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 § 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) 1, 2, 4, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190390906 A1 to Wu et al. (Wu) in view of JP 2020103611 A to Kaneda.
In reference to independent claim 1, Wu discloses:
A dehydrator unit (200) comprising:
an enclosed housing (see Fig. 4) that houses one or more removable desiccant cartridges (110, 210), wherein the one or more desiccant cartridges are designed to remove moisture from air;
a front panel disposed at a front end of the enclosed housing (see Fig. 4);
a back panel disposed at a back end of the enclosed housing (see Fig. 4);
one or more fans that circulates air through the desiccant to remove moisture (see [0038]);
a humidity sensor (206) configured to measure a humidity level in air surrounding the dehydrator unit (see [0041]); and
a controller (400, 208) comprising:
a memory (not shown but this is inherently part of a controller) that stores a pre-set humidity threshold (“defined threshold”); and
a processor (not shown but this is inherently part of a controller) communicatively coupled to the memory and the humidity sensor, wherein the processor is configured to:
receive a first humidity value measured by the humidity sensor (see [0032]);
compare the first humidity value to the pre-set humidity threshold;
determine, based on the comparing, that the first humidity value exceeds the pre-set humidity threshold (see [0032]); and
in response to determining that the first humidity value exceeds the pre-set humidity threshold, turn on the one or more front fans, the one or more back fans, or a combination thereof (see [0032]).
Even though Wu discloses the use of multiple fans, it is silent regarding the placements/locations of the fans, i.e. the front panel and the back panel each comprising one or more front fans.
Kaneda teaches a clothing dryer for drying and dehydrating clothes, the dryer including fans (4A and 4B) positioned in opposing locations of the dryer (see Fig. 2).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the dehydrator of Wu to place the fans in the front and back as taught by Kaneda in order to facilitate circulation the air around the enclosed housing.
In reference to dependent claim 2, Wu further discloses: the processor is further configured to: receive a second humidity value measured by the humidity sensor; compare the second humidity value to the pre-set humidity threshold; determine, based on comparing the second humidity value to the pre-set humidity threshold, that the second humidity value equals or is lower than the pre-set humidity threshold; and in response to determining that the second humidity value equals or is lower than the pre-set humidity threshold, turn off the one or more front fans, the one or more back fans, or the combination thereof (see [0032]).
In reference to dependent claim 4, Kaneda further teaches: the front panel comprises a front fan array having a plurality of the front fans that cause the air to flow into the enclosed housing; and the back panel comprises a back fan array having a plurality of the back fans that cause the air to flow out of the enclosed housing (see Fig. 2, there are four 4A blowers and four 4B blowers).
In reference to dependent claim 9, Wu further discloses the dehydrator unit (200) is configured to be deployed inside an enclosed cabinet designed to house electronic equipment (208) (see [0042] and Fig. 7; electronic components including and associated with the PID 208 are housed in the modular humidity control system 200 connected to the housing of the TMS 100).
In reference to dependent claim 10, Wu further discloses each of the one or more desiccant cartridges comprises a desiccant material that removes moisture from ambient air (see e.g. Abstract, [0038], [0046]).
Claim(s) 5, 16, and 18 are is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kaneda further in view of US 20230308307 A1 to Hu et al. (Hu).
In reference to dependent claims 5, 16, and 18, Wu is silent regarding a network interface communicating with computing nodes and the processor receiving the humidity threshold via the network interface and the memory storing humidity threshold.
Hu teaches a controller (170) including a network interface (136) for an appliance (100), the network interface connects and communicates with network nodes (see [0033]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the dehydrator of Wu to include a network interface communicating with nodes as taught by Hu since doing so would reduce the need for on-board processing capacity and allow for remote control of the dehydrator, thus reducing its size.
In reference to independent claims 13 and 17, the subject matter recited therein overlap with that recited in claims 1 and 9, respectively and are likewise rejected.
In reference to dependent claims 14 and 19, the claims are similarly rejected to claim 2 as they recite similar subject matter.
Claim(s) 11-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kaneda further in view of Micro-tec reusable orange indicating desiccant sorbent dehydration low humidity box bulk. (2017, March 26). https://www.microtonano.com/Micro-Tec-orange-indicating-reusable-desiccant-sorbent-dehydration-box.php (hereinafter as Micro-tec).
In reference to dependent claims 11 and 12, Wu is silent regarding the desiccant material changing color to indicate moisture saturation level of the desiccant material, and the desiccant material comprising silica gel that that changes from a first color when moisture saturation of the silica gel is below a first saturation level to a second color when the moisture saturation of the silica gel exceeds a second saturation level.
Micro-tec teaches a desiccant material, particularly silica gel, that changes color to indicate various levels of saturation between 0% and 100%.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the dehydrator of Wu to include the color-changing silica gel as taught by Micro-tec to allow the saturation level to be clearly shown, thus allowing the user/operator to quickly assess the moisture state.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu in view of Kaneda further in view of CN 208963590 U to Zhang et al. (Zhang).
In reference to dependent claim 6, Wu is silent regarding a desiccant tray configured to be housed inside the enclosed housing and hold the one or more removable desiccant cartridges on a top surface of the desiccant tray, wherein the desiccant tray slides in and out of the enclosed housing; and one or more indentations provided at a front end of the desiccant tray, wherein each of the one or more indentation is configured to receive a finger of a user for holding the desiccant tray and sliding out the desiccant tray from the enclosed housing.
Zhang teaches a similar food storage and drying device including desiccant trays (8) slidable on a slide rail (9), the trays including handles (11) that are suitable for pulling by fingers or a hand (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have further modified the dehydrator of Wu to include slidable desiccant trays with handles as taught by Zhang to allow for easy removal and replacement of the desiccant.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 7, 8, 15, and 20 are 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ngoc T Nguyen whose telephone number is (571)272-7176. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Helena Kosanovic can be reached at (571) 272-9059. 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.
/NGOC T NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3799
Prosecution Insights