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 .
Status of Claims
In the response dated 08/04/2026, the status of the claims are as follows:
Claims 1, 4, 9, and 15 have been amended.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 08/04/2026, with respect to the claim objections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim objections have been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 08/04/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 101 rejections have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 USC § 101 rejections have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, filed 08/04/2026, with respect to the 35 USC § 103 rejections have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Desai in view of Hagstroem, as applied in the office action, teaches “an actuator operably coupled to the sash to move the sash between the open and closed positions independent of airflow through the work chamber” ad claimed, as the Desai teaches “the fume hood controller may adjust airflow through the hood opening and/or the flow of air removed from the hood by adjusting a blower or damper associated with the hood. The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” in {0022]; thus, airflow rate through the hood opening is controlled by adjusting hood blower speed and damper position. Therefore, the opening as closing of the sash is controlled independently of the control of airflow rate control. Additionally, Hagstrom is only relied upon to modify Desai to teach “a monitoring sensor operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood”; therefore, Desai, which teaches “A fume hood controller receiving the wireless signal may use information in the signal in any suitable way to control the system… The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” in [0022], wherein the detected “presence” in [0021] comprises meeting a predetermined threshold. Therefore, Desai n view of Hagstroem continues to read on the claims.
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) 1-2, 6 and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1).
Regarding claim 1, Desai teaches
A chemical fume hood system (fume hood assembly 100), comprising:
a chemical fume hood (single hood housing 1, fig. 1), comprising:
a work chamber for conducting laboratory procedures therein (within single hood housing 1, described in [0005]);
an access window providing access to the work chamber for a user in a breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood (hood opening 8); and
a sash movable within the access window from an open position wherein the work chamber is accessible through the access window and a closed position wherein the work chamber is isolated from the breathing environment (“pair of sashes 2a and 2b that may be moved to adjust the size of the hood opening 8”) [0024]; “Users may access the interior of the housing through an opening, which in some hoods may be opened and closed by one or more movable sashes” [0005]); and
a personal guard assembly, comprising:
a monitoring sensor operable to detect a concentration of a chemical (“A containment condition detected by one or more sensors regarding the hood opening may be used by a wireless transmitter to send a wireless signal that contains at least information regarding the detected condition. For example, the wireless signal may include… the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021];
an actuator operably coupled to the sash to move the sash between the open and closed positions independent of airflow through the work chamber (“the fume hood controller may adjust airflow through the hood opening and/or the flow of air removed from the hood by adjusting a blower or damper associated with the hood. The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” {0022]; thus, comprising an actuator; controller adjusts airflow based on blower speed, thus independent of sash); and
a controller (fume hood controller 5) operably coupled to the personal monitoring sensor to receive a signal indicative of the concentration of the chemical detected thereby (“A containment condition detected by one or more sensors regarding the hood opening may be used by a wireless transmitter to send a wireless signal that contains at least information regarding the detected condition. For example, the wireless signal may include information regarding… the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021], and operably coupled to the actuator to instruct the actuator to move the sash to the closed position in response to determining that the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold (“A fume hood controller receiving the wireless signal may use information in the signal in any suitable way to control the system… The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” [0022]; detected “presence” in [0021] comprises meeting a predetermined threshold)
Desai does not teach
a portable monitoring sensor operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood;
determining that the concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold representing a concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber
Hagstroem teaches
a monitoring sensor operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood (“at least one sensor is arranged to measure chemical, pathogenic, radiological, or particulate content in the air” [0017]; “In an embodiment of the invention, one sensor is arranged outside of the laboratory containment device. The location in this case may be for example near the means for user to access inside the laboratory containment device” [0021];
In [0021-0022] Desai teaches detecting a containment condition and controlling the system based on the sensed condition, for instance adjusting airflow through the hood opening or automatically open or close one or more hood sashes. However, while Desai teaches the sensing detecting “the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021 of Desai], Desai does not explicitly teach the sensor as within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor arranged outside of the laboratory containment device as taught in Hagstroem to the system of Desai, in order to provide the sensor “near the means for user to access inside the laboratory containment device” [0021 of Hagstroem] and thus improve user safety by effectively monitoring the air conditions in the operating area for the user.
The combination teaches
determining that the concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold representing a concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber (“A fume hood controller receiving the wireless signal may use information in the signal in any suitable way to control the system… The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” [0022 of Desai]; detected “presence” in [0021 of Desai] comprises meeting a predetermined threshold; as modified by Hagstroem, which teaches “one sensor is arranged outside of the laboratory containment device” [0021], thus wherein concentration of the chemical is measured in the breathing environment)
While Hagstroem as applied to Desai teaches a monitoring sensor operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood, Hagstroem does not explicitly teach the monitoring sensor as portable. However, In re Lindberg, 194 F.2d 732, 93 USPQ 23, the federal circuit held that a claimed device is portable or movable is not sufficient by itself to patentably distinguish over an otherwise old device unless there are new or unexpected results. Therefore, the claimed portable configuration of the monitoring sensor does not distinguish the claimed invention over the prior art since it does not produce a new or unexpected result for the system.
Regarding claim 2, Desai, as modified, teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the personal guard assembly further comprises an alarm operably coupled to the controller, and wherein the controller is operable to instruct the alarm to issue an alert in response to instructing the actuator to move the sash to the closed position (“The controller also may provide an alarm in particular situations where hood containment may be less than optimal”) [0022]
Regarding claim 6, Desai, as modified, teaches the system of claim 1,
wherein the chemical fume hood further comprises a fan operably coupled to the controller, and wherein the controller is operable to adjust a speed of the fan and thereby adjust extraction of air from the work chamber (“the fume hood controller may adjust airflow through the hood opening and/or the flow of air removed from the hood by adjusting a blower or damper associated with the hood”) [0022]
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is rejected over Desai in view of Hagstroem for substantially the same reason as rejected claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is rejected over Desai in view of Hagstroem for substantially the same reason as rejected claim 2.
Claim(s) 3 and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1), in further view of Sloo (US20150097678A1).
Regarding claim 3, Desai, as modified, does not teach the system of claim 2,
wherein the controller is operable to instruct the alarm to issue an alert in response to determining that the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds an alert set point less than the predetermined threshold
Sloo teaches
wherein the controller is operable to instruct the alarm to issue an alert in response to determining that the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds an alert set point less than the predetermined threshold (“Hazard monitor engine 112 of processing system 110 may receive indications of the amount of a hazard detected in the ambient environment of hazard detector 100 from hazard sensor 120. Hazard detector 100 may be configured to be set into multiple states, such as detailed in relation to FIGS. 3A-3C. Based upon the comparison to one or more threshold values, hazard monitor engine 112 may provide input to state engine 111 , which may track which state hazard detector 100 is currently in. For instance, when a first threshold value is exceeded, state engine 111 may be set to a pre-alarm state. If a second threshold value of detected hazard is exceeded, state engine 111 may be set to an alarm state”) [0031]; “For instance, when messaging engine 113 determines that the state of hazard detector 100 has entered a pre-alarm state, messaging engine 113 may cause output device 130 to provide an auditory and/or visual indication to a user that the amount of a hazard in the environment is rising” [0032]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the multiple state alarm system of Sloo to Desai, as modified, since “Such a pre-alarm state may allow a user time to ameliorate the hazardous condition before having a full alarm sound” [0028 of Sloo].
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is rejected over Desai in view of Hagstroem and Sloo for substantially the same reason as rejected claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is rejected over Desai in view of Hagstroem and Sloo for substantially the same reason as rejected claim 4.
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1) and Sloo (US20150097678A1), in further view of Aultman (US20160116181A1).
Regarding claim 19, Desai, as modified, does not teach the system of claim 18,
wherein the monitoring sensor includes a fastener for affixing the monitoring sensor to the user
Aultman teaches
wherein the monitoring sensor includes a fastener for affixing the monitoring sensor to the user (”sensor modules 111 may comprise a wearable sensor module 112 that a person, or user, may wear while within the home 110 . For example, the wearable sensor module may be placed in a user's pocket, clipped to an article of clothing, or otherwise secured to their person”) [0019]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor arranged outside of the laboratory containment device of Hagstroem, as applied to Desai, to comprise the wearable sensor module 112 of Aultman, since it allows the system to monitor the air quality in close proximity to the user no matter where the user is located around the fume hood assembly 100 of Desai.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1), in further view of Berg (US20160223220A1).
Regarding claim 7, Desai, as modified, does not teach the system of claim 6,
wherein the chemical fume hood further comprises manual fan speed controls operably coupled to the controller
Berg teaches
wherein the chemical fume hood further comprises manual fan speed controls operably coupled to the controller (“each control panel 95 includes an exhaust control knob 105 - 1 in electrical connection the exhaust fan 69” [0075]; “plate 95 is marked with eleven incremental settings about each control knob 105 to assist in metering the speed of its corresponding fans” [0076])
Berg teaches “enclosed systems that are designed to maintain a pollutant controlled, or clean, workspace” [0001] wherein the system comprises manual fan speed controls as described above as well as “Accordingly, the speed of fans 65 , 69 and 77 can be automatically and instantaneously adjusted to compensate for fluctuations in measured particle counts and thereby ensure an optimally clean workspace 81” [0079]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the manual fan control system of Berg to the system of Desai, in order to allow both the automatic control by the fume hood controller 5 and manual adjustments to the fan based on user preferences.
Claim(s) 8 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1), in further view of Cha (KR200310020Y1), referring to the English translation dated 05/08/2026.
Regarding claim 8, Desai, as modified, does not teach the system of claim 1,
wherein the monitoring sensor is operable to detect a concentration of at least one of the group consisting of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and hydrogen sulfide
Cha teaches
wherein the monitoring sensor is operable to detect a concentration of at least one of the group consisting of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and hydrogen sulfide (“the gas sensor 310 should also be installed accordingly. For example, TGS 2610 (sensor sensitivity 500 ~ 10000PPM) for LPG or propane gas, TGS2611 (sensor sensitivity 500 ~ 10000PPM for general experiment or methane gas), TGS series precision sensor of FIGARO USA INC , TGS826 (sensor sensitivity 30 to 300PPM) for ammonia gas, TGS825 (5 to 100 ppm of sensitivity) for hydrogen sulfide, and TGS2620 (50 to 5000PPM) for alcohol can be used”) [0048-0049]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor types of Cha, including the “TGS825 (5 to 100 ppm of sensitivity) for hydrogen sulfide”, to the system of Desai, as modified, in order to ensure an appropriate sensor is being used based on the chemicals worked with in fume hood assembly 100 of Desai.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is rejected over Desai in view of Hagstroem and Cha for substantially the same reason as rejected claim 8.
Claim(s) 9-10 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1) and Aultman (US20160116181A1).
Regarding claim 9, Desai teaches
a method for conducting a laboratory procedure within a chemical fume hood system (fume hood assembly 100), the method comprising:
providing a monitoring sensor, the monitoring sensor being operable to detect a concentration of a chemical (“A containment condition detected by one or more sensors regarding the hood opening may be used by a wireless transmitter to send a wireless signal that contains at least information regarding the detected condition. For example, the wireless signal may include… the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021];
detecting the concentration of the chemical within the breathing environment with the monitoring sensor and transmitting the concentration to a controller (“A containment condition detected by one or more sensors regarding the hood opening may be used by a wireless transmitter to send a wireless signal that contains at least information regarding the detected condition. For example, the wireless signal may include information regarding… the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021];
determining whether the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold representing a concentration of the chemical with the controller (determining detected “presence” in [0021] comprises meeting a predetermined threshold); and
transmitting a command signal from the controller to an actuator to close a sash and thereby isolate the work chamber from the breathing environment independent of any adjustment to airflow through the work chamber in response to determining the concentration meets or exceeds the predetermined threshold (“A fume hood controller receiving the wireless signal may use information in the signal in any suitable way to control the system… The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” [0022]; controller adjusts airflow based on blower speed, thus independent of sash)
Desai does not teach
providing a monitoring sensor configured to be affixed to a user, the monitoring sensor being operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment of the user exterior to a work chamber within a chemical fume hood;
detecting the concentration of the chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber with the monitoring sensor and transmitting the concentration to a controller
determining whether the concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold representing a concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber with the controller
Hagstroem teaches
providing a monitoring sensor configured to be affixed to a user, the monitoring sensor being operable to detect a concentration of a chemical within the breathing environment of the user exterior to a work chamber within a chemical fume hood (“at least one sensor is arranged to measure chemical, pathogenic, radiological, or particulate content in the air” [0017]; “In an embodiment of the invention, one sensor is arranged outside of the laboratory containment device. The location in this case may be for example near the means for user to access inside the laboratory containment device” [0021];
detecting the concentration of the chemical within the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber with the monitoring sensor and transmitting the concentration to a controller (“The control unit is arranged to receive signals from at least one sensor constantly”) [0016]
In [0021-0022] Desai teaches detecting a containment condition and controlling the system based on the sensed condition, for instance adjusting airflow through the hood opening or automatically open or close one or more hood sashes. However, while Desai teaches the sensing detecting “the presence of particular, potentially harmful materials at or near the hood opening”) [0021 of Desai], Desai does not explicitly teach the sensor as within the breathing environment exterior to the chemical fume hood. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor arranged outside of the laboratory containment device as taught in Hagstroem to the system of Desai, in order to provide the sensor “near the means for user to access inside the laboratory containment device” [0021 of Hagstroem] and thus improve user safety by effectively monitoring the air conditions in the operating area for the user.
The combination teaches
determining whether the concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber meets or exceeds a predetermined threshold representing a concentration of the chemical in the breathing environment exterior to the work chamber with the controller (“A fume hood controller receiving the wireless signal may use information in the signal in any suitable way to control the system… The controller may automatically adjust the size of the hood opening, e.g., automatically open or close one or more hood sashes” [0022 of Desai]; detected “presence” in [0021 of Desai] comprises meeting a predetermined threshold; as modified by Hagstroem, which teaches “one sensor is arranged outside of the laboratory containment device” [0021], thus wherein concentration of the chemical is measured in the breathing environment)
Aultman teaches
affixing a monitoring sensor to a user (”sensor modules 111 may comprise a wearable sensor module 112 that a person, or user, may wear while within the home 110 . For example, the wearable sensor module may be placed in a user's pocket, clipped to an article of clothing, or otherwise secured to their person”) [0019]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor arranged outside of the laboratory containment device of Hagstroem, as applied to Desai, to comprise the wearable sensor module 112 of Aultman, since it allows the system to monitor the air quality in close proximity to the user no matter where the user is located around the fume hood assembly 100 of Desai.
Regarding claim 10, Desai, as modified, teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising
transmitting a command signal from the controller to an alarm to instruct the alarm to issue an alert in response to instructing the actuator to move the sash to the closed position (“The controller also may provide an alarm in particular situations where hood containment may be less than optimal”) [0022]
Regarding claim 13, Desai, as modified, teaches the method of claim 9, further comprising
adjusting a speed of a fan with the controller to thereby adjust extraction of air from the work chamber (“the fume hood controller may adjust airflow through the hood opening and/or the flow of air removed from the hood by adjusting a blower or damper associated with the hood”) [0022]
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1) and Aultman (US20160116181A1), in further view of Sloo (US20150097678A1).
Regarding claim 11, Desai, as modified, does not teach the method of claim 10, further comprising
instructing the alarm to issue an alert in response to determining that the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds an alert set point less than the predetermined threshold
Sloo teaches
instructing the alarm to issue an alert in response to determining that the concentration of the chemical meets or exceeds an alert set point less than the predetermined threshold (“Hazard monitor engine 112 of processing system 110 may receive indications of the amount of a hazard detected in the ambient environment of hazard detector 100 from hazard sensor 120 . Hazard detector 100 may be configured to be set into multiple states, such as detailed in relation to FIGS. 3A-3C. Based upon the comparison to one or more threshold values, hazard monitor engine 112 may provide input to state engine 111 , which may track which state hazard detector 100 is currently in. For instance, when a first threshold value is exceeded, state engine 111 may be set to a pre-alarm state. If a second threshold value of detected hazard is exceeded, state engine 111 may be set to an alarm state”) [0031]; “For instance, when messaging engine 113 determines that the state of hazard detector 100 has entered a pre-alarm state, messaging engine 113 may cause output device 130 to provide an auditory and/or visual indication to a user that the amount of a hazard in the environment is rising” [0032]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the multiple state alarm system of Sloo to Desai, as modified, since “Such a pre-alarm state may allow a user time to ameliorate the hazardous condition before having a full alarm sound” [0028 of Sloo].
Regarding claim 12, Desai, as modified, teaches the method of claim 11,
wherein transmitting the concentration to the controller and instructing the alarm comprises transmitting signals through a cable operably coupling the monitoring sensor and the alarm to the controller (“The controller 2 can also be implemented using a plurality of separate dedicated programmable integrated or other electronic circuits or devices, e.g., hard wired electronic or logic circuits, such as discrete element circuits or programmable logic devices. The controller 5 also can include other devices, such as information display devices (monitors, printers, display lights, etc.), user input devices (a keyboard, user pointing device, touch screen or other user interface), data storage devices, communication devices, airflow sensors, or other electronic circuitry or components”) [0030]
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1) and Aultman (US20160116181A1), in further view of Cha (KR200310020Y1), referring to the English translation dated 05/08/2026.
Regarding claim 14, Desai, as modified, does not teach the method of claim 9,
wherein detecting the concentration of the chemical comprises detecting the concentration of at least one of the group consisting of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and hydrogen sulfide
Cha teaches
wherein detecting the concentration of the chemical comprises detecting the concentration of at least one of the group consisting of benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene and hydrogen sulfide (“the gas sensor 310 should also be installed accordingly. For example, TGS 2610 (sensor sensitivity 500 ~ 10000PPM) for LPG or propane gas, TGS2611 (sensor sensitivity 500 ~ 10000PPM for general experiment or methane gas), TGS series precision sensor of FIGARO USA INC , TGS826 (sensor sensitivity 30 to 300PPM) for ammonia gas, TGS825 (5 to 100 ppm of sensitivity) for hydrogen sulfide, and TGS2620 (50 to 5000PPM) for alcohol can be used”) [0048-0049]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the sensor types of Cha, including the “TGS825 (5 to 100 ppm of sensitivity) for hydrogen sulfide”, to the system of Desai, as modified, in order to ensure an appropriate sensor is being used based on the chemicals worked with in fume hood assembly 100 of Desai.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Regarding claim 4, the subject matter not found includes “wherein the chemical fume hood further comprises a sensor mount on a front face of the housing, the monitoring sensor being removably supported on the sensor mount and carriable by the user in the breathing environment during a laboratory procedure, the cable tethering the monitoring sensor to the chemical fume hood during use”, in combination with the other elements of the claim and claim 1-3 from which claim 4 depends. The closest art of record is Desai (US20040209564A1) in view of Hagstroem (US20180056285A1), in further view of Sloo (US20150097678A1), as applied in the previous office action. While other references teach aspects of these elements of claim 4 (Aultman (US20160116181A1) teaches a sensor carriable by the user in the breathing environment during a laboratory procedure, as taught regarding claim 9; Du (US20190234634A1) teaches “Air quality sensors may be installed in homes or other buildings, but it also may be desirable for a user to have a portable sensor device that may be mounted on the wall and/or carried with them to different areas” [0026]), a modification to further include this combination ] to the system of Desai, as previously modified by Hagstroem and Sloo, would have been non-obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. No other prior art was found to teach the claim in its entirety.
Claims 5 is indicated as allowable based on its dependence to claim 4.
Conclusion
The prior art of record not relied upon includes:
Naito (WO2022163607A1), which teaches a similar gas sensing device to that claimed
Hui (CN216690759U), which teaches a similar chemical fume hood system to that claimed
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 BRETT P. MALLON whose telephone number is (571)272-4749. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday from 8am to 5pm.
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 (571)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.
/BRETT P. MALLON/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights