CTNF 18/527,428 CTNF 97286 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement(s) filed on 04/16/2024 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement(s) is/are being considered by the examiner. Drawings 06-36 AIA The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the signal generator (claim 1), receiver (claim 10) and feedback generator (claim 19) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim (s) 1 and 4-6 is/are objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1, line 11, recites “…based on the adsorption estimate…” but should recite “…based on the an adsorption estimate…” due to lack of antecedent basis. Claim 4, line 1, recites “…wherein the future parameter estimations are based…” but should recite “…wherein the parameter trend retriever retrieves future parameter estimations and the future parameter estimations are based…” as seen on page 35, line 30 to page 36, line 2 for clarity as it there is a lack of antecedent basis for future parameter estimations. Claim 5, recites “…wherein the future parameter estimations are modified by the future parameter indications” but should recite “…wherein the future parameter estimations are modified by the a future parameter indications” due to lack of antecedent basis. Claim 6, line 31-32, recites “…wherein the concentration estimation is adjusted accordingly” but should recite “…wherein the a concentration estimation is adjusted accordingly” due to lack of antecedent basis . Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows: Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more. Claim 1 is directed to “a system,” (i.e. a machine), claim 10 is directed to “a method,” (i.e. a process) and claim 19 is directed to “a device” (i.e. a machine), hence the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). In other words, Step 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.” However, the claims are drawn to an abstract idea of “retrieving parameter information” and “ generating a predicted capacity estimate” in the form of “mental processes,” in terms of processes that can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement or opinion). The claims are further drawn to an abstract idea of “a real time capacity estimator that, based on the parameter information retrieved, solves a set of controlling equations to generate an estimated capacity, wherein the controlling equations are a set of mass and energy balance equation” or “a predicted capacity estimator to, based on the device specification, the use condition, the set of site parameters and the set of expected parameter values, predict a filter capacity by solving a set of controlling equations” or “generate an estimate for a predicted filter capacity by solving a set of control equations comprising the updated set of default estimate parameter” in the form of “mathematical calculations,” an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number. These limitations simply describe a process of data gathering and manipulation, which is partially analogous to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection analysis” (i.e. Electric Power Group, LLC, v. Alstom, 830 F.3d 1350, 119 U.S.P.Q.2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016)) and an act of calculating using mathematical methods to determine a variable or number, which is partially analogous to “ calculating a number representing an alarm limit value using the mathematical formula ‘‘B1=B0 (1.0–F) + PVL(F)’’ (i.e. Parker v. Flook, 437 U.S. 584, 585, 198 USPQ 193, 195 (1978)). Hence, these limitations are akin to an abstract idea which has been identified among non-limiting examples to be an abstract idea. In other words, Step 2A, Prong 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.” Furthermore, the claims do not include additional elements that either alone or in combination are sufficient to claim a practical application because to the extent that, e.g., “a signal generator,” “receiver” and “feedback generator” are merely claimed to generally link the use of a judicial exception (e.g., pre-solution activity of data gathering and post-solution activity of presenting data) to (1) a particular technological environment or (2) field of use, per MPEP §2106.05(h); and are applying the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, per MPEP §2106.05(f). In other words, the claimed “a parameter retriever that retrieves parameter information for an atmosphere around the filter; a parameter trend retriever that retrieves historical parameter indications from a database; a real time capacity estimator that, based on the parameter information retrieved, solves a set of controlling equations to generate an estimated capacity, wherein the controlling equations are a set of mass and energy balance equations; a parameter projection generator that, based on the historic parameter indications, generates a future parameter trend for the atmosphere and filter use; a predicted capacity estimator that, based on the adsorption estimate, and based on the future parameter trend, generates a predicted capacity estimate” and “retrieve a set of default estimate parameters for a filter; retrieve a future parameter value indication for the filter; update the set of default estimate parameters; and generate an estimate for a predicted filter capacity by solving a set of control equations comprising the updated set of default estimate parameter” is not providing a practical application, thus Step 2A, Prong 2 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.” Likewise, the claims do not include additional elements that either alone or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because to the extent that, e.g. “a signal generator,” “receiver” and “feedback generator” are claimed, these are generic, well-known, and conventional elements. As evidence that these are generic, well-known, and a conventional elements (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known, the Applicant’s specification discloses these in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), per MPEP § 2106.07(a) III (a). As such, this satisfies the Examiner’s evidentiary burden requirement per the Berkheimer memo. The element of “a signal generator” is described on page 35, lines 24-26, states: “The system also includes a signal generator that generates a signal if either the estimated capacity or the predicted capacity estimate is above a threshold.” This element is a generic signal generator used to generate a signal with no description beyond what is otherwise known to be in existence. Similarly, the element of “a feedback generator” is described on page 40, lines 1-3, states “The device also includes a feedback generator that generates a feedback signal indicative of the predicted filter capacity.” This element is a generic feedback signal generator used to generate a signal with no description beyond what is otherwise known to be in existence. The element of “a receiver” has not been described in the specification with more details than what is within the claims, as such the receiver is a generic receiver used to receive data. As such, the elements of “a signal generator,” “receiver” and “feedback generator” are reasonably understood as ubiquitous standard equipment within modern computers/inhalers having generic, well-known, and conventional elements and the elements do not provide anything significantly more. Therefore, Step 2B, of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.” In addition, dependent claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20 do not provide a practical application and are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As such, dependent claims 2-9, 11-18 and 20 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on their respective dependencies to claim 1, 10 or 19. Therefore, claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA 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. 07-34-01 Claim(s) 7-8 is/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. Claim 7, line 1-2, recites “wherein the adsorption estimate generator solves the set of controlling equations in substantially real time” however, it is unclear what the adsorption estimate generator is referring to. Claim 1 discusses a real time capacity estimator which solves a set of controlling equations to generate an estimated capacity. It is unclear whether or not the adsorption estimate generator is the same as the real time capacity estimator or a different estimator altogether as the specification only reiterates what is in the claims (see page 36, lines 31-32). For examination purposes, as best understood, the real time capacity estimator is equivalent to the adsorption estimate generator. Claim(s) 8 are rejected as they depend from and therefore incorporate the claimed subject matter rejected under this statute. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-fti 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) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2, 4, 7-10 and 14-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Truex (WO 2012033852 A1) . Regarding claim 1, Parham teaches a predicted remaining filter capacity estimation system (system 100, see Fig. 1; Parham teaches system 100 to determine a residual service life ("RSL") and an end of service life ("ESL") for a filter 102 as seen in Figs. 1 and 3 and [0018]) comprising: a parameter retriever that retrieves parameter information for an atmosphere around the filter (Parham teaches one or more sensors 212, 214 and 216 that measures exposure data in which the exposure data is representative of one or more ambient conditions to which filter 102 is exposed to including a pressure, a temperature, a concentration of one or more other contaminants or chemical species, and the like as seen in [0020] and [0027]) ; a parameter trend retriever that retrieves historical parameter indications from a database (Parham teaches the input device 108 can communicate values for the ambient conditions that are stored in a memory of the input device 108 and further teaches the contaminant exposure can be calculated based on the history of the filter 102, such as historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations to which the filter 102 has been exposed to as seen in [0025]) ; a real time capacity estimator that, based on the parameter information retrieved, generates an estimated capacity (Parham teaches monitoring module 106 receiving exposure data from the sensors 212, 214 and 216 for a service life estimate that is representative of the estimated exposure time that the filter 102 may be exposed to ambient conditions as seen in [0029]) ; a parameter projection generator that, based on the historic parameter indications, generates a future parameter trend for the atmosphere and filter use (Parham teaches environmental data including historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations and predetermined values for one or more ambient conditions as seen in [0025] and [0026]. Parham further teaches using the environmental data to determine a service life prediction as seen in [0030] and [0039] which is based on atmosphere (due to the ambient conditions) and filter use (due to the historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations)) ; a predicted capacity estimator that, based on the adsorption estimate, and based on the future parameter trend, generates a predicted capacity estimate (Parham teaches the monitoring module 106 to compare the service life estimate and service life prediction to determine a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator as see in [0030]) ; and a signal generator (alarm unit 112, see Fig. 3) that generates a signal if either the estimated capacity or the predicted capacity estimate is above a threshold (Parham teaches at 328, a determination is made as to whether an alarm should be activated to warn an operator that a filter is at or is approaching the end of service life for the filter as seen in Fig. 3 and [0050]. The determination examines the value of the end of service life indicator to see if it has a value of one or a value above a predetermined threshold and if so, it will activate as seen in [0052]. Similarly, if the determination examines the value of the residual life indicator to be a value of zero or less than a predetermined threshold, the alarm will activate as seen in [0052]) . But does not teach a real time capacity estimator that, based on the parameter information retrieved, solves a set of controlling equations to generate an estimated capacity, wherein the controlling equations are a set of mass and energy balance equations However, Truex teaches a real time capacity estimator that, based on the parameter information retrieved, solves a set of controlling equations to generate an estimated capacity, wherein the controlling equations are a set of mass and energy balance equations (Truex teaches the central processing unit can estimate a total amount of airborne contaminants for any period of elapsed time from the value of the concentration output from the concentration sensor and the value of the air flow from the air flow sensor and further teaches equations to determine the remaining life service of the sorbent as seen in [00047]-[00052]. Furthermore, the CPU can integrate all signals received from the sensors as parameters change in real time as seen in [00053] and [00095]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Parham to include central processing unit and equations taught by Truex as an alternative known method to determine the remaining service life of the sorbent of the filter (see [00047]-[00052] and [00036]). Regarding claim 2, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 1 , and Parham further teaches wherein the parameter information comprises a first concentration value for a first contaminant and a second concentration value for a second contaminant (Parham teaches sensors 12, 14 and 16 to measure the concentration of one or more chemical contaminants as seen in [0022], and therefore, the sensors can include information for a first concentration value for a first contaminant and a second concentration value for a second contamination) . Regarding claim 4, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 1 , and Parham further teaches wherein the future parameter estimations are based on a set of historic parameter values for the atmosphere (see claim objection above; Parham teaches the environmental data to include historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations such as a previous humidity exposure [0025] and [0026] and the environmental data is used to determine a service life prediction as seen in [0030] and [0039]). Parham further teaches the monitoring module 106 to compare the service life estimate and service life prediction to determine a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator as see in [0030]). Regarding claim 7, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 1 , and Truex further teaches wherein the adsorption estimate generator solves the set of controlling equations in substantially real time (Truex teaches the central processing unit can estimate a total amount of airborne contaminants for any period of elapsed time from the value of the concentration output from the concentration sensor and the value of the air flow from the air flow sensor and further teaches equations to determine the remaining life service of the sorbent as seen in [00047]-[00052]. Furthermore, the CPU can integrate all signals received from the sensors as parameters change in real time as seen in [00053] and [00095]) . Regarding claim 8, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 7 , and Truex further teaches wherein the controlling equations are partial differential equations (Truex teaches the equation to include a partial differential equation as seen in equation 1 in [0047], wherein the data is integrated) . Regarding claim 9, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 1 , and further teaches further comprising: a controller that initiates retrieval of parameter information by the parameter retriever and generation of the adsorption estimate (Parham teaches monitoring module 106 and/or sub-modules 510-514 to be implemented with a single processor or multiple processors, wherein the sub-modules 510-514 are to perform one or more of the actions and determinations described above in connection with the process 300 as seen in Figs. 3 and 5 and [0055]). Regarding claim 10, Parham teaches a method of predicting a remaining capacity estimate for a filter (Parham teaches system 100 and method to determine a residual service life ("RSL") and an end of service life ("ESL") for a filter 102 as seen in Figs. 1 and 3 and [0017]- [0018]) , the method providing: retrieving a specification for a filter and a use condition for a device comprising the filter (Parham teaches obtaining exposure data 318 (see Fig. 3 and [0043]), wherein the exposure data includes information related to the filter such as properties of the filter, the adsorbent materials included in the filter 102, the packing density of the adsorbent materials in the filter 102, additional materials in the filter 102, the arrangement of the materials with respect to one another in the filter 102, and the like as seen in [0023]. Parham further teaches obtaining environmental data 308 (see Fig. 3 and [0035]), wherein the environmental data includes a previous chemical contaminant exposure that is a value of a total amount of a chemical contaminant that the filter 102 has been exposed as seen in [0025]. The environmental data further includes predetermined information associated with the respirator in which the filters 102 are coupled to as seen in [0025]) ; retrieving a set of environmental parameters for a site (Parham teaches obtaining exposure data which is measured by sensors 212, 215 and 216 and further includes concentration of the chemical contaminant, pressure, temperature, and humidity that surrounds the filter 102 as seen in Fig. 2-3 and [0020]). retrieving a set of expected parameter values for the site (Parham teaches obtaining environmental data including historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations and predetermined values for ambient conditions as seen in Fig. 3 and [0025]-[0026]); initiating a predicted capacity estimator to, based on the device specification, the use condition, the set of site parameters and the set of expected parameter values, predict a filter capacity (Parham teaches monitoring module 106 receiving exposure data from the sensors 212, 214 and 216 for a service life estimate that is representative of the estimated exposure time that the filter 102 may be exposed to ambient conditions as seen in [0029]. The environmental data is further inputted into the monitoring module 106 using input device 108, wherein the environmental data including historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations and predetermined values as seen in [0025] and [0026]. Parham further teaches using the environmental data to determine a service life prediction as seen in [0030] and [0039]. The monitoring module 106 to then compare the service life estimate and service life prediction to determine a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator as see in Fig. 3 and [0030]. As such, the exposure data comprising information related to the filter and data measured by the sensors and environmental data comprising including a previous chemical contaminant exposure that is a value of a total amount of a chemical contaminant that the filter 102 has been exposed and predetermined values for ambient conditions is used to predict a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator) . But does not teach initiating a predicted capacity estimator to, based on the device specification, the use condition, the set of site parameters and the set of expected parameter values, predict a filter capacity by solving a set of controlling equations; and providing the predicted filter capacity to a receiver. However, Truex teaches initiating a predicted capacity estimator to, based on the device specification, the use condition, the set of site parameters and the set of expected parameter values, predict a filter capacity by solving a set of controlling equations (Truex teaches using a RFID to store data or information that the canister has been put in service and update based upon the service with a remaining life as % of original capacity as seen in [00023] and [00081], such that the central processing unit will accept the information and integrate it. The RFID further contains information for the filter, cartridge and canister equipment as seen in [00076]-[00077]. Also, Truex teaches the central processing unit can estimate a total amount of airborne contaminants for any period of elapsed time from the value of the concentration output from the concentration sensor and the value of the air flow from the air flow sensor and further teaches equations to determine the remaining life service of the sorbent as seen in [00047]-[00052], wherein equation 3 includes predetermined values for compensation factors); and providing the predicted filter capacity to a receiver (RFID; Truex teaches the data from the CPU calculations can be depicted on a display after communicating with a RFID as seen in [00052] and [00078]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method taught by Parham to include the central processing unit and the multiple equations taught by Truex as an alternative known method to determine the remaining service life of the sorbent of the filter (see [00047]-[00052] and [00036]). Furthermore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include a RFID and display as taught by Truex to display the information on a screen in a convenient location for visual observation (see [00084]). Regarding claim 14, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , and Truex further teaches wherein the controlling equations comprise a mass balance and an energy balance equation derived to model a mass transfer effect through a sorbent bed (Truex teaches the central processing unit can estimate a total mass of airborne contaminants for any period of elapsed time from the value of the concentration output from the concentration sensor and the value of the air flow from the air flow sensor and further teaches multiple equations to determine the remaining life service of the sorbent as seen in [00047]-[00052]). Regarding claim 15, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , and Parham further teaches wherein the specifications for the device comprise filter specifications for a filter within the device (Parham teaches obtaining exposure data 318 (see Fig. 3 and [0043]), wherein the exposure data includes information related to the filter such as properties of the filter, the adsorbent materials included in the filter 102, the packing density of the adsorbent materials in the filter 102, additional materials in the filter 102, the arrangement of the materials with respect to one another in the filter 102, and the like as seen in [0023]) . Regarding claim 16, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , and Parham further teaches wherein the environmental parameters comprise a temperature, a relative humidity, a pressure, a contaminant, or a contaminant concentration for the site (Parham teaches obtaining exposure data which is measured by sensors 212, 215 and 216 and further includes concentration of the chemical contaminant, pressure, temperature, and humidity that surrounds the filter 102 as seen in Fig. 2-3 and [0020]). Regarding claim 17, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , and further teaches wherein the steps of initiating and providing proceed automatically if the retrieved set of environmental parameters differ from a stored set of environmental parameters by more than a threshold (Parham teaches obtaining environmental data including historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations and predetermined values for ambient conditions as seen in Fig. 3 and [0025]-[0026]. Fig. 3 shows environmental data being obtained in 308 (see [0035]), exposure data being obtained in 318 (see [0043]) and continuing the process of initiating the values of one or more monitoring indices in 312 and determining RLI and ESLI as seen in [0044]-[0045]. As such, the steps of initiation proceeds whether or not the retrieved set of exposure data is different from predetermined environmental parameters). Regarding claim 18, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , and further teaches and also comprising: retrieving a device use condition (Parham further teaches obtaining environmental data 308 (see Fig. 3 and [0035]), wherein the environmental data includes a previous chemical contaminant exposure that is a value of a total amount of a chemical contaminant that the filter 102 has been exposed as seen in [0025]) ; and wherein the estimated remaining capacity is based on the device use condition (Parham teaches using the environmental data to determine a service life prediction as seen in [0030] and [0039]. The monitoring module 106 to then compare the service life estimate and service life prediction to determine a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator as see in Fig. 3 and [0030]. As such, environmental data including a previous chemical contaminant exposure that is a value of a total amount of a chemical contaminant that the filter 102 has been exposed to is used predict a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 and 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Truex (WO 2012033852 A1) , as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yu (US 20170361133 A1) . Regarding claim 3, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 1 , and Parham further teaches the input device 108 is capable of receiving environmental data and communicating the environmental data to the monitoring module 106 as seen in [0025]. But does not teach wherein the parameter trend retriever retrieves future parameter estimations from a weather report. However, Yu teaches wherein the parameter trend retriever retrieves future parameter estimations from a weather report (Yu teaches the controller may access daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts as seen in [0135]. Yu further teaches CSS 3902 to use information from new updates 3904 and the weather service 3906 as seen in Fig. 39 and [0162]- [0165]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Parham in view of Truex to include the controller and clean space server as taught by Yu to retrieve information such as daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts using the weather service to inform the user of potential data that may have the user change locations (see [0164]-[0165]). Regarding claim 5, Parham in view of Truex teaches the system of claim 4 , but does not teach wherein the future parameter estimations are modified by the future parameter indications. However, Yu teaches wherein the future parameter estimations are modified by the future parameter indications (Yu teaches the controller may access daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts as seen in [0135] and teaches a clean space server 3902 to use information from news updates 3904 and the weather service 3906 as seen in Fig. 39 and [0162]- [0165]. Yu further teaches the system to consult the weather forecast or local air quality indicators to assess the intensity of filtration required for the day, wherein the information received by the sensors can cause the system to automatically adjust certain parameters as seen in [0076]. Therefore, based on the weather and air quality forecasts/indications, parameters may be adjusted) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Parham in view of Truex to include the controller and clean space server as taught by Yu to retrieve information such as daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts using the weather service to inform the user of potential data that may have the user change locations (see [0164]-[0165]). Regarding claim 6, modified Parham teaches the system of claim 5 , and further teaches wherein the future parameter indication comprises a first concentration value, of a first contaminant, and a second concentration value, of a second contaminant, a second contaminant, and wherein the concentration estimation is adjusted accordingly (see claim objection above; Parham teaches sensors 12, 14 and 16 to measure the concentration of one or more chemical contaminants as seen in [0022]. Yu teaches the system to consult the weather forecast or local air quality indicators to assess the intensity of filtration required for the day, wherein the information received by the sensors can cause the system to automatically adjust certain parameters as seen in [0076]. Yu further teaches monitoring in real time for pollutants shown in Table 3 as seen in [0130]-[0132]. As such, modified Parham teaches the future parameter indication comprising a first concentration value for a first contaminant and a second concentration value for a second containment and adjusting certain parameters due to the air quality indicators due to the pollution (see [0163]-[0164] of Yu)) . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Truex (WO 2012033852 A1) , as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Stein (WO 2020128952 A2) . Regarding claim 11, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , but does not teach wherein the set of expected parameter values are based on a process schedule for the site. However, Stein teaches wherein the set of expected parameter values are based on a process schedule for the site (Stein teaches processors 302 to apply one or more models 322 to sensor data 320 to determine whether contamination capture devices 23A are due for replacement as seen in [0098], wherein the models 322 are trained on historical environmental data generated by environmental sensors 312 or sensing stations 21 of FIG. 1 and historical determinations of contaminant capture device lifespan as seen in [0097]-[0099]. As such, Stein teaches a set of expected parameter values associated with contaminant capture for an environment). Parham teaches the environmental data to include historical measurements of the contaminant concentrations such as a previous humidity exposure [0025] and [0026] and the environmental data is used to determine a service life prediction as seen in [0030] and [0039]. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method taught by Parham in view of Truex to include the processor and model taught by Stein to use the historical determinations of the contaminant capture device to determine whether the containment capture device is due for replacement (see [0097]-[0099]). Regarding claim 12, Parham in view of Truex teaches the method of claim 10 , but does not teach wherein the set of expected parameter values are based on a user associated with the filter. However, Stein teaches wherein the set of expected parameter values are based on a user associated with the filter (Stein teaches processors 302 to apply one or more models 322 to determine whether contamination capture device 32A are due for replacement as seen in [0098], wherein models 322 can be trained on historical air pressure data associated with worker 10A as seen in Fig. 3 and [0098]. Stein further teaches worker data 324 to comprise of worker profiles as seen in [0097] and [0107]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the method taught by Parham in view of Truex to include the processor, worker data and models as taught by Stein to create worker profiles to indicate the experience level, training and if the worker has used a particular type of respirator (with filter) before (see [0107]). This allows the processor to determine if the worker has been trained in a specific respirator/contaminant capture device associated with hazards in an environment (see [0107]). Therefore, if a worker has been trained, the parameter values to determine whether the filter/contamination capture device would need to be replaced would be different compared to an untrained worker . 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Truex (WO 2012033852 A1) and Stein (WO 2020128952 A2) , as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Yu (US 20170361133 A1) . Regarding claim 13, modified Parham teaches the method of claim 12 , but does not teach wherein the set of expected parameter values comprise expected location of the user. However, Yu teaches wherein the set of expected parameter values comprise expected location of the user (Yu teaches the controller may access daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts as seen in [0135] and teaches a clean space server 3902 to use information from news updates 3904 and the weather service 3906 as seen in Fig. 39 and [0162]- [0165]. Yu further teaches the system to consult the weather forecast or local air quality indicators to assess the intensity of filtration required for the day, wherein the information received by the sensors can cause the system to automatically adjust certain parameters as seen in [0076]. Therefore, Yu teaches expected parameter values obtained from weather and air forecasts based on the expected location of the user) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by modified Parham to include the controller and clean space server as taught by Yu to retrieve information such as daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts using the weather service to inform the user of potential data that may have the user change locations (see [0164]-[0165]) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Parham (US 20100153023 A1) in view of Truex (WO 2012033852 A1) and Yu (US 20170361133 A1) . Regarding claim 19, Parham teaches a filter capacity prediction estimation device (system 100, see Fig. 1; Parham teaches system 100 to determine a residual service life ("RSL") and an end of service life ("ESL") for a filter 102 as seen in Figs. 1 and 3 and [0018]) comprising: a processing unit (monitoring module 106 and sub-modules 510-514, see Figs. 1 and 5) configured to, upon receipt of an estimate initiation signal: retrieve a set of default estimate parameters for a filter (Parham teaches obtaining exposure data 318 (see Fig. 3 and [0043]), wherein the exposure data includes information related to the filter such as properties of the filter, the adsorbent materials included in the filter 102, the packing density of the adsorbent materials in the filter 102, additional materials in the filter 102, the arrangement of the materials with respect to one another in the filter 102, and the like as seen in [0023]) ; update the set of default estimate parameters (Parham teaches monitoring module 106 receiving exposure data from the sensors 212, 214 and 216 for a service life estimate that is representative of the estimated exposure time that the filter 102 may be exposed to ambient conditions as seen in [0029]. Parham further teaches the service life estimate is dynamically updated during use of the filter 102 as seen in [0029]) ; and generate an estimate for a predicted filter capacity (Parham teaches the monitoring module 106 to compare the service life estimate and service life prediction to determine a residual life indicator and an end of service life indicator as see in [0030]) ; and a feedback generator (alarm unit 112, see Fig. 3) that generates a feedback signal indicative of the predicted filter capacity (Parham teaches at 328, a determination is made as to whether an alarm should be activated to warn an operator that a filter is at or is approaching the end of service life for the filter as seen in Fig. 3 and [0050]. The determination examines the value of the end of service life indicator to see if it has a value of one or a value above a predetermined threshold and if so, it will activate as seen in [0052]. Similarly, if the determination examines the value of the residual life indicator to be a value of zero or less than a predetermined threshold, the alarm will activate as seen in [0052]) . But does not teach retrieve a future parameter value indication for the filter; generate an estimate for a predicted filter capacity by solving a set of control equations comprising the updated set of default estimate parameters. However, Truex teaches generate an estimate for a predicted filter capacity by solving a set of control equations comprising the updated set of default estimate parameters (Truex teaches the central processing unit can estimate a total amount of airborne contaminants for any period of elapsed time from the value of the concentration output from the concentration sensor and the value of the air flow from the air flow sensor and further teaches multiple equations to determine the remaining life service of the sorbent as seen in [00047]-[00052]. Furthermore, the CPU can integrate all signals received from the sensors as parameters change in real time as seen in [00053] and [00095]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Parham to include central processing unit and equations taught by Truex as an alternative known method to determine the remaining service life of the sorbent of the filter (see [00047]-[00052] and [00036]). However, Yu teaches retrieve a future parameter value indication for the filter (Yu teaches the controller may access daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts as seen in [0135]. Yu further teaches CSS 3902 to use information from new updates 3904 and the weather service 3906 as seen in Fig. 39 and [0162]- [0165]) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system taught by Parham in view of Truex to include the controller and clean space server as taught by Yu to retrieve information such as daily and regional weather and air quality forecasts using the weather service to inform the user of potential data that may have the user change locations or set intensities for the filters (see [0164]-[0165]). Regarding claim 20, modified Parham teaches the device of claim 19 , and Yu further teaches wherein the future parameter value indication is a trend for a parameter (Page 36, lines 5-20 of applicant’s specification discusses a future parameter indication such as lower than expected temperature, lower concentration, higher than expected temperature and higher concentration. Yu teaches accessing regional weather and air quality forecasts as seen in [0135] and [0162]-[0165], and would therefore indicate a higher temperature, lower temperature, higher concentration or lower concentration) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Springer (US 20190151686 A1) teaches a PAPR with a filter including sensors that detect measurement, wherein alerts may be provided to the user when the measurements are compared to predetermined thresholds. Ammann (US 6040777 A) teaches indicating the exhaustion of an adsorption filter to indicate a necessary filter change. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tina Zhang whose telephone number is (571)272-6956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM. 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, Brandy Lee can be reached at (571) 270-7410. 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. /TINA ZHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785 /BRANDY S LEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 2 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 3 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 4 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 5 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 6 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 7 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 8 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 9 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 10 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 11 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 12 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 13 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 14 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 15 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 16 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 17 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 18 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 19 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 20 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 21 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 22 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 23 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 24 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 25 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 26 Art Unit: 3785 Application/Control Number: 18/527,428 Page 27 Art Unit: 3785
Prosecution Insights