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
1. This Office Action is in response to the filing of the application on 06/14/2024. Since the initial filing, no claims have been amended, added, or cancelled. Thus, claims 1-19 are currently pending.
Specification
2. Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
The abstract recites “the present invention discloses” in line 1, it is suggested to remove this language.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-6 and 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariola et al. (US 2018/0193577).
Regarding claim 1, Cariola discloses a portable respiratory system (fig. 4a, respiratory pressure therapy (RPT) device 8000), comprising:
a housing (fig. 4B, housing 8010 which comprises top housing portion 8012 and bottom housing portion 8014);
a divider (fig. 4H, intermediate cover 8040), disposed in the housing and partitioning an internal space of the housing into an upper chamber and a lower chamber (see annotated fig. 4H below);
a flow sensor ([0146] states that a flow rate sensor is provided to device 8000, which can be a differential pressure transducer, see [0235]);
an elastic member (fig. 4H, blower suspension 8054, outlet bellows 8056, inlet end suspension 8064, are considered the elastic member, see paragraphs [0184], [0186], and [0203] respectively), disposed in the lower chamber (see annotated fig. 4H below where 8054, 8056, and 8064 are disposed in the lower chamber);
a rigid member (fig. 4H, first plate assembly 8050 and second plate assembly 8060), fixed in the lower chamber by the elastic member (fig. 4H, shows plates 8050 and 8060 connected to the blower via the elastic member 8054, 8056, and 8064) and the housing ([0140] states that the housing 8010 contains the components within it), defining an air inlet flow channel, a lateral flow channel, a transmission flow channel and an air outlet flow channel, wherein the lateral flow channel is connected between the air inlet flow channel and the transmission flow channel (see annotated fig. 4E below where the lateral flow channel is between the inlet flow channel and transmission flow channel and [0141] which states the internal components and housing of device 800 cooperate to form the pneumatic air flow path that extends from housing inlet 8018 to blower inlet 8032,, to blower outlet 8034 and housing outlet 8020);
a blower (fig. 4H, blower 8030), disposed in the elastic member (fig. 4H shows the blower connected to the plates via suspensions 8054 and 8064), operable to receive an airflow from the transmission flow channel to generate a positive pressure airflow (see annotated fig. 4E below and [0141] where air enters the inlet and flows through the defined transmission channel to the blower inlet 8032, housed in suspension 8064), and transmit the airflow to the air outlet flow channel (see annotated fig. 4E below where blower outlet 8034 is housed in suspension 8054); and
a flow limiter (fig. 4E, flow tubes 8065), disposed in the lateral flow channel (see annotated fig. 4E below), the flow limiter comprising a plurality of pipes extending along the lateral flow channel (see annotated fig. 4E below where flow tubes 8065 are shown extending along the defined lateral flow channel);
the rigid member further comprises a first detection passage (fig. 4M, pressure port 8058).
The system of Cariola does not expressly disclose that the flow sensor is disposed in an upper chamber, the rigid member further comprises a second detection passage, the first detection passage is located in an upstream of the flow limiter, the second detection passage is located in a downstream of the flow limiter, and the first detection passage and the second detection passage are individually connected to the flow sensor.
However, Cariola further teaches that the flow sensor measures a first pressure in the first chamber and a second pressure in the second chamber to determine an air flow rate ([0146]), and teaches of pressure port 8058 which is configured to connect to a pressure sensor ([0187]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Cariola with the pressure sensors and pressure port as taught by Cariola to allow measurement of pressure in the first and second chambers to determine an air flow rate ([0146]).
The modified system of Cariola reads on the flow sensor is disposed in an upper chamber (fig. 4H, pressure port 8058 allows measurement of pressure in the lower chamber where the sensor is placed in the upper chamber), the rigid member further comprises a first detection passage and a second detection passage ([0146] the flow sensor measures pressure in the first and second chamber which the lateral flow channel spans which is made using the rigid member 8050 and 8060), the first detection passage is located in an upstream of the flow limiter, the second detection passage is located in a downstream of the flow limiter (see annotated fig. 4E below for positions of the added pressure ports), and the first detection passage and the second detection passage are individually connected to the flow sensor ([0146] states that the flow sensor measures pressure in both chambers to determine air flow rate, inherently needing a first and second pressure value which are provided by each added pressure port.
PNG
media_image1.png
843
667
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
835
837
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on wherein each of the first detection passage and the second detection passage has a lower opening ([0146] states the flow sensor measures the pressure in the first and second chambers, which inherently means and opening is present in the first and second chambers for the pressure measurement to be taken), and the two lower openings are higher than an upper edge of a highest one of the pipes (fig. 4R shows tubes 8065 as being below an upper edge of the chamber, defined as the outer edge of plate assembly 8060, where the pressure ports are placed on the upper surface of the chamber thereby being above the tubes 8065).
Regarding claim 3, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 2 and further reads on wherein the flow limiter is disposed below the air outlet flow channel of the rigid member (fig. 4H, shows the flow tube array 8062 below the outlet, represented by outlet bellows 8056, when standing the device such that the inlet is below the outlet, see annotated fig. 4A below), the lower opening of the first detection passage and top portions of the pipes define a first buffer space in between (see annotated fig. 4E above where the buffer space is defined between the added pressure ports and flow tube array 8062), the lower opening of the second detection passage and the top portions of the pipes define a second buffer space in between, and airflow speeds in the first buffer space and the second buffer space are lower than an airflow speed at an opening of each of the pipes ([0146] states that the first pressure and second pressure in each chamber is used to determine flow rate due to the configuration of the flow tube array 8062 due to its pressure drop and/or aerodynamic impedance which means the buffer space after the array 8062 would inherently have a lower airflow speed due to the pressure drop and/or impedance in view of the similar areas of the inlet and outlet of the tube array, see figs. 4o-4p which shows the area the air can flow through is relatively the same).
PNG
media_image3.png
731
495
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on wherein the first buffer space and the second buffer space are in non-symmetrical arrangement in between with respect to a central axis of the air outlet flow channel (see annotated fig. 4J below where the central axis, in plane form, would divide the flow tube array while the buffer spaces, indicated by the added pressure ports) would be closer to the circuit board 8070 thereby not being bisected by the central axis and having a non-symmetrical arrangement relative to the central axis).
PNG
media_image4.png
668
524
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 3 and further reads on wherein each of the pipes extends from right below a central axis of the air outlet flow channel in a direction away from the air inlet flow channel by a first length and extends in a direction toward the air inlet flow channel by a second length, and the first length is greater than the second length (see annotated fig. 4R below where the orientation of the system determines the location of how the pipes extend towards or away from a central axis where when oriented as annotated (see “up” and “down” indicating which direction is up), the first length is greater than the second length, also see [0214]-[0215] which states the inlet tubes and tube array 8062 are offset).
PNG
media_image5.png
413
629
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 2, but does not expressly disclose wherein a vertical distance between the two lower openings and the upper edge of the highest one of the pipes is a first distance, which is greater than or equal to a half of an inner diameter of the pipe.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the distance between the opening of the pressure ports and the upper edge of the highest one of the pipes of the system of Cariola to be half an inner diameter of the pipe, for the purpose of providing an pressure port capable of facilitating a pressure measurement ([0146] which states that a flow rate sensor is configured to measure a first and second pressure), and since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. Furthermore, Applicant has not provided criticality that the vertical distance between the two lower openings and the upper edge of the highest on of the pipes is a first distance which is greater than or equal to half of an inner diameter of the pipe provides an advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem beyond stating that “the first distance D1 can be designed to be 3 to 15 mm or greater than 15 mm”, see the [0046] in the specification. Further it appears the added pressure ports of the modified system of Cariola would perform equally well with the recited distance from the pipes. See MPEP 2144.05(II).
Regarding claim 8, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on wherein the flow limiter comprises a sealing member (fig. 4P base plate 8061 acts as a sealing member), the sealing member covers on an outside of the pipes so as to fix the pipes (fig. 4P, base plate 8061 is connected to each pipe via 8065, see [0205]), and the sealing member and an outer wall of the air outlet flow channel form airtightness in between (fig 4P, sealing lip 8069 is used to provide a seal between the first and second chambers, see [0202]).
Regarding claim 9, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on wherein the flow limiter is detachably disposed in the lateral flow channel (fig. 4F shows interior slots 8015a and 8015b for securing the first plate 8050 and second plate 8060 which tube array 8062 is located on, see [0154], because second plate assembly can be removed and comprises tube array 8062, tube array 8062 is detachably disposed).
5. Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariola in view of Wondka et al. (US 2011/0197885).
Regarding claim 7, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1, and further discloses the channel defined by the pressure port to connect with the flow channel (fig. 4N shows the pressure port 8058 defines a channel that continues into the chamber, thereby reading on a channel protruding into the lateral flow channel due to the connection between the pressure port channel and the flow channel), but does not expressly disclose the first detection passage and the second detection passage protrude downward into the lateral flow channel.
However, Wondka teaches of respiratory sensing device that uses pressure ports (fig. 24A, P1 and P2) disposed on different sides of a conduit screen (fig. 24A 232) so as to measure dynamic pressure drop across the distance using Pouisille’s Law ([0123]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the bottom of pressure ports of the modified system of Cariola with the bottom of the pressure ports as taught by Wondka as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of allowing the measurement of pressure in two different chambers across a pressure drop portion (see Wondka [0123]).
6. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariola in view of Velzy et al. (US 2015/0023782).
Regarding claim 12, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on wherein the rigid member comprises a plurality of protruding flow guide plates (fig. 4H inlet tube array 8052 which protrude into the first chamber and fig. 4M shows them protruding away from the first chamber off of base plate 8051), the flow guide plates separate a front section of the air inlet flow channel into a plurality of air inlet channels (fig. 4M, air entering into inlet array 8052 is separated by inlet tubes 8055, see [0050] which states the inlet tube array delivers air from an inlet to the first chamber), but does not expressly disclose a spacing plate at the air inlet flow channel or that the spacing plate is disposed at a middle section of the air inlet flow channel, and a bottom edge of the spacing plate is closer to a bottom portion of the housing than bottom edges of the flow guide plates.
However, Velzy teaches of a flow generator that uses an S-shaped sound baffle (fig. 27-2, 568) adjacent to the inlet to provide a noise barrier for the blower and/or reflect noise from the blower ([0116]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the system of Cariola with the baffle as taught by Velzy behind the air inlet tube array to provide a noise barrier and reflect noise from the blower (Velzy [0116]).
The further modified system of Cariola reads on a spacing plate at the air inlet flow channel (Velzy fig. 27-2 baffle 568) disposed at a middle section (Velzy fig. 27-2 shows the baffle spanning the width of the inlet channel), and a bottom edge of the spacing plate is closer to a bottom portion of the housing than bottom edges of the flow guide plates (see annotated fig. 4E below, Velzy fig. 27-2 shows the baffle as starting at the edge of the inlet 527 and extending further right than the rightmost edge of inlet 527, in the modified system of Cariola, the outlet portion of air inlet tubes can be treated as the air inlet of Velzy where the baffle would be lower relative to the bottom of the housing).
PNG
media_image6.png
843
655
media_image6.png
Greyscale
7. Claim(s) 14-16 and 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariola in view of Khan (US 2022/0331532).
Regarding claim 14, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 1 and further reads on a circuit board (fig. 4H, printed circuit board assembly 8070), disposed in the upper chamber (fig. 4H, shows PCBA 8070 above intermediate cover 8040 thereby being in the upper chamber); a button element, disposed on the circuit board (fig. 4K, button elements 8003 and 8004 correspond to circuit board 8072); a shade hood (fig. 4K, first part 8012a covers the circuit board) comprising a through opening (fig. 4K, opening 8004K), and further discloses an output device that can be a LED display ([0285]) and a column disposed near the button (fig. 4K, opening 8004A shows a small column beside it), but does not expressly disclose a light emitting element, disposed on the circuit board covering the light emitting element; and a light guide column, disposed in the through opening, operable to guide light.
However, Khan teaches of a CPAP machine that uses an LED (see [0050] which states the LED is on the circuit board) where a light tube adapter is fitted over the LED (fig. 2, 104) which connects to a light tube (fig. 2, 106) that connects to a lens (fig. 2, lens 90) outside the casing (fig. 2, 2) which allows the light from the LED to be view by the user even when the circuit board is located away from an edge of the casing ([0050]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the modified system of Cariola with the LED, light tube adapter, light tube, and lens as taught by Khan to communicate the state of the machine to the user based on an LED placed on the circuit board ([0050]).
The modified system of Cariola reads on a light emitting element, disposed on the circuit board (Khan [0050] states an LED is located on the circuit board); the shade hood covering the light emitting element (Cariola fig. 4K, first part 8012a covers the circuit board and therefore the light emitting element); and a light guide column (Khan fig. 2, light tube 106), disposed in the through opening (Khan fig. 2, an opening for the light tube 106 to connect to a lens 90 is necessary due to the lens being outside the casing 20, see [0050]), operable to guide light (Khan [0050] states that the connection from the LED, light tube adapter, light tube, and lens allows light to shine outside of the casing).
Regarding claim 15, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 14 and further reads on wherein the through opening has a first section, the first section is operable to receive the light guide column (Khan fig. 2, an opening for the light tube 106 to connect to a lens 90 is necessary due to the lens being outside the casing 20, see [0050], where the opening itself in Cariola fig. 4K, first part 8012a is defined as a first section), but the modified system of Cariola does not expressly disclose a second section, the second section is operable to cover the light emitting element, and an inner diameter of the second section is greater than an inner diameter of the first section.
However, it would have been an obvious matter of design choice to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to widen the opening on the side of the circuit board since such a modification would have involved a mere change in the form or shape of a component. A change in shape or form is generally recognized as being within the level of ordinary skill in the art. Further, Applicant has not provided criticality that the second section provides and advantage, is used for a particular purpose, or solves a stated problem. It appears the modified system of Cariola would perform equally well with the opening for the light tube (Khan fig. 2, 106) having a slightly larger diameter on the side corresponding to the LED for allowing light to shine outside of the casing (Khan [0050] states that the connection from the LED, light tube adapter, light tube, and lens allows light to shine outside of the casing).
Regarding claim 16, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 14 and further reads on wherein the shade hood further comprises a protruding unit (fig. 4K, cantilevered button portion 8003A), and a lower portion of the protruding unit corresponds to the button element on the circuit board (fig. 4K, the bottom of 8003A is shown placed against the circuit board 8072), a press member is disposed on an outer surface of the housing (fig. 4K, button portion 8003B), and a top surface of the protruding unit has a slot for matching with a bottom surface structure of the corresponding press member (fig. 4K, the top of cantilevered button portion 8003A has a raised ridge corresponding with button portion 8003B).
Regarding claim 18, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 16 and further reads on wherein a bottom surface of the press member has a support wall (fig. 4K, button portion 8003B shows a ridge that has the same height as the button), which is disposed around the bottom surface structure to enhance stability when the press member is pressed downward (fig. 4K, the ridge surrounding button portion 8003B would prevent horizontal movement of the button portion at rest and during pressing thereby enhancing stability).
Regarding claim 19, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 18 and further reads on wherein the bottom surface of the press member has a stop portion (fig. 4K, the bottom surface of button portion 8003B also acts as a stop portion), and the shade hood has thereon a recess for correspondingly accommodating the stop portion (fig. 4K, the raised edge of cantilevered button portion 8003A forms a recess within it which accommodates the button portion 8003B and therefore the bottom surface which acts as a stop portion).
8. Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cariola in view of Khan as applied to claim 16 above, and further in view of Yao (US 2017/0315722).
Regarding claim 17, the modified system of Cariola reads on the limitations of claim 16, but does not disclose that the slot is a cross positioning slot, and the bottom surface structure is a cross positioning rib matching with the cross positioning slot.
However, Yao teaches of a structure for aligning a button with a circuit board where a key (fig. 11, cap 122) uses a cross shape (fig. 11, stem 413) and a groove complementary to the stem at the lower end of the keycap column ([0056]) for positioning the key against a circuit board (fig. 11, 42).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to replace the slot of the protruding unit and bottom surface structure of the press member of Cariola with the cross-shaped stem and groove as taught by Yao as a simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain a predictable result of allowing an external button which receives mechanical force to communicate with a circuit board.
The modified system of Cariola reads on wherein the slot is a cross positioning slot (Yao [0056] the corresponding cross groove provided at fig. 11, column 121 is provided on Cariola fig. 4K, cantilevered button portion 8003A), and the bottom surface structure is a cross positioning rib matching with the cross positioning slot (Yao fig. 11, the cross-shaped stem 413 is provided on Cariola fig. 4K, the bottom surface of button portion 8003B).
Allowable Subject Matter
9. Claims 10-11 and 13 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: the prior art of record fails to disclose the specific structural and functional limitations as recited in the claims. In dependent claim 10, the prior art of record fails to disclose an upper wind guide cover which has a plurality of flow guide protrusions protruding downward.
The closest prior art of record is Cariola and Velzy.
While Cariola discloses upper and lower elastic members (fig. 4H, blower suspension 8054 and 8064) that can function to absorb shock ([0171]), and the upper wind guide cover and blower can define an input flow channel (fig. 4F, blower suspension 8064 is place on blower 8030 and forms an air input channel to blower 8030 with a blower inlet 8032), Cariola does not disclose that the upper wind guide cover has a plurality of flow guide protrusions protruding downward. While Velzy discloses upper (fig. 16, suspension wall 42) and lower (fig. 16, suspension wall 44) elastic members ([0091]), the upper wind guide cover and can define an input flow channel (fig. 16, defining annular support member 46 which helps enclose the airflow below it as part of suspension wall 42 means that the upper cover can partially define an input flow channel), and further discloses protrusions (fig. 16, the suspension walls 42, 44 include flexible cones 48 which function to absorb shock, [0151], and impact the air flow), but does not disclose that the upper wind guide cover has a plurality of flow guide protrusions protruding downward.
Conclusion
10. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Winkler (US 2009/0191054) discloses a blower that creates less noise by elastically suspending the blower. Hungr et al. (US 2022/0111163) discloses a respirator that uses a blower between two elastomer membranes which have openings to form air circulation paths. Mazzone (US 2023/0398318) discloses a respiratory pressure therapy device that includes a seal around the edge of the housing and shows the blower in a disassembled configuration. Truitt (US 7,975,688) discloses a respiratory treatment device that uses elastomeric vibration damping members to surround the blower.
11. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS Z CHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0432. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am-5:00 pm.
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, Timothy Stanis can be reached at (571)272-5139. 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.
/THOMAS Z CHANG/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/TIMOTHY A STANIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights