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 § 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 7, 8, and 14, and also claims 9-13 by dependency 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 7 recites the limitations “the air quality rating” in line 1 and "the sensor" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, claim 7 is being interpreted as being dependent on claim 2 in which these limitations were introduced.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “the control mechanism” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, claim 8 is being interpreted as being dependent on claim 2 in which this limitation was introduced.
Claims 9-13 are also rejected based on their dependency from claim 8.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “the control mechanism” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitations in the claim. For the purposes of this Office Action, claim 14 is being interpreted as being dependent on claim 2 in which this limitation was introduced.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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.
Claims 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by US 5,707,005 issued to Kettler et al (hereinafter “Kettler”).
Regarding claim 1, Kettler discloses an air circulation device (Examiner Annotated Figure A below) comprising:
a housing including an exhaust (Fig 1 housing 12);
a base (Fig 1 platform 54);
a filter intake and a bypass intake, the filter intake and bypass intake being configured to draw air into the air circulation device from an environment (Examiner Annotated Figure A);
a damper system coupling the exhaust of the housing to the filter intake and bypass intake (Fig 1 flow control device 42), the damper system being adjustable between a filter state (lower section 46 is open and upper section 44 is closed) and a bypass state (lower section 46 is closed and upper section 44 is open) and comprising:
a bypass damper movable via a bypass actuator (Fig 1 upper section 44);
a filter damper movable via a filter actuator (Fig 1 lower section 46);
a filter mechanism disposed in air communication with the filter damper and the filter intake (Fig 1 filtration system 40); and
a motor communicatively coupled to the bypass actuator and the filter actuator, such that the bypass damper and the filter damper are both movable between an open position and a closed position (col 5 line 52-57).
Regarding claim 2, Kettler discloses that the air circulation device further comprises a control mechanism having a sensor (Fig 1 controller 29 with detectors 74/76/78), the control mechanism being configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state (col 6 line 48-50), wherein the sensor determines an air quality rating of the air and compares the air quality rating of the air to a predetermined air quality threshold (Fig 3A sensors used to determine whether air quality is below a specification limit; step 108/124 for return air quality, step 104/22 for outside air quality).
PNG
media_image1.png
580
951
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Figure A, from Figure 1 of Kettler showing bypass intake and filter intake of the air circulation device
Regarding claim 3, Kettler discloses that when the damper system is in the filter state, the bypass damper is in a closed position and the filter damper is in an open position (see filter state in claim 1; filter state is the state in which bypass damper 44 is closed and filter damper 46 is open).
Regarding claim 4, Kettler discloses that when the damper system is in the bypass state, the bypass damper is in an open position and the filter damper is in a closed position (see bypass state in claim 1; bypass state is the state in which bypass damper 44 is open and filter damper 46 is closed).
Regarding claim 7, Kettler discloses that the air quality rating generated by the sensor represents a volume of particulate matter present in the air (col 6 line 29-37; air quality detector 74 measures level of pollutant, which may include airborne particulates1).
Claims 1, 15, 21, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by JP 2022191768 by Sasaki (hereinafter “Sasaki”).
Regarding claim 1, Sasaki discloses an air circulation device (Fig 10 air purifier 1d) comprising:
a housing including an exhaust (Fig 10 housing 10c);
a base (Fig 10 base 16c, see Fig 7);
a filter intake (Fig 10 first air passage 51d includes portion of suction port 13c above base) and a bypass intake (Fig 11 air passage 52d includes portion of suction port 13c below base), the filter intake and bypass intake being configured to draw air into the air circulation device from an environment (Figs 10-11);
a damper system coupling the exhaust of the housing to the filter intake and bypass intake (Figs 10-11, switching mechanism 30d), the damper system being adjustable between a filter state (Fig 10) and a bypass state (Fig 11) and comprising:
a bypass damper movable via a bypass actuator (Fig 10-11 and paragraph [0084], a second damper opens/closes air passage 52d);
a filter damper movable via a filter actuator (Fig 10-11 and paragraph [0084], a first damper opens/closes air passage 51d);
a filter mechanism disposed in air communication with the filter damper and the filter intake (Figs 10-11, filter unit 20c); and
a motor communicatively coupled to the bypass actuator and the filter actuator, such that the bypass damper and the filter damper are both movable between an open position and a closed position (Figs 10-11, motor 33d, paragraph [0084]).
Regarding claim 15, Sasaki discloses that the air circulation device is a tower fan (Figs 10-11, also see Fig 1).
Regarding claim 21, Sasaki discloses an air circulation device (Fig 10 air purifier 1d) comprising:
a housing including an exhaust (Fig 10 inner cylinder 12c with air outlet 14c);
a base (Fig 10 outer cylinder 11c);
one or more filter intakes and bypass intakes configured to draw air into the air circulation device from an environment (Figs 10-11, suctions port 13c includes intakes for first air passage 51d and second air passage 52d);
a damper system coupling the exhaust of the housing to the one or more filter intakes and bypass intakes (Figs 10-11, switching mechanism 30d), the damper system being adjustable to actuate one or more dampers associated with one or more filters, the damper system further comprising:
at least one damper associated with at least one filter (Figs 10-11, damper 25d associated with filter unit 20c), the at least one damper actuatable via an actuator between an open position and a closed position, wherein in said open position, said damper allows air to flow through said at least one filter (Fig 10; paragraph [0080]), and wherein in said closed position, said at least one damper prevents air to flow through said at least one filter (Fig 11; paragraph [0081]).
Regarding claim 22, Sasaki further discloses that said actuator is driven by a motor (Fig 10 motor 33d drives toothed belt 32d to move damper 25d).
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.
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.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of EP 3306218 by Bhajak et al (hereinafter “Bhajak”).
Regarding claim 5, Sasaki teaches the air circulation device of claim 1, including the damper system with a filter state and a bypass state (see details in claim 1 rejection to Sasaki above). Sasaki teaches that the housing includes a plurality of inputs for manual inputs from the user, which controls operating states of the system, which would be understood to include the operating state of the damper system (Fig 1 control unit 60a; paragraph [0012]).
Additionally or alternatively, Bhajak similarly teaches an air circulation device (Fig 1a, air purifying device 10) comprising a filter pathway to filter the circulating air (Fig 1c airflow 34 through first inlet 35 flows through filter 14) and a bypass pathway for air flow to bypass the filter (Fig 1f, airflow 34 though second inlet 28 bypasses filter) and a damper system configured to adjust the airflow between a filter airflow and a bypass airflow (Figs 1e, louver 11) and a plurality of inputs on a housing for manually controlling an operating state of the damper system (Fig 1a,1b; paragraph [0025], control buttons 32 or latch knobs 27 may operate louver 11 to control the operating state of the damper system).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Sasaki by including a plurality of inputs on the housing for manually controlling the operating state of the damper system, in order to allow the user to directly adjust the damper system to their preferred setting for filtration and air flow.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki, as applied to claim 1 above, in view of US 2023/0243521 by Chu et al (hereinafter “Chu”).
Regarding claim 6, Sasaki teaches the air circulation device of claim 1 (see details in claim 1 rejection to Sasaki above). Sasaki teaches at least one embodiment of the air circulation device wherein the housing includes a user interface with which the user can select an operating status of the damper system (Fig 1 operating unit 60a; paragraph [0021], user can select the operating mode which is either a filtering mode wherein the damper system is set to the filter state as described in paragraph [0029] or a fan mode where the damper system is set to the bypass state as described in paragraph [0030]).
Furthermore, Chu teaches an air circulation device (Fig 2 air purifier; Abstract) which can operate in a filter state (Figs 7-8) or a bypass state (Figs 5-6) and wherein the device further includes a user interface that displays the operating status of the device (paragraph [0046], controller 40 includes a output to a display unit to display control state).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Sasaki such that the user interface on the housing displays the operating status of the damper system. Sasaki teaches that the user can select the operating status of the damper system (i.e., filtering/purification mode or fan mode), so it would be obvious to also display the operating status to the user, in a manner similar to that taught by Chu, so that the user may be informed of the current operating status of the damper system, and thus the operating mode of the device.
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler, as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, in view of JP 2019015458 by Hirao et al (hereinafter “Hirao”).
Regarding claim 8, Kettler teaches the air circulation device of claim 2 (see claim 2 rejection to Kettler above). But Kettler does not teach that the control mechanism is connected to a communication interface for communicatively coupling the air circulation device to a network.
However, Hirao teaches a control mechanism for an air circulation device (Fig 1 air conditioning control device 2 for indoor air conditioning unit 3) wherein the control mechanism includes a communication interface for communicatively coupling the air circulation device to a network (Fig 1, control mechanism is coupled to network through wireless communication devices 32; network comprises at least smartphones 4; paragraph [0020]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Kettler by including a communication interface in the control mechanism for communicatively coupling the air circulation device to a network, so that the user can adjust device settings, such as desired air flow, conveniently from a network device and the control mechanism can receive the user-adjusted settings and control the settings accordingly.
Regarding claim 9, Hirao further teaches that the network includes at least a user device and a smart home environment communicatively coupled to the network (Fig 1 network includes at least one user’s smartphone 4 and, as per paragraph [0019], may also include multiple connected devices, which would make up a smart home environment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention, having modified the air circulation device of Kettler with the communication device and network taught by Hirao, that the network would include at least a user device and a smart home environment communicatively coupled to the network, so that the air circulation device could send and receive information, including user-selected settings, operation status, and/or the presence and operation of other related devices, to and from the network for coordinated operation.
Regarding claim 10, Hirao further teaches that the user device is configured to provide real-time user location data to the control mechanism (paragraph [0024], user device 4 provides data indicative of a user location to position estimation unit 202 of control mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention, having modified the air circulation device of Kettler with the communication device and network taught by Hirao, to configure the user device to provide real-time user location data to the control mechanism, as taught by Hirao, in order to more precisely tailor the settings of the device for a user or users in a particular location.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler and Hirao, as applied to claims 9 and 10 above, and in further view of US 2022/0203288 by Wenger et al (hereinafter “Wenger”).
Regarding claim 11, Kettler modified with the communication device and network of Hirao, teaches the air circulation device of claim 10 (see details in claim 10 rejection above). But Kettler/Hirao does not teach that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time user location data to a predetermined zone.
However, Wenger teaches a similar air circulation device (multi-contaminant air cleaner, “MCAC” 1550, which may also be a stand-alone device separate from the HVCAR system, as shown in Fig 15D) comprising a filter pathway to filter the circulating air and a bypass pathway for air flow to bypass the filter (Fig 15A shows air flow with arrows through a path which includes HEPA filter 1560 and a bypass air pathway for air to bypass filter 1560) and a damper system configured to adjust the airflow between a filter airflow and a bypass airflow (Fig 15A switching apparatus 1580; also note that, as per paragraph [0133], MCAC may include other filtration systems, such as the one shown in Fig 4 having both a filter damper 310 in communication with the filter 330 and a bypass damper 320 to control bypass air around the higher-rated filter 330). Wenger teaches that the device also comprises a control mechanism configured to adjust the damper system among varying positions between the filter state and the bypass state (Fig 15A controller 1525) and that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state based on data indicative of user(s) location in a predetermined zone (paragraph [0058], control mechanism uses occupancy data of the occupied space, to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state; see also Fig 16 and note that ACH_min is determined based on occupancy and ACH_min is then used to determine MCAC operation, including damper system adjustment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Kettler/Hirao by configuring the control mechanism to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time user location data to a predetermined zone. Using both occupancy data, as determined by user locations, and air quality data from the sensors, would be advantageous in providing a more energy-efficient system. For example, the system would be able to operate in a lower-energy mode when it is determined that there are no users present in the predetermined zone.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler and Hirao, as applied to claim 9 above, and in further view of US 2024/0003860 by Tan et al (hereinafter “Tan”).
Regarding claim 12, Kettler modified with Hirao, teaches the air circulation device of claim 9 (see details in claim 9 rejection above). Kettler further teaches that the air circulation device comprises a network of connected sensors which are configured to provide real-time environmental condition data to the control mechanism (Fig 1 air quality detector 74 along with sensors 76 and 78 which provide data to controller 29 regarding air quality, and enthalpy for return air and outside air; col 6 line 38-50). Additionally or alternatively, Tan teaches a smart home environment which comprises a plurality of sensors which are configured to provide real-time environmental condition data (Fig 2 modular air quality sensor 100, which can be used in an outlet or fixture such as those of Fig 1A-1C as part of a smart home environment, is configured to provide data regarding CO2 levels, temperature, humidity, etc., as per paragraph [0034]; see also Fig 5 which shows air quality sensing system 500 which includes the air quality sensors 100 connected to a smart home environment, including an HVAC system which can be adjusted according to data from air quality sensors; paragraph [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Kettler/Hirao such that the smart home environment is configured to provide real time environmental condition data to the control mechanism. The control mechanism of Kettler is already configured to receive sensor data regarding real-time environmental conditions. Tan teaches that it is known to provide similar sensors as part of a connected, smart home environment. This allows for a connected system which can provide data to both connected systems and to the user and also advantageously incorporates sensors into room objects such as outlets or fixtures so that the sensors are easily installed and do not require additional space (Tan paragraph [0030]).
Regarding claim 13, Kettler, as modified with Hirao and Tan, teaches the air circulation device of claim 12 (see details in claim 12 rejection above). Kettler further teaches that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time environmental condition data to a predetermined environmental condition threshold (Fig 3A illustrates the processing sequence of the control mechanism and includes steps of comparing environmental data, specifically the return air quality, to a predetermined specification, in order to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state at steps 108/124).
Claims 16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler in view of Tan.
Regarding claim 16, Kettler teaches an air circulation device comprising:
a housing including an exhaust (see Examiner Annotated Figure B below);
a base including a filter intake and a bypass intake formed in the base, the filter intake and bypass intake being configured to draw air into the air circulation device from an environment (see Examiner Annotated Figure B below);
a damper system coupling the exhaust of the housing to the filter intake and bypass intake of the base (Fig 1 flow control device 42), the damper system being adjustable between a filter state (lower section 46 is open and upper section 44 is closed) and a bypass state (lower section 46 is closed and upper section 44 is open) and comprising:
a bypass damper movable via a bypass actuator (Fig 1 upper section 44);
a filter damper movable via a filter actuator (Fig 1 lower section 46);
a filter mechanism disposed in air communication with the filter damper and the filter intake (Fig 1 filtration system 40);
a motor communicatively coupled to the bypass actuator and the filter actuator, such that the bypass damper and the filter damper are both movable between an open position and a closed position (col 5 line 52-57); and
a control mechanism configured to adjust the damper system among varying positions between the filter state and the bypass state (Fig 1 controller 29; col 6 line 48-50); and
a sensor communicatively coupled to the control mechanism (Fig 1 detectors 74/76/78),
wherein the control mechanism utilizes real-time data received from the sensor to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state (Fig 3A sensed air quality data used to control damper system, particularly at steps 118 and 126).
But Kettler does not teach a network communicatively coupled to the control mechanism, the network including at least a user device or a smart home environment and wherein the real-time data utilized by the control mechanism to adjust the damper system is received from the network.
However, Tan teaches a network (Fig 5 system 500; paragraph [0050]) which includes a user device (paragraph [0052]) and a smart home environment (paragraph [0050]) which comprises a plurality of sensors which are configured to provide real-time environmental condition data which is communicatively coupled to a control mechanism of an HVAC unit (Fig 5 air quality sensor 506, which may be the previously described modular air quality sensor 100 of Fig 2 and which can be used in an outlet or fixture such as those of Fig 1A-1C as part of a smart home environment, and which is configured to provide data regarding CO2 levels, temperature, humidity, air quality, etc., as per paragraph [0034] and [0039]; paragraph [0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Kettler to include a network communicatively coupled to the control mechanism, the network including at least a user device or a smart home environment and wherein the real-time data utilized by the control mechanism to adjust the damper system is received from the network. The control mechanism of Kettler is already configured to receive sensor data regarding real-time environmental conditions. Tan teaches that it is known to connect such a device to a network with a user device and a smart home environment, with similar sensors as part of the connected, smart home environment. This allows for an interconnected system which can provide data to a number of connected systems and to the user and also advantageously incorporates sensors into room objects such as outlets or fixtures so that the sensors are easily installed and do not require additional space (Tan paragraph [0030]).
PNG
media_image2.png
580
951
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Examiner Annotated Figure B, from Figure 1 of Kettler, showing the housing and base, as well as the bypass intake and filter intake as claimed in claim 16
Regarding claim 19, Kettler, as modified with Tan, teaches that the smart home environment is configured to provide or receive real-time environmental condition data to or from the control mechanism (Kettler teaches, in col 6 lines 26-50, that the set of sensors is configured to provide real-time environmental condition data, including air quality, to the control mechanism. Tan teaches that the sensors are part of a smart home environment. See details in parent claim 16 rejection above, including the motivation for one of ordinary skill in the art to modify).
Regarding claim 20, Kettler, teaches that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time environmental condition data to a predetermined environmental condition threshold (Kettler Fig 3A controller compares air quality to a predetermined specification and adjusts damper system between a filter state and bypass state, as at steps 108,118).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler in and Tan, as applied to claim 16 above, and in further view of Hirao.
Regarding claim 17, Kettler, as modified with Tan, teaches the air circulation device of claim 16, including the network which includes a user device. See details in parent claim 16 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill to modify. But Kettler/Tan does not teach that the user device is configured to provide real-time user location data to the control mechanism.
However, Hirao teaches a control mechanism for an air circulation device (Fig 1 air conditioning control device 2 for indoor air conditioning unit 3) and a network including a user device communicatively coupled to the control mechanism (Fig 1, control mechanism is coupled to network through wireless communication devices 32; network comprises at least smartphones 4; paragraph [0020]), wherein the user device is configured to provide real-time user location data to the control mechanism (paragraph [0024], user device 4 provides data indicative of a user location to position estimation unit 202 of control mechanism).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the air circulation device of Kettler/Tan by configuring the user device of the network to provide real-time user location data to the control mechanism, as taught by Hirao, in order to more precisely tailor the settings of the device for a user or users in a particular location.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kettler and Tan and Hirao, as applied to claim 17 above, and in further view of Wenger.
Regarding claim 18, Kettler, as modified by Tan and Hirao, teaches the air circulation device of claim 17. . See details in parent claim 17 rejection above, including the motivation for a person of ordinary skill to modify. But Kettler/Tan/Hirao does not explicitly teach that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time user location data to a predetermined zone.
However, Wenger teaches a similar air circulation device (multi-contaminant air cleaner, “MCAC” 1550, which may be a stand-alone device separate from the HVCAR system, as shown in Fig 15D) comprising a filter pathway to filter the circulating air and a bypass pathway for air flow to bypass the filter (Fig 15A shows air flow with arrows through a path which includes HEPA filter 1560 and a bypass air pathway for air to bypass filter 1560) and a damper system configured to adjust the airflow between a filter airflow and a bypass airflow (Fig 15A switching apparatus 1580; also note that, as per paragraph [0133], MCAC may include other filtration systems, such as the one shown in Fig 4 having both a filter damper 310 in communication with the filter 330 and a bypass damper 320 to control bypass air around the higher rated filter 330). Wenger teaches that the device also comprises a control mechanism configured to adjust the damper system among varying positions between the filter state and the bypass state (Fig 15A controller 1525) and that the control mechanism is configured to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state based on data indicated of user(s) location in a predetermined zone (paragraph [0058], control mechanism uses occupancy data of the predetermined zone of the occupied space, to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state; see also Fig 16 and note that ACH_min is determined based on occupancy and ACH_min is then used to determine MCAC operation, including damper system adjustment).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention, having modified the air circulation device of Kettler with the user device and smart home environment taught by Tan and user location information taught by Hirao, to configure the control mechanism to adjust the damper system between the filter state and the bypass state by comparing the real-time user location data to a predetermined zone. Using both occupancy data, as determined by user locations, and air quality data from the sensors, would be advantageous in providing a more energy-efficient system. For example, the system would be able to operate in a lower-energy mode when user location data indicates that there are no users present in the predetermined zone.
Claim 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sasaki, as applied to claim 21 above, in view of US 2007/0298706 by Hudon et al (hereinafter “Hudon”).
Regarding claim 23, Sasaki teaches the air circulation device of claim 21 (see details in claim 21 rejection above). But Sasaki does not teach that the actuator is a solenoid.
However, Hudon, in solving a similar problem, teaches a damper used to open and close an air flow path which may be actuated by a solenoid (paragraph [0070], louver 24 may be actuated by solenoid; also paragraph [0076], the louver may be a sliding louver similar to that of Sasaki with a push-pull solenoid as actuator).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify the actuator of Sasaki to make the actuator a solenoid. Sasaki discloses the claimed invention except that Sasaki teaches that the actuator is a lifting gear driven by a motor (Sasaki paragraph [0079]). Hudon teaches that a solenoid is an equivalent structure known in the art for moving a similar sliding damper (Hudon paragraphs [0070] and [0076]). Therefore, because these two actuators were art-recognized- equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a solenoid for the motor with lifting gear mechanism of Sasaki. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious before the effective filing date of the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2015/0354874 by Cur et al teaches an air conditioner with selective filtering.
US 2022/0268464 by Jenkins et al teaches a system for treating and filtering air wherein the system includes an air treatment pathway and a bypass pathway and a controller is configured to control a damper to open the filter and/or bypass pathway based on an air quality measurement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Amy E Carter whose telephone number is (703)756-5894. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 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.
/AMY E CARTER/Examiner, Art Unit 3762
/Allen R. B. Schult/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3762
Prosecution Insights