DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 19 is 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 19 is indefinite because the phrase “the plurality of apertures” lack antecedent basis. Claim 19 depends on claim 18 but does not further limit claim 18 as both recite “a drain conduit extends from a lower end of the liquid introduction section to return the liquid removed from the air in the liquid removal section to the liquid tank. It appears that claim 19 should instead depend on claim 2 and the Examiner will treat claim 19 as it is dependent on claim 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 1 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yun US 2007/0051245.
Regarding claims 1 and 16, Yun teaches a wet filtration device comprising (see Figure 15 and [0048]):
a) A housing (Figure 15, 909) having an air intake 905 and an air outlet 932;
b) An air conduit 906 downwardly (pertinent to claim 16) extending between the air intake 905 and air outlet 932; and
c) A centrifuge fan 908 positioned in the air conduit 906 and configured to suction air from intake 905 and propel the air downward to the air outlet 932 ([0048], [0055]); wherein
d) The air conduit 906 is fluidically connected to a liquid introduction section including liquid source 901 and pipe 902 that introduces liquid into the air in the air channel ([0048]); and
e) A liquid removal section 919 configured to guide air down centrifugally downward from the liquid introduction section 901 to separate air (outlet via 932) from liquid (drains to 941) by centrifugal force ([0048]).
Regarding claim 18, Yun teaches a drain 941 and drain conduit 911 that extends from the lower end of the liquid removal section 919 and routes the liquid to the liquid tank 901 ([0048]).
Regarding claim 20, the interior walls of the chamber include arcute walls 416 that are configured to direct the air along a helical path [0055]).
Regarding claim 21, the air outlet comprises an exhaust pipe that extends centrally from the air outlet 932 in the bottom portion of the chamber with an opening to receive the air (Figure 9).
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.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun US 2007/0051245 in view of Chisel US 6,641,635.
Regarding claim 17, Yun teaches the liquid introduction section 901 into the air intake 905 using an atomizer, but does not clearly disclose that the liquid introduction section itself defines and upward air path.
However, Chisel teaches a liquid based air filtration system where air enters the chamber at the bottom and exits at the top while liquid enters through the heads at the top and sides having holes so that falling water may capture contaminants in the upward-moving air stream (column 3 lines 50-65). It would therefore have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the liquid/air introduction section in Yun to allow an upward air flow and improve contaminant capture before downstream centrifugal liquid removal.
Claims 23 and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yun US 2007/0051245 in view of Lakdawala US Patent 8,523,970.
Regarding claim 23, Yun does not explicitly teach wheels on the device for easy transport. Lakdawala teaches adding wheels to the air filter to allow portability (column 2 lines 15-20). Thus, one having ordinary skill in the art would find it obvious to include wheels for easy transport.
Regarding claim 24, Yun does not explicitly teach duct adaptors for securely coupling a duct to the intake and outlet. However, these adaptors are known in the art as shown in Lakdawala who teaches a rigid collar sized to fit over ducts in order to provide secure placement and support (column 3 lines 20-45). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to include known means to secure ducts to the inlet and outlet during operation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-15 and 19 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 prior art does not teach or fairly suggest a reservoir positioned above the liquid introduction section, the reservoir having a plurality of apertures configured to allow the fluid to precipitate from the reservoir into the air in the air channel.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARON PREGLER whose telephone number is (571)270-5051. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9am - 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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571) 272-5954. 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.
/SHARON PREGLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights