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 .
The pending claims are claims 1-10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ahn et al., US 20220181655.
Regarding claim 1, Ahn et al., teaches a membrane humidifier cartridge (abstract; 0044) comprising:
an inner case (0041-0043) accommodating therein a hollow fiber membrane (0009; 0012-0015) in which a first fluid flows (0014; 0104);
a potting portion fixing a terminal (outer projection; 232b) (0028; 0044) of the hollow fiber membrane (0009-0013); a first mesh hole portion (0104-0105) into which a second fluid is introduced (0105), and formed to protrude (project) from one side of the inner case (0044; 0099); and a second mesh hole portion (0104-0105) formed to protrude (project) from another side of the inner case (0031-0032; 0044), wherein the second fluid introduced through the first mesh hole portion (0104-0105) is discharged after exchanging moisture with the first fluid through the hollow fiber membrane (0010; 0077).
Regarding claim 6, Ahn et al., fuel cell membrane humidifier performing moisture exchange (abstract; 0024) between a first fluid (0101; 0104) and a second fluid (0101; 0104-0105) and comprising:
a mid-case (middle case) (abstract; 0012-0015);
a second fluid inlet introducing the second fluid into the mid-case (abstract; 0012-0015);
a second fluid outlet discharging the second fluid to outside (0012-0013; 0077; 0081); and at least one cartridge disposed in the mid-case (0024-0025) and accommodating a plurality of hollow fiber membranes (0012-0013),
wherein the cartridge comprises:
an inner case (0041-0043) accommodating therein a hollow fiber membrane (0012-0013) in which a first fluid flows (0014);
a potting portion fixing a terminal of the hollow fiber membrane (0012; 0015)
a first mesh hole portion (0104-0105) into which the second fluid is introduced (0024; 0104), and formed to protrude from one side of the inner case (0029-0032; 0044); and
a second mesh hole portion (0104-0105) formed to protrude (project) from another side of the inner case (0044; 0099) , wherein the second fluid introduced through the first mesh hole portion is discharged after exchanging moisture with the first fluid through the hollow fiber membrane (0009-0010; 0013; 0024).
Regarding claim 7, Ahn et al., wherein the first mesh hole portion and the second mesh hole portion are formed to protrude (projection) (0031-0032; 0044) to a preset height from a surface of the inner case by a protrusion support (0099; 0125).
Thus, the claims are anticipated.
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, 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.
Claim(s) 2-5, 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn et al., US 20220181655.
Regarding claim 2, Ahn et al., teaches wherein the first mesh hole portion and the second mesh hole portion are formed to protrude (projection) (0099; 0124-0126) to a preset height from a surface of the inner case by a protrusion support.
Ahn does not teach a preset height, however, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 3, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein a vertical height of the protrusion support is set by calculating, based on a ratio of slack when the hollow fiber membrane is wet, a maximum movable distance of the hollow fiber membrane due to fluctuation, and when an initial length of the hollow fiber membrane is 100 and an increased length of the hollow fiber membrane is a, a maximum movable distance b is calculated as b = a(a + 200)/2(a + 100).
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 4, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein when a length of the hollow fiber membrane is 100, a vertical height of the protrusion support is 1 to 20.
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 5, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein the vertical height of the protrusion support is 1 to 5.
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 8, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein a vertical height of the protrusion support is set by calculating, based on a ratio of slack when the hollow fiber membrane is wet, a maximum movable distance of the hollow fiber membrane due to fluctuation, and when an initial length of the hollow fiber membrane is 100 and an increased length of the hollow fiber membrane is a, a maximum movable distance b is calculated as b = a(a + 200)/2(a + 100).
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 9, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein when a length of the hollow fiber membrane is 100, a vertical height of the protrusion support is 1 to 20.
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Regarding claim 10, Ahn et al., does not teach wherein the vertical height of the protrusion support is 1 to 5.
However, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Ito, US 2024/0181395; Tamio et al., JP 2015226859.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANGELA J MARTIN whose telephone number is (571)272-1288. The examiner can normally be reached 7am-4pm.
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, Barbara Gilliam can be reached at 571-272-1330. 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.
ANGELA J. MARTIN
Examiner
Art Unit 1727
/ANGELA J MARTIN/Examiner, Art Unit 1727
Prosecution Insights