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.
Drawings
Figures 1 and 2 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated (“conventional” par [4]). See MPEP § 608.02(g).
Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. 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
Claims 1 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 lines 2 and 6 respectively, "[[to be]] spaced". The verb "to be" is future tense, which typically indicates a future occurrence.
Claim 14 line 4, "[[to be]] spaced". The verb "to be" is future tense, which typically indicates a future occurrence.
Appropriate correction is required.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
par [38], "[[a]] second dust collection films 200".
par [40], "side-by-side".
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-14 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 1 recites the limitation "dust collection unit for an electric precipitator, comprising: a plurality of dust collection films arranged to be spaced apart from each other and having different electrodes alternately arranged thereon" in lines 1-3. The phrase "arranged thereon" is unclear and raises the questions—Are different electrodes alternately arranged on the plurality of dust collection films? Are the plurality of dust collection films alternately arranged? Are the different electrodes alternately arranged.
The specification as originally filed describes the limitation verbatim at par [11] but also discloses at pars [39]-[40]
“The first dust collection film 100 is formed as a plurality of first dust collection films, and the plurality of first dust collection films 100 may be arranged side-by-side to be spaced apart from each other at specific intervals. In addition, the plurality of first dust collection films 100 may be connected to a negative electrode power source, which is a low-voltage side, so that the negative electrode power source may be applied to the plurality of first dust collection films 100.
The second dust collection films 200 is formed as a plurality of second dust collection films, and the plurality of second dust collection films 200 may be arranged side by side to be spaced apart from each other at specific intervals. In addition, the plurality of second dust collection films 200 may be connected to a positive electrode power source, which is a high-voltage side, so that the positive electrode power source may be applied to the plurality of second dust collection films 200. In addition, the plurality of second dust collection films 200 may be inserted between the plurality of first dust collection films 100 and disposed to be spaced apart from the first dust collection films 100, and the dust collection films may be arranged in the form in which the first dust collection film 100 and the second dust collection film 200 are disposed alternately. Therefore, the dust collection films connected to different electrode[[s]] [power sources] may be arranged alternately” [emphasis added]. NOTE: In the last sentence from the disclosure above, it is unclear how said electrode sources have become different electrodes when the former information from the disclosure define negative/positive electrode power source and not electrode sources—a power source, i.e., voltage, and electrode sources are not interchangeable components and are distinct components. Also, see pars [42]-[43] and [46].
Further regarding claim 1, the language in the claim is unclear whether or not said plurality of dust collection films have at least two sides (i.e., "one side or both sides"), each individual collection film for the plurality of duct collection films has at least two sides, or both the individual film and the plurality of collection films have at least two sides for the recitation “a fixing member coupled to the plurality of dust collection films at one side or both sides at which the plurality of dust collection films are arranged and configured to fix the plurality of dust collection films to be spaced apart from each other at specific intervals” in lines 4-6 [emphasis added].
Claim 1 recites the limitation "specific intervals" in line 6 but fails to define the word specific in the claims with context to another claim limitation. The metes and bounds of the limitation "specific intervals" are indefinite.
In order to advance prosecution, for examination on the merits claim 1 is interpreted as follows:
A dust collection unit for an electric precipitator, comprising:
a plurality of dust collection films arranged to be spaced apart from each other [[and]] having different electrode[[s]] power sources and alternately arranged
a fixing member coupled to the plurality of dust collection films at one side or both sides of each dust collection film of the plurality of dust collection films at which the plurality of dust collection films are arranged and configured to fix the plurality of dust collection films to be spaced apart and at specific intervals; and
a ground electrode stored inside the fixing member.
Regarding the language recited in claim 1 in line 8, "a ground electrode stored inside the fixing member," the phrase "stored inside" is interpreted under broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). The claim fails to define the phrase "stored inside" with specificity, i.e., spatially, and therefore, is imprecise—Does the phrase "stored inside," define the ground electrode is a fully enclosed, embedded, partially contained, at an interior of the fixing member—all of the previous descriptions are considered BRI?
Claim 4 lines 2-3, "[[any]] at least one
Claim 5 recites the limitations "the plurality of first dust collection films" in lines 2-3 and "the first dust collection film" in line 4 and claim 6 in lines 5 and 8, claim 7 in line 3, claim 8 in lines 3 and 5, claim 10 lines 2-3 . Claim 3 recites the limitation "a plurality of first dust collection films" in line 2 that is the antecedent for the former limitation but not the later limitation. The antecedent basis for the later limitation "the first dust collection film" is unclear, and therefore, the claims 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 are indefinite.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the first dust collection film side" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitation "a first dust collection film side" was not previously recited. Additionally, since the limitation "the first dust collection film side" is recited, it is unclear if this limitation requires "a second dust collection film side."
Claim 9 recites the limitation "face each other" in lines 3 and 4. The language is spatial and unclear. Use precise language in context and associated with the structural components defined in the claim.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "an elastically fixing portion formed at one side thereof" in line 1. The limitation is unclear (see claim 1 above regarding "one side or both sides" related to the limitation "a fixing member").
Claim 13 recites the limitation "in close contact" in line 9. The word close is subjective, and therefore, indefinite.
Claim 14 recites the limitation "an electric precipitator" in lines 1 and 2. The recitation raises the following question—Are the recitations of the limitation "an electric precipitator" in lines 1 and 2 distinct limitations? Are the recitations for the limitations electric precipitator in lines 1 and 2, distinct from or the same as the limitation electric precipitator in line 1 of claim 1?
Claim 14 recites the limitation "spaced apart from a side adjacent to the ground electrode" in lines 4-5. The phrase "a side adjacent to" is unclear and raises the questions—which side of the ground electrode, and what defines a side (i.e., what a side for said ground electrode is defined in the claim language)?
Lastly, claims 2, 3, 4, 9, 11, and 12 depend from the above claims and are also rejected.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 4, 11, 12, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee (US 20170120257 A1).
For claim 1, as interpreted above, Lee discloses a dust collection unit for an electric precipitator (an electric dust collector 500; Fig. 9), comprising: a plurality of dust collection films (a dust collection unit 540, Figs. 12-15) arranged to be spaced apart from each other and having different electrode power sources alternately arranged (pars [0111]-[0113], [0165]; Fig. 15); a fixing member coupled (base gap maintenance part 561; roof gap maintenance part 566) to the plurality of dust collection films at one side or both sides of the collection films in the plurality at which the plurality of dust collection films are arranged and configured to fix the plurality of dust collection films to be spaced apart from each other at specific intervals (par [0155]; Figs. 12-13); and a ground electrode stored inside the fixing member (pars [0111]-[0113], [0164]).
For claim 3, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein the plurality of dust collection films include a plurality of first dust collection films connected to a low-voltage side power source and a plurality of second dust collection films connected to a high-voltage side power source (pars [0164]-[0165]), and the fixing member includes a first fixing member coupled to the plurality of first dust collection films and a second fixing member coupled to the plurality of second dust collection films (base gap maintenance part 561; roof gap maintenance part 566; Figs. 12-13).
For claim 4, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein the ground electrode is coupled to any one or more of the first fixing member and the second fixing member (pars. [0163]-[0168]).
For claim 5, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein the first fixing member includes a first support formed to extend in a direction in which the plurality of first dust collection films are arranged and a plurality of first spacers formed to protrude from the first support toward the first dust collection film, and the plurality of first dust collection films are coupled by being inserted between adjacent first spacers (pars [0188]-[0190]).
For claim 6, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein the first fixing member includes: a 1-1 fixing member including a 1-1 support formed to extend in a direction in which the plurality of first dust collection films are arranged and a plurality of 1-1 spacers formed to protrude from the 1-1 support toward the first dust collection film; and a 1-2 fixing member including a 1-2 support formed to extend in the direction in which the plurality of first dust collection films are arranged and a plurality of 1-2 spacers formed to protrude from the 1-2 support toward the first dust collection film, an insertion groove is formed in the 1-1 fixing member so that a ground electrode is inserted into the insertion groove, and a portion of the 1-2 fixing member is coupled by being inserted into the insertion groove, and the 1-1 spacer and the 1-2 spacer are alternately disposed to be spaced apart from each other (Figs. 13, 18-23,28-34).
For claim 7, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein a plurality of coupling portions are formed to extend to the first dust collection film side, and the first dust collection film is coupled by being inserted between the plurality of coupling portions (Fig. 28).
For claim 8, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein the 1-1 fixing member further includes a plurality of 1-1 protruding portions formed to protrude from the 1-1 support toward the first dust collection film, and the 1-2 fixing member further includes a plurality of 1-2 protruding portions formed to protrude from the 1-2 support toward the first dust collection film, the 1-1 protruding portion is disposed at a position corresponding to the 1-2 spacer, and the 1-2 protruding portion is disposed at a position corresponding to the 1-1 spacer, and the plurality of coupling portions are interposed between the 1-1 spacer and the 1-2 protruding portion or between the 1-2 spacer and the 1-1 protruding portion (Figs. 18-23,28-34).
For claim 9, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein portions of the plurality of coupling portions protrude inward from surfaces in which the 1-1 spacer and the 1-2 protruding portion face each other and surfaces in which the 1-2 spacer and the 1-1 protruding portion face each other (Figs. 12, 18-23, 29-34 ).
For claim 10, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses wherein protrusions are formed to protrude from opposite surfaces into which the first dust collection films are inserted of the plurality of spacers (Figs. 27-28).
For claim 11, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses further comprising a case (a case 501 and 502) to which the plurality of dust collection films and the fixing member are fixedly coupled (Fig. 9).
For claim 12, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses further wherein a ground terminal is formed on the case, and one end of the ground electrode is in contact with and electrically connected to the ground terminal (pars [0111]-[0113]).
For claim 14, the prior art is relied upon as set forth above. Lee discloses an electric precipitator comprising the dust collection unit for an electric precipitator (see claim 1 above) and a charging unit disposed to be spaced apart from a side adjacent to the ground electrode of the dust collection unit for an electric precipitator and configured to charge passing dust particles (electrification unit 510; Figs. 9-11; par [0131]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 2, 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee.
Regarding claim 2, the prior art to Lee is relied upon as indicated above and discloses said ground electrode, said plurality of duct collection films, and said fixing member. Lee teaches that a shielding member may be made of insulative material (par [0152]). Lee does not appear to state explicitly said ground electrode is formed to extend in a direction in which the plurality of dust collection films are arranged and coupled to the fixing member to shield an electric field generated by applying a voltage to the plurality of dust collection films. This arrangement for said ground electrode is considered location of parts. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to relocate the ground electrode as claimed since it has been held that rearranging part of an invention involves only routine skills in the art and relocating the ground electrode would not have changed the function of the dust collection unit. See MPEP § 2144.04(VIC).
The phrase “to shield an electric field generated by applying a voltage to the plurality of dust collection films” is an intended result/use. The instant invention is an apparatus. Apparatus claims are distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than intended use or function. See MPEP § 2114. Nonetheless, Lee discloses the plurality of dust collecting films has insulative layers (pars [0170],[0180]), and one of ordinary skill in the art would find obvious for the insulative layers to shield the electric field resulting from voltage applied to the plurality of dust collection films.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art to Lee is relied upon as indicated above and discloses the first fixing member and the ground electrode. Lee teaches the first fixing member (either of—base gap maintenance part 561; roof gap maintenance part 566) includes an elastically fixing portion formed at one side thereof (either of—vertical bars 564 and 568; pars [0189]-[0194]; Figs. 18-23). Lee does not explicitly state a coupling hole and a coupling protrusion are formed on the case (case 501 and 502) but does illustrate attachment structures (Figs. 10-12, 23). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to envisage the case as claimed since Lee illustrates the coupling of case 501 and 502 to contain the dust collecting unit.
The phrases “the one end of the ground electrode is positioned on the elastically fixing portion of the first fixing member so that the one end of the ground electrode is exposed to or protrudes from an outer surface of the elastically fixing portion” and “so that the elastically fixing portion of the first fixing member is inserted into the coupling hole and a portion of the elastically fixing portion is fixedly caught on the coupling protrusion, and the one end of the ground electrode is in close contact with a ground terminal” are an intended result/use. The instant invention is an apparatus. Apparatus claims are distinguished from the prior art in terms of structure rather than intended use or function. See MPEP § 2114.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant should consider the all of prior art made of record in response to this action—for example:
KR 20170051145 A; KR 101839557 B1; KR 101936630 B1: Figs. 9-13 disclose the structural limitations of claim 1; collection films (541, 542) and fixing member (561, 566).
KR 20200021700 A: Figs. 5-9 disclose the collection films and fixing member of claim 1.
JP 2009095799 A: discloses electrostatic precipitator 1, non-dust collecting electrode 13 and the dust collecting electrode 15 at predetermined intervals, grounding member 31.
US 20170120182 A1: Fig. 27 discloses a dust collection unit.
US 20170120256 A1: Figs. 8-13 discloses a dust collection unit; Figs. 12-13, 26-28 discloses a fixing member.
US 3018844 A: discloses spacer bars 11 and grounded plates 5 and 6.
US 3665679 A: alternating charged plates.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONJI TURNER whose telephone number is (571) 272-1203. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:00 am - 2:00 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. 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.
/SONJI TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 February 19, 2026
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776