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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed 1/11/2024 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97, 1.98 and MPEP § 609 because the NPL “Sun Liyan” has no publication date. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits. Applicant is advised that the date of any re-submission of any item of information contained in this information disclosure statement or the submission of any missing element(s) will be the date of submission for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing the statement, including all certification requirements for statements under 37 CFR 1.97(e). See MPEP § 609.05(a).
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 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 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, 6-9, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang (CN 210332287) in view of Liu (CN 111964998) and Oder et al (US Pub 2002/0014440 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses a system (see Fig. 1) comprising: a primary separation assembly (element 1) for separating aerosol particles with a particle size of r1, the primary separation assembly comprising a primary separation chamber (see Fig. 1; upper separation chamber), a pair of electrode plates (elements 101 and 201) arranged within the primary separation chamber and located between an inlet (elements 3 and 4) and an outlet (element 5), and an inlet of the primary separation chamber being connected to an outlet of the aerosol generator (element 3), and a channel being formed between the pair of the electrode plates for aerosol particles to pass through (interior of element 1): and a secondary separation assembly (element 2) for separating aerosol particles with a particle size of r2, the secondary separation assembly comprising a secondary separation chamber (see Fig. 1; lower separation chamber), an inlet of the secondary separation chamber being connected to the outlet of the primary separation chamber (element 11), and r1 is less than r2 (see Fig. 1; element 5 output is less than element 9 output and Description; page 2; paragraph 11), but Wang does not disclose an aerosol generation system comprising an aerosol generator for generating and a power supply connected to the pair of electrode plates to apply a voltage to the pair of electrode plates.
Liu teaches an aerosol generation system comprising an aerosol generator for generating aerosol (Description; page 2, paragraph 7) for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Liu, for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles.
Oder teaches a power supply (paragraph 0047; elements 51 and 52) connected to the pair of electrode plates to apply a voltage to the pair of electrode plates for the purpose of providing a desired level of voltage to separate particles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Oder, for the purpose of providing a desired level of voltage to separate particles.
Regarding claim 2, Wang discloses the pair of electrode plates is arranged horizontally up and down, and a channel extending in a horizontal direction is formed between the pair of electrode plates (see Fig. 1; elements 1, 101, and 201).
Regarding claim 6, Wang discloses the secondary separation assembly further comprises an impact block (element 12), the impact block is at least partly located within the secondary separation chamber (see Fig. 1; lower separation chamber element 12 opposite inlet via element 11), and the impact block is arranged directly opposite the inlet of the secondary separation chamber (see Fig. 1).]
Regarding claim 7, Wang does not disclose the claim limitations. Liu teaches the impact block is movable in a direction close to and away from the inlet of the secondary separation chamber (Description; page 4; paragraph 1) for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Liu, for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles.
Regarding claim 8, Wang discloses the inlet of the secondary separation chamber is horizontally oriented (see Fig. 1; where the inlet is oriented horizontally to the lower separation chamber).
Regarding claim 9, Wang does not disclose the claim limitations. Liu teaches a storage tank is used to collect aerosol particles that have undergone secondary separation, and is connected to the secondary separation chamber (element 500) for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Liu, for the purpose of sorting large-particle diameter aerosol particles.
Regarding claim 13, Wang does not explicitly disclose an electric field intensity between the pair of electrode plates is above 100 V/cm. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to separate particles because Applicant has not disclosed that a particular electric field intensity provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wang, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either electrode because both electrodes would perform the same function of separating particles for the purpose of obtaining a desired classification of aerosol particles.
Regarding claim 14, Wang in view of Oder does not explicitly disclose a voltage applied to the pair of electrode plates by the power supply is in the range of 50 - 200 V. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to separate particles because Applicant has not disclosed that a particular power level provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wang, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either range of power because both electrodes would perform the same function of separating particles for the purpose of obtaining a desired classification of aerosol particles.
Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang/Liu/Oder in further view of Reavell (USP 6,828,794).
Regarding claim 3, Wang does not disclose the claim limitations. Reavell teaches a lower electrode plate is provided with holes, and the holes are used for the passage of aerosol particles separated in the primary separation (col. 12, lines 54-64) for the purpose of allowing charged particles through a mesh to be collected. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Reavell, for the purpose of allowing charged particles through a mesh to be collected.
Regarding claim 4, Wang discloses a diversion pipe (element 11), and an inlet of the diversion pipe is connected to the primary separation chamber (element 1) and located below the lower electrode plate (see Fig. 1).
Claims 10, 11, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang/Liu/Oder in further view of Li (CN 105499047).
Regarding claim 10, Wang discloses an outlet of from a feeding tanking is connected to the inlet of the primary separation chamber (element 3), but Li does not disclose the aerosol generator comprises a liquid storage tank and an aerosol nozzle arranged within the liquid storage tank, the aerosol nozzle is connected to an air intake pipe and a liquid suction pipe, and one end of the air intake pipe extends out of the liquid storage tank to form an air inlet end; the liquid suction pipe is located in the liquid storage tank and extends to a bottom of the liquid storage tank. Li teaches the aerosol generator comprises a liquid storage tank (element 1) and an aerosol nozzle (element 3) arranged within the liquid storage tank (see Fig. 1), the aerosol nozzle is connected to an air intake pipe (element 7) and a liquid suction pipe (end of element 3 within element 1), and one end of the air intake pipe extends out of the liquid storage tank to form an air inlet end (see Fig. 1; where element 7 meets element 3); the liquid suction pipe is located in the liquid storage tank and extends to a bottom of the liquid storage tank (see Fig. 1; element 3 within element 1) for the purpose of generating an aerosol with good dispersion and stability (Description; page 1; lines 23-25). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Li, for the purpose of generating an aerosol with good dispersion and stability.
Regarding claim 11, Wang does not disclose the claim limitations. Li teaches the aerosol generator further comprises a compressed air source, which is connected to the air inlet end of the air intake pipe (Description; page 2, lines 22-29) for the purpose of generating an aerosol with good dispersion and stability (Description; page 1; lines 23-25). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to modify Wang, as taught by Li, for the purpose of generating an aerosol with good dispersion and stability.
Regarding claim 15, Wang in view of Li does not explicitly disclose a pressure of the compressed air source is 0.1 MPa - 0.5 MPa. However, before the time the invention was effectively filed, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to separate particles because Applicant has not disclosed that a particular pressure provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. One of ordinary skill in the art, furthermore, would have expected Wang, and applicant’s invention, to perform equally well with either range of pressure because both pressures would perform the same function of aerosolizing particles for the purpose of obtaining a desired classification of aerosol particles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is allowed.
Claims 5 is 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 following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The closest prior art discloses an aerosol generation system. The closest prior art does not disclose or make obvious an outlet of the diversion pipe is connected to the aerosol generator in conjunction with the other structures in claims 5 and 12.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kalyanavenkateshware Kumar whose telephone number is (571)272-8102. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 08:00-16:30.
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, Michael McCullough can be reached on 571-272-7805. 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.
/K.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3653
/MICHAEL MCCULLOUGH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3653