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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
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, 3-11,13,14 and 16-18 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 line 9 of claim 1 (the September 16, 2024 preliminary amendment) it is claimed that the pressure control device monitors the pressure of the compressed air “during the filter drying”. This implies sensing the pressure within or after the filter during the process. The claim would be clearer is amended to claim that the sensed pressure is of the compressed air at the compressed air connector. Claims 3-10 are unclear due to their dependency on claim 1. Claim 2 is clear on the location of the pressure control device, so it overcomes the clarity problem. Independent claim 11 suffers from a problem similar to claim 1. The pressure is monitored during the filter drying, but the air is claimed to pass through the compressed air connector, through the filter connector, through the filter and into the surrounding of the filter-drying device. Claims 13,14 and 16-18 are unclear as well, due to their dependency on claim 11, but claim 12 (and claim 19 due to its dependency on claim 12) claims the pressure is set for the sterile compressed air, wherein the filter is applied with the set pressure. This makes it clear what pressure is being sensed. It is noted that claim 6 is a product by process claim that does not impart any structural limitation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2,12 and 19 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.
Claims 1,3-11,13,14 and 16-18 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 prior art fails to teach a filter drying device or method with a compressed air connector and a filter connector which form an airtight connection with a filter to be dried and a pressure control device to monitor the pressure of the supplied compressed air and cancelling the drying if the pressure is above an upper limit or below a lower limit.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Reyes (US 2020/0197989), from the search report is considered the closest prior art but fails to teach the cancelling of the drying when the air pressure is not in the desired range. Guerra (WO 2020/100171) shows a filter testing system that injects compressed air at specified pressures through the filter for differing periods. Handte (US 10,272,378) shows a device for cleaning filters which detects the pressure at the filters to initiate the cleaning. Helig (WO 2018/148802 A1) shows an air filter cleaning device. Ragaller (US 2016/0136557) shows a system for cleaning filters using pressurized or vacuum fluids. Mengle (US 8,590,173) shows a filter dryer which will cancel the drying if the filter is not properly connected (see paragraph 12).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM C DOERRLER whose telephone number is (571)272-4807. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7-5.
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, Eileen Lillis can be reached at (571) 272-6928. 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.
/WILLIAM C DOERRLER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3993
Prosecution Insights