CTNF 18/530,217 CTNF 82971 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. DETAILED ACTION 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “blowing device” in claims 2 and 5. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. Specifically, the corresponding structure for the “blowing device” is a blower (see [0024] on p. 4 of Specification). If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. 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 Claims 3-4 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. 07-34-05 AIA Claim 3 recites the limitation " the fragrance generators " in line 2 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. In Claim 3, it is not clear whether the limitation “the fragrance generator” in lines 4 and 5 are attempting to point to “the fragrance generator” as set forth in the parent claim 1 or to one of “the plurality of” fragrance generators as set forth in line 2. Claim 4 is rejected due to its dependence on a rejected claim. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim (KR20030062375) . As to Claim 1, Kim (‘375) discloses a vehicle fragrance supply device (see Figure 1), comprising: a fragrance generator (18) configured to generate a fragrance; a fragrance supply pipe (i.e. conduit connecting 18 and 19) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (18) to a vehicle cabin interior (29); and an ion supply pipe (i.e. conduit connecting 19 and 20) connected (via 19) to the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. conduit connecting 18 and 19), through which ions generated at an ion generator (19) flow (see Figure 1) . 07-15 AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim (KR20030077064) . As to Claim 1, Kim (‘375) discloses a vehicle fragrance supply device (see Figure 1), comprising: a fragrance generator (19) configured to generate a fragrance; a fragrance supply pipe (i.e. supply line which includes 20 and a conduit connecting 19 and 20 ) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (19) to a vehicle cabin interior (17); and an ion supply pipe (i.e. conduit connecting 18 and 19) connected (via 19) to the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. supply line which includes 20 and a conduit connecting 19 and 20), through which ions generated at an ion generator (18) flow (see Figure 1) . 07-15 AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Wang (CN107953752) . As to Claim 1, Wang (‘752) discloses a vehicle fragrance supply device (see entire document, particularly Figure 1; English translation, Abstract), comprising: a fragrance generator (7) configured to generate a fragrance (see entire document, particularly Figure 1; English translation, particularly p. 3 – 2 nd line from the bottom); a fragrance supply pipe (i.e. conduit from 7 to the air outlet) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (7) to a vehicle cabin interior (see entire document, particularly Figure 1; English translation, p. 3 – 2 nd to 4 th lines from the bottom); and an ion supply pipe (i.e. conduit from 6 and 7) connected (via 7) to the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. conduit from 7 to the air outlet), through which ions generated at an ion generator (7) flow (see Figure 1) . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Chang (CN210970611) . As to Claim 1, Chang (‘611) discloses a vehicle fragrance supply device (100) (see entire document, particularly Figures 1-2; English translation, Abstract), comprising: a fragrance generator (176) configured to generate a fragrance (see entire English translation, particularly Abstract, p. 1 – “technical field”, p. 2 lines 12-14); a fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (176) to a vehicle cabin interior (see entire document, particularly Figures 1-2; English translation, Abstract, p. 1 – “technical field”, p. 6 – 4 th – 6 th paragraphs); and an ion supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 162 to 164 that enters opening on 174) connected to the fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) (see Figures 1-3), through which ions generated at an ion generator (160) flow (see Figures 1-3; English translation, p. 6 – 4 th paragraph). As to Claim 2, Chang (‘611) discloses that a blowing device (110) is provided at the fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) (see Figure 1), and the ion supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 162 to 164 that enters opening on 174) is connected to the fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) between the blowing device (110) and the fragrance generator (176). As to Claim 5, Chang (‘611) discloses that a blowing device (110) is provided at the fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) (see Figure 1), and the ion supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 162 to 164 that enters opening on 174) is connected to the fragrance supply pipe (172, 174, 120) at a downstream side of the blowing device (110) (see Figure 1) . 07-15 AIA Claim s 1 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by Kim (KR20080104960) . As to Claim 1, Kim (‘960) discloses a vehicle fragrance supply device (see entire document, particularly Figures 1-4; English translation, Abstract), comprising: a fragrance generator (50, 51, 52) configured to generate a fragrance (see entire document, particularly Figures 2-3; English translation, particularly p. 4 lines 23-29); a fragrance supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 40 and 30 to 51-52 and 60) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (50-52) to a vehicle cabin interior (see entire document, particularly Figures 1-3; English translation, p. 4 lines 18-24); and an ion supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 60 to 33, 22, 90) connected to the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 40 and 30 to 51-52 and 60), through which ions generated at an ion generator (60) flow (see Figures 2-3; English translation, p. 4 lines 22-24). As to Claim 5, Kim (‘960) discloses that a blowing device (30) is provided at the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 40 and 30 to 51-52 and 60) (see Figures 2-3), and the ion supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 60 to 33, 22, 90) is connected to the fragrance supply pipe (i.e. airflow path from 40 and 30 to 51-52 and 60) at a downstream side of the blowing device (30) (see Figures 2-3) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim (s) 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN107953752) or Chang (CN210970611) or Kim (KR20080104960 or KR20030062375 or KR20030077064) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Koetteritz (DE102008033826) . Wang (‘752) or Chang (‘611) or Kim (‘960 or ‘375 or ‘064) is relied upon for disclosure described in the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1). None of Wang (‘752), Chang (‘611) and Kim (‘960 or ‘375 or ‘064) appears to specifically teach that a plurality of the fragrance generators are provided, nor that the vehicle fragrance supply device further comprises a switch valve that is switchabte between a state in which one of the plurality of fragrance generators is communicated with the fragrance supply pipe, and a state in which another of the plurality of fragrance generators is communicated with the fragrance supply pipe. It was known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a plurality of fragrance generators with a switch valve in a fragrance supply device. Koetteritz (‘826) discloses a fragrance supply device (10) (see Figure) comprising: a plurality of fragrance generators (18, 28, 12) configured to generate a fragrance; a fragrance supply pipe (20, 30) configured to supply a generated scent from the fragrance generator (30) to a cabin interior capable of being a vehicle interior (see Figure 2); and a switch valve (34; 36) that is switchabte between a state in which one (18) of the plurality of fragrance generators (18, 28, 12) is communicated with the fragrance supply pipe (20, 30), and a state in which another (28) of the plurality of fragrance generators (18, 28, 12) is communicated with the fragrance supply pipe (20, 30) (see Figure), in order to enable switching between multiple/different fragrances to the vehicle cabin interior (see entire English translation, particularly p. 3 – 2 nd – 6 th lines from the bottom). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in this art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a plurality of fragrance generators and a switch valve with the vehicle fragrance supply device of Wang or Chang or Kim as a known configuration in order to provide multiple/different fragrances to the vehicle cabin interior as shown by Koetteritz. Moreover, as to Claim 4, it would have been obvious to and well within the purview of one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a switch valve such as four-way switch valve where the ion supply pipe is connected to the four-way valve that is able to switch to a state in which the ion supply pipe rather than one of the plurality of fragrance generators is communicating with the fragrance supply pipe as a known alternate configuration in the vehicle fragrance supply device of Wang or Chang or Kim in order to allow selective control over which composition (i.e. one of a plurality of fragrances or ion) is provided to the vehicle cabin interior as desired. Only the expected results would be attained. Thus, Claims 3-4 would have been obvious within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 103 over the combined teachings of Wang (‘752) or Chang (‘611) or Kim (‘960 or ‘375 or ‘064), and Koetteritz (‘826) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The following references relate either to the field of the invention or subject matter of the invention, but are not relied upon in the rejection of record: KR20170057027 and KR20140001328 and KR200316162 and CN217969192 and JP2003129994 and JP2003033677 and CN110481280 (a vehicle interior air treatment device comprised of an ion generator and a fragrance generator), WO03074304 (a vehicle air ionizer), FR3069809 and FR3051403 (an air purifier with an ionizer and a fragrance diffuser), CN101098650 (an air purification device with a plurality of fragrance generators), CN217245714 (a vehicle fragrance supply device with a plurality of fragrance generators with switch valves) . Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to REGINA M YOO whose telephone number is (571)272-6690. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm EST. 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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571)270-7698. 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. /REGINA M YOO/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1758 Application/Control Number: 18/530,217 Page 2 Art Unit: 1758
Prosecution Insights