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
This final action is in response to the amendment/arguments filed on 03/23/2026. The same grounds of rejections are maintained in this final as in the nonfinal action dated 11/21/2025
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5, 10-11 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piontek (US 7,905,728 B2) in view of Vellinger et al. (US 2002/0118594 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 17; Piontek discloses an apparatus (Fig.1 and col.1, lines 5-8) that is capable of generating and distributing a gaseous cleaning agent (Piontek is capable of generating and distributing chlorine dioxide gas), the apparatus comprising:
a container (Fig.1:15) having an interior volume (unlabeled interior volume of liquid container 15 as shown in Fig.1) that is capable of being configured to contain water and a formulation that produces the gaseous cleaning agent when in contact with the water;
a magnetic stir bar (Fig.1:30) configured to be placed in the container;
a base (Fig.1:20) coupled to an end of the container (Fig.1:15); and
a magnetic field (col.5, lines 28-39) in the base of the apparatus, configured to be brought into rotation and to couple magnetically with the magnetic impeller (col.5, lines 8-14), thereby bringing the magnetic impeller into rotation;
wherein, during operation of the apparatus, controlled rotation (col.5, lines 28-39) of the magnetic impeller in the container containing the water and the formulation forms a vortex (Fig.1:40) in the container that is capable of accelerating the release of the gaseous cleaning agent and emission of an airborne spray comprising water and the gaseous cleaning agent from the container;
a magnetic stir bar (Fig.1:30) located in the container;
a base (Fig.1:20) coupled to a bottom end of the container (Fig.1:15), the base having a base interior isolated (Fig.4:20 and 15) from fluid communication with the interior of the container;
a motor (Fig.2:67) housed within the base interior (Fig.2:20); and
a magnet (Fig.2:62) housed in the base interior, the magnet rotationally coupled to the motor (col.5, lines 8-14), the magnet having a magnetic field (col.5, lines 28-39) configured to cause the magnetic stir bar to rotate when the magnet is rotated by the motor;
wherein, when the magnetic stir bar is rotated (Fig.4:30 and 40), and the container is capable of containing water and a formulation, the water forms a vortex (Fig.1:40) in the container;
a container (Fig.1:15) resistant (glass and hard plastic in col.3, lines 43-45 are considered resistant to ClO2 corrosion) to chlorine dioxide corrosion having an (unlabeled interior of liquid container 15 as shown in Fig.1) interior that is capable of being configured to contain water and a formulation, the formulation producing gaseous chlorine dioxide when in contact with water;
a magnetic stir bar (Fig.1:30) located in the container; the magnetic stir bar coated (plastic caps 32 in Fig.5 that are coated on magnet 31 are considered resistant to chlorine dioxide) with a chlorine dioxide resistant composition;
a base (Fig.1:20) coupled to a bottom end of the container (Fig.4:20 and 15), the base having a base interior (base 20 is isolated from liquid container 15 as shown in Fig.4) isolated from fluid communication with the interior of the container;
a motor (Fig.2:67) housed within the base interior (Fig.2:20); and
a magnet (Fig.2:62) housed in the base interior, the magnet rotationally coupled to the motor (col.5, lines 8-14), the magnet having a magnetic field (col.5, lines 28-39) configured to cause the magnetic stir bar to rotate when the magnet is rotated by the motor;
wherein, when the magnetic stir bar is rotated (Fig.4:30 and 40), and the container is capable of holding water and the formulation, the water forms a vortex (Fig.1:40) in the container.
Piontek appears silent to disclose the use of a magnetic impeller.
Vellinger et al. discloses a vortex generating apparatus for mixing small volumes of liquid (Fig.1(a):16 and [0003]) that uses a permanent magnet impeller (Fig.1(a):16) in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid within which the permanent magnet impeller moves [0009]. 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 to substitute Piontek magnetic stir bar with Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid.
Regarding claim 2, Piontek discloses that the magnetic field is provided by a magnet (Fig.2:62) in the base (Fig.2:20 and col.5, lines 28-39); and a motor rotationally coupled to the magnet, such that rotation of a spindle of the motor (col.5, lines 8-14) causes rotation of the magnet and thereby rotation of the magnetic field.
Regarding claim 3, Piontek discloses using magnetic stir bar (Fig.1;30). However, Piontek appears silent to disclose the use of a magnetic impeller.
Vellinger et al. discloses a vortex generating apparatus for mixing small volumes of liquid (Fig.1(a):16 and [0003]) that uses a permanent magnet impeller (Fig.1(a):16) in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid within which the permanent magnet impeller moves [0009]. 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 to substitute Piontek magnetic stir bar with Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid.
Regarding claim 4, Piontek discloses that the base (Fig.4:20 and 15) of the apparatus is isolated from fluid communication with the interior volume of the container.
Regarding claim 5, Piontek discloses that the base (Fig.4:20) comprises a mechanical interface (unlabeled upper walls of 20 that interlock with the bottom 24 of liquid container 15 as shown in Fig.4) configured to engage a corresponding interface (Fig.4:24) of the container.
Regarding claims 10 and 16, Piontek discloses using magnetic stir bar (Fig.1;30). However, Piontek appears silent to disclose the use of a magnetic impeller.
Vellinger et al. discloses a vortex generating apparatus for mixing small volumes of liquid (Fig.1(a):16 and [0003]) that uses a permanent magnet impeller (Fig.1(a):16) in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid within which the permanent magnet impeller moves [0009]. Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller is considered resistant to the gaseous cleaning agent. 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 to substitute Piontek magnetic stir bar with Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller in order to generate microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid.
Claims 6-9, 12-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piontek (US 7,905,728 B2) in view of Vellinger et al. (US 2002/0118594 A1) as applied to claims 1, 11, 17, and further in view of Burt et al. (US 2013/0079733 A1).
Regarding claims 6, 12 and 18; the combined Piontek apparatus appears silent to disclose that the lid includes a nozzle that is configured to release the gaseous cleaning agent from the container during use, wherein the lid and nozzle are configured to emit the air-borne spray of gaseous cleaning agent and entrained water through the nozzle.
Burt et al. discloses an oxidizing mist generator (Fig.39A:1 and [0020 and 0083]) that uses a lid (Fig.24:122 and 124) that includes a nozzle that is configured to release the gaseous cleaning agent from the container during use [0148], wherein the lid and nozzle are configured to emit the air-borne spray of gaseous cleaning agent and entrained water through the nozzle. Burt et al. further teaches that the mist generator provides a technical benefit to airspaces by providing the airspaces with the aerosolized treatment compositions [0017]. 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 to substitute the combined Piontek lid assembly with Burt et al. lid/nozzle system since such a system provides a technical benefit to airspaces by providing the airspaces with the aerosolized treatment compositions.
Regarding claims 7 and 13; the combined Piontek apparatus appears silent to disclose the use of a baffle that is configured to selectively allow passage of droplets of water based on droplet size.
Burt et al. discloses an oxidizing mist generator (Fig.39A:1 and [0020 and 0083]) that includes a baffle (Fig.1:22 and Fig.20E:21) having micro perforations [0105] that is capable of selectively allowing the passage of droplets of water based on droplet size in order to provide a technical benefit to airspaces by providing the airspaces with the aerosolized treatment compositions [0017]. 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 to add Burt et al. baffle to the combined Piontek apparatus in order to provide a technical benefit to airspaces by providing the airspaces with the aerosolized treatment compositions.
Regarding claims 8, 14 and 19; the combined Piontek apparatus appears silent to disclose the use of a timer.
Burt et al. discloses an oxidizing mist generator (Fig.39A:1 and [0020 and 0083]) that includes the use of a timer [0164] that is capable of being set for a duration of operation of the apparatus in order to control the rate of delivery of the mist of the treatment composition [0164]. 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 to add Burt et al. timer to the combined Piontek apparatus in order to control the rate of delivery of the mist of the treatment composition.
Regarding claims 9, 15 and 20; the combined Piontek apparatus appears silent to disclose of use external indicia that alert when an operating cycle is complete.
Burt et al. discloses an oxidizing mist generator (Fig.39A:1 and [0020 and 0083]) that includes one or more status indicator means (Fig.39A:167; [0164] considered as external indicia) that alert when an operating cycle is complete in order to provide information regarding the status of the device to a user [0164]. 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 to add Burt et al. status indicators to the combined Piontek apparatus in order to provide information regarding the status of the device to a user.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 03/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-10 of the Remarks section, Applicant argues the following: that the combination of references would render the primary reference unsuitable for its intended use; that it is clear that the magnetic impeller 16 of Vellinger, relied upon by the examiner for curing the deficiencies of Piontek, cannot provide the turbulent flow and microscopic eddies for mixing; that Piontek’s liquid container 15 includes a lid assembly 17 and a bottom 24 to form a closed container and therefore with both ends of Piontek’s liquid container 15 sealed, Piontek’s liquid container 15 could not permit “release of the gaseous cleaning agent and emission of an airborne spray”; that Piontek’s device 10 includes a lid 17 with rubber seal 17b configured to “create a water-tight seal that allows device 10 to be moved without spilling the contents of cylinder 15.”; that replacing Piontek’s magnetic stir bar 30 with Vellinger’s magnetic impeller 16 would cause mixing of the phases and disturb formation of a clearly visible vortex, thereby impeding Piontek’s stated purpose.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Piontek container 15 is capable of generating vortex with or without lid assembly 17. And depending on the intended use, without the lid assembly, Piontek’s liquid container 15 can permit “release of the gaseous cleaning agent and emission of an airborne spray comprising water and the gaseous cleaning agent from the container”.
Substituting Piontek magnetic stir bar with Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller will result in a permanent magnet impeller that is capable of generating microscopic eddies that lead to the uniform dispersal of solutes and particles in the liquid. Also, substituting Piontek magnetic stir bar with Vellinger et al. permanent magnet impeller will result in a permanent magnet impeller that is capable of generating two distinct phases and would not disturb the formation of a clearly visible vortex.
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 MONZER R CHORBAJI whose telephone number is (571)272-1271. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 5:30-12:00 and 6:00-9:00.
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, Jill J Warden can be reached at (571)272-1267. 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.
/MONZER R CHORBAJI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights