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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority to Application No. (JP2022-010229) filed on the January 26, 2022.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the when a virtual line linking the specific point and the discharge outlet with a shortest distance is drawn on the inner wall of the case in claim 2 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. Examiner sees in Fig. 4 VL3 is position on the projection portion; however, the specific virtual line (VL3) does not link with the specific point (P) and the discharge outlet 71.
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.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2 objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding Claim 1, line 16, “a specific point” should read as “an at least one specific point ” for consistency.
Regarding Claim 1, line 17, “has at least one specific point” should read as “has the at least one specific point ” for consistency.
Regarding Claim 1, line 18, “the specific point” should read as “the at least one specific point ” for consistency.
Regarding Claim 1, line 18, “a virtual line segment” should read as “a first virtual line segment”.
Regarding Claim 1, line 20, “a virtual line segment” should read as “a second virtual line segment”.
Regarding Claim 2, line 4, “a virtual line segment” should read as “a third virtual line segment”.
Regarding Claim 2, line 4, “the specific point” should read as “the at least one specific point ” for consistency.
Regarding Claim 2, line 7, “a virtual line segment” should read as “the third virtual line segment”.
Regarding Claim 9, the limitation of “the case includes a case body and a pipe, the case body housing the nozzle therein, the pipe having a tubular shape, a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body, a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet” should be amended out as Claim 9 depends off Claim 3 which has all the same limitations from claim 3.
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 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, and 9 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.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the virtual line" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of the OA, Examiner is interpreting that is referring to “a virtual line” in line 4 of the claim 2.
Additionally, as stated above in drawing objections, Examiner sees in Fig. 4 (VL3) is position on the projection portion; however, the specific virtual line (VL3) does not link with the specific point (P) and the discharge outlet 71. Making the claim indefinite as the second virtual line segment (VL2) is what links the two (specific point and the discharge outlet). Examiner is unsure if applicant referring to a new virtual line (VL3) in line 4 in claim 2 or was referring to the second virtual line that is mentioned in claim 1 line 20.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "an inner wall" in line 6 . There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purpose of the OA, Examiner is interpreting that is referring to an inner wall of the case is the same as the inner wall of the case body.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 8-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Glenn (US 4007238 A),
Regarding Claim 1, Glenn discloses a nebulizer comprising:
a case (Fig. 1; 10) having an inner wall (Fig. 1; inside of 10, 12), the inner wall defining an internal space (Fig. 1; the inner wall has an internal space); and
a nozzle (Fig. 1; 38) located in the internal space (Fig. 1) and configured to atomize a liquid stored in the internal space (Examiner note: this limitation is functional, Col. 2 lines 31-50),
wherein the case has a discharge outlet (Fig. 1; outside of tube 18) for guiding the atomized liquid to outside of the case (Col. 2 lines 16-30),
the nozzle has a gas hole (Fig. 1; out of 38) and a liquid hole (Fig. 1; out of 48), the gas hole being configured to eject a gas (Fig. 1; 40), the liquid hole being located adjacent to the gas hole and being configured to eject the liquid (Fig. 1; coming out 48) (Col. Col. 2 lines 31-50), in the internal space,
the case does not have any straight-line path extending from the gas hole to the discharge outlet by passing only through the internal space (Fig. 1; Examiner note: it is not a straight path to the outlet),
when a point is specified on the inner wall of the case and is set to a specific point (“A” in Annotated Fig. A below), the inner wall of the case has at least one specific point specified on the inner wall (“A” in Annotated Fig. A below), the specific point being a point from which a virtual line segment linking (dashed line to “A” ) the gas hole and the specific point by passing only through the internal space and a virtual line segment (dotted line away from “A”) linking the specific point and the discharge outlet by passing only through the internal space are drawn (Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
629
520
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure A: Adapted Fig. 1 from Glenn
Regarding Claim 2, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 1, wherein:
the inner wall (Fig. 1; inside of 10, 12) of the case includes a projecting portion (“B” in Annotated Fig. A); and
when a virtual line (dotted line coming of “A” in Fig. A above) linking the specific point (“A” in Annotated Fig. A above) and the discharge outlet (Fig. 1; outside of tube 18) with a shortest distance (The dotted line coming from A is shorter than the distance from the gas hole 38; Fig. 1) is drawn on the inner wall of the case, the projecting portion (“B” in Annotated Fig. A) is positioned on the virtual line (Fig. A above).
Regarding Claim 3, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 2, wherein:
the case (Fig. 1; 10) includes a case body (Fig. 1) and a pipe (Fig. 1; 18), the case body housing the nozzle therein (Fig. 1; the nozzle is inside 10), the pipe having a tubular shape (Fig. 1; 18 is tubular), a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body (Fig. 1; 18 is connected to 12), a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet (Fig. 1; end outlet 18); and an inner wall (Examiner is interpreting that this inner wall is the same as inside of 10; Fig. 1) of the case body (Fig. 1; 10) includes the projecting portion (Fig. 1; “B” in annotated Fig. A above).
Regarding Claim 5, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 1, wherein: the case (Fig. 1; 10) includes a case body (Fig. 1) and a pipe (Fig. 1; 18), the case body housing the nozzle therein (Fig. 1; the nozzle is inside 10), the pipe having a tubular shape (Fig. 1; 18 is tubular), a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body (Fig. 1; 18 is connected to 12), a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet (Fig. 1; end outlet 18);
when a pointing direction (“C” in Fig. A Above) of the gas hole is set to a first direction and a virtual plane perpendicular (“D” in Fig. A above) to the first direction is imagined, a central axis of the pipe is parallel with the virtual plane (Fig. 1; the central axis of 18 is parallel with the plane “D” in Fig. A above).
Regarding Claim 8, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 2, wherein: the case (Fig. 1; 10) includes a case body (Fig. 1) and a pipe (Fig. 1; 18), the case body housing the nozzle therein (Fig. 1; the nozzle is inside 10), the pipe having a tubular shape (Fig. 1; 18 is tubular), a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body (Fig. 1; 18 is connected to 12), a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet (Fig. 1; end outlet 18);
when a pointing direction (“C” in Fig. A Above) of the gas hole is set to a first direction and a virtual plane perpendicular (“D” in Fig. A above) to the first direction is imagined, a central axis of the pipe is parallel with the virtual plane (Fig. 1; the central axis of 18 is parallel with the plane “D” in Fig. A above).
Regarding Claim 9, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 3, wherein: the case includes a case body and a pipe, the case body housing the nozzle therein, the pipe having a tubular shape, a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body, a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet (See the rejection of claim 3 above and objection);
when a pointing direction (“C” in Fig. A Above) of the gas hole is set to a first direction and a virtual plane perpendicular (“D” in Fig. A above) to the first direction is imagined, a central axis of the pipe is parallel with the virtual plane (Fig. 1; the central axis of 18 is parallel with the plane “D” in Fig. A above).
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4, 6-7, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Glenn, as applied to claim 1-3, in view of Burt et al. (US 20130079733 A1), hereafter as Burt.
Regarding Claim 4, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 1, air under pressure is provided in accordance with arrow 54 to the central opening 36. (Col. 2 lines 31-50)
Glenn does not disclose specifically that a piezoelectric pump configured to output the gas.
However, Burt teaches a piezoelectric pump (Fig. 2; 20; 24; 22) configured to output the gas (par. 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Glenn to include the piezoelectric pump as taught by Burt for the purpose of pumping a treatment composition in the form of a mist in the direction of the arrow (par. 0106).
Regarding Claim 6, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 2,
Glenn does not disclose specifically that a piezoelectric pump configured to output the gas.
However, Burt teaches a piezoelectric pump (Fig. 2; 20; 24; 22) configured to output the gas (par. 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Glenn to include the piezoelectric pump as taught by Burt for the purpose of pumping a treatment composition in the form of a mist in the direction of the arrow (par. 0106).
Regarding Claim 7, Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 3,
Glenn does not disclose specifically that a piezoelectric pump configured to output the gas.
However, Burt teaches a piezoelectric pump (Fig. 2; 20; 24; 22) configured to output the gas (par. 0106).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the device of Glenn to include the piezoelectric pump as taught by Burt for the purpose of pumping a treatment composition in the form of a mist in the direction of the arrow (par. 0106).
Regarding Claim 10, Modified Glenn discloses the nebulizer according to Claim 4, wherein: the case (Fig. 1; 10) includes a case body (Fig. 1) and a pipe (Fig. 1; 18), the case body housing the nozzle therein (Fig. 1; the nozzle is inside 10), the pipe having a tubular shape (Fig. 1; 18 is tubular), a first end of the pipe being linked with the case body (Fig. 1; 18 is connected to 12), a second end of the pipe being used as the discharge outlet (Fig. 1; end outlet 18);
when a pointing direction (“C” in Fig. A Above) of the gas hole is set to a first direction and a virtual plane perpendicular (“D” in Fig. A above) to the first direction is imagined, a central axis of the pipe is parallel with the virtual plane (Fig. 1; the central axis of 18 is parallel with the plane “D” in Fig. A above).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure, see PTO-892 for additional attached references. Other prior art of particular note include:
Germinario et al. (US 20170319797 A1) teaches piezoelectric pump in nebulizer.
Rubin et al. (US 9757528 B2) and Huang (US 9833582 B2) teach a nebulizer with nozzle (Fig. 1)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAAP A ELLABIB whose telephone number is (571)272-5879. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, KENDRA CARTER can be reached at (571) 272-9034. 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.
MAAP A. ELLABIB
Examiner
Art Unit 3785
/M.A.E./Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/KENDRA D CARTER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights