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 .
Examiner’s Comments
This is a second Non-Final neither necessitated by applicant’s amendment of the claims, nor based on information submitted in an information disclosure statement filed during the
period set forth in 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p). This Non-Final replaces the previous Non-final dated Oct. 18, 2024.
Communications
The examiner called and emailed the applicant’s representative Russell S. Krajec for a proposed examiner’s amendment to fix outstanding issue without success.
Claim Objections
Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities:
There is a typo in the limitation of “The method of claim 15 further comprising sending a signal to an alarm to when…”. Emphasis Added.
Claim 18 is objected to because the limitation of “measuring a time interval beginning when removing gas from the gas removal filter” should be “measuring a time interval beginning when the removing gas from the gas removal filter…”.
Claim 18 is also objected because the second recited ‘a time interval” should be “the [[a]] time interval”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 17 and 20 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 20 is indefinite because the term “the gas removal chamber” lacks antecedent basis. Claim 20 is also indefinite because it recites two “an upright orientation,” and it is therefore unclear if the first “an upright orientation” is the same as the second “upright orientation.”
Additionally, claim 17 recites “a valid upright orientation” and claim 20 recites “an upright orientation”. The published Spec. defines the term “upright orientation” in [0043]. However, the published Spec. does not define what is “a valid upright orientation”. The applicant is encouraged to clarify the difference.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15–16 and 18–19 are allowed.
Claims 17 and 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Gara et al., US 2006/0155236 A1 (“Gara”) is the closet prior art.
Regarding claim 15:
Gara is discussed in the Non-Final Rejection dated Oct. 18, 2024. Gara fails to disclose the gas is removed from a wearable device. It would not have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include a wearable device in Gara because none of the prior art shows or renders such limitation as being obvious.
Claim 16–20 are allowed because they depend on claim 15.
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
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Stearns et al., US 2013/0231606 A1 (“Stearns”). Stearns discloses a controller unit configured to detect the orientation position of the filter cartridge. But Sterns orientation detection is used to make sure seal is properly formed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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 on (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 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights