Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/684,614

A DESICCANT DEHUMIDIFIER

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 16, 2024
Examiner
HOPKINS, ROBERT A
Art Unit
1776
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Munters Europe Aktiebolag
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 7m
To Grant
93%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
1336 granted / 1577 resolved
+19.7% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.1%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 7m
Avg Prosecution
34 currently pending
Career history
1611
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
1.3%
-38.7% vs TC avg
§103
33.2%
-6.8% vs TC avg
§102
33.7%
-6.3% vs TC avg
§112
26.0%
-14.0% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1577 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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. Claims 14, 18-22, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A). Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) in figures 1 and 2 teaches a dehumidifier comprising a dehumidifier rotor(1), which is rotatably arranged around a center axis of the desiccant rotor, a process air circuit(suction side supply line 7 to adsorption zone 2) arranged to conduct a process airflow(7) through a process sector(2) of the dehumidifier rotor, a regeneration air circuit(unnumbered conduit downstream of heater 12 through desorption zone 3) arranged to conduct a regeneration airflow through a regeneration sector(3) of the dehumidifier rotor, a purge air circuit arranged to conduct a purge air flow(from purge pipe 9) through a first purge sector(purge zone 4) and a second purge sector(preheating zone 5; noting no heating of purge air upstream or within preheating zone 5) of the dehumidifier rotor, an air fan(desorption side blower 13) arranged downstream of the dehumidifier rotor (downstream arrangement shown in figure 1), the air fan being configured to generate the regeneration airflow in the regeneration air circuit and the purge airflow in the purge air circuit, wherein the purge air circuit is arranged to conduct the purge airflow through the first purge sector in a first direction through the dehumidifier rotor, and through the second purge sector in a second direction through the desiccant rotor, the first direction being opposite to the second direction(noting forward airflow through purge zone 4 and reverse airflow through preheating zone 5). Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) is silent as to the rotor being a desiccant rotor. Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) in figure 1 teaches a desiccant dehumidifier including a desiccant rotor(1; noting translation stating adsorbent such as silica gel or zeolite), a process air circuit through adsorption zone 2), a regeneration air circuit(downstream of heater 11), and a purge air circuit(noting branch conduit upstream of adsorption zone 2). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the dehumidifier rotor with a desiccant material in order to provide a mechanism for adsorption of the process air flow of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) with a rotor including a desiccant material. With regards to claim 18, Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) further teaches wherein the first purge sector is arranged adjacent to the regeneration sector on a first side of the regeneration sector, and the second purge sector is arranged adjacent to the regeneration sector on a second side of the regeneration sector. With regards to claim 19, Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) further teaches wherein the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and second purge sectors is selected such that both the regeneration airflow and the purge airflow are generated. With regards to claim 20 Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) is silent as to wherein the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is in the range of 1:1 – 1.5:1. Figure 2 of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) shows a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector of 40 degrees, and a sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors of 50 degrees, however Japanese reference specifically teaches that an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone. Examiner respectfully submits that given information that an angle of a regeneration zone should be greater than either angle of the separate purge zones, someone of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, would have been motivated to adjust the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is in the range of 1:1 – 1.5:1, so that flow velocity of the air passing through the desorption zone is slowed down so that the heat of air is given to the dehumidication rotor as much as possible(from translation of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). For example, providing a desorption zone angle of 50 degrees, a preheating zone angle of 30 degrees , and a purge zone angle of 10 degrees provides for a ratio in the range of 1:1 – 1.5:1, and still meets requirements of an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). Examiner also notes that the claimed ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is a result effective variable, wherein someone of ordinary skill in the art would have motivation to adjust the sector angle of the regeneration sector and each purge sector to meet the claimed ratio. Examiner notes MPEP 2144.05(II)(B) for a discussion of result effective variable. With regards to claim 21 Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) is silent as to wherein the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is in the range of 1:1 – 1.25:1. Figure 2 of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) shows a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector of 40 degrees, and a sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors of 50 degrees, however Japanese reference specifically teaches that an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone. Examiner respectfully submits that given information that an angle of a regeneration zone should be greater than either angle of the separate purge zones, someone of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, would have been motivated to adjust the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is in the range of 1:1 – 1.25:1, so that flow velocity of the air passing through the desorption zone is slowed down so that the heat of air is given to the dehumidication rotor as much as possible(from translation of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). For example, providing a desorption zone angle of 50 degrees, a preheating zone angle of 30 degrees , and a purge zone angle of 10 degrees provides for a ratio in the range of 1:1 – 1.25:1, and still meets requirements of an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). Examiner also notes that the claimed ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is a result effective variable, wherein someone of ordinary skill in the art would have motivation to adjust the sector angle of the regeneration sector and each purge sector to meet the claimed ratio. Examiner notes MPEP 2144.05(II)(B) for a discussion of result effective variable. With regards to claim 22 Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) is silent as to wherein a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector is equal to the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and second purge sectors. Figure 2 of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) shows a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector of 40 degrees, and a sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors of 50 degrees, however Japanese reference specifically teaches that an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone. Examiner respectfully submits that given information that an angle of a regeneration zone should be greater than either angle of the separate purge zones, someone of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, would have been motivated to adjust the ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is 1:1 , so that flow velocity of the air passing through the desorption zone is slowed down so that the heat of air is given to the dehumidication rotor as much as possible(from translation of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). For example, providing a desorption zone angle of 45 degrees, a preheating zone angle of 35 degrees , and a purge zone angle of 10 degrees provides for a ratio of 1:1 , and still meets requirements of an angle of the desorption zone > an angle of the preheating zone > an angle of the purge zone of Japanese reference(JP5805978B2). Examiner also notes that the claimed ratio between a regeneration sector angle of the regeneration sector and the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge sector angle of the respective first and purge sectors is a result effective variable, wherein someone of ordinary skill in the art would have motivation to adjust the sector angle of the regeneration sector and each purge sector to meet the claimed ratio. Examiner notes MPEP 2144.05(II)(B) for a discussion of result effective variable. With regards to claim 25, Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) further teaches wherein the purge airflow is configured to flow through the first purge sector in the same direction as the direction of the regeneration airflow through the regeneration sector. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 15,16,17,23,24,26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Claim 15 recites “wherein the purge air circuit is connected to the regenerated air circuit downstream of the desiccant rotor.”. Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches a purge air circuit and a regenerated air circuit, however Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) does not teach or suggest wherein the purge air circuit is connected to the regenerated air circuit downstream of the desiccant rotor. Claim 16 recites “wherein the purge air circuit is connected to the regeneration air circuit upstream of the desiccant rotor, and wherein the purge airflow is configured to be collected from regeneration airflow in the regeneration airflow in the regeneration air circuit.”. Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches a purge air circuit and a regenerated air circuit, however Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) does not teach or suggest wherein the purge air circuit is connected to the regeneration air circuit upstream of the desiccant rotor, and wherein the purge airflow is configured to be collected from regeneration airflow in the regeneration airflow in the regeneration air circuit. Claim 17 depends on claim 16 and hence would also be allowable upon incorporation of claim 16 into claim 14. Claim 23 recites “wherein the regeneration sector angle is 60o , the first purge sector angle (B1) is 30o , and the second purge sector angle (B2) is 30o.”. Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches a regeneration angle sector equal to the sum of a first purge sector angle and a second purge section angle of the respective first and second purge sectors, however Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches against wherein the regeneration sector angle is 60o , the first purge sector angle (B1) is 30o , and the second purge sector angle (B2) is 30o. Claim 24 recites “wherein the purge airflow is configured to flow through the first purge sector in the opposite direction to the direction of the regeneration airflow through the regeneration sector.”. Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches a first purge sector and a regeneration airflow through a regeneration sector, however Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) does not teach or suggest wherein the purge airflow is configured to flow through the first purge sector in the opposite direction to the direction of the regeneration airflow through the regeneration sector. Claim 26 recites “wherein the first purge sector is arranged after the regeneration sector in relation to the rotational direction of the desiccant rotor.”. Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) teaches a first purge sector and a regeneration airflow through a regeneration sector, however Japanese reference(JP5805978B2) taken together with Japanese reference(JP2005-337616A) does not teach or suggest wherein the first purge sector is arranged after the regeneration sector in relation to the rotational direction of the desiccant rotor. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT A HOPKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-1159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-4pm. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 5712707872. 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. /ROBERT A HOPKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776 March 3, 2026
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 16, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 03, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12582946
ERGONOMIC DEVICE FOR MIXING FLUIDS WITH CONTROLLED METERING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582931
DRYING OF FILTER ELEMENTS IN A FILTER SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582934
SMART DUST SUPPRESSION SYSTEM THAT SPRAYS ATOMIZED WATER THROUGH A FAN
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12578106
AIR CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12577927
ADJUSTMENT STRUCTURE AND CARBURETOR
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
93%
With Interview (+8.1%)
2y 7m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1577 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month