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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 10 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 line 5 recites “supply tank and a”, but should recite “supply tank, and a” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 1 line 8 reads “wherein,”, but should recite “wherein[[,]]” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 1 line 13 reads “space;”, but should read “space; and” or “space; wherein” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 2 line 3 reads “and an electrolytic stack and”, but should read “[[and]] an electrolytic stack and” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 4 line 4 reads “each the heat dissipation opening”, but should read “each of the heat dissipation openings” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 5 line 3 reads “each the gas guide groove”, but should read “each of the gas guide grooves” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 5 line 4 reads “each the gas guide groove”, but should read “each of the gas guide grooves” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 10 line 4 reads “an gas guide channel”, but should read “a[[n]] gas guide channel” to be grammatically correct;
Claim 10 line 5 reads “and then”, but should read “[[and]] then” to be grammatically correct.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
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 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) 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):
(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). The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) 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). The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), 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) 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) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
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), 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 is: “a supply part for supplying water to the water supply tank” in claim 1.
Because this claim limitation is being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), it is being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this limitation interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f).
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.
Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 1, claim 1 recites the limitation “a control panel for controlling the operation of an electrolyzing water hydrogen-oxygen generator” in lines 5-6. However, the line 1 of the claim recites “a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device”, and line 2 of the claim recites “an electrolytic cell”. Based on the specification, it is considered that the “control panel” is intended to control either the “high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device” or the “electrolytic cell”, rather than a separate “electrolyzing water hydrogen-oxygen generator”, but this is inconsistent with the language of the claim as currently drafted. It is therefore unclear what the “control panel” is intended to control the operation of.
Furthermore, claim 1 recites the limitation “the air guide plate in the water supply tank upper cover” in lines 16-17, but recites the limitation “the air guide plate” in line 18. Because different terms are used, it is unclear whether these recitations are intended to refer to the same or different components of the system.
Furthermore, claim limitation “a supply part for supplying water to the water supply tank” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f). However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Specifically, the specification recites the term “a supply part for supplying water to the water supply tank”, but does not describe any structure associated therewith. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b).
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f);
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Regarding claim 2, claim 2 recites “the electrodes in the electrolytic stack are disposed in a serial-parallel connection mode”. It is unclear, in light of the specification, how this limitation should be interpreted.
Specifically, the term “serial-parallel connection mode” is not a term of art, and is not defined in the specification. Fig. 7 is indicated as depicting the “serial-parallel connection mode”, however Fig. 7 depicts a system comprising two sets of bipolar electrodes on either side of an anode, and it is unclear what specific structural features depicted in Fig. 7 Applicant considers to result in the “serial-parallel connection mode”.
Furthermore, claim 2 depends from claim 1, and therefore incorporates the indefinite language of claim 1.
Claim 2 is therefore indefinite.
Regarding claim 3, claim 3 recites the limitation “a gas outlet pipe” in line 2, however claim 1, from which claim 3 depends, already recites “a gas outlet pipe” in line 16. It is therefore unclear whether claim 3 is intended to recite “the gas outlet pipe”, or whether claim 3 is intended to require two discrete “gas outlet pipes”.
Furthermore, claim 3 depends from claims 1 and 2, therefore incorporates the indefinite language of those claims.
Claim 3 is therefore indefinite.
Regarding claims 4 and 9, claims 4 and 9 depend from claims 1 and 2, and therefore incorporate the indefinite language of claims 1 and 2. Claims 4 and 9 are therefore indefinite.
Regarding claims 5 and 6, claims 5 and 6 depend from claim 1, and therefore incorporate the indefinite language of claim 1. Claims 5 and 6 are therefore indefinite.
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites the limitation "the gas washing" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Specifically, claim 1, from which claim 7 depends, does not recite “gas washing”, but instead recites “secondary cleaning”. Based on the specification, it appears the limitation “gas washing” is intended to refer to this “secondary cleaning”, but this is inconsistent with the usage of two different terms.
Furthermore, claim 7 depends from claim 1, and therefore inherits the indefinite language of claim 1.
Claim 7 is therefore indefinite.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites the limitation “an atomizer is fixed on the fixing plate” in line 2. However, claim 1, from which claim 8 depends, already recites “an atomizer” in line 12. It is therefore unclear whether claim 8 is intended to recite a second “atomizer” in addition to the “atomizer” recited in claim 1, or whether claim 8 is intended to read “the atomizer”.
Furthermore, claim 8 depends from claim 1, and therefore inherits the indefinite language of claim 1.
Claim 8 is therefore indefinite.
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites the limitation “an appropriate amount of water”. The term “an appropriate amount” is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “an appropriate amount” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Specifically, the specification uses the term “an appropriate amount”, but does not provide any indication as to what “an appropriate amount” of water would be.
Furthermore, claim 10 depends from claim 1, and therefore incorporates the indefinite language of claim 1.
Claim 10 is therefore indefinite.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-10 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 1, the prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not reasonably teach or render obvious the cumulative limitations of claim 1, when interpreted as “a control panel for controlling the operation of the electrolytic cell”, and is NOT interpreted as invoking 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), with a particular emphasis on the cumulative structural limitations defining the housing of the system and the relationship between the housing and the other recited components.
The closest prior art is considered to be Lin ‘035 (WO 2022/017035 A1, with citations to US Pat. Pub. 2023/0272544 A1 as the official English language translation on file with the Office), Lin ‘020 (WO 2022/268020 A1 with citations to US Pat. Pub. 2024/0240327 A1 as the official English language translation on file with the Office), Lin ‘914 (WO 2023/035914 A1, with citations to US Pat. Pub. 2024/0368772 A1 as the official English language translation on file with the Office), Watson (US Pat. Pub. 2017/0037815 A1), and Toffoletto (EP 2876187 A1).
Lin ‘035 teaches a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device (“a hydrogen generator” para. 5) for medical care (“to form healthy gas” para. 9), comprising:
a housing (“a housing 10” para. 48 and Figs. 6-8) configured to hold an electrolytic cell (“electrolytic module 22” Id.), a water supply tank (“water tank 21” Id.), and a secondary water tank (“hydrogen water cup 27” Id.);
an upper cover fastened to an upper part of the housing (e.g., Fig. 6 shows the housing comprises an upper cover fastened to the remainder of the housing) and provided with a gas circulation part (“nebulizer 28” para. 48 and Fig. 6 shows the “nebulizer 28” comprises an outlet in the upper cover);
a bottom cover fastened to a bottom of the housing (e.g., Fig. 6 shows the housing comprises a bottom cover fastened to a bottom of the housing); wherein
the water supply tank is provided with a water supply tank upper cover (comprising “water tank upper cover 211”, “humidification cup 25”, and “integrated passageway device 23” para. 48 and Figs. 7-8), an accommodating space is disposed inside the water supply tank upper cover (Fig. 7b shows the “humidification cup 25” and “integrated passageway device 23” comprise spaces for accommodating components), the upper cover is fastened to the housing (Fig. 6 depicts the upper cover as being attached to the remainder of the “housing 10”), and an air guide plate (comprising “gas inlet passageway 232, a gas outlet passageway 233, and a gas communication passageway 234” para. 48 and Figs. 7-8) and an atomizer (“nebulizer 28” para. 48 and Figs. 7-8) are disposed in the accommodating space (e.g., Fig. 7 shows the gas inlet passageway 232, a gas outlet passageway 233, and a gas communication passageway 234” and “nebulizer 28” are disposed in the accommodating space of the water supply tank upper cover);
the electrolytic cell is disposed on the bottom cover at the bottom of the housing (“the electrolytic module 22 can be accommodated in the water tank 21” para. 51, and Fig. 6 shows the water tank is disposed on the bottom cover of the housing), and is connected to the water supply tank (“the electrolytic module 22 can receive water in the water tank 21 to electrolyze water for generating the gas” para. 51), the oxyhydrogen generated by the electrolysis of the electrolytic cell enters the water supply tank for primary cleaning (“the gas comprising hydrogen is outputted and accommodated into the water tank 21” para. 53), and then enters the secondary water tank for secondary cleaning (“the gas comprising hydrogen passes through … the hydrogen water cup 27” para. 56 and Fig. 9), and the cleaned gas is discharged from the gas circulation part (“… and the nebulizer 28” para. 56).
However, Lin ‘035 does not teach the upper cover comprises a supply port for supplying water to the water supply tank, a control panel for controlling the operation of the electrolytic cell is located in the upper cover, wherein a circuit board and a fixing plate for fixing the circuit board are disposed in the accommodating space, the upper cover is sleeved on the outer side of the water supply tank upper cover, the electrolytic cell is connected to a water supply tank arranged thereabove through a pipeline, or the oxyhydrogen generated by the electrolysis of the electrolytic cell passes through a gas outlet pipe and the air guide plate in the water supply upper tank cover to enter the water supply tank, then enters the secondary water supply tank through the air guide plate.
While each of the limitations not taught by Lin ‘035 may reasonably be considered, in isolation, obvious over the prior art of record, no particular motivation to modify Lin ‘035 to comprise all of the modifications necessary to read on the cumulative limitations of claim 1 could be identified in the prior art. It is therefore considered that the cumulative limitations of claim 1, when taken as a whole, are patentably distinguished over Lin ‘035, whether taken alone or in combination with the other cited prior art.
Lin ‘020 teaches a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device for medical care (abstract), comprising:
a housing (“machine housing 1” para. 38 and Fig. 4) configured to hold an electrolytic cell (“electrolytic tank 12” para. 57 and Fig. 4) and a water supply tank (“pure water tank 9” para. 57 and Fig. 4);
an upper cover fastened to an upper part of the housing (see e.g., Fig. 4) including a supply port for supplying water to the water supply tank (“a switch plate 7 is provided on the machine housing 1 corresponding to the water tank cover 10 for adding pure water into the pure water tank 9” para. 59 and Fig. 4);
a control panel for controlling the operation of the electrolyzer (“a display screen 2, a power switch 3 and an LED indicator lamp 4” para. 53 and Fig. 1);
a bottom cover fastened to a bottom of the housing (see e.g., Fig. 4);
wherein the water supply tank is provided with a water supply tank upper cover (“water tank cover 10” para. 59 and Fig. 4); and
the electrolytic cell is disposed on the bottom cover at the bottom of the housing (see e.g., Fig. 4).
However, Lin ‘020 does not teach a secondary water tank or an air guide plate whatsoever, much less in the specific configuration claimed.
Lin ‘914 teaches a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device with a structure comparable to that of Lin ‘035 (see e.g., Figs. 12 and 13) with additional details regarding heat dissipation structures. However, Lin ‘914 does not teach any of the features recited in claim 1 that are missing from Lin ‘035.
Watson teaches a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device (abstract) comprising:
an electrolytic cell (“HHO generators 18a and 18b” para. 15 and Fig. 1a), a water supply tank (“liquid and gas solution tank 12” Id.), and a secondary water tank (“safety bubbler 20” Id.); wherein
the oxyhydrogen generated by the electrolysis cell passes through the water supply tank for primary cleaning, and then enters the secondary water tank for secondary cleaning (para. 17 and Fig. 1a).
However, Watson does not describe the details of the housing arrangement, or even indicate if each of the components is contained in a common housing.
Toffoletto teaches a high-efficiency oxyhydrogen generation device (title) comprising:
an electrolytic cell (“at least one electrolytic cell (2)” abstract and Fig. 1), a water supply tank (“first bubbler 7” para. 50 and Fig. 1), and a secondary water tank (“second bubbler 17” para. 54 and Fig. 1); wherein,
the oxyhydrogen generated by the electrolysis cell passes through the water supply tank for primary cleaning, and then enters the secondary water tank for secondary cleaning (paras. 46, 57).
However, Toffoletto does not describe the details of the housing arrangement.
Therefore, it is considered that the prior of record, alone or in combination, does not disclose or render obvious the cumulative limitations of claim 1. It is therefore considered that claim 1 is patentably distinguished over the prior art of record, and would be allowable if amended to address the rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) established in this Office action.
Regarding claims 2-10, claims 2-10 depend from claim 1, and are therefore patentably distinguished over the prior art of record for at least the reasons enumerated for claim 1. Claims 2-10 would therefore be allowable if amended to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEXANDER R PARENT whose telephone number is (571)270-0948. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 11:00 AM - 6 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, Luan V. 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.
/ALEXANDER R. PARENT/Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights