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 Status
Pending claims 1-5 are addressed below.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a unit exchange lid provided in the body case, and opening/closing the unit accommodation chamber” should be amended to recite “a unit exchange lid, provided in the body case, to open or close the unit accommodation chamber”
“a manual valve provided inside the body case, and switched to an open state or a closed state by a trigger lever” should be amended to recite “a manual valve provided inside the body case, to switch between an open state [[or]] and a closed state by a trigger lever”
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a communication chamber for guiding the air, which flows out from the manual valve, to the discharge flow path provided in the discharge nozzle is formed in the nozzle holder” should include a comma before “is formed in the nozzle holder”. Comma after “the manual valve,” should be deleted.
“by regarding the discharge nozzle as a counter electrode to generate corona discharge between the counter electrode and a discharge electrode, the discharge electrode for ionizing the air flowing through the discharge flow path is provided in the nozzle holder” should be changed to “wherein the discharge nozzle is a counter electrode to generate corona discharge between the counter electrode and a discharge electrode, the discharge electrode for ionizing the air flowing through the discharge flow path is provided in the nozzle holder.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
In claim 1:
- “the pulse blow unit intermittently outputting …air” in line 4-5, which uses a generic placeholder “unit” that is coupled with functional language “intermittently outputting …air” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier; paragraph 16 describes the components that constitute the pulse blow unit, including a switching valve 32, valve housing 34, a small-diameter piston, a large-diameter piston, a small-diameter pilot chamber, and a large-diameter pilot chamber, an intermittent output end portion, and an intermittent input end portion.
- “the continuous blow unit continually outputting…air” in line 6-7, which uses a generic placeholder “unit” that is coupled with functional language “continually outputting…air” without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier; paragraph 21 describes the components that constitute the continuous blow unit, including a tube member 42, a continuous output end portion, and a continuous input end portion, large-diameter flange, an input joint, a small-diameter portion.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-5 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.
In claim 1 lines 3-4, limitation reciting “a unit accommodation chamber formed in the body case so as to selectively accommodate both of a pulse blow unit and a continuous blow unit” is indefinite. Firstly, it is unclear if “a pulse blow unit” and “a pulse blow unit” are positively recited, since these components are part of the functional claim language. Secondly, since the chamber can only receive one unit at a time, the phrase “accommodate both of…and…” indicate that both unit can be placed in the chamber at the same time, which is conflicting with the disclosed device.
To positively recite these components and clarify the interchangeable feature, line 3 of claim 1 can recite “a pulse blow unit; a continuous blow unit; a unit accommodation chamber formed in the body so as to selectively accommodate one of the pulse blow unit or the continuous blow unit…”.
In claim 1 lines 15-16, limitation reciting “wherein both of a continuous blow gun continuously discharging the air toward an object and a pulse blow gun intermittently discharging the air are applicable” is indefinite. The metes and bound of the claim is unclear as it is not understood what is meant by “are applicable”. It is unclear if the claim intends to define additional and separate “continuous blow gun” and “pulse blow gun”. As best understood by examiner, this limitation may be amended to recite “wherein, when the unit accommodation chamber receives the continuous blow unit, the air blow gun functions as a continuous blow gun to continuously discharge the air toward an object; and wherein, when the unit accommodation chamber receives the pulse blow unit, the air blow gun functions as a pulse blow gun to intermittently discharge the air”.
In claim 4, limitations “an intermittent output end portion”, “an intermittent input end portion”, “a continuous output end portion”, “a continuous input end portion” appear to be double inclusion of the same components already defined in lines 5-7 of claim 1, which renders the claim indefinite.
In claim 5, “the discharge flow path” lacks proper antecedent basis in the claim.
In claim 1, limitations “the pulse blow unit intermittently outputting …air” and “the continuous blow unit continually outputting…air” have been evaluated under the three-prong test set forth in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, but the result is inconclusive. Thus, it is unclear whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because claim 1 further indicates related components of the “pulse blow unit” including “an intermittent output end portion” and “an intermittent input end portion”, and the “continuous blow unit” including “a continuous output end portion” and “a continuous input end portion”. It is unclear if these components are sufficient or insufficient to perform the recited function. The boundaries of this claim limitation are ambiguous; therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
In response to this rejection, applicant must clarify whether this limitation should be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Mere assertion regarding applicant’s intent to invoke or not invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph is insufficient. Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim to clearly invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by reciting “means” or a generic placeholder for means, or by reciting “step.” The “means,” generic placeholder, or “step” must be modified by functional language, and must not be modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function;
(b) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, should apply because the claim limitation recites a function to be performed and does not recite sufficient structure, material, or acts to perform that function;
(c) Amend the claim to clearly avoid invoking 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, by deleting the function or by reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to perform the recited function; or
(d) Present a sufficient showing that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, does not apply because the limitation does not recite a function or does recite a function along with sufficient structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Other claim(s) listed in the rejection title is/are indefinite due to its/their dependency upon the rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-5 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The most relevant prior arts include Schmon (US 20030189105), Numata (US 20220097093), Shih (US 20150174597), Furukawa (US20190232312). None of the references teach or suggest “a unit accommodation chamber formed in the body case so as to selectively accommodate both of a pulse blow unit and a continuous blow unit, the pulse blow unit intermittently outputting, to an intermittent output end portion, air supplied to an intermittent input end portion from outside, the continuous blow unit continually outputting, to a continuous output end portion, air supplied to a continuous input end portion from the outside; a unit exchange lid provided in the body case, and opening/closing the unit accommodation chamber; and a manual valve provided inside the body case, and switched to an open state or a closed state by a trigger lever, air discharged from the pulse blow unit or the continuous blow unit being discharged to the discharge nozzle in the open state, the discharge is stopped in the closed state, wherein both of a continuous blow gun continuously discharging the air toward an object and a pulse blow gun intermittently discharging the air are applicable”.
Claims 2-4, depending from claim 1, therefore would also be allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TUONGMINH NGUYEN PHAM whose telephone number is (571)270-0158. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM - 5PM M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Arthur Hall can be reached at 571-270-1814. 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.
/TUONGMINH N PHAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights