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
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 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 1-2 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi (JP 2019063054 A) in view of Kurokawa (US 20030116430 A1) .
Regarding claim 1, Hayashi teaches a space purification device comprising (space sterilization device, paragraph [0001]): an electrolysis bath that mixes an electrolysis accelerator and water (an electrolysis unit, paragraph [0007], and electrolysis of an aqueous solution of an electrolytic auxiliary agent, paragraph [0036]); a water supply unit that supplies the water to the electrolysis bath (water supply unit for supplying water to tray, paragraph [0007]); an electrode unit that generates hypochlorous acid water from the electrolysis accelerator and the water mixed in the electrolysis bath (electrolytic unit having electrodes, paragraph [0025], and hypochlorous acid is generated by electrolysis of an aqueous solution of an electrolytic auxiliary agent, paragraph [0036]); and an electrode controller performs energization in the electrode unit for the required energization time (perform electrolysis on the water in the tray for a certain period of time, paragraph [0036]), but does not teach a first calculator that calculates an increased concentration of hypochlorous acid water per unit time based on (i) a first sodium chloride concentration that is a sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath after the sodium chloride concentration has changed due to an input of the electrolysis accelerator into the electrolysis bath and (ii) hypochlorous acid generation efficiency per unit time set in advance; a second calculator that calculates, based on a target hypochlorous acid water concentration in the electrolysis bath, a first hypochlorous acid water concentration that is a hypochlorous acid water concentration in the electrolysis bath before energizing by the electrode unit, and the increased concentration of hypochlorous acid water per unit time calculated by the first calculator, a required energization time for achieving the target hypochlorous acid water concentration; and the electrode control based on the time calculated by the second calculator. However, Kurokawa teaches a first calculator that calculates an increased concentration of hypochlorous acid water per unit time based on (i) a first sodium chloride concentration that is a sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath after the sodium chloride concentration has changed due to an input of the electrolysis accelerator into the electrolysis bath (reaction of the for-treatment water is controlled by the salt during electrolysis, paragraph [0056]), and predetermined amount of salt water is added to electrolysis chamber, paragraph [0055]) and (ii) hypochlorous acid generation efficiency per unit time set in advance (rate of conversion of the salt into hypochlorous acid changes according to temperature and current densities of the electrode, paragraph [0057]); a second calculator that calculates, based on a target hypochlorous acid water concentration in the electrolysis bath, a first hypochlorous acid water concentration that is a hypochlorous acid water concentration in the electrolysis bath before energizing by the electrode unit, and the increased concentration of hypochlorous acid water per unit time calculated by the first calculator, a required energization time for achieving the target hypochlorous acid water concentration (microcomputer calculates electrolysis time, paragraph [0055], correlations between concentrations of residual chlorine and times to achieve a concentration of produces hypochlorous acid are obtained in advance and stored in memory, paragraph [0056], and calculation of electrolysis time do not exceed time required to convert 90% of salt in electrolysis chamber based on rate of conversion, paragraph [0057]); and the electrode control based on the time calculated by the second calculator (microcomputer starts to energize the electrode and determines if set electrolysis time has elapsed, paragraph [0059])
Hayashi and Kurokawa are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the hypochlorous acid space purification device as taught by Hayashi with the calculations taught by Kurokawa because Kurokawa teaches such calculations advantageously allow for the effective use of the added salt to be accomplished (paragraph [0057]).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Hayashi and Kurokawa teaches a third calculator that calculates a second sodium chloride concentration that is the sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath after the energization by the electrode unit based on the first sodium chloride concentration, the increased concentration of hypochlorous acid water per unit time, and the required energization time (concentration of the hypochlorous acid in the electrolysis chamber is detected by residual chlorine concentration sensor to achieve target concentration, paragraph [0065], Kurokawa).
Regarding claim 8, a combination of Hayashi and Kurokawa teaches a purification unit that purifies a space using the hypochlorous acid water in the electrolysis bath (spatial sterilization device that generates hypochlorous acid by electrolysis and diffuses it into the target space, paragraph [0007], Hayashi).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi and Kurokawa as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Iseki (WO 2021066202 A1).
Regarding claim 3, a combination of Hayashi and Kurokawa all aspects of the current invention except a purification bath that stores the hypochlorous acid water generated in the electrolysis bath; an electrolytic water supply unit that supplies the hypochlorous acid water from the electrolysis bath to the purification bath; and a purification unit that purifies a space using the hypochlorous acid water stored in the purification bath. However, Iseki teaches a purification bath that stores the hypochlorous acid water generated in the electrolysis bath (the water storage tank is for storing the hypochlorous acid water from the hypochlorite water generation storage tank, page 14 line 17); an electrolytic water supply unit that supplies the hypochlorous acid water from the electrolysis bath to the purification bath (connecting section is formed between the generation storage tank and the disinfection storage tank, page 14 line 19); and a purification unit that purifies a space using the hypochlorous acid water stored in the purification bath (volatile hypochlorous acid is discharged into the room from exhaust port, page 27 line 13).
Hayashi, Kurokawa, and Iseki are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine the hypochlorous acid space purification device as taught by Hayashi and Kurokawa with the discharge structure of Iseki because the separate storage tanks prevents contamination of the already disinfected water and only the minimal amount is consumed for disinfection (page 29 lines 7-9).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi, Kurokawa, and Iseki as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of JP 6924926 B2.
Regarding claim 13, the combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 teaches all aspects of the current invention including comprising an electrolysis accelerator input unit that inputs the electrolysis accelerator into the electrolysis bath (tray is designed to allow the addition of an electrolytic auxiliary agent, paragraph [0025], Hayashi), wherein the electrolytic water supply controller supplies electrolytic water to the purification bath by the electrolytic water supply unit every first time (connecting section is formed between the generation storage tank and the disinfection storage tank, page 14 line 19, Iseki, and Figure 13 discharge electrolytic water step “S12”, Kurokawa), but does not teach the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator when the required energization time calculated by the second calculator is longer than the first time. However, Iseki teaches the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator when the required energization time calculated by the second calculator is longer than the first time (determined the energization time has exceeds the energization time threshold input process instructs the electrolysis-promoting tablet input unit to input the electrolysis-promoting tablet, paragraph [0031], JP 6924926 B2).
Hayashi, Kurokawa, Iseki, and JP 6924926 B2, are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the hypochlorous acid space purification device as taught by Hayashi, Kurokawa, and Iseki with the electrolysis accelerator input taught by JP 6924926 B2 because JP 6924926 B2 teaches such an addition mechanism advantageously allows for the stable generation of reactive oxygen species by electrolysis (paragraph [0033]).
Claims 12 and 14are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi and Kurokawa as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of JP 6924926 B2.
Regarding claim 12, the combination of Hayashi and Kurokawa teaches an electrolysis accelerator unput unit that inputs the electrolysis accelerator into the electrolysis bath (tray is designed to allow the addition of an electrolytic auxiliary agent, paragraph [0025], Hayashi), but does not teach wherein the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator when the required energization time calculated by the second calculator is longer than a longest energization time. However, JP 6924926 B2 teaches wherein the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator when the required energization time calculated by the second calculator is longer than a longest energization time (determined the energization time has exceeds the energization time threshold input process instructs the electrolysis-promoting tablet input unit to input the electrolysis-promoting tablet, paragraph [0031]).
Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2, are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the hypochlorous acid space purification device as taught by Hayashi and Kurokawa with the electrolysis accelerator input taught by JP 6924926 B2 because JP 6924926 B2 teaches such an addition mechanism advantageously allows for the stable generation of reactive oxygen species by electrolysis (paragraph [0033]).
Regarding claim 14, the combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 teaches a sodium chloride concentration addition unit that adds an increase theoretical value of the sodium chloride concentration due to the input of the electrolysis accelerator to the sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath after the input of the electrolysis accelerator by the electrolysis accelerator input unit (introduce electrolysis-promoting tablets into the water reservoir in response to the chloride ions consumed by electrolysis, paragraph [0033], and electrolysis-promoting tablet is sodium chloride, paragraph [0020], JP 6924926 B2).
Claims 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 as applied to claim 12 above, and further in view of Iseki (WO 2021066202 A1).
Regarding claim 16, the combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to wait until a non-energization state and to input the electrolysis accelerator in the non-energization state when a time of inputting the electrolysis accelerator is in an energization state (Figure 13 salt water feed “S7” occurs before energize electrodes “S9”), but does not teach the electrode controller performs energization control to alternately perform energization and non-energization by the electrode unit, and the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to wait until a non-energization state and to input the electrolysis accelerator in the non-energization state when a time of inputting the electrolysis accelerator is in an energization state. However, Iseki teaches the electrode controller performs energization control to alternately perform energization and non-energization by the electrode unit, and the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to wait until a non-energization state and to input the electrolysis accelerator in the non-energization state when a time of inputting the electrolysis accelerator is in an energization state (current is applied for 6 minutes and the powered off for 54 minutes, page 31 lines 13-14).
Hayashi, Kurokawa, JP 6924926 B2, and Iseki are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the space purification unit taught by Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 with the alternating energization states taught by Iseki because Iseki teaches charge discharge as a result of the power off and current reversal will prevent damage to the electrode.
Regarding claim 17, the combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 teaches all aspects of the current invention including wherein the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator in a non-energization state (Figure 13 salt water feed “S7” occurs before energize electrodes “S9”), but does not teach the electrode controller performs energization control in which energization and non-energization by the electrode unit are alternately performed, an energization direction is reversed from a first energization direction after a total energization time in the first energization direction has elapsed a second time, and a first non-energization time is provided after reverse of the energization direction, and the electrolysis accelerator input unit is configured to input the electrolysis accelerator in a non-energization state. However, Iseki teaches the electrode controller performs energization control in which energization and non-energization by the electrode unit are alternately performed (current is applied for 6 minutes and the powered off for 54 minutes, page 31 lines 13-14), an energization direction is reversed from a first energization direction after a total energization time in the first energization direction has elapsed a second time, and a first non-energization time is provided after reverse of the energization direction (during power-off period the polarity switching output of the polarity switching circuit is switched so that the direction of the current flow is reversed, page 31 lines 15-16).
Hayashi, Kurokawa, JP 6924926 B2, and Iseki are considered analogous to the current invention because all are in the field of hypochlorous acid generators. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the space purification unit taught by Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 with the alternating energization states taught by Iseki because Iseki teaches charge discharge as a result of the power off and current reversal will prevent damage to the electrode.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-7, 9-11, and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 4, the closest prior art is Hayashi and Kurokawa in view of Iseki as identified above. However, a combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and Iseki fails to teach a fourth calculator that calculates an amount supplied electrolytic water by the electrolytic water supply unit; and a fifth calculator that calculates a third sodium chloride concentration that is the sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath after a supply of the electrolytic water by the electrolytic water supply unit based on the second sodium chloride concentration calculated by the third calculator, the amount of supplied electrolytic water calculated by the fourth calculator, and a capacity of the electrolysis bath.
Claims 5-7 are considered allowable based on their dependence on claim 4.
Regarding claim 9, the closest prior art is Hayashi in view of Kurokawa as identified above. However, a combination of Hayashi and Kurokawa fails to teach a seventh calculator that calculates a hypochlorous acid decrease amount decreased from the electrolysis bath due to the purification by the purification unit; and an eighth calculator that calculates a third hypochlorous acid water concentration that is the hypochlorous acid water concentration in the electrolysis bath after decrease of hypochlorous acid by the purification based on the target hypochlorous acid water concentration and the hypochlorous acid decrease amount calculated by the seventh calculator.
Claims 10-11 are allowable based on their dependence on claim 9.
Regarding claim 15, the closest prior art is Hayashi and Kurokawa in view of JP 6924926 B2. However, a combination of Hayashi, Kurokawa, and JP 6924926 B2 fails to teach a sodium chloride concentration addition unit that performs, a predetermined number of times, processing of adding a divided increase value to the sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath every unit time after the input of the electrolysis accelerator by the electrolysis accelerator input unit, the divided increase value being obtained by dividing an increase theoretical value of the sodium chloride concentration due to the input of the electrolysis accelerator by the predetermined number of times, wherein the unit time is a time obtained by dividing a time until the sodium chloride concentration in the electrolysis bath is increased by the increase theoretical value by the predetermined number of times.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAYLA ROSE SARANTAKOS whose telephone number is (703)756-5524. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-4:00.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/K.R.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/DONALD R SPAMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights