DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s response filed December 29, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 1, 8-9, 29, 32, and 38-39 are amended. Claims 1-3, 5, 8-9, 28-30, and 32-40 are pending and further considered on the merits.
Response to Amendment
In light of applicant’s amendment, the examiner modifies the grounds of rejection set forth in the office action filed August 27, 2025.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 8-9, and 28-30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandra et al., US 2019/0351352 (Chandra, IDS) in view of Dhiman, US 2014/0353233 (Dhiman) and Fullerton et al., US 7817006 (Fullerton, IDS).
Regarding claim 1, Chandra discloses a filter cartridge (abstract, figs. 1, 14-17) comprising:
A housing having a body comprising a sidewall (REF 230), a top surface (REF 250), a bottom surface (REF 252), an axial length, a longitudinal direction, a radial direction, and an internal cavity (figs. 1, 14-17);
An ingress port (REF 241, fig. 5) and an egress port (REF 242, fig. 5) in fluid communication with said internal cavity (fig. 5);
An attachment member (REF 352, 354, 356, figs. 14, 16-17) connected to or integral with the housing (fig. 14); and
A magnetic structure (REF 272, fig. 14, ¶ 0075) secured to an external surface of the housing and adjacent to or proximate to said attachment member along said longitudinal direction (figs. 14, 16-17), said magnetic structure having a radially outwardly-facing surface (REF 272, fig. 14).
While Chandra discloses the attachment member and magnetic structure located proximate the housing sidewall (fig. 14), Chandra does not disclose these components being located on the housing sidewall. However, Dhiman discloses a filter cartridge (REF 116, fig. 1A) where a magnetic structure and attachment member (REF 120, figs. 1A-1B, see “structure”, ¶ 0021, 0037) are located on a housing sidewall (fig. 1B).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the cartridge of Chandra to have the magnetic structure and attachment members located on the housing sidewall as described in Dhiman since it has been shown that attachment members secured proximate to or on filter cartridge sidewalls are routine in the art and the selection of any of these known equivalents to provide magnetic attachment means would be within the level of ordinary skill in the art (MPEP 2144.06).
Chandra (in view of Dhiman) does not disclose the magnetic structure including a coded polymagnet having a plurality of field emission sources having positions and polarities relating to a predefined spatial force function that corresponds to a predetermined alignment of said field emission sources, the predefined spatial force function being a magnetic shear force. However, Fullerton discloses a magnetic attachment system including a first and second field emission structures, where each field emission structure includes multiple magnetic field emission sources having positions and polarities relating to a predefined spatial force function that corresponds to a predetermined alignment of the field emission structures (abstract, C2/L8-26), the predefined spatial force function including a magnetic shear force (C15/L40-49).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the magnetic structure of Chandra (in view of Dhiman) to include the correlated polymagnet system described in Fullerton in order to allow precision alignment and attachment (C1/L63-C2/L3) and prevent inadvertent disengagement (C11/L28-40).
Regarding claim 3, Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) discloses a cartridge where the magnetic structure (REF 272) outwardly-facing surface extends no further radially than an outward-most radial extension of said housing body (figs. 14-17).
Regarding claim 5, Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) discloses the magnetic structure (REF 272) outwardly-facing surface extends parallel to a longitudinal axis of said housing body (figs. 14, 15-17).
Regarding claims 8-9, Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) discloses a cartridge wherein said magnetic structure and attachment member are proximate said housing top surface along the housing sidewall (see combination of Chandra and Dhiman relied upon in the rejection of claim 1).
Regarding claim 28, Chandra (in view of Fullerton) discloses a cartridge where said attachment member (REF 352, 354, 356) has a contacting surface extending in a direction perpendicular to a longitudinal axis of said housing body (fig. 14).
Regarding claim 29, Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) discloses a cartridge where said attachment member comprises on one side a substantially planar surface (REF 354) extending approximately parallel to the top surface of the housing (fig. 14).
Regarding claim 30, Chandra (in view of Fullerton) discloses a cartridge where said attachment member comprises on one side a contacting surface (REF 354) forming a first angle (i.e. 90 degrees) with respect to a longitudinal axis of said housing body, and an adjacent side (‘rounded side’ of REF 354) forming a second angle with respect to said longitudinal axis, such that the first angle and the second angle are not equal (fig. 14).
Claim(s) 2 and 32-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandra in view of Dhiman and Fullerton as relied upon in the rejection of claim 1 set forth above, and in further view of Huda et al., US 9233322 (Huda, IDS).
Regarding claim 2, while Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) discloses a cartridge with upwardly extending ingress and egress fluid ports (figs. 11-13), Chandra does not disclose a cartridge where the ingress and egress ports are radially offset from a center axis of the housing body. However, Huda discloses that it is common to place fluid ports in a position radially offset from a center axis of a filter cartridge housing body (abstract, REF 410a/b, figs. 1-5).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to modify the ports of Chandra (in view of Dhiman and Fullerton) to have a radially offset position as described in Huda since it has been shown that such alternative design is equally effective in providing adequate fluid flow into and out of a filter cartridge.
Regarding claims 32-36 and 38-39, Chandra (in view of Dhiman, Fullerton, and Huda) is relied upon in the rejection of claims 1-3, 5, and 8-9 as set forth above.
Regarding claim 37, Fullerton further discloses that the predefined spatial force function is a magnetic repulsion force (C6/L50-63, C10/L51-67).
Regarding claim 40, Chandra (in view of Dhiman, Fullerton, and Huda) discloses the magnetic structure (REF 272) radially outwardly-facing surface presents in a direction away from a center axis of said housing body (figs. 14-17).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Dhiman, US 2014/0353233.
Conclusion
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 DIRK R BASS whose telephone number is (571)270-7370. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached on (571) 270-3240. 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.
DIRK R. BASS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1779
/DIRK R BASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779