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 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.
Claims 21, 23-27, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kodama et al (PG-PUB US 20190321505).
Regarding claims 21, 25, and 38, Kodama et al disclose an ultraviolet treatment apparatus for fluid sterilization (ABSTRACT). The apparatus comprises
(1) a sterilization unit 2 extending along a longitudinal axis and having an inner cylinder 21 and an outer casing body 22 surrounding the inner cylinder 21, wherein the inner cylinder 21 is in fluid communication with the outer casing body 22 through a covering plate 23 at one end and a communication port 21a at the opposing end, forming one or more flow passages (i.e., a reactor body … inner/secondary and outer/primary chambers… one or more passages …, Figures 1-2 & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], [0069] – [0070], [0126] – [0129] & [0133] – [0135]);
(2) an inflow portion 4 in fluid communication with the inner cylinder 21/the outer casing body 22 and spaced apart from the one end (i.e., an inlet/outlet …, Figures 1-2 & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], [0077], [0126] – [0129] & [0133] – [0135]);
(3) an outflow portion 5 in fluid communication with the inner cylinder 21/the outer casing body 22 and spaced apart from the opposing end (i.e., an outlet/inlet …, Figures 1-2 & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], [0077], [0126] – [0129] & [0133] – [0135]); and
(4) a light emitting unit 3 having a light source 34 enclosed in a window portion 31 and a recess portion 32a, wherein the light source 34 is arranged to irradiate the light toward the flow path 21d of the inner cylinder 21 and the enclosed light emitting unit is attached to cover an end of the sterilization unit 2 (i.e., a cap/house housing/supporting one or more UV radiation emitters, … operatively connected …, optically oriented …, Figures 1-2 & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], & [0100] – [0105]), wherein
(i) the cross-section of inflow port 221a is smaller than the cross-section of the inner cylinder 21 (i.e., a first fluid-flow … less than a minimum …, Figures 1-2, & 8-10, paragraph [0128]);
(ii) the cross-section of the inner cylinder 21 is greater than the cross-section of gap for flowing the fluid between the outer casing body 22 and the inner cylinder 21 (i.e., an inner fluid-flow … of the inner chamber … greater than an outer fluid-flow … of the outer chamber…, Figures 1-2, & 8-10, paragraphs [0057] – [0058] & [0066]); and
(iii) the outer casing body 22 is longer and wider in dimension than that of the inner cylinder 21 (i.e., a fluid-flow cross section of the primary reactor …, Figures 1-2, & 8-10, paragraphs [0057] – [0058]).
It should be noted that “a cap”/“a house” does not recite any structural limitation and will be interpreted as an enclosed structure comprising a recess/cavity to cover/attach/seal to an end of a body. Kodama teaches that the light source 34 is enclosed in a window portion and a recess portion which is attached/sealed to an end of the sterilization unit 2 to cover the chamber (Figures 2 & 9, paragraphs [0100] – [0105]), reading on “a cap”/“a house”.
Regarding claim 23, Kadama teaches that the inflow port 221a is at one end of the sterilization unit 201 while the flow path is developed toward the other end of the sterilization unit 201 (Figures 8-9, paragraphs [0126] – [0129]).
Regarding claim 24, “a first/second average fluid velocity” is not structural limitation, rather a process-limiting parameter which does not differentiate the apparatus claim from the prior art (MPEP 2114). Moreover, since the device of Kodama comprises substantially the same/similar structures as claimed, it is fully capable of performing the claimed functions.
Regarding claim 26, Kadama teaches that the inflow portion 4 or inflow port 221a is in fluid communication with and spaced apart from one end of the casing body 22 (Figures 1-2, & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], & [0128]).
Regarding claim 27, Kodama teaches that the outflow portion 5 or the outflow port 251 is in fluid communication with the inner cylinder 21 at the other end of the casing body 22 which is opposing to the one end (Figures 1-2, & 8-9, paragraphs [0057] – [0058], & [0134]).
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.
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.
Claim 35 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kodama et al (PG-PUB US 20190321505) as applied to claim 21 above, and further in view of Woelk (PG-PUB US 20210138519).
Regarding claim 35, Komada teaches that the light source 34 is enclosed in a UV transparent window 33 that fits in step portions 31a and 31b for sealing the UV light source 34 within the recess portion 32a (Figure 2, paragraphs [0100] – [0105]), but does not teach the window having a curved surface with concave and convex portions.
However, Woelk discloses an ultraviolet treatment apparatus (ABSTRACT). Woelk teaches that the apparatus comprises one or more UV LED 608 enclosed within a cavity having a dome-shaped UV transparent window 604 with concave and convex portions (Figure 6, paragraph [0046]). Woelk further indicates that the curved window can help reduce biofouling and may be a window-as-a-lens integration for more uniform UV distribution (paragraph [0048]).
Therefore, it would be obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art to utilize a curved window as suggested by Woelk in order to reduce biofouling and provide more uniform UV distribution within the device of Kodama.
Conclusion
Claims 21, 23-27, 35, and 38 are rejected.
NOTE: Claims 22, 28-34, and 36-37 directly or indirectly depend upon canceled claim 1. Thus, claims 22, 28-34, and 36-37 will be treated as canceled claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to XIUYU TAI whose telephone number is (571)270-1855. The examiner can normally be reached Mon.-Fri. 9:00-5:00.
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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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.
/XIUYU TAI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights