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 action is responsive to communications filed 12/19/2023. As per claims filed 12/19/2023.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are currently pending.
Claim(s) 1, 14, 20 is/are independent claims.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority based United States provisional applicant number 63/433,840, filed on December 20, 2022.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0097, line 17, referring to Figure 5 “525” and second “526” should read “524” and “528”, respectively.
Appropriate correction is required.
Prior Art
Listed herein below are the prior art references relied upon in this Office Action:
Hartenstein et al. (US 6,711,470 B1, which has a priority date of 11/16/2000), referred to as Hartenstein herein.
Hummer et al. (US 11,340,210 B2, which has a priority date of 07/11/2020), referred to as Hummer herein.
Economopoulos et al. (US 11,077,005 B1, which has a priority date of 04/06/2020), referred to as Economopoulos herein.
Federspiel et al. (US 11,181,289 B2, which has a priority date of 04/14/2020), referred to as Federspiel herein.
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 (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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Hartenstein.
Regarding Claim 1, Hartenstein teaches an HVAC system of a building (“The present invention provides system, apparatus and methods for monitoring and adjusting the quality of indoor air and is adaptable to new and existing HVAC systems.” (Col 5, line 6-8));
comprising: a controller comprising memory and at least one processor configured to ("includes a general-purpose computing device in the form of a conventional computer 20, including a processing unit 21, a system memory 22, and a system bus 23 that couples various system components including the system memory to the processing unit…. The system memory includes read only memory (ROM) 24 and random-access memory (RAM) 25." (Col 6, line 2-11, Fig 1 & 2));
receive, from a plurality of sensors disposed throughout the building, infectious agent data, (“Each zone sampler 62 provides sensor array 82 access to the indoor air located with the respective zone 60. Outdoor air sampler 74 provides sensor array 82 access to the outdoor air and recirculated air sampler 69 provides sensor array 82 access to the recirculated air.” (Col 8, line 14-18) and "a sensor array senses an air sample from the indoor air and analyzes the air sample to obtain signatures representative of contaminants in the air sample." (Abstract));
at least one of the plurality of sensors comprising an apparatus configured to collect samples, (“One embodiment of each air sampler is a tube connecting sensor array 82 to the air to be sampled.” (Col 7, line 60-62));
wherein the plurality of sensors configured to continuously test the samples over a sampling period for infectious agents and provide the infectious agent data to the controller (“the present invention is able to monitor and adjust the quality of indoor air in real time by sensing the level and type of contaminants present in indoor air,” (Abstract) and “The signatures are sent to a processing unit which compares the signatures to a database or library of known signatures.” (Col 3, line 36-38), thereby teaching that sampled contaminant data is communicated to a controller for analysis);
in response to indicating of an infectious agent based on the infectious agent data, determine at least one area of the building exposed to the infectious agent; (“Each Zone 60 may be in the same building or in Separate buildings. Both the outside air and the recirculated air are considered zones. A zone comprises any area from which an air sample is taken..... (Col 7, line 22-26), thereby defining zone-based control in order to detect contaminants in the air. Additionally, “...IAQMS 80 knows the location of the air that is being sampled or tested for contaminants.” (Col 8, line 20-22), further implying that the system determines a zone of the building where the contaminants are present);
and selectively control an amount of equivalent clean air delivered to the at least one area based on the indication of the infectious agent. (“When the level or type of contaminant poses a threat or hazard to the occupants, the present invention takes corrective actions which may include introducing additional fresh air” (Abstract), “Each zone 60 has a supply air 64 and supply air 64 may come from multiple potential sources, including the outside air, a reservoir of clean air or recirculated air.” (Col 7, Line 33-35), "adjustments to the quality of the indoor air can be made in real time" (Col 8, line 31-32) and “corrective action may be taken when the contaminants or pollutants in the indoor reach 80 percent of the proposed ASHRAE standards.” (Col 11, line 15-27). Thereby implying selectively controlling the amount of clean air delivered to the infected zone based on the detected contaminants);
therefore, Hartenstein anticipates all limitations of claim 1.
Regarding Claim 2, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 1, wherein the indication of the infectious agent is at least one of an indication of a presence of the infectious agent, an indication of a change in an amount of the infectious agent, or an indication of exceeding a threshold corresponding with the amount of the infectious agent ("IAQMS functions by recognizing when contaminants reach concentration levels determined to be harmful and therefore need to be reduced to acceptable levels" (Col 8, line 54-57), implying that the systems detects the presence of the contaminants and takes appropriate corrective actions in order to decrease the levels of contaminants. Given the conditional limitation of claim 2, the teaching of any one of the recited conditions is sufficient).
Regarding Claim 3, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 2, the at least one processor is further configured to: monitor the change in the amount of the infectious agent over a period of time, ("the present invention is able to monitor and adjust the quality of indoor air in real time by sensing the level and type of contaminants present in indoor air" (Abstract) and "adjustments to the quality of the indoor air can be made in real time" (Col 8, line 31-32));
and wherein selectively controlling the amount of equivalent clean air is based on an increase in the amount of the infectious agent over the period of time in the at least one area of the building. (“When the level or type of contaminant poses a threat or hazard to the occupants, the present invention takes corrective actions which may include introducing additional (increased based on amount of contaminant) fresh air” (Abstract), “Each zone 60 has a supply air 64 and supply air 64 may come from multiple potential sources, including the outside air, a reservoir of clean air or recirculated air.” (Col 7, Line 33-35), and (“The corrective response is automatic and prevents people from being overexposed to undesirable levels determined to be hazardous” (Col 11, line 8-10), implying selectively controlling the amount of clean air delivered to the infected zone based on the detected contaminants).
Regarding Claim 4, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 2, wherein selectively controlling the amount of equivalent clean air is in response to an increase in the amount of the infectious agent above a normal background level, (“corrective action may be taken when the contaminants or pollutants in the indoor reach 80 percent of the proposed ASHRAE standards.” (Col 11, line 15-27) and "The need for the IAQMS is based on the consideration that low levels of most contaminants exist in most locations at levels that are not considered hazardous" (Col 8, line 57-60). This disclosure inherently defines a normal background level, as it establishes a reference concentration below which contaminants are acceptable and above which corrective action is triggered);
and wherein the normal background level is specific to the at least one area of the building. (“low levels of most contaminants exist in most locations at levels that are not considered hazardous.” (Col 8, line 57-60), implying location-specific concentration levels).
Regarding Claim 9, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 1, the at least one processor is further configured to: in response to indicating the infectious agent based on the infectious agent data, determine a plurality of guidelines or procedures corresponding with the at least one area of the building, (different operational modes: "Green Mode, Health Mode, and Disinfect Mode" (Col 7, line 9-10)), "corrective actions can include activating certain mitigation modules to strip particular contaminants from the incoming outdoor air" (Col 12, line 36-49), different responses based on "the signatures of the contaminants present in the air" (Col 12, line 2-3), and using guidelines set by ASHRAE “corrective action may be taken when the contaminants or pollutants in the indoor reach 80 percent of the proposed ASHRAE standards." (Col 11, line 15-17));
wherein the plurality of guidelines or procedures are different from a first area of the building and a second area of the building. (“Each zone 60 has a supply air 64 and supply air 64 may come from multiple potential sources, including the outside air, a reservoir of clean air or recirculated air.” (Col 7, Line 33-35), thereby defining zone-based control in order to detect contaminants in the air and area-specific response based on contamination signatures).
Regarding Claim 10, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 9, the at least one processor is further configured to: generate a graphical user interface (GUI) comprising graphical information and steps for the determined plurality of guidelines or procedures, ("IAQMS permits operator input. Operator input permits acceptable contaminant levels to be set, permits database to be updated and allows unknown or new signatures to be identified" (Col 10, line 27-30) and “The corrective response is automatic and prevents people from being overexposed to undesirable levels determined to be hazardous” (Col 11, line 8-10). Additionally, Fig 1 illustrates a monitor (47) providing system information to a user, thereby teaching a graphical user interface);
wherein the GUI comprises at least one interactive item corresponding with implementing the determined plurality of guidelines or procedures; (“The signatures are sent to a processing unit which compares the signatures to a database or library of known signatures.” (Col 3, line 36-38), thereby teaching that sampled contaminant data is communicated to a controller for analysis upon which the corrective responses are initiated and "IAQMS permits operator input. Operator input permits acceptable contaminant levels to be set, permits database to be updated and allows unknown or new signatures to be identified" (Col 10, line 27-30), thereby interacting with the system to implement contaminant control procedures as the operator can input commands and adjust system parameters through the interface);
and provide the GUI to at least one computing device within the at least one area of the building or associated with the at least one area, wherein the at least one computing device is associated with the at least one area based on at least one of scheduling information, a designation of association, or a previous presence of the at least one computing device within the at least one area. (as illustrated in Fig 1 and Fig 2, where the monitor (47) and computing system are integrated with the HVAC system and zones of the building. The computing device is associated with the building areas because the system monitors and controls air quality on a per-zone basis, and the interface is used to manage those zones. These disclosures collectively teach providing a GUI to computing devices associated with a monitored environment previously presented. Given the conditional limitation of claim 10, the teaching of any one of the recited conditions is sufficient).
Regarding Claim 11, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 10, the at least one processor is further configured to: monitor an amount of the infectious agent in the building; (the present invention is able to monitor and adjust the quality of indoor air in real time by sensing the level and type of contaminants present in indoor air,” (Abstract));
determine controlling the amount of equivalent clear air and the plurality of guidelines or procedures decreased the amount of the infectious agent in the building; (“the present invention takes corrective actions which may include introducing additional fresh air” (Abstract), “corrective action may be taken when the contaminants or pollutants in the indoor reach 80 percent of the proposed ASHRAE standards.” (Col 11, line 15-27) and "adjustments to the quality of the indoor air can be made in real time" (Col 8, line 31-32). Thereby taking corrective actions such as introducing fresh air and adjusting airflow, using ASHRAE guidelines, in response to detected contaminants, while continuously monitoring indoor air quality. The continuous monitoring before and after corrective actions means determining whether the amount of contaminants has decreased);
and modify the selective control of the amount of equivalent clear air of the air flowing through the air handling unit of the HVAC system. ("adjustments to the quality of the indoor air can be made in real time by sensing the level and type of contaminants present in indoor air" (Abstract) and “exemplary corrective action is to adjust the ratio of outside air mixed with recycled inside air to reduce the concentration of the contaminant to an acceptable level.” (Col 3, line 42-45)).
Regarding Claim 12, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 1, the at least one processor is further configured to: determine a prevalence of the infectious agent in the building based on cross-referencing external infectious agent data of an external data source with the infectious agent data. ("The need for the IAQMS is based on the consideration that low levels of most contaminants exist in most locations at levels that are not considered hazardous" (Col 8, line 57-60). This disclosure inherently defines a normal background level, as it establishes a reference concentration below which contaminants are acceptable and above which corrective action is triggered. "IAQMS permits operator input. Operator input permits acceptable contaminant levels to be set, permits database to be updated and allows unknown or new signatures to be identified" (Col 10, line 27-30), here the operator inputting data inherently means external data source, implying that operator provide data is cross-referenced in order to determine the contaminant levels of the infectious agents).
Regarding Claim 13, Hartenstein teaches the HVAC system of claim 1, the at least one processor is further configured to: determine a baseline prevalence of the infectious agent in a public area of the building; (“low levels of most contaminants exist in most locations at levels that are not considered hazardous" (Col 8, line 57-60), thereby establishing a baseline contaminant level across areas of a building, including commonly occupied (public) areas).
determine a prevalence of the infectious agent in the at least one area of the building; ("The need for the IAQMS is based on the consideration that low levels of most contaminants exist in most locations at levels that are not considered hazardous" (Col 8, line 57-60) and “Each Zone 60 may be in the same building or in Separate buildings....A zone comprises any area from which an air sample is taken....” (Col 7, line 22-26), implying location-specific concentration levels);
and modify the selective control of the amount of equivalent clear air of the air flowing through the air handling unit of the HVAC system based on the prevalence in the at least one area being above the baseline prevalence in the public area. (“corrective action may be taken when the contaminants or pollutants in the indoor reach 80 percent of the proposed ASHRAE standards.” (Col 11, line 15-27) and "IAQMS functions by recognizing when contaminants reach concentration levels determined to be harmful" (Col 8, line 54-56). This disclosure inherently defines a normal background level, as it establishes a reference concentration below which contaminants are acceptable and above which corrective action is triggered).
With regard to Claim 14, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 1 above.
With regard to Claim 15, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 2 above.
With regard to Claim 16, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 3 above.
With regard to Claim 17, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 4 above.
With regard to Claim 18, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 10 and claim 11 above.
With regard to Claim 19, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 13 above. The areas of the building taught by Hartenstein are considered “public areas.”
With regard to Claim 20, it is rejected under the same reasons as claim 1 above.
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) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartenstein in view of Hummer.
Regarding Claim 5, Hartenstein does not explicitly teach sensors to collect liquid samples. However, Hummer discloses the HVAC system of claim 1, wherein the at least one of the plurality of sensors comprises a collection apparatus, (“Detection using liquid samples is performed using impedimetric biosensors 2500. The impedimetric biosensors 2500 are powered using sensor circuit power 2510 and use impedance measurement circuitry 2520 for an analysis process.” Hummer (Col 20, line 54-58));
and wherein the samples are liquid samples collected via the collection apparatus. (“FIG. 25 shows a monitor system with at least one liquid sample monitor/detector component 2440 with biological sensors configured to sample liquids 2426.” Hummer, (Col 20, line 52-54)).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify Hartenstein’s collection apparatus to collect liquid samples for infectious agent testing, as liquid sampling is a known and effective way to detect biological contaminants and establishes the need for infectious agent monitoring.
The motivation for doing so would have been the shared goal to provide more accurate sensitive detection capabilities for biological contaminants, as Hummer teaches a proven way to effectively detected biological contaminants, including viruses such as SARS-CoV-2, using liquid sampling techniques.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartenstein in view of Economopoulos.
Regarding Claim 6, Hartenstein discloses the HVAC system of claim 1, wherein selectively controlling the amount of equivalent clean air comprises at least one of increasing an airflow rate or increasing outside air ventilation, air handling unit (AHU) airflow rate, in zone filtration, or in zone disinfection, (“When the level or type of contaminant poses a threat or hazard to the occupants, the present invention takes corrective actions which may include introducing additional fresh air” (Abstract), "adjustments to the quality of the indoor air can be made in real time" (Col 8, line 31-32) and “exemplary corrective action is to adjust the ratio of outside air mixed with recycled inside air to reduce the concentration of the contaminant to an acceptable level.” (Col 3, line 42-45). Thereby implying selectively controlling the amount of clean air delivered by adjusting airflow and ventilation to the infected zone based on the detected contaminants);
Hartenstein does not expressly disclose negative pressure space relative to rest of building or plurality of lighting apparatuses activation. However, Economopoulos discloses and wherein the at least one processor are further configured to selectively activate at least one of a negative pressure space relative to rest of the building or a plurality of lighting apparatuses in at least one of the air handling unit or the at least one area. ("pump air out of the isolation chamber to decrease the pressure within the isolation chamber relative to the ambient atmosphere. " (Col 3, lines 59-62). Given the conditional limitation of claim 6, the teaching of any one of the recited conditions is sufficient).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate Economopoulos’s negative pressure control into the combined HVAC system of Hartenstein in order to further prevent the spread of airborne infectious agents in between areas of the building, enabling the zone based selective control features including negative pressure as extensions of the comprehensive HVAC control.
The motivation for doing so would have been the widely known principle in the art that negative pressure effectively isolates airborne infectious agents, such as SARS-Cov-2, from travelling through the air, as taught by Economopoulos (Col 1, lines 19-34). And incorporating such containment techniques to HVAC systems would enable Hartenstein's teaching to "promote overall health of personnel, prevent personnel from being overexposed to hazardous contaminants and minimize the cost of operating the HVAC system" (Col 2, line 51-52).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartenstein and Economopoulos, as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Federspiel.
Regarding Claim 7, Hartenstein discloses the HVAC system of claim 6, the at least one processor is further configured to: selectively control, in real-time or near real-time, access to the at least one area of the building, (“the early detection of the chemical agent enables the population to be notified of evacuation procedures immediately" (Col 13, line 27-29), thereby teaching system responses to detected hazardous contaminant levels within building area);
Hartenstein does not expressly disclose selectively accessing door to areas to the building. However, Federspiel discloses wherein selectively controlling access further comprises locking at least one door controlling access to the at least one area. (zone-based pathogen control and "it may be advisable to interact with the building management system, or with the building management team, to keep zones physically isolated for the duration of a mode, for example by keeping doors closed to keep the zones contained" (Col 8, line 65 - Col 9, line 5), which restricts movement in and out of the zones and thereby teaches control of access).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine selectively controlling access including locking doors, as Hartenstein teaches population control and evacuation procedures combined with Federspiel's access control concepts would naturally extend to physical access control.
The motivation for doing so would have been Hartenstein's teaching about "early detection" enabling "evacuation procedures immediately" to prevent exposure, which would further include restricting access to contaminated zones using known techniques such as door control, as taught by Federspiel.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hartenstein and Economopoulos, as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Hummer.
Regarding Claim 8, Hartenstein does not explicitly teach cross-referencing location data of the sensors with user location. However, Hummer discloses the HVAC system of claim 6, the at least one processor is further configured to: communicate a presence of the infectious agent to a plurality of individuals selected based on cross-referencing location data of the plurality of sensors and location data of user devices of the plurality of individuals, (“The biological pathogen app is configured to use location information from a GPS chip, WIFI or any other location information available to the cell phone to identify the location of the detected highly infectious pathogen 3440.” (Col 24, line 12-16), thereby teaching cross-referencing detection location with user location).
Hartenstein discloses wherein the communication of the presence further comprises a notification to avoid the at least one area of the building. ("the early detection of the chemical agent enables the population to be notified of evacuation procedures immediately" (Col 13, line 27-29), thereby teaching communication of hazardous contaminant levels within a building).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine Hummer’s location-based notification to communicate the presence of infectious agents to individuals to avoid areas into the system of Federspiel which teaches integration with external systems and Hartenstein’s population notification system.
The motivation for doing so would have been Hartenstein's teaching that "early detection" enables immediate response to prevent exposure and Hummer’s teaching that location-based communication improves the effectiveness of such notifications by informing individuals based on proximity to detected hazards.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHANDNI PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-9661. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-4pm, every other Friday off.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at (571) 272-3644. 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.
/CHANDNI PATEL/Examiner, Art Unit 2118
/SCOTT T BADERMAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights