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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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 10 and 20 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “near” in claims 10 and 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “near” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes Examiner will consider near to be interpreted broadly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1-6, 9-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent 9366472 to Seo et al. (Seo).
Regarding claim 1, Seo teaches a frame having an opening (2, figure 1); a first bracket provided on the frame and including a first hole (120, Figures 2 and 3); a second bracket provided to correspond to the first bracket and including a second hole that is bilaterally symmetrical to the first hole on the first bracket (120, Figures 2 and 3 shown at the top and bottom of door or blade); a blade rotatably coupled to the first bracket and configured to open or close the opening (50 is a door and can also be considered a blade, Figure 2); and a motor configured to rotate the blade through one of the first hole and the second hole (180, Figures 2 and 3), wherein the blade is connected to the first hole when rotated in a first direction and is connected to the second hole when rotated in a second direction opposite to the first direction (connected to both regardless or rotation direction, additionally the doors can be placed on either side of the unit which would also fulfil the claim language).
Regarding claim 2, Seo teaches wherein the blade further includes a first hinge shaft and a second hinge shaft formed to be attached to one of the first hole and the second hole (190 and/or 160, Figures 2 and 3 provided on top and bottom of both doors).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Seo teaches a rotation guide provided between the motor and one of the first hinge shaft and the second hinge shaft to guide a rotation of the blade (190, 192, 194 and/or the connection between 190 and the motor, Figure 3).
Regarding claims 4 and 15, Seo teaches wherein the rotation guide includes: a motor coupling coupled to a motor shaft of the motor (190, Figure 3 is disclosed as a hinge shaft coupled to a motor, the coupling between 190 and the motor is considerd the coupling), a hinge coupling extending integrally from the motor coupling and coupled to one of the first hinge shaft and the second hinge shaft (190, Figure 3, 160 is considered the hinge shaft for this claim).
Regarding claims 5 and 16, Seo teaches wherein the hinge coupling further includes a support surface having a D-cut shape, a portion of which is formed to be flat (190 has a D shape per Figure 3).
Regarding claims 6 and 17, Seo teaches wherein one of the first hinge shaft and the second hinge shaft further includes a hinge groove corresponding to the support surface and having a D- cut shape (160 has a groove that is D shaped per Figure 3).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, Seo teaches wherein one of the first bracket and the second bracket further includes a motor installation portion (right side of Figure 3 inclusive of the apertures) on which the motor is mounted (motor is mounted on bracket through intermediary devices).
Regarding claims 10 and 20, Seo teaches wherein the motor installation portion further includes a plurality of mounting holes formed near the first hole and the second hole (apertures in Figure 3 are near the first hole at 140 and the second hole on the other bracket).
Regarding claim 11, Seo teaches a ventilation device including: an intake flow path for drawing outdoor air into an interior of the ventilation device (path through right door, Figure 1), an exhaust flow path for discharging indoor air to an outside (path through left door, Figure 1), and a connecting flow path connecting the intake flow path and at least a portion of the exhaust flow path (flowpath connected in a number of ways through the device of Figure 1), a damper device provided to open and close the connecting flow path (50, Figure 1). The rest of the device is taught in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claim 12, Seo teaches a dehumidifying flow path provided on the intake flow path (any path through Figure 1 can be considered a dehumidifying flow path), and a heat exchanger to remove moisture in the air flowing through the intake flow path (refrigerators have heat exchangers which cool and would remove humidity), wherein the damper device is positioned on the dehumidifying flow path (door is positioned at the inlet of the flowpath per Figure 1).
Regarding claim 14, Seo teaches wherein the hinge shaft includes a first hinge shaft formed on an upper side of the blade and a second hinge shaft formed on a lower side thereof (190 and/or 160, Figures 2 and 3 provided on top and bottom of both doors).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 7, 8, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Seo in view of U.S. PGPUB 20090033189 to Glanz et al. (Glanz).
Regarding claims 7, 8, and 18, Seo is silent on wherein the blade further includes a seal provided in close contact around the opening so as to maintain airtightness and wherein the seal includes either a rubber or a resin.
Glanz teaches wherein the blade further includes a seal provided in close contact around the opening so as to maintain airtightness and wherein the seal includes either a rubber or a resin (Paragraphs 0005 and 0019). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Seo with the teachings of Glanz to provide wherein the blade further includes a seal provided in close contact around the opening so as to maintain airtightness and wherein the seal includes either a rubber or a resin. Doing so would keep the interior of the device sealed and allow temperature to be maintained, it would also be a structure common to refrigerators.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVEN S ANDERSON II whose telephone number is (571)272-2055. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5.
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, Michael Hoang can be reached at 574-272-6460. 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.
/STEVEN S ANDERSON II/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762