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 .
Claims 1-6 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
It is noted that an information disclosure statement (IDS) was not included in the electronic file wrapper of the instant application. Applicant is reminded of the duty to disclose information material to patentability as defined by 37 C.F.R. 1.56 (also see MPEP § 2001).
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 01/30/2024. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN 2024101236405 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference characters "9" and "19" have both been used to designate the water tank in Figures 1 and 3, as described on Page 4 of the instant specification.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-6 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 1, “dispenser comprises” should read “dispenser comprising”.
In claim 1, line 1, “tank; a” should read “tank; wherein a”.
In claim 1, line 10, “board; a” should read “board; and a”.
In claims 2-6, the word “Claim” in the preambles should be the lowercase “claim”.
In claim 2, line 1, “1, the water” should read “1, wherein the water”.
In claim 3, line 1, “1, an anode” should read “1, wherein an anode”.
In claim 4, line 1, “1, a hook” should read “1, wherein a hook”.
In claim 5, line 1, “1, both” should read “1, wherein both”.
In claim 6, line 1, “1, the electrode” should read “1, wherein the electrode”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 2, 4 and 6 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 2 recites the limitation "the water body" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no previous mention of a “water body” in the claims.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the filter head" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no previous mention of a “filter head” in the claims.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the tank" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The limitations of “a water tank” and “a reaction tank” are previously introduced respectively in lines 1 and 7 of claim 1, upon which claim 4 depends. It is therefore unclear which “tank” is being referred to in the claim. For examination purposes, based on Figure 3, the limitation has been interpreted to be referring to the water tank.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the electrode sheet" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no previous mention of an “electrode sheet” in the claims. For examination purposes, the “electrode sheet” has been interpreted to form part of the anode plate and/or cathode plate introduced in claim 3.
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.
Claims 1, 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong et al. (CN 213127575 U, citations based on translation) in view of Li et al. (CN 217742700 U, citations based on translation), and further in view of Oyama et al. (U.S. 2018/0334752), Takahashi (U.S. 2008/0017039) and Xue (U.S. 2023/0157259).
Regarding claim 1, Zhong teaches an intelligent pet oral cleaning water dispenser (see e.g. Paragraphs n0001 and n0015, pet water dispenser with sterilization/disinfection/purification of water) comprising a water tank (see e.g. Figs. 1-2, water tank 1; Paragraph n0023, line 1); wherein a detachable water storage area (see e.g. Figs. 1-2, detachable drinking tray 4; Paragraph n0005 and Paragraph n0023, lines 1-2 and 8-9) and a host machine are arranged on the water tank (see e.g. Fig. 1, sealed box in water tank 1 containing electrolysis device 2, water pump 3, controller 9 and power supply 10; Paragraph n0028, lines 5-7); a water leakage port is arranged on the detachable water storage area (see e.g. Fig. 2, gap between edge of drinking tray 4 and inner wall of tank 1 forming water return structure for overflowing water, i.e. a leakage port; Paragraph n0026); a filter is arranged below the water leakage port (see e.g. Fig. 2, filter layer 6 with filter element 7 below water return structure/gap formed at edge of drinking tray 4; Paragraphs n0025-n0026); a diverted and distributed water pipe is arranged on the uppermost part of the host machine (see e.g. Figs. 1-2, uppermost water supply pipe 5 with guide edge 8 extending outward, i.e. diverted and distributed; Paragraph n0027); the bottom of the diverted and distributed water pipe is connected to a water outlet (see e.g. Fig. 2, outlet of electrolysis device 2 connected to bottom of water supply pipe 5; Paragraph n0028, lines 7-8); a water inlet is provided (see e.g. Fig. 2, inlet of electrolysis device 2 from water pump 3; Paragraph n0023, lines 3-4); a reaction tank is arranged below the water outlet (see e.g. Fig. 2, electrolysis device 2 below its outlet connected to water supply pipe 5; Paragraph n0028, lines 7-8); a micropump is arranged near the reaction tank (see e.g. Fig. 2, water pump 3 adjacent electrolysis device 2; Paragraph n0023, lines 2-3); a controller is arranged near the micropump (see e.g. Fig. 2, controller 9 in box near water pump 3; Paragraph n0028, lines 1-2 and 5-6); a switch is provided (see e.g. Figs. 1-2, switch button 11; Paragraph n0025, lines 3-4); and a power supply is arranged below the micropump (see e.g. Fig. 2, power supply 10 below pump 3; Paragraph n0028, lines 1-2).
Zhong does not explicitly teach the filter being a filter screen, but does teach it serving to filter water returning from the drinking tray to the water storage tank to prevent impurities from contaminating water quality in the storage tank (see e.g. Paragraph n0025, lines 3-5).
Li teaches a pet water dispenser (see e.g. Paragraph n0001) comprising a filter screen capable of filtering out pet hair and food residue from water before it flows back into a water basin of the dispenser (see e.g. Figs. 2-3, filter screen 07 over water basin 12; Paragraph n0024, lines 3-5, and Paragraph n0035, lines 4-6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the filter of Zhong to be in the form a filter screen as taught by Li as a suitable filtering element for filtering out pet hair and food residue from water returning to the tank/basin of a pet water dispenser. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Modified Zhong does not teach the water inlet being next to the water outlet and the reaction tank also being below the water inlet, instead teaching the water inlet being below the reaction tank on the opposite side of the water outlet (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 2, inlet from water pump 3 at bottom of electrolysis device 2 while outlet connected to water supply pipe 5 is at top; Paragraph n0023, lines 3-4, and Paragraph n0028, lines 7-8).
Oyama teaches a device comprising an electrolytic bath for generating sterilizing ozone water (see e.g. Abstract), wherein a raw water inflow port of the electrolytic bath case is provided on the same side of the case as an ozone water outflow port (see e.g. Figs. 1-2, inflow port 3 on same side of case 2 as outflow port 4; Paragraph 0026, lines 1-5).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the water inlet of modified Zhong to be arranged alongside the water outlet above the reaction tank as taught by Oyama as a suitable alternate configuration for the inlet and outlet of an electrolytic treatment bath case/reaction tank for sterilization of water. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results. Furthermore, changes of position or rearrangement of parts have been held to be an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Modified Zhong does not teach the micropump being arranged below the reaction tank, instead teaching it being next to the reaction tank (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 2, water pump 3 adjacent electrolysis device 2; Paragraph n0023, lines 2-3).
Takahashi teaches an apparatus including an electrolytic device for generating sterilizing/deodorizing electrolytic water (see e.g. Abstract), wherein an electrolytic bath of the apparatus is positioned above a circulating pump for supplying water thereto (see e.g. Fig. 4, electrolytic bath 4 and pump 5; Paragraph 0059, lines 4-13)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the water dispenser of modified Zhong to have the electrolytic reaction tank arranged above the micropump as taught by Takahashi as an alternate suitable position arrangement for an electrolytic bath and circulating pump for an apparatus generating electrolytic sterilizing/deodorizing water. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results. Furthermore, changes of position or rearrangement of parts have been held to be an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Modified Zhong does not explicitly teach the controller being a circuit board, and does not teach it being next to the pump, instead teaching it being slightly below but to the side of the pump (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 2, controller 9 below and offset from pump 3; Paragraph n0028, lines 2-3). Zhong does however teach the controller being electrically connected to the pump (see e.g. Zhong Paragraph n0028, lines 2-3).
Xue teaches a pet water dispenser (see e.g. Abstract) comprising a control circuit board with pins at its side connected to sheets on a side end of an adjacent water pump for control of the pump (see e.g. Fig. 1, control circuit board 21 with pins 22 connected to metal sheets 18 on water pump 15; Paragraph 0043, lines 16-21 and 31-37, and Paragraph 0053).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the controller of modified Zhong to comprise a control circuit board connected to the pump at its side as taught by Xue as a particular suitable controller and connection positioning thereof for a pet water dispenser. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results. Furthermore, changes of position or rearrangement of parts have been held to be an obvious matter of design choice (see MPEP § 2144.04(VI)(C)).
Zhong, as modified above, does not explicitly teach the switch and a charging port being arranged on the circuit board and the power supply comprising a battery, but does teach power being provided to the power supply of the device by charging (see e.g. Zhong Paragraph n0028, lines 8-10).
Xue further teaches a power supply device including a battery and start button, i.e. switch, connected to the control circuit board, wherein a charging port is connected to the control circuit board for charging the battery (see e.g. Xue Fig. 1, battery 23 and start button 24 connected to circuit board 21 along with charging port 32; Paragraphs 0045-0047).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the water dispenser of modified Zhong to comprise a power supply device including a battery and the switch connected to the control circuit board along with a charging port for charging the battery as taught by Xue as a particular suitable power supply configuration for a pet water dispenser. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Regarding claim 3, modified Zhong teaches an anode plate and a cathode plate being arranged in the reaction tank (see e.g. Zhong Paragraph n0007).
Regarding claim 6, Zhong, as modified above, does not explicitly teach an electrode sheet of the anode plate or cathode plate being a porous electrode sheet, but does teach the anode plate and cathode plate being used with a proton exchange membrane therebetween for ozone generation by electrolysis (see e.g. Zhong Paragraph n0007).
Oyama further teaches a cathode electrode and anode electrode sandwiching a cation exchange membrane for electrolytic ozone generation having a tabular, i.e. plate/sheet, shape through which through holes, i.e. pores, having a desired diameter are pierced (see e.g. Oyama Figs. 7and 9, anode electrode 10 and cathode electrode 11 with respective through holes 10a and 11a sandwiching membrane 12; Paragraph 0028, lines 11-17, and Paragraph 0039).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the anode and cathode plates of modified Zhong to be formed with through holes of a desired diameter, thereby forming porous electrode sheets, as taught by Oyama as a suitable form for cathode and anode electrodes sandwiching a proton exchange membrane for electrolytic ozone generation. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Li, Oyama, Takahashi and Xue, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heiss (U.S. 2009/0095666).
Regarding claim 2, modified Zhong teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Zhong further teaches the water inlet being connected to the water body of the water tank through a hose, and one end of the hose being immersed in the water (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 2, water from tank 1 delivered to inlet of electrolysis device 2 via water inlet of pump 3 with its end positioned in the inner cavity of the water tank 1, thereby being immersed in the water; Paragraph n0024, lines 1-2, and Paragraph n0028, lines 5-7).
Modified Zhong does not teach the end of the hose immersed in the water being connected to a filter head, but does teach it forming an inlet into the pump from the tank (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 2, water inlet of pump 3 connected to inner cavity of tank 1; Paragraph n0028, lines 6-7).
Xue further teaches a residue blocking cover being provided in the water tank of the water dispenser connected to a water pump inlet hole, thereby forming a filter head, to filter granular impurities in the water (see e.g. Xue Figs. 1 and 3, residue blocking cover connected to pump inlet hole 3 in water tank 1; Paragraph 0058).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the water dispenser of modified Zhong to comprise a residue blocking cover, i.e. filter head, connected to the end of the inlet hose to the pump immersed in the water as taught by Xue to filter granular impurities in the water.
Modified Zhong does not explicitly teach the hose being a latex hose.
Heiss teaches a system for producing high purity water (see e.g. Abstract) in which pipes, channels, tubes or similar means for passage of water in the system may be made of a suitable material such as latex that may be cleaned, sanitized and/or sterilized periodically with no loss of function in order to maintain sterility of the system (see e.g. Paragraph 0016).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the hose of modified Zhong to be made of latex as taught by Heiss as a suitable material for a pipe, channel, tube or other means for passage of water in an water purification system that may be cleaned, sanitized and/or sterilized periodically with no loss of function in order to maintain sterility of the system. MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Li, Oyama, Takahashi and Xue, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (U.S. 2015/0239760).
Regarding claim 4, modified Zhong teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Zhong does not teach a hook being arranged on the host machine for easy fixation on the tank, but does teach the host machine, which contains the electrolysis reaction tank and other components, being provided on an interior side of the tank (see e.g. Zhong Fig. 1, sealed box with electrolysis device 2 and other components shown on the side of tank 1; Paragraph n0028, lines 5-6).
Kim teaches a water dispenser including an electrolytic device (see e.g. Abstract) in which the electrolytic device may be detachably attached to the side of a water tank of the dispenser using a bracket with a holding protrusion, i.e. hook, so that the electrolytic device may be easily detached during maintenance thereof (see e.g. Figs. 2-3, bracket 123 with holding protrusion 124 for attachment of device to water tank 111; Paragraph 0058).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the host machine of modified Zhong to be detachably attached to the water tank via a bracket with a holding protrusion, i.e. hook as taught by Kim to allow easy detachment of the host machine, along with the contained electrolytic reaction tank and other components, during maintenance thereof.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhong, Li, Oyama, Takahashi and Xue, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Rohrer (U.S. Patent No. 6,971,331) and Boss (U.S. 2008/0308413).
Regarding claim 5, modified Zhong teaches all the elements of the apparatus of claim 1 as stated above. Modified Zhong does not explicitly teach both the water tank and the reaction tank being made of polypropylene or acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymer.
Rohrer teaches a water dispending device for a pet (see e.g. Abstract), wherein a storage vessel, i.e. tank, of the device may be made of a material such as polypropylene (see e.g. Fig. 4, storage vessel 24; Col. 5, lines 15-18).
Boss also teaches an apparatus comprising an electrochemical cell for treatment of water, e.g. drinking water for animals (see e.g. Abstract and Paragraph 0242), in which a container of the apparatus, i.e. reaction tank, may be of a suitable material for holding the water to be treated, such as polypropylene (see e.g. Paragraphs 0032 and 0045-0048).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the water dispenser of modified Zhong to have both the water tank and reaction tank made of polypropylene as taught by Rohrer and Boss as a suitable material for the tank of a pet water dispensing device and an electrochemical reaction tank for treatment of drinking water for animals, respectively. MPEP § 2143(I)(A) states that “combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results” may be obvious. The claimed elements were known in the prior art and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would yield nothing more than predictable results. Further, MPEP § 2144.07 states “The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945)”.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Hennessey et al. (U.S. 2024/0060193) discloses an apparatus including an electrolysis cell for generating microbubbles and/or nanobubbles of hydrogen gas in a water reservoir or flow of water, e.g. for drinking water for animals.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MOFOLUWASO S JEBUTU whose telephone number is (571)272-1919. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm.
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, Luan Van can be reached at (571) 272-8521. 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.
/MOFOLUWASO S JEBUTU/Examiner, Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
