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 .
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to communication filed on 06/22/2026. Claims 1-5, 7, 9-13, 21-25, 27-29 remain pending, with claims 1, 9-10, 21-25, 27 currently amended, and claims 28-29 newly presented.
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 disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank as recited in claims 1, 21, and 27 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-12, 21-24, and 27-29 is/are rejected under35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 3,860,972 (hereinafter Costello) in view of KR 102212662 B1 using machine translation from Non-Final Rejection dated 04/21/2026 (hereinafter Shin).
Regarding claim 1, Costello discloses a ‘disinfection system’ for a toilet (1) (fig. 1)(col. 3, ln. 2-16), the disinfection system comprising: a toilet tank (10); a drain opening (top of drain passage 54) at a bottom of the toilet tank (fig. 5); at least one disinfection channel (54) extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to a pedestal for the toilet (12); and a valve system (54, 56, 88) in the toilet tank, the valve system configured to empty the toilet tank through the drain opening to below a predetermined level (when the tank is empty; col. 1, ln. 31-35). Costello fails to show further comprising a disinfection dispenser in the toilet tank, the disinfection dispenser configured to dispense a disinfection material into the toilet tank and the at least one disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to the pedestal for the toilet. Attention is turned to Shin in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets that shows including a disinfection dispenser (300) in a toilet tank that dispenses a disinfection material (electrolyzed water) into the toilet tank and disinfection channel extending to a toilet bowl. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include a disinfection dispenser in the toilet tank, the disinfection dispenser configured to dispense a disinfection material into the toilet tank and the at least one disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to the pedestal for the toilet to prevent buildup of bacteria in the tank and toilet bowl as evidenced by the teachings of Shin. This coincides with the primary goals and intended use of Costello of preventing bacteria growth in the tank and toilet bowl.
Regarding claim 2, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 1, wherein the valve system includes a flush valve (56, 88), and the predetermined level is below the flush valve (the level coincides with the bottom of the tank when the tank is essentially empty which is positioned below the valve (56) – fig. 5).
Regarding claim 3, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 2, the valve system further comprising: a float (56), wherein the float is configured to maintain the float in an open state until water in the tank is below the predetermined level (col. 3, ln. 52-62).
Regarding claim 4, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 3, wherein the float (56) is coupled to the flush valve (56, 88).
Regarding claim 6, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 1, wherein the valve system (54, 56, 88) includes a drain valve (56, 58).
Regarding claim 7, the disinfection system of claim 1, Costello discloses wherein the predetermined level is less than 5 millimeters from the drain opening of the toilet tank (the predetermined level is at the drain opening of the toilet tank (fig.5); accordingly, 0 mm is less than 5mm).
Regarding claim 9, under the modification in view of Shin, the combination shows the disinfection system of claim 8, and Shin shows wherein the disinfection material is a vapor (ozone).
Regarding claim 10, under the modification in view of Shin, the combination shows the disinfection system of claim 8, and Shin shows further comprising: a fan (361) configured to increase a mass flow of the disinfection material through the toilet tank.
Regarding claim 11, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 1, wherein the toilet tank includes a bottom surface including at least one slanted surface adjacent to the drain opening (fig. 5 shows the bottom surface of the tank (10) as being curved/slanted adjacent the drain opening near sleeve (90)).
Regarding claim 12, Costello shows the disinfection system of claim 1, but fails to show further comprising: a lamp coupled to an inside of the tank and configured to irradiate the tank. Attention is turned to Shin in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets which teaches including a UV lamp (330) to irradiate the interior of a toilet water tank. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include a UV lamp to irradiate the interior walls of the toilet tank of Costello to sterilize the walls and prevent bacteria growth as evidenced by the teachings of Shin. This coincides with the primary goals and intended use of Costello of preventing bacteria growth in the tank and toilet bowl.
Regarding claim 21, Costello discloses a ‘disinfection system’ for a toilet (1) (fig. 1)(col. 3, ln. 2-16), the disinfection system comprising: a toilet tank (10); a drain opening (top of drain passage 54) at a bottom of the toilet tank (fig. 5); at least one disinfection channel (54) extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to a pedestal for the toilet (12); and a valve system (54, 56, 88) in the toilet tank, the valve system configured to empty the toilet tank through the drain opening to below a predetermined level (when the tank is empty; col. 1, ln. 31-35). Costello fails to show further comprising a disinfection dispenser in the toilet tank, the disinfection dispenser configured to dispense a disinfection material into the toilet tank and the at least one disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to the pedestal for the toilet. Attention is turned to Shin in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets that shows including a disinfection dispenser (300) in a toilet tank that dispenses a disinfection material (electrolyzed water) into the toilet tank and disinfection channel extending to a toilet bowl. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include a disinfection dispenser in the toilet tank, the disinfection dispenser configured to dispense a disinfection material into the toilet tank and the at least one disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to the pedestal for the toilet to prevent buildup of bacteria in the tank and toilet bowl as evidenced by the teachings of Shin. This coincides with the primary goals and intended use of Costello of preventing bacteria growth in the tank and toilet bowl.
Regarding claim 22, Costello discloses the toilet of claim 21, wherein the valve system includes a flush valve (56, 88), and the predetermined level is below the flush valve (the level coincides with the bottom of the tank when the tank is essentially empty which is positioned below the valve (56) – fig. 5).
Regarding claim 23, Costello discloses the toilet of claim 22, the valve system further comprising: a float (56), wherein the float is configured to maintain the float in an open state until water in the tank is below the predetermined level (col. 3, ln. 52-62).
Regarding claim 24, Costello discloses the toilet of claim 23, wherein the float (56) is coupled to the flush valve (56, 88).
Regarding claim 27, Costello discloses a disinfection system for a toilet (fig. 1)(col. 3, ln. 2-16), the disinfection system comprising: at least one disinfection channel (54) extending from an opening (top of drain passage 54) of a toilet tank (10) to a pedestal for the toilet (12); and a valve system (54, 56, 88) in the toilet tank, the valve system configured to empty the toilet tank through the drain opening to below a predetermined level, wherein negative air pressure created by water of a flush pulls disinfection material through the at least one disinfection channel (due to the natural properties of fluid displacement within a container). Costello fails to show a disinfection material. Attention is turned to Shin in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets that shows including a disinfection dispenser (300) in a toilet tank that dispenses a disinfection material (electrolyzed water) into the toilet tank and disinfection channel extending to a toilet bowl. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include a disinfection dispenser in the toilet tank, the disinfection dispenser configured to dispense a disinfection material into the toilet tank and the at least one disinfection channel extending from the drain opening of the toilet tank to the pedestal for the toilet to prevent buildup of bacteria in the tank and toilet bowl as evidenced by the teachings of Shin. This coincides with the primary goals and intended use of Costello of preventing bacteria growth in the tank and toilet bowl.
Regarding claim 28, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 1, wherein negative air pressure created by water of a flush pulls the disinfection material through the at least one disinfection channel (due to the natural properties of fluid displacement within a container).
Regarding claim 29, Costello discloses the disinfection system of claim 21, wherein negative air pressure created by water of a flush pulls the disinfection material through the at least one disinfection channel (due to the natural properties of fluid displacement within a container).
Claim(s) 5 and 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Costello and Shin as set forth above, and further in view of US Patent 9,834,918 (hereinafter Veros).
Regarding claims 5 and 25, Costello in view of Shin shows the disinfection system of claims 3 and 23, but fails to show wherein the float is electronically connected to a controller that controls the flush valve. Attention is turned to Veros in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets which shows utilizing an electronic float (“float device”) to control a flush valve (1100) in a toilet tank electronically (col. 20, ln. 63-67). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the system of Costello to utilize an electronic float to allow a user to electronically control the flush valve as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Costello, such modification producing the same expected result of relying on a float responsive to a water level in a toilet tank to control opening and closing of a valve.
Claim(s) 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Costello and Shin as set forth above, and further in view of US Patent 6,237,164 (hereinafter LaFontaine).
Regarding claim 13, Costello in view of Shin discloses the disinfection system of claim 1, but fails to show wherein an interior of the toilet tank is glazed. Attention is turned to LaFontaine in the same field of endeavor of flush toilets which teaches glazed ceramics to be a well-known and suitable material for toilet tanks (col. 5, ln. 57-59). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to glaze the interior of the toilet tank since the selection of a material based on its suitability for its intended use involves only routine skill in the art as evidenced by the teachings of LaFontaine.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/22/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. In response to Applicant’s remarks pertaining to the drawing objection, the remarks were not found persuasive as Applicant did not point out in the drawings where the disinfection channel is located. The drain opening (135) is separate from the disinfection channel as described in the specification. The objection is maintained since 37 CFR 1.83(a) states the drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims, and the actual disinfection channel has not been shown.
Applicant’s remarks pertaining to the combination of Costello in view of Shin are not found persuasive. Examiner has presented a rationale for the combination: to prevent buildup of bacteria in the tank and toilet bowl as evidenced by the teachings of Shin. This coincides with the primary goals and intended use of Costello of preventing bacteria growth in the tank and toilet bowl. The device would function as intended when installed in a toilet system such as that taught by Costello as the toilet system of Shin appears to be a conventional tank and toilet pedestal similar to that of Costello. Furthermore, Shin teaches treating the flushing water with ozone; accordingly, in at least one embodiment, the treated water becomes the “disinfectant material” which is then ejected through the passageway that extends from the tank to the bowl, synonymous to the claimed “disinfection channel.” The rejection is deemed proper and maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754
Prosecution Insights