable to seal the outlet 10 (the “control housing”) when the brush array of Waddell is connected to the outlet 10, as claimed, at least because the cover 15 could prevent, for instance water, from entering the outlet 10 due to the solid structure of the cover 15. Note also that the claim is not specific about what the cover seals against. Therefore, the cover 15 completely seals against items that are larger than the opening 23.
Regarding claim 2, Waddell teaches, in the second interpretation, that the ion generation device 10 (the “brush array”) in the “second configuration” is rotated about a longitudinal axis relative to the “first configuration,” as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 3, Waddell teaches, in the second interpretation, that the ion generation device 10 (the “brush array”) in the “second configuration” is rotated 180 degrees about a longitudinal axis relative to the “first configuration,” as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Waddell in view of Correnti teaches that the power supply (the “control housing”) comprises a top socket (in top opening 11 of Correnti) operatively coupled to the top connector 18 of Waddell and a bottom socket (in the bottom opening 11 of Correnti) operably coupled to the bottom connector 18 of Waddell, with the brush array of Waddell comprising a first electrical plug at the top connector 18 and a second electrical plug at the bottom connector 18. See Waddell Fig. 4, [0051]; Correnti Fig. 4, col. 4, ll. 57–68. The top and bottom socket and the top and bottom plugs plugs are identical.
Regarding claim 5, Waddell in view of Correnti teaches that in the “first configuration” seen in Fig. 4, the top electrical plug is received within the top socket and the bottom electrical plug is received within the bottom socket.
Regarding claim 6, Waddell in view of Correnti is capable of functioning such that in the “second configuration” the bottom electrical plug is received within the top socket and the top electrical plug is received within the bottom socket, because the ion electrode 10 is capable of being rotated 180° about a longitudinal axis (relative to the orientation of Fig. 4), as explained in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Waddell in view of Correnti teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Regarding claim 11, Correnti teaches that each of the second flanges 22 is C-shaped, because each second flange has an outline comprising a top horizontal section, a curve, a vertical portion, another curve and a bottom horizontal section, as seen in Fig. 3.
PNG
media_image3.png
790
821
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 14 and 15, Waddell teaches that the ion generation device 10 (the “brush assembly”) comprises a plurality of emitters 20/brushes 32 (“brush assemblies”). See Waddell Figs. 4, 7, [0036], [0052]. Each emitter 20 is an “electrode” because it is configured to emit electrons. Id. at [0018]. Also, Each brush 32 comprises a plurality of bristles 36, and each bristle is an “electrode” because each bristle is made from an electrically conductive material so that it can dispense ions (claim 14). Id. at [0052]. Because each “brush assembly” 20/32 comprises a plurality of bristles 36, each “brush assembly” comprises a plurality of electrodes (claim 15).
Regarding claim 16, Waddell teaches that the Fig. 4 embodiment includes twenty-two emitters 20. This reads on “a total number of electrodes of the plurality of brush assemblies is between four electrodes and twenty electrodes” because four to twenty of the twenty-two emitters is “a total number” of the emitters 20.
In the alternative, it also would have been obvious to reduce the exact number of emitters 20 in the Fig. 4 embodiment to between four and twenty because Waddell suggests that the number of emitters 20 provided on the ion emitting device 10 is variable. See Waddell [0037].
Regarding claim 17, Waddell teaches that the ion generation device 10 (the “brush array”) comprises a “brush arm,” which is the elongated structure of the ion generation device 10, as seen in Fig. 4. The “brush arm” comprises a plurality of openings, which the area in the elongated structure where each emitter 20 (part of the “brush assembly”) is located. See Waddell [0036].
Regarding claim 18, Waddell teaches that the device further comprises a cap 34 mounted to the elongated structure of the ion generation device 10 (the “brush arm”) coaxially with the opening of each emitter 20, where the bristles 36 (part of the “brush assembly”) is receivable within the cap 34 such that the bristles 36 extend beyond the cap 34. See Waddell Fig. 7, [0052]. The cap 34 reads on the “retaining ring.”
Claims 12 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Waddell, US 2017/0232131 A1 in view of Correnti, US 5,382,755 and in further view of Byrne et al., US 2018/0358749 A1.
Regarding claim 12, Waddell as modified teaches the limitations of claim 1, as explained above.
Waddell as modified differs from claim 12 because it is silent as to the electrode 10 (the “brush array”) being connectable to the housing of the power supply (the “control housing”) by a snap fit connection.
But Byrne teaches an electrical connection comprising a female connector part 212 having receptacle openings 216 that receive corresponding prongs 218 of a male connector part 214. See Byrne Figs. 11, 12, [0041], [0043]. The connector also comprises a feedback member 224 drawn to an actuation member 220 to provide a snap engagement therewith. See Byrne Figs. 11, 12, [0043]. The snap connection between the feedback member 224 and actuation member 220 is beneficial because it causes tactile sensation that provides a user with confirmation that connector parts are adequately mated. Id.
It would have been obvious for the connection between the housing of power supply and the ion electrode 10 to comprise the snap connection of Byrne to provide a user with confirmation that connector parts are adequately mated.
Regarding claim 13, Correnti teaches that the cavities 14 (the “at least one connector”) each have an opening, because they are cavities, and the first flanges 21 (the “at least one engagement post”) is receivable in one of the openings. See Correnti Fig. 5, col. 5, ll. 12–20.
Response to Arguments
35 U.S.C. 103 Rejections
Applicant’s arguments with respect to 35 U.S.C. 103 rejections over Waddell, US 2017/0232131 A1 in view of Colson et al., US 2013/0235084 A1 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections are withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of Correnti, US 5,382,755.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Wescott, US 4,211,461 (Fig. 1 shows a cable connector comprising a housing 10 with locking arms 22, 24 that are a plurality of flanges extending perpendicularly from a surface of the housing 10 and with a V-shaped positioning member 26, which is an engagement post extending from the surface of the housing to be removably couplable to a groove on another housing 16).
PNG
media_image4.png
558
706
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Shuey, US 7,708,589 B2 (Fig. 2 shows an electrical connector comprising pockets 29, which are a plurality of flanges extending perpendicularly from a first surface and angled guide walls 30, which are engagement posts).
PNG
media_image5.png
428
587
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Niitsu et al., US 4,370,013 (Fig. 2 shows a female connector housing 1 comprising a pair of hollow portions 4, which are a plurality of flanges extending perpendicularly from a surface of the housing, with a tongue piece 8, which is an engagement post, extending from the surface).
PNG
media_image6.png
540
629
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to T. BENNETT MCKENZIE whose telephone number is (571)270-5327. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 7:30AM-6:00PM.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
T. BENNETT MCKENZIE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1776
/T. BENNETT MCKENZIE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights