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 .
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, 6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN122 (CN107433122A, attached translation will be referenced).
Claim 1: CN122 teaches an air purification apparatus (exhaust gas treatment system 10) comprising: a purification main body having an air purification space provided therein, the purification main body including an air inlet provided at one side thereof, and an air outlet provided at the other side thereof (Spray tower 200 having inlet 130 and outlet 201.); a purification fluid spray unit configured to spray a purification fluid into the air purification space so that polluted air introduced into the purification main body is purified in the air purification space (Page 7 teaches there is a pump 220 that connects to a water source to send the water source to 230, which is a spray that directs the fluid into spray tower 200.); a nano-micro bubble supply unit configured to generate nano-micro bubbles in the purification fluid and supply the purification fluid containing the nano-micro bubbles to the purification fluid spray unit to improve purification power of the purification fluid (micro nano bubble generating device 300 connects the water source 210 and the spray 230.); and a hydroxyl radical generation unit configured to generate hydroxyl radicals to purify the polluted air introduced into the purification main body (Page 5 teaches that hydroxyl radicals are dissolved in the water tank 240. Page 6 teaches that when the nano bubbles burst in spray tower 200 they will release chemical energy and generate a large amount of hydroxyl radicals.).
Claim 2: CN122 teaches the nano-micro bubble supply unit comprises: a purification fluid container configured to accommodate the purification fluid (210 can read upon the fluid container); a nano-micro bubble generator configured to generate the nano-micro bubbles (300 is the micro nanobubble generating device which includes the bubble generating tank 310.); and an injection port formed in the purification fluid container to inject a promoter into the purification fluid (240 appears to be a superoxide water raw material device which can read upon injecting a promoter.).
Claim 3: CN122 teaches the hydroxyl radical generation unit comprises: a hydroxyl radical generation main body connected to at least any one of the air outlet and the purification fluid spray unit; and a flow passageway provided in the hydroxyl radical generation main body so that the purification fluid is introduced into or discharged from the flow passageway (Page 5 teaches that hydroxyl radicals are dissolved in the water tank 240, which can read upon a passageway.).
Claim 6: CN122 teaches the purification fluid spray unit comprises: a purification fluid inlet port connected to the nano-micro bubble supply unit; a purification fluid tube configured to accommodate the purification fluid; and a purification fluid spray port configured to spray the purification fluid into the purification space (Figure 1 teaches that the bubble generating tank 310 is connected via a line into the spray device 230, which sprays into the spray tower 200.).
Claim 9: CN122 teaches an air blower connected to the purification main body so that the polluted air is introduced into the air inlet, and the purified air is discharged to the air outlet (Blower 150.).
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.
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.
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) 5 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN122.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN122 in view of CN829 (CN106178829A, attached translation is referenced.).
Claim(s) 1 and 3-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR210 (KR20200103210A, attached translation will be referenced) in view of Hwang (US20050000243A1).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN122 in view of Pui (US20180200661A1).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over KR210 in view of Hwang in view of Pui.
Rejection in view of CN122
Claim 5: The limitation of “the nano-micro bubbles are generated in the flow passageway as a collision, friction, and shear stress occur between particles in the purification fluid while the purification fluid flows” is considered to be intended usage. Since the prior art teaches the structure of the claims, it would be capable of this limitation. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. MPEP 2114.
CN122 does not explicitly teach the flow passageway has a mesh structure so that a plurality of flow passageways is formed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have a plurality of flow passageways since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Claim 10: CN122 teaches the purification main body having one side connected to the air inlet, and the other side connected to the air outlet, such that the polluted air is introduced into the air inlet, purified while passing through the purification space, and then discharged to the air outlet (Figure 1 shows the air inlet 130 and air outlet 201 are on different sides of the spray tower 200.), wherein the purification fluid spray unit is disposed in the purification space and sprays the purification fluid to the air introduced into the purification main body through the air inlet (Spray 230 sprays into the tower 200 to purify the gas.), and wherein the hydroxyl radical generation unit is disposed at a rear end of the purification fluid spray unit and generates the hydroxyl radicals in the air to which the purification fluid is sprayed by the purification fluid spray unit (Page 6 teaches that the hydroxyl radicals are formed when the bubbles burst. Therefore the area in the spray tower 200 in which they burst can be read upon by the hydroxyl radical generation unit and it would be at a rear end of the spray unit as the fluid would have to react with the gas. Since the hydroxyl radicals are created in the spray tower 200 when the bubbles burst, they would be subject to the fluid as it is being sprayed out.).
CN122 does not explicitly state the purification main body has a tubular structure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have an optimal shape for the spray tower 200, such as being tubular, in order to be able to have an efficient surface area for gas and liquid contact.
Rejection in view of CN122 and CN829
Claim 7: CN122 does not explicitly state the purification main body further comprises a partition wall disposed to allow the polluted air to meander in the purification space. CN829 teaches an air purification device that also uses micro nano bubbles. It teaches condensation plates 33 that capture the water droplets in the air. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have the partition walls of CN829 in the device of CN122 as CN829 teaches that this would allow for a more tortuous path and be able to make sure the water and gas would have contacted each other and be collected on the plates.
Rejection in view of KR210 and Hwang
Claim 1: KR210 teaches an air purification apparatus ([0001] teaches air purifying apparatus) comprising: a purification main body having an air purification space provided therein, the purification main body including an air inlet provided at one side thereof, and an air outlet provided at the other side thereof (The body 110 has a purification space within and has air inlet 160 and air outlet 112.); a purification fluid spray unit configured to spray a purification fluid into the air purification space so that polluted air introduced into the purification main body is purified in the air purification space (Nozzles 155 spray water into body 110.); a nano-micro bubble supply unit configured to generate nano-micro bubbles in the purification fluid and supply the purification fluid containing the nano-micro bubbles to the purification fluid spray unit to improve purification power of the purification fluid ([0037] teaches microbubbles are formed in the treated water).
KR210 does not explicitly teach a hydroxyl radical generation unit configured to generate hydroxyl radicals to purify the polluted air introduced into the purification main body. KR210 teaches the use of water to treat gas. Hwang teaches a air cleaning device that uses a spray of water (abstract). Hwang teaches the reuse of the water as shown in figure 14. Hwang teaches in [0049] and [0073] that the water is recirculate and could potentially end up with various contaminants. Therefore it for hydroxyl radicals to help destroy bacterial that could potentially propagate in the water circulation tank. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have a hydroxyl radical generation unit as taught by Hwang in the device of KR210 as Hwang teaches the benefit of being able to make sure the water is not contaminated during recirculation and reuse.
Claim 3: Hwang teaches the hydroxyl radical generation unit comprises: a hydroxyl radical generation main body connected to at least any one of the air outlet and the purification fluid spray unit; and a flow passageway provided in the hydroxyl radical generation main body so that the purification fluid is introduced into or discharged from the flow passageway (Figure 14 shows the water is sent through the UV sterilization unit.).
Claim 4: KR210 and Hwang teach the hydroxyl radical generation unit further comprises a coating layer formed on an inner surface of the flow passageway and configured to generate the hydroxyl radicals by means of a chemical reaction with the purification fluid (Hwang [0043]-[0045] teaches that there is a photocatalyst of TiO2. KR210 teaches in [0049] that there is a UV lamp using a photocatalyst but can require a coating layer to further transmit UV rays. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have a coating layer in Hwang as KR210 teaches that this is able to help transmit UV rays.).
Claim 5: KR210 teaches the nano-micro bubbles are generated in the flow passageway as a collision, friction, and shear stress occur between particles in the purification fluid while the purification fluid flows ([0040] teaches that bubbles can be generated via cavitation or shear method. This is also considered to be intended usage. Since the prior art teaches the structure of the claims, it would be capable of this limitation. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. MPEP 2114.).
KR210 and Hwang do not explicitly teach the flow passageway has a mesh structure so that a plurality of flow passageways is formed. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have a plurality of flow passageways since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Rejection in view of CN122 and Pui
Claim 8: CN122 does not explicitly teach an air pollution degree measurement unit provided in the outlet port and configured to measure a pollution degree of the purified air; and an operation control unit connected to the air pollution degree measurement unit and configured to control an operation of the nano-micro bubble supply unit, wherein the operation control unit starts the operation of the nano-micro bubble supply unit when the pollution degree measured by the air pollution degree measurement unit exceeds a preset reference value. Pui teaches a spray cleaning device that cleans a gas through an inlet and outlet with a liquid spray (Abstract). It also teaches in the abstract that there are sensors at the gas outlet to measure a pollutant characteristic and a controller controls the sprayer assembly according to the measured pollutant characteristic. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have the sensor and controller of Pui in the device of CN122 as Pui teaches the benefits of being able to adjust operating parameters of the device in order to enhance particle and gas pollutant removal efficiency ([0011]).
Rejection in view of KR210, Hwang, and Pui
Claim 8: KR210 and Hwang do not explicitly teach an air pollution degree measurement unit provided in the outlet port and configured to measure a pollution degree of the purified air; and an operation control unit connected to the air pollution degree measurement unit and configured to control an operation of the nano-micro bubble supply unit, wherein the operation control unit starts the operation of the nano-micro bubble supply unit when the pollution degree measured by the air pollution degree measurement unit exceeds a preset reference value. Pui teaches a spray cleaning device that cleans a gas through an inlet and outlet with a liquid spray (Abstract). It also teaches in the abstract that there are sensors at the gas outlet to measure a pollutant characteristic and a controller controls the sprayer assembly according to the measured pollutant characteristic. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to have the sensor and controller of Pui in the device of KR210 and Hwang as Pui teaches the benefits of being able to adjust operating parameters of the device in order to enhance particle and gas pollutant removal efficiency ([0011]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US20180272276, 20170021049, 20070084350, 20040262240, 20040120845.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP Y SHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8171. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9-5:30.
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.
/P.Y.S/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 06/03/2026
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights