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 .
Power of Attorney
It appears applicant has legal representation but a valid power of attorney has not been filed in the present application. Providing representative information in an Application Data Sheet (ADS) does not constitute a power of attorney. See 37 CFR 1.76(b)(4) and MPEP § 408. For information on appointing a power of attorney, see MPEP § 402.02 et seq.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of the invention of Group III (claim 3) in the reply filed on 10 September 2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1 and 2 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to nonelected inventions, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 10 September 2025.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancelation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
This application is claiming the benefit of prior-filed application No. 18/389,397 under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c). Copendency between the current application and the prior application is required. Since the applications are not copending, the benefit claim to the prior-filed application is improper.
Applicant is required to delete the claim to the benefit of the prior-filed application, unless applicant can establish copendency between the applications.
The prior application 18/389,397 went abandoned on 2 February 2024 and the present application was filed on 20 June 2024. Accordingly, the two applications are not copending.
Additionally, the other applications listed in the application data sheets filed on 20 June 2024 have not been recognized by the Office.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 24-26 do not comply with 37 CFR 1.84. The reproductions of photographs or computer drafted figures with dark shading are not acceptable in this situation because they make for illegible reproduction.
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 6 and 7 must not be connected by reference character lead lines.
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 17 and 18 must not be connected by reference character lead lines.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
Title of the Invention:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the elected invention to which claim 3 is directed. It is suggested that the title of the invention be changed to --METHOD OF ADJUSTING THE HUMIDITY IN A CONTAINER--.
Written Description:
The disclosure is objected to because the paragraph [002] on page 1 is improper because it makes reference to a part of the application which is not part of the written description. The written description must be complete in and of itself, and not incorporate by reference documents which are found elsewhere in the application file. Appropriate correction is required.
The disclosure is objected to because in paragraph [044], page 17, line 8, the use of the term “carberator” is confusing as there is no such thing as a “carberator”. It is unclear if the term should be “carburetor” and applicant is cautioned against adding new matter to the disclosure. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim 3 is 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.
Regarding claim 3, line 6, the use of the term “carb” renders the claim vague and indefinite because it is unclear as to the precise meaning of this term.
Regarding claim 3, line 14, the recitation “automatically burping the container …” is vague and indefinite because it is unclear from the claim as to how such step is able to occur without the claim including the structure of the intake port with pump or fan as the step is described in paragraph [044], page 17, lines 4-11.
These and any other informalities should be corrected so that the claim may particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention, as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph.
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.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Siann et al. (US 11,801,980) in view of Bernheim et al. (WO 2018/009947).
Regarding claim 3, the Siann et al. reference teaches a method of turning a non-humidity controlled container (figs. 1 and 4, a Mason jar “payload chamber”) into a humidity controlled container (figs. 1 and 4, Mason jar “payload chamber” and lid “ECU” and “ECU threaded coupler”) adjusting the humidity in the humidity controlled container (col. 4, lines 6-60) comprising:
obtaining a non-humidity controlled container (Mason jar, payload chamber, cols. 5 and 6, section 2.1.1) having an edge (fig. 4, mouth of Mason jar);
obtaining a lid (lid “ECU” and “ECU threaded coupler”), the lid comprising:
a topside and an underside (figs. 1 and 2);
an exhaust port (figs. 6 and 18) and carb (the term “carb” is read as being equivalent to the shutter, col. 13, lines 1-15, and seen in fig. 18, see col. 16, section 3.1.1 Airflow Control) which are configured to connect the topside and the underside of the lid wherein the exhaust port features a fan or pump (fan, col. 16, lines 4-39) that is powered automatically at timed intervals and is controlled by a timer (implicit from section 2.1.2.5 Airflow and Ducting: “fan may be used to pump air from the payload chamber through the ECU and back to the payload chamber. The fan may be single speed or variable speed and may be on all the time or used only when required.” and col. 39, section 6 Interface: “interface system may allow for programming a set of multi-time period (e.g. hours, days, weeks, months, etc.) environmental conditions (e.g. temperature, humidity, light illumination, solar radiation, vibration, shock, etc.) for automated and/or semi-automated operation.”);
a circular rim (ECU threaded coupler, fig. 4) configured to attach to the non-humidity controlled container (Mason jar);
securing the lid (ECU and ECU threaded coupler) to the non-humidity controlled container (Mason jar) by placing the rim over the edge of the non-humidity controlled container, thus transforming the non-humidity controlled container into the humidity controlled container (col. 8, line 66 - col. 9, line 4);
setting the timer (implicit from section 6 Interface); and,
automatically burping the container at the timed intervals (this limitation is taught by the Siann et al. reference based on applicant’s definition of “automatically burping” in light of the teachings in the reference found at section 2.1.2.5 Airflow and Ducting, section 2.1.2.6 Condenser, section 2.1.2.9 Sensors, section 2.1.2.10 Water Tank, and section 3.4.1 Humidification, and section 6 Interface).
The Siann et al. reference meets all of applicant’s claimed subject matter with the exception of the exhaust port being a filtered exhaust port.
However, the Bernheim et al. reference teaches that it is old and well known in the relevant art to provide a lid on a container in which the lid is used to control the humidity in the container. The lid (fig. 2) includes both an air inlet (222) and an air outlet (228). The air outlet (228) includes a filter (paragraph [0090]: screens of appropriate material in which “the screens and gasket respectively will be effective to reduce or prevent the ingress of foreign substances, including, without limitation, dust, insects, chemical aerosols, bacteria and viruses, etc. from entering the inlet and outlet chambers and an internal cavity of an active container”).
It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to have modified the Siann et al. method by having incorporated that the exhaust port is a filtered exhaust port, as suggested by Bernheim et al., in order to prevent the ingress of foreign substances, including, without limitation, dust, insects, chemical aerosols, bacteria and viruses, etc. from entering the inlet and outlet chambers and an internal cavity of an active container as taught by the Bernheim et al. reference. In this instance, a skilled artisan would have recognized that the combination of Siann et al. with the teachings of Bernheim et al. involves no more than the predictable use of prior art elements according to their established functions. The combination of familiar elements according to known methods is likely to be obvious when it does no more than yield predictable results. KSR, 550 U.S. at 416.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The references listed on the attached form (PTO-892) are cited to show methods of using containers and lid structures. All are cited as being of interest and to show the state of the prior art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN F. GERRITY whose telephone number is (571)272-4460. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday (7:30-4:00).
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, Thanh Truong can be reached at 571-272-4472. 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.
/STEPHEN F. GERRITY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3731 16 October 2025