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 .
Status of Claims
The Office Action is in response to the remarks and amendments filed on 1/30/2026. The objections to the Specification have been withdrawn in light of the amendments filed. Claims 9 and 11 are cancelled. Claims 16 and 17 are new. Accordingly, claims 1-8,10 and 12-17 are pending for consideration in this Office Action.
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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20220196267A1) in view of Livchak et al. (WO2022010680A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Kim teaches an air conditioner [air conditioner 1, Figure 2] comprising:
a housing [case 10, Figure 1] including an air inlet [inlet 10a, Figure 1] and an air outlet [outlet 10b, Figure 1];
a heat exchanger [heat exchanger 44, Figure 1] disposed inside the housing [where heat exchanger 44 heats or cools air flowing in case 10, Figure 1; 0023];
a blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1] rotatably provided inside the housing [where blower fan rotates with respect to a rational shaft inside case, Figure 1; 0091];
an ultraviolet (UV) light source [sterilization device 50, Figure 1] provided inside the housing and configured to irradiate UV light toward the blower fan [where the sterilization device 50 may be disposed at or on the lower guide 22 to emit ultraviolet light toward the blower fan 46, Figure 8; 0043];
a blade [outer vane 42, Figure 1], rotatable relative to the housing [where outer vane 42 is rotatable connected via connector 40, Figure 1; 0042], and configured to be in an open position to open the air outlet or in a closed position to block the air outlet [where outer vane 42 adjusts a wind direction of air of air outlet 10b, implying varying degrees of openness and blocking of the air; 0042]; but
Kim does not teach a sensor configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position, wherein the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is selectively stopped based on the position of the blade detected by the sensor.
However, Livchak teaches embodiments to disinfect air in a room [0003] where a sensor [where door sensor 105 may include a reed switch, a magnet-based sensor; 0031] is configured to detect whether the blade [door of door sensor 105, Figure 1A;0031] is in the open position or the closed position [where door sensor 105 is mounted near a door and detect opening and closing of the door when magnet 106 is mounted on the door; 0031], wherein the UV light source [UV light 120; 0038] is configured such that operation of the UV light source is selectively stopped based on the position of the blade detected by the sensor [where UV light source 120 is turned off when door sensor 104 indicates opening of a door; 0038] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements, a reed switch, as claimed, at the opening of the space exposed to UV light, by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Kim to have where a sensor configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position, wherein the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is selectively stopped based on the position of the blade detected by the sensor in view of the teachings of Livchak where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Regarding Claim 2, Kim teaches the invention of claim 1 and does not teach where the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is stopped when the sensor detects that the blade is in the open position, and the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is permitted when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position.
However, Livchak teaches embodiments to disinfect air in a room [0003] teaches the UV light source [UV light 120, Figure 1A] is configured such that operation of the UV light source is stopped when the sensor detects that the blade is in the open position [where when the door sensor 105 indicates opening of a door, the UV light 120 is turned off to prevent the human opening the door from exposure to UV light; 0038], and the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is permitted when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position [where the controller is further configured to turn on the disinfecting light source when the door into the room is closed; 0095 ] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art, i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is stopped when the sensor detects that the blade is in the open position, and the UV light source is configured such that operation of the UV light source is permitted when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position in view of the teachings of Livchak where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable, i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Regarding Claim 3, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 and further teaches wherein the blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1], is configured to rotate about a rotation axis [center 46a, Figure 1] extending along a longitudinal direction of the housing [where Figure 1 is the axial cross-section view of blower fan 46 in housing 10, and the length of blower 46 is shown in Figure 7; 0062], and the UV light source [sterilization lamp 52, Figure 8] is spaced apart from the blower fan along a radial direction of the blower fan [where Figure 7 shows the transmission range of the sterilization device 50 along the lateral direction of blower fan 46; 0062].
Regarding Claim 4, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 3 and further teaches where the UV light source [sterilization device 50, Figure 1] is configured to irradiate UV light toward the blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1] while the blower fan is rotating [where there is an advantage of sterilizing a blower fan while maintaining stable air flow; 0086] but does not teach the UV light source is configured to irradiate UV light toward the blower fan while the blower fan is rotating when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position.
However, Livchak teaches embodiments to disinfect air in a room [0001] when the sensor [door sensor 105, Figure 2A] detects that the blade is in the closed position [where when the door remains closed the room is considered unoccupied; 0070], the UV light source [light source 120; Figure 1A] is configured to irradiate UV light while the blower fan is rotating [where fan 115 and UV light 120 is turned on in unoccupied mode; 0042] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays while drawing air into a space for sterilization [Livchak; 0038].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have the UV light source configured to irradiate UV light toward the blower fan while the blower fan is rotating when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position in view of the teachings of Livchak where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays while drawing air into a space for sterilization [Livchak; 0038].
Regarding Claim 5, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 3 and further teaches where the blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1] is provided within a UV irradiation range where UV light is irradiated from the UV light source [where sterilization lamp 52 may be emitted in a range in a front-rearward direction of the blower fan 46, Figure 8; 0061], and the air outlet [outlet 10b, Figure 1] is provided outside the UV irradiation range of the UV light source [where the light emitted is limited by the top wall 68, Figure 2 and Figure 8; 0061].
Claims 6-8 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20220196267A1) in view of Livchak et al. (WO2022010680A1) and in further view of Kim et al. (US20180172288A1), hereinafter Kim ‘288.
Regarding Claim 6, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 and does not teach where the blade comprises a plurality of first holes, and when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position [refer to Livchak as applied to the rejection of claim 1 above for the teaching of the sensor], the air conditioner is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of first holes.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches various ways of controlling an air discharge current of an air conditioner [0002] where the blade [blade 70, Figure 3] comprises a plurality of first holes [holes 74, Figure 5], and when the blade is in the closed position [where blade 70 shuts outlet 40, Figure 10; 0111], the air conditioner is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of first holes [and the air drawn in may discharge through holes 74 formed in blade 70, Figure 10; 0111] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., improving user comfort by increasing air flow resistance to gradually adjust the temperature of a room [Kim ’288; 0112].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings have where the blade comprises a plurality of first holes, and based on the blade being in the closed position, the air conditioner is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of first holes in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., improving user comfort by increasing air flow resistance to gradually adjust the temperature of a room [Kim ’288; 0112].
Claim 6 recites functional limitations drawn toward the intended use or manner of operating the claimed apparatus. The functional limitations are: “when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position” When the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. The courts have held that: (1) "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and (2) a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP § 2114.
Regarding Claim 7, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 and further teaches where the housing [case 10, Figure 1] comprises a main body frame accommodating [curved surface 22a of lower guide 22 and upper end guide 30 of inner frame 26, Figure 1; 0036] the blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1] and the heat exchanger therein [heat exchanger 44, Figure 1], a panel frame configured to be assembled to the main body frame [upper case 12 and outer vane 42, Figure 1] and provided with the air inlet [inlet 10a at upper case 12, Figure 1] and the air outlet [outlet 10b below front case 14, Figure 1], a grille panel [grille groove 38a of first connector 38 in Figure 2 in which horizontal grille 96b of steel net 96 is mounted in Figure 10; 0041] mounted on the panel frame [via connector 40, Figure 10] and an intermediate panel [front case 14 above outer vane 42 and below upper case 12 as viewed in Figure 1] but
Kim does not teach where the panel grille panel is configured to cover the air inlet, and the intermediate panel mounted on the panel frame between the grille panel and the blade.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches various ways of controlling an air discharge current of an air conditioner [0002] where the panel grille panel [where a grill 7 may be coupled to the inlet 30 to filter out dust from the air drawn in, Figure 3; 0138] is configured to cover the air inlet [inlet 30, Figure 3; 0138] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e., minimizing particulate build up in the air conditioner by filtering dust from air prior to being drawn into the housing [Kim ‘288, 0138]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where the panel grille panel is configured to cover the air inlet, such that the intermediate panel mounted on the panel frame is between the grille panel and the blade in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e., minimizing particulate build up in the air conditioner by filtering dust from air prior to being drawn into the housing [Kim ‘288, 0138]
Regarding Claim 8, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 7 and does not teach where the intermediate panel comprises a plurality of second holes, and when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position [refer to Livchak as applied to the rejection of claim 1 above for the teaching of the sensor], the blower fan is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of second holes.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches various ways of controlling an air discharge current of an air conditioner [0002] where the intermediate panel [where cover panel 20 is between outlet 40 and inlet 30, Figure 2; 0070] comprises a plurality of second holes [where in another embodiment the cover panel 420 may include a panel outlet with a plurality of holes 422 formed therein, Figure 13; 0118;0119], and when the blade is in the closed position [where blade 70 shuts outlet 40, Figure 13; 0121], air is configured to be discharged to outside of the housing through the plurality of second holes where air flowing may be discharged through holes 74 in blade 70 and holes 422 in cover panel 420, Figure 13; 0121] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., improving the level of control over the amount of discharge air in different operational modes [Kim ‘288; 0121].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings have where the intermediate panel comprises a plurality of second holes, and when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position, the blower fan is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of second holes in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable, i.e., improving the level of control over the amount of discharge air in different operational modes [Kim ‘288; 0121].
Claim 8 recites functional limitations drawn toward the intended use or manner of operating the claimed apparatus. The functional limitations are: “when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position” When the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. The courts have held that: (1) "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and (2) a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP § 2114.
Regarding Claim 16, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 1 and does not teach a motor configured to rotatably drive the blade.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches a motor [a blade drive motor 9; 0102] configured to rotatably drive the blade [where a blade drive motor 9 may be equipped in housing 10 connected to pivot shaft portion 77 of blade 70, Figure 6; 0102] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements, a motor and rotatable pivot, as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e., delivering hands-free rotational force to drive the blade position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have a motor configured to rotatably drive the blade in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e., delivering hands-free rotational force to drive the blade position.
6. Claims 10 and12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20220196267A1) in view of Livchak et al. (WO2022010680A1).
Regarding Claim 10, Kim teaches air conditioner [air conditioner 1, Figure 2] comprising:
a housing [case 10, Figure 1] including an air inlet [inlet 10a, Figure 1] and an air outlet [outlet 10b, Figure 1];
a heat exchanger [heat exchanger 44, Figure 1] disposed inside the housing [where heat exchanger 44 heats or cools air flowing in case 10, Figure 1; 0023];
a blower fan [blower fan 46, Figure 1] rotatably provided inside the housing [where blower fan rotates with respect to a rational shaft inside case, Figure 1; 0091];
an ultraviolet (UV) light source [sterilization device 50, Figure 1] provided inside the housing and configured to irradiate UV light toward the blower fan [where the sterilization device 50 may be disposed at or on the lower guide 22 to emit ultraviolet light toward the blower fan 46, Figure 8; 0043];
a blade [outer vane 42, Figure 1], rotatable relative to the housing [where outer vane 42 is rotatable connected via connector 40, Figure 1; 0042] and configured to be in an open position for opening the air outlet or in a closed position for blocking the air outlet [where outer vane 42 adjusts a wind direction of air of air outlet 10b, implying varying degrees of openness and blocking of the air; 0042]; and
Kim does not teach where a sensor is configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to a user, wherein: based on a result of a detection of the position of the blade by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to the user, and the air conditioner is configured to control operation of the UV light source based on a result of the detection by the sensor.
However, Livchak teaches embodiments to disinfect air in a room [0003] where a sensor [where door sensor 105 may include a reed switch; 0031] is configured to detect whether the blade [door of door sensor 105, Figure 1A;0031] is in the open position or the closed position [where door sensor 105 is mounted near a door and detect opening and closing of the door when magnet 106 is mounted on the door; 0031], to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to a user [where controller 101 determines the human occupants have entered the space from various sensors 103; 0037], wherein based on a result of a detection of the position of the blade by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to the user [where when the door sensor 105 indicates opening of the door, the UV light 120 is turned off to prevent the human opening the door from exposure to UV light; 0038], and the air conditioner is configured to control operation of the UV light source based on a result of the detection by the sensor where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements, a reed switch, as claimed, at the opening of the space exposed to UV light, by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of Kim to have where a sensor is configured to detect whether the air outlet is accessible to a user, where a sensor is configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to a user, wherein based on a result of a detection of the position of the blade by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to the user, and the air conditioner is configured to control operation of the UV light source based on a result of the detection by the sensor in view of the teachings of Livchak where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Regarding Claim 12, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 10 and does not teach where when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source.
However, Livchak teaches embodiments to disinfect air in a room [0001] when the sensor [door sensor 105, Figure 2A] detects that the blade is in the closed position [where when the door remains closed the room is considered unoccupied; 0070]; the air conditioner [light fixture 100 with disinfecting plenum 112, Figure 2A] is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user [where the UV light 120 is turned on in unoccupied mode, where it is undesirable to expose human occupants; 0037;0038], and permit operation of the UV light source [UV light 120; 0037;0038], where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique, operating UV light when humans are not detected, to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source in view of the teachings of Livchak where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., Improving safety measures by preventing irradiation of the user with ultraviolet rays [Livchak; 0038].
Claims 13 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20220196267A1) in view of Livchak et al. (WO2022010680A1) and in further view of Kim et al. (US20180172288A1), hereinafter Kim ‘288.
Regarding Claim 13, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 12 and does not teach where the blade comprises a plurality of first holes, and when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position [refer to Lichak as applied to the rejection of claim 10 above], the blower fan is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing through the plurality of first holes.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches various ways of controlling an air discharge current of an air conditioner [0002] where the blade [blade 70, Figure 3] comprises a plurality of first holes [holes 74, Figure 5], and when the blade is in the closed position [where blade 70 shuts outlet 40, Figure 10; 0111], the blower fan [blower fan 3, Figure 1] is configured to discharge air to outside of the housing [housing 10, Figure 3] through the plurality of first holes [where the air may discharge through holes 74 formed in blade 70, Figure 10; 0111] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., improving user comfort by increasing air flow resistance to gradually adjust the temperature of a room [Kim ’288; 0112].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings have where the blade comprises a plurality of first holes, and based on the blade being in the closed position, air is configured to be discharged to outside of the housing through the plurality of first holes in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., improving user comfort by increasing air flow resistance to gradually adjust the temperature of a room [Kim ’288; 0112].
Claim 13 recites functional limitations drawn toward the intended use or manner of operating the claimed apparatus. The functional limitations are: “when the sensor detects that the blade is in the closed position” When the cited prior art teaches all of the positively recited structure of the claimed apparatus, it will be held that the prior art apparatus is capable of performing all of the claimed functional limitations of the claimed apparatus. The courts have held that: (1) "apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990), and (2) a claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). MPEP § 2114.
Regarding Claim 17, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 10 and does not teach a motor configured to rotatably drive the blade.
However, Kim ‘288 teaches a motor [a blade drive motor 9; 0102] configured to rotatably drive the blade [where a blade drive motor 9 may be equipped in housing 10 connected to pivot shaft portion 77 of blade 70, Figure 6; 0102] where one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements, a motor and rotatable pivot, as claimed by known methods and that in combination, each element would perform the same function as it did separately and one of ordinary skills would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable i.e., delivering hands-free rotational force to drive the blade position.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have a motor configured to rotatably drive the blade in view of the teachings of Kim ‘288 where the elements could have been combined by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination would have yielded predictable results i.e., delivering hands-free rotational force to drive the blade position.
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US20220196267A1) in view of Livchak et al. (WO2022010680A1) and in further view of Zheng et al. (CN212132741U).
Regarding Claim 14, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 10 and does not teach wherein the sensor is configured to detect the user, and based on a result of the detection of presence of the user by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to the user.
However, Zheng teaches an air conditioning system with ultraviolet sterilization function [0002] where the sensor [human detection module 2, Figure 1] is configured to detect the user [where the human sensing detection module 2 is used to monitor in real time whether there is anyone in the room; 0021], and based on a result of the detection of presence of the user by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to the user [where the sensor is installed on the front of the indoor unit where air flows out, see air flow arrow in Figure 2; 0021; where human detection module 2 is connected to main control unit 100; 0027] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., preventing harmful exposure to ultraviolet light [Zheng, 0004].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have where based on the blade being in the closed pose, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source in view of the teachings of Zheng where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable i.e., preventing harmful exposure to ultraviolet light [Zheng, 0004].
Regarding Claim 15, Kim, as modified, teaches the invention of claim 14 and does not teach where based on presence of the user being detected by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is accessible to the user, and stop operation of the UV light source, and based on presence of the user not being detected by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source.
However, Zheng teaches an air conditioning system with ultraviolet sterilization function [0002] where based on the presence of the user being detected by the sensor [human detection module 2, Figure 1], the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is accessible to the user [where the sensor is installed on the front of the indoor unit where air flows out, see air flow arrow in Figure 2; 0021; where human detection module 2 is connected to main control unit 100; 0027], and stop operation of the UV light source [where once the main control unit 100 receives a detection feedback signal of "someone is there", it controls the ultraviolet lamp 1 to turn off immediately; 0022], and based on presence of the user not being detected by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source [where ultraviolet lamp 1 will not be turned on for sterilization until the person leaves the room and "someone" is no longer detected; 0022] where one of ordinary skill in the art would have been capable of applying this known technique to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art i.e., preventing harmful exposure to ultraviolet light [Zheng, 0004].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the assembly of the combined teachings to have based on the user being detected by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is accessible to the user, and stop operation of the UV light source, and based on the user not being detected by the sensor, the air conditioner is configured to determine that the air outlet is inaccessible to the user, and permit operation of the UV light source in view of the teachings of Zheng where this known technique could have been applied to a known device that was ready for improvement and the results would have been predictable, i.e., preventing harmful exposure to ultraviolet light [Zheng, 0004].
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments on pages 7-9 of the remarks filed 1/30/2025 with respect to claims 1 and 10 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
On page 7 of the remarks, Applicant argues in regards to claim 1 rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Kim in view of Oji that the prior art fail to teach the feature as amended where a sensor is configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
On page 8 of the remarks, Applicant argues in regards to claim 10 rejected under 35. U.S.C. § 103 over Kim in view of Hak that the prior art fails to teach the feature as amended where a sensor is configured to detect whether the blade is in the open position or the closed position to determine whether the air outlet is accessible to a user. Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant does not separately argue the rejection of claims 2-8 and 12-17 except for their dependence upon claim 1 and claim 10. Accordingly, the rejections of record are considered proper and remain.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEONA LAUREN BANKS whose telephone number is (571)270-0426. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30- 6:00 EST.
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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at 5712705054. 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.
/KEONA LAUREN BANKS/Examiner, Art Unit 3763
/ELIZABETH J MARTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763