DETAILED ACTION
The present office action is in response to claims filed on 12/14/2023. Claims 1 – 19 are pending in the application.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 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.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 6, 9, 10, 16, and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “the gravity direction” in lines 2-3, which should recite “a gravity direction” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 6 recites “the gravity direction” in lines 2-3, which should recite “a gravity direction” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 9 recites “the inner side of the housing” in lines 3-4, which should recite “the inside of the housing” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 10 recites “the gravity direction” in lines 3-4, which should recite “a gravity direction” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 10 recites “the another partition” in line 4, which should recite “ another partition” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 16 recites “the gravity direction” in line 4, which should recite “a gravity direction” for proper antecedent basis.
Claim 18 recites “the gravity direction” in line 3, which should recite “a gravity direction” for proper antecedent basis.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 of this title, 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.
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelosi, Jr. et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,202,676) in view of Krippner et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,393,373).
Regarding Claim 1, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
A medical device (10) comprising:
an inner louver (31) that is a ventilation path (as illustrated by the air flow arrows in Figure 4) for ventilation between an outside (the exterior of 10) and an inside (the interior of 10) of a housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1) and has a structure (the structure of 31 is illustrated in Figure 4) in which a plurality of ventilation paths (as illustrated in Figure 4, there are a plurality of ventilation paths formed between adjacent louvers within 31) having a longitudinal cross-sectional shape (each ventilation path has a cross-sectional shape that extends horizontally from the exterior of 31 to the interior of 31) with a predetermined first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) as a longitudinal direction (the horizontal direction is defined herein as the longitudinal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) is arranged along (as illustrated in Figure 4, the plurality of paths through the louver are arranged in a vertically stacked orientation along the vertical direction) a second direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) different from the first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4).
However, Pelosi lacks showing a covering member that covers the inner louver from an outer side of the housing, the covering member including a plurality of ventilation paths that allows ventilation between the outside of the housing and the inner louver.
In the same field of endeavor of medical devices, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
It is known in the medical device (10) art to include a covering member (80 including 84) that covers (as illustrated in Figures 3 and 9a) an inner intake opening (82) from an outer side (as illustrated in Figures 3 and 9a, 80 is located on the outer side of 10) a housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figures 1 and 3), the covering member (80 including 84) including a plurality of ventilation paths (86) that allows ventilation (through 86) between the outside (the exterior of 10) of the housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figures 1 and 3) and the inner intake opening (82).
Further, “it is desirable to form the vent 80 such that its effective projected area 88 can be easily varied… slotted frame 83 around three sides of the opening 82 for removable receipt of covers 84, 84’ of varying patterns and sizes of holes 86, 86’. As such, one cover is easily replaceable with another by sliding them in and out of the slotted frame 83 to quickly and conveniently vary the effective vent projected area”, Col. 11, lines 35-52.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the medical device comprising the inner louver shown by Pelosi to include a covering member that covers the inner louver from an outer side of the housing, the covering member including a plurality of ventilation paths that allows ventilation between the outside of the housing and the inner louver, as taught by Krippner, since it is desirable to form the vent such that its effective projected area can be easily varied by replacing one cover with another quickly and conveniently.
Regarding Claim 2, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The second direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) is a direction orthogonal to (the vertical direction and horizontal direction are orthogonal directions) to the first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 3, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) is a direction along a direction orthogonal to (the horizontal direction is orthogonal to the vertical direction of gravity, as illustrated in Figure 4) a gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 4, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The second direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) is a direction along a gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 5, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The inner louver (31) has a partition (each individual louver blade of 31 is a partition, as illustrated in Figure 4) that partitions each of the plurality of ventilation paths (as illustrated in Figure 4, there are a plurality of ventilation paths formed between adjacent louvers within 31)
Regarding Claim 6, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The partition (each individual louver blade of 31 is a partition, as illustrated in Figure 4) has an inclined surface (as illustrated in Figure 4, the surface of the partition is inclined vertically upward from the inside of the housing towards the outside of the housing) in a gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) from the inside (the interior of 10) of the housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1) toward the outside (the exterior of 10) of the housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 7, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The inclined surface (as illustrated in Figure 4, the surface of the partition is inclined vertically upward from the inside of the housing towards the outside of the housing) of the partition (each individual louver blade of 31 is a partition, as illustrated in Figure 4) is inclined in the gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) toward a predetermined direction (a predetermined, upward angle has a component that extends in the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) in the first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 11, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The inner louver (31) is integrally formed (in the operational state, 31 is integral within 10) with the housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 12, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The inner louver (31) is attachable to and detachable from (during manufacturing, 31 is attached, therefore it is also detachable from) the housing (the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1).
Regarding Claim 13, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
The covering member (84) is attachable to and detachable from (via 83) the housing (the housing of 10).
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Pelosi (Figures 1 and 4) and Krippner (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d) teaches:
A front surface (Krippner: the front surface of 84) of the covering member (Krippner: 80 including 84) has a shape (Krippner: as illustrated in Figure 3, 80 has a rectangular shape) following (it is noted the front surface of 10 is rectangular) a front surface (Pelosi: the front surface of 10) of the housing (the housing of 10).
Regarding Claim 15, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
The covering member (80 including 84) has a structure (as illustrated in Figure 9a_ in which the plurality of ventilation paths (86) having the longitudinal cross-sectional shape (each ventilation path has a cross-sectional shape that extends both horizontally from the exterior of 84 to the interior of 84 and vertically, as illustrated in Figure 9a) with a direction along the second direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a) as the longitudinal direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a) is arranged along the first direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a).
Regarding Claim 16, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
The covering member (80 including 84) has a structure (as illustrated in Figure 9a) in which the plurality of ventilation paths (86) having the longitudinal cross-sectional shape (each ventilation path has a cross-sectional shape that extends both horizontally from the exterior of 84 to the interior of 84 and vertically, as illustrated in Figure 9a) with a direction along a gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a) as the longitudinal direction (the horizontal direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a) is arranged along a direction different from the gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a).
Regarding Claim 17, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
The covering member (80 including 84) has a partition (84) that partitions (as illustrated in Figure 9a) each of the plurality of ventilation paths (86) of the covering member (84).
Regarding Claim 18, Krippner teaches (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d):
The covering member (80 including 84) has a structure (structure illustrated in Figure 9a) that guides (a water droplet is guided downward along the exterior of 84 due to gravity) a water droplet from the outside (the exterior of 10) in a gravity direction (the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 9a).
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Pelosi (Figures 1 and 4) and Krippner (Figures 1, 3, and 9a-9d) teaches:
The inner louver (Pelosi: 31) and the covering member (Krippner: 80 including 84) are disposed in (Pelosi: as illustrated in Figure 4) the housing (Pelosi: the housing of 10) on a back surface portion (30) of a monitor (55, which is a used as a monitor to view the inside of 10).
Claims 8, 9, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelosi, Jr. et al. (U.S. Patent No. 4,202,676) and Krippner et al. (U.S. Patent No. 7,393,373), as recited in Claim 7 above, further in view of Lane (U.S. Patent No. 3,771,430).
Regarding Claim 8, Pelosi shows (Figures 1 and 4):
The inclined surface (as illustrated in Figure 4, the surface of the partition is inclined vertically upward from the inside of the housing towards the outside of the housing) comprises a first inclined surface (the lower part of the individual louver 31 to the left of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4) and a second inclined surface (the upper part of the individual louver 31 to the right of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4).
However, Pelosi lacks showing the first inclined surface and the second inclined surface have different inclinations.
In the same field of endeavor of louver assemblies, Lane teaches (Figures 2 and 4):
It is known in the louver assembly art for a partition (11) to have a first inclined surface (40) and a second inclined surface (44) having different inclines (as illustrated in Figure 4, 44 has a steeper incline than 40).
Further, “due to protruding extension 44, such water is effectively stopped and eventually harmlessly falls to the outside”, Col. 5, lines 13-15.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the second inclined surface shown by Pelosi to have a larger/steeper incline than the first inclined surface, as taught by Lane, to effectively stop water from entering, as it harmlessly falls to the outside.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Pelosi (Figures 1 and 4) and Lane (Figures 2 and 4) teaches:
The first inclined surface (Pelosi: the lower part of the individual louver 31 to the left of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4) is smaller in inclination (as taught by and modified in view of Lane) than the second inclined surface (Pelosi: the upper part of the individual louver 31 to the right of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4) and is disposed closer to (Pelosi: as illustrated in Figure 4) the inside (Pelosi: inside 10) of the housing (Pelosi: the housing of 10, as illustrated in Figure 1) than the second inclined surface (Pelosi: the upper part of the individual louver 31 to the right of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Pelosi (Figures 1 and 4) and Lane (Figures 2 and 4) teaches:
The second inclined surface (Pelosi: the upper part of the individual louver 31 to the right of the midpoint, as illustrated in Figure 4) of the partition (Pelosi: each individual louver blade of 31 is a partition, as illustrated in Figure 4) is disposed at a position through which a water droplet dropped in a gravity direction (Pelosi: the vertical direction, as illustrated in Figure 4) from another partition (Pelosi: the louver 31 adjacent and positioned above the partition) adjacent to the partition (Pelosi: each individual louver blade of 31 is a partition, as illustrated in Figure 4) passes (Pelosi: a water droplet dropped from above onto the upper part of the louver 31 passes off of the upper part).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and is provided in the Notice of References Cited.
The following prior art teaches related medical devices:
Maloney (U.S. Patent No. 8,007,351): see Figures 2 and 4
Heselton et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2008/0310992): see Figures 1 and 2
Matthews (U.S. Patent No. 3,272,199): see Figure 1
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANA K TIGHE whose telephone number is (571)272-9476. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8:00 - 4:00.
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, Steve McAllister, can be reached on 571-272-6785. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/DANA K TIGHE/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/AVINASH A SAVANI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762