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
Claims 8 and 11-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 8, it is suggested that "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" be amended to read "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
In claim 11, it is suggested that "and determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal " be amended to read "and determining the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
In claim 12, it is suggested that "determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" be amended to read "determining the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
In claim 13, it is suggested that "the determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" be amended to read "the determining the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
In claim 14, it is suggested that "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" be amended to read "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
In claim 15, it is suggested that "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" be amended to read "configured to determine the dose of the aerosol from the detection signal" for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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:
"extinction structure…configured to eliminate the received emitting light" of claim 1: interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0071]: multiple reflection structure, conical structure, or the like
"light emitting module…configured to provide an emitting light into a flow channel" of claim 1, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0068]: laser, light emitting diode, or the like
"a photosensitive module…configured to receive the scattering light and output a detection signal based on an output end" of claim 1, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0030]: a photoelectric sensor or a solar battery and paragraph [0068]: photosensitive transistor (such as a photo diode, a photosensitive transistor, and the like), a solar battery, and the like
“a heating component configured to heat the aerosol-generating substrate” of claim 8, (since the Specification does not provide any specific types of heating components used, the limitation is interpreted as any well known heating mechanism in the art, such as a heating element, heater, heater plate, etc.)
"an inhalation detection module…configured to detect a duration of each inhalation action" of claim 10 and claim 13, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to detecting a duration of each inhalation action.
"a light emitting control module configured to control, during a process of generating the aerosol by the aerosol-generating device, the light emitting module" of claim 14, paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to control of the light emitting module
"a first detection signal obtaining module configured to obtain the detection signal output by the photosensitive module" of claim 14, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to obtaining the detection signal output by the photosensitive module
"a first dose determining module configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal" of claim 14, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to determining the dose of the aerosol
"a heating control module configured to control the vaporizer to heat the aerosol-generating substrate to generate the aerosol" of claim 15 , interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to controlling the vaporizer to heat the aerosol generating substrate
"a second detection signal obtaining module configured to obtain the detection signal during a process of generating the aerosol" of claim 15, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to obtaining the detection signal
“a second dose determining module configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal”, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to determining the dose of the aerosol
"a stop heating control module configured to control the vaporizer to stop heating" of claim 15, interpreted in accordance with paragraph [0113]: software, hardware, or a combination thereof… built in or independent of a processor of an electronic device in a hardware form, or may be stored in a memory of the electronic device in a software form, so that the processor invokes and performs an operation corresponding to controlling the vaporizer to stop heating
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.
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.
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 1-17 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1, line 1 recites "An aerosol dose testing device, applied to an aerosol-generating device, comprising:". It is unclear if "applied to an aerosol generating device" is an intended use limitation or if it means the dose testing device is physically applied to aerosol generating device, thus positively claiming the aerosol generating device as part of the claimed structure. Examiner suggests amending the language to read "An aerosol dose testing device, for use with an aerosol generating device, comprising:" or "An a dose testing device; " to clarify.
Claim 11, line 1 recites: "A method for testing a dose of an aerosol, applied to the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1". The term "applied to" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1 is being positively claimed. Examiner suggests amending the language to read "A method for testing a dose of an aerosol, using the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1" to clarify.
Claim 12, line 1 recites: "A heating control method of an aerosol-generating device, applied to the aerosol-generating device of claim 7,". The term "applied to" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the aerosol generating device of claim 7 is being positively claimed. Examiner suggests amending the language to read "A method for controlling heating of
Claim 14, line 1 recites: "An apparatus for testing a dose of an aerosol, applied to the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, comprising". The term "applied to" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1 is being positively claimed as part of the claimed structure or if it is an intended use limitation. Examiner suggests amending the language to read "An apparatus for testing a dose of an aerosol, the apparatus comprising: the dose testing device of claim 1; " to clarify.
Claim 15 recites "a second detection signal obtaining module" and "a second dose determining module", yet a first detection signal obtaining module and a first dose determining module have not been claimed in the instant or parent claims. Thus, it is not clear if the scope encompasses one detection signal obtaining module and one dose determining module or if two detection signal obtaining modules and two dose determining modules are required. For purposes of examination, the scope has been interpreted to read on just one of each module.
Claim 17 recites "wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, facilitates the method of claim 11". The term "facilitates" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if the instructions, when executed, actually perform the method of claim 11 or if it simply makes the method of claim 11 easier. Examiner suggests using more precise language such as "wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, cause a processor to perform the method of claim 11".
Claims 2-9, 13, and 16 are rejected based solely on their dependency to rejected claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 5-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Freeman et al. (US 2019/0335817).
As to claim 1, Freeman discloses an aerosol dose testing device (Fig. 1A-1C), applied to an aerosol-generating device (inhalation device 100, e.g., a vaporizer, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0032]), comprising:
a flow channel structure (channel 106) configured to flow an aerosol (Fig. 1A-1C, paragraph [0032]);
a light emitting module (signal emitter 110, Fig. 1A-1C, paragraph [0036]: signal emitter can be any suitable device that produces light, such as an LED), arranged on an inner wall of the flow channel structure 106 and configured to provide an emitting light into a flow channel 106 (see Fig. 1A-1C, paragraphs [0036]-[0037]); and
a photosensitive module 108 (Fig. 1A, paragraph [0036]: sensor 108 can be any suitable sensor that senses light including photosensor, photodetector, etc.), arranged on the inner wall of the flow channel structure 106 corresponding to a projection path of a scattering light, and configured to receive the scattering light and output a detection signal based on an output end (see Fig. 1A-1C, paragraphs [0033],[0036]-[0038]),
wherein the scattering light comprises a light formed by scattering the emitting light onto the aerosol in the flow channel structure 106, and the detection signal is used for determining a dose of the aerosol (paragraphs [0033],[0036]-[0038]).
As to claim 5, Freeman discloses the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, wherein the photosensitive module 108 comprises at least one of a photoelectric sensor or a solar battery (paragraph [0036]: sensor 108 can be a solar cell).
As to claim 6, Freeman discloses the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, wherein the light emitting module comprises at least one of a laser or a light emitting diode (paragraph [0036]: signal emitter 110 can be an LED).
As to claim 7, Freeman discloses an aerosol-generating device 400 (Fig. 4, paragraph [0050]), comprising: a vaporizer 400, provided with a flow channel structure 417 configured to flow an aerosol and heat an aerosol-generating substrate (liquid on wick 413) to generate the aerosol (via heating element 412, paragraph [0050]); and the aerosol dose testing device (sensor 416 and emitter 418, Fig. 4) of claim 1 (paragraph [0051]).
As to claim 8, Freeman discloses the aerosol-generating device of claim 7, wherein the vaporizer 400 comprises: a heating component (heating element 412, Fig. 4) configured to heat the aerosol-generating substrate (liquid on wick 413); and a controller (processor 404) connected to the heating component 412, the light emitting module 318, and the photosensitive module 316 (Fig. 3, paragraph [0050]-[0051]), the controller 404 being configured to control the heating component 412 to perform heating (paragraph [0054]: processor 404 can adjust the intensity of the heating element 412), and configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal (paragraph [0047]-[0048]: processor 404 uses data from sensor 416 to calculate when a particular amount of the vaporized substance has been produced).
As to claim 9, Freeman discloses the aerosol-generating device of claim 8, wherein the controller (processor 404, Fig. 4) is configured to control the heating component (heating element 412, Fig. 4) to stop heating when the determined dose of the aerosol reaches a preset upper limit value (paragraph [0063]: system could be set to stop dispensing the drug once a certain dose is reached).
As to claim 10, Freeman discloses the aerosol-generating device of claim 9, further comprising: an inhalation detection module (sensor 422, Fig. 4, paragraph [0052]: can be any type of airflow sensor) arranged at a vapor outlet 408 of the flow channel structure 417 and configured to detect a duration of each inhalation action, wherein the controller 404 is connected to the inhalation detection module and configured to calculate a dose of an inhaled aerosol of a duration of each inhalation action and the detection signal obtained within the duration (paragraph [0048]), and configured to control the heating component 412 to stop heating when the dose of the inhaled aerosol reaches the preset upper limit value (paragraph [0063]: system could be set to stop dispensing the drug once a certain dose is reached).
As to claim 11, Freeman discloses a method for testing a dose of an aerosol, applied to the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, comprising: controlling, during a process of generating the aerosol by the aerosol-generating device, the light emitting module 318 to provide the emitting light into the flow channel 317 (paragraph [0046]); obtaining the detection signal output by the photosensitive module 316; and determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal (paragraph [0047]-[0048]).
As to claim 12, Freeman discloses a heating control method of an aerosol-generating device, applied to the aerosol-generating device of claim 7, comprising: controlling the vaporizer to heat the aerosol-generating substrate to generate the aerosol; obtaining the detection signal during a process of generating the aerosol; determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal; and controlling the vaporizer to stop heating when the determined dose of the aerosol reaches a preset upper limit value (paragraph [0047]-[0048]).
As to claim 13, Freeman discloses the heating control method of claim 12, further comprising: obtaining a duration of each inhalation action detected by an inhalation detection module (airflow sensor 422, Fig. 4), the inhalation detection module 422 being arranged at a vapor outlet 408 of the flow channel structure 417 (Fig. 4, paragraph [0052]), wherein the determining the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal comprises: calculating a dose of an inhaled aerosol of the duration of each inhalation action and the detection signal obtained within the duration (paragraph [0048]).
As to claim 14, Freeman discloses an apparatus (Fig. 4) for testing a dose of an aerosol, applied to the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, comprising: a light emitting control module configured to control, during a process of generating the aerosol by the aerosol-generating device, the light emitting module 318 to provide the emitting light into the flow channel 317 (paragraph [0046]); a first detection signal obtaining module configured to obtain the detection signal output by the photosensitive module 316; and a first dose determining module configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal (paragraph [0047]-[0048]: the modules being programmed functions of the processor 304).
As to claim 15, Freeman discloses a heating control apparatus of an aerosol-generating device, applied to the aerosol-generating device of claim 7, comprising: a heating control module configured to control the vaporizer 400 to heat the aerosol-generating substrate 413 to generate the aerosol (paragraph [0053]: processor 404 adjusts the heating intensity of the heating element by adjusting the voltage of the heating element); a second detection signal obtaining module configured to obtain the detection signal during a process of generating the aerosol; a second dose determining module configured to determine the dose of the aerosol of the detection signal (processor304/404 uses data from the sensor 316/416 to calculate when a particular amount of the vaporized substance has been produced); and a stop heating control module configured to control the vaporizer to stop heating when the determined dose of the aerosol reaches a preset upper limit value (paragraph [0043]: a session can be vapor-based, where the inhalation device 200 keeps a session open until a certain quantity of vapor is produced).
As to claim 16, Freeman discloses an electronic device (Fig. 3), comprising: a memory (see Freeman’s claim 1); and a processor 304 (Fig. 3), wherein the memory stores a computer program (memory configured to store one or more instructions, Freeman’s claim 1), and wherein the processor 304, when executing the computer program, implements the method of claim 11 (Fig. 3, paragraph [0046]-[0048], Freeman’s claim 1).
As to claim 17, Freeman discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable storage mediums having processor-executable instructions stored thereon, wherein the processor-executable instructions, when executed, facilitates the method of claim 11 (see Freeman’s claim 16, Fig. 3, paragraph [0046]-[0048]).
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 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.
Claims 1, 2, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Altobelli et al. (US 2005/0068528) in view of Freeman et al. (US 2019/0335817).
As to claim 1, Altobelli discloses an aerosol dose testing device (Fig. 3), applied to an aerosol-generating device (atomizer 305), comprising:
a flow channel structure configured to flow an aerosol (aerosol flow path 306, Fig. 3, paragraph [0039]);
a light emitting module (light source 307, Fig. 3), arranged on the flow channel structure 306 and configured to provide an emitting light into a flow channel 306 (paragraph [0040]); and
a photosensitive module (detector 308, Fig. 3), arranged on the flow channel structure 306 corresponding to a projection path of a scattering light, and configured to receive the scattering light and output a detection signal based on an output end (Fig. 3, Fig. 2A, paragraph [0040],[0043])
wherein the scattering light comprises a light formed by scattering the emitting light onto the aerosol in the flow channel structure, and the detection signal is used for determining a dose of the aerosol (paragraph [0047]: processor calculates the amount of aerosol that traverses the flow path).
Altobelli does not expressly disclose that the light emitting module and photosensitive module (light source 307 and detector 308) are arranged on the inner wall of the flow channel. However, Freeman teaches an aerosol generating device (inhalation device 100, Fig. 1A) having a light source (signal emitter 110, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0036]: signal emitter can be any suitable device that produces light, such as an LED) and a detector (sensor 108, Fig. 1A, paragraph [0036]: sensor 108 can be any suitable sensor that senses light including photosensor, photodetector, etc.), both of which are arranged on an inner wall of the flow channel (see Fig. 1, paragraph [0032]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device of Altobelli so that the light source and detector are arranged on an inner wall of the flow channel, as taught by Freeman, in order to provide a suitable alternative location which ensures a direct reading without interference of the channel walls.
As to claim 2, modified Altobelli discloses the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, further comprising: an extinction structure (beam dump 204a, Fig. 2A of Altobelli), arranged on a wall of the flow channel structure corresponding to a projection direction of the emitting light and configured to eliminate the received emitting light (beam dump 204a absorbs or contains light from the light beam emitted by light source 201a that is not scattered by the aerosol; alternatively, beam dump 204a can be a hole allowing the light to exit the system, Fig. 2a, paragraph [0038]).
As to claim 6, modified Altobelli discloses an aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, wherein the light emitting module comprises at least one of a laser or a light emitting diode (Altobelli, paragraph [0025]).
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Freeman et al. (US 2019/0335817), in view of Jiang (US 2022/0280732).
As to claim 3, Freeman discloses the aerosol dose testing device of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose an amplification circuit, wherein an input end of the amplification circuit is connected to the output end of the photosensitive module. However, Jiang teaches an aerosol dose testing device (aerosol particle sensor 60 (Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) having a photosensitive module (photodetector 606) connected to an amplification circuit (paragraph [0056]: an analog electrical signal is generated which is proportional to the intensity of the scattered light. The analog electrical signal can be amplified, filtered, and then converted into a digital signal using analog-to-digital conversion (ADC)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the aerosol dose testing device of Freeman to include an amplification circuit connected to the output end of the photosensitive module, as taught by Jiang, in order to condition the signal for being read by the processor.
As to claim 4, modified Freeman discloses the aerosol dose testing device of claim 3, but does not expressly disclose a filter circuit, wherein an input end of the filter circuit is connected to the photosensitive module, and wherein an output end of the filter circuit is connected to the input end of the amplification circuit. However, Jiang teaches an aerosol dose testing device (aerosol particle sensor 60 (Fig. 5A, Fig. 5B) having a photosensitive module (photodetector 606) connected to a filter circuit (paragraph [0056]: an analog electrical signal is generated which is proportional to the intensity of the scattered light. The analog electrical signal can be amplified, filtered, and then converted into a digital signal using analog-to-digital conversion (ADC)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the aerosol dose testing device of Freeman to include a filter circuit connected to the output end of the photosensitive module, as taught by Jiang, in order to condition the signal for being read by the processor.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hohlfeld et al. (US 2022/0316927) discloses a sensor module including a light source and light detecting element for determining an aerosol dose rate.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VALERIE L WOODWARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1479. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:30 am - 4:30 pm.
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 on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VALERIE L WOODWARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785