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 § 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 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.
With regards to claim 2, the claim depends upon claim 1 which establishes “an opening” in line 4. Claim 2 then recites “an opening is provided at a position facing the crossing portion in the cover” rendering the claim indefinite as it is unclear if this is the same opening of claim 1 or a new opening.
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 (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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Mizusaki et al. (US 2019/0260059 A1).
With regards to claims 1 and 8, Mizusaki teaches a ventilation apparatus for a fuel cell (abstract) comprising a fuel cell case (14) accommodating a stacked body formed by stacking a plurality of power generation cells (12) (Fig. 1, 2) and a ventilation unit (122M) attached to the fuel cell case so as to cover an opening provided at the fuel cell case, an internal space and an external space of the fuel cell case communicating through the opening (Fig. 4, 5B). Mizusaki teaches that the ventilation unit (122M) comprises a filter (124) facing the opening, a holding member (128, 126) formed in a frame shape and attached to the fuel cell case to hold a peripheral portion of the filter and a cover (131) attached to the holding member to cover an inside of the peripheral portion of the filter as seen in Fig. 5B. Mizusaki teaches that the cover is attached to the holding member by a plurality of coupling portions (131a) which as seen in Fig. 5B provide a gap between the cover (131) and the holding frame about the entire periphery of the cover member as the coupling protrusions extend from the holding member to the cover a distance within the outer perimeter of the cover.
With regards to the method of claim 8, as Mizusaki teaches as described above an assembled fuel cell case having all the components attached to either other the method of attaching the respective components is necessarily completed as no particular order of operations or particular method of attachment is claimed.
With regards to claim 6, Mizusaki teaches that the ventilation members are attached to side walls extending in the stacking direction (Fig. 4).
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.
Claim(s) 2 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizusaki et al. (US 2019/0260059 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Wayne (US 3303769).
With regards to claims 2 and 5, Mizusaki teaches a plurality of adjacent filtered ventilation elements in the housing walls (Fig. 3) covering a plurality of openings, but does not teach that the frame includes a crossing member as claimed.
In a similar field of endeavor of filtered ventilation devices Wayne teaches that it was known in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to utilized a reinforced frame with crossing members in order to span the length of multiple filter elements and openings in a framed and covered ventilation apparatus (Figs. 1, 7 and 8, col 1 ln 10-22, col 4 ln 31-62). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to use a larger integral frame with crossing members to span multiple vent elements in Mizusaki as opposed to discrete individual filter devices as such presents a simple substitution of known prior art filter elements design yielding predictable results and there is a reasonable expectation of success as the use of crossed frame members has a known use in the art of ventilation.
Claim(s) 3-4 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizusaki et al. (US 2019/0260059 A1) as applied to claims 1 and 8 above, and further in view of Cawthon et al. (US 5549345).
With regards to claims 3 and 4, Mizusaki teaches the cover is attached to the holding member by a plurality of coupling portions (131a) which as seen in Fig. 5B provide a gap between the cover (131) and the holding frame about the entire periphery of the cover member as the coupling protrusions extend from the holding member to the cover a distance within the outer perimeter of the cover as applied to claim 1 above; however, Mizusaki is silent with respect to the mechanism by which the coupling portions are attached to either the cover or the frame prompting one of ordinary skill to look to related art.
In a similar field of endeavor and reasonably pertinent to the particular problem faced by the inventor, Cawthon teaches an arrangement for fastening a cover member for a vent to the frame for the vent opening in which the frame comprises a plurality of protruding elements (20) which pass through a plurality of through holes in the cover (31) and are riveted to provide a secure, stepped arrangement (abstract, Fig. 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to utilize a similar riveting means for assembling the structure of Mizusaki as Mizusaki is silent with respect to the joining means prompting one of ordinary skill to look to related art and riveting is a known method of connecting a cover to the vent frame yielding predictable results.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mizusaki et al. (US 2019/0260059 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Erdogan et al. (DE 10 2009 023241 A1, machine translation provided for citation).
With regards to claim 7, Mizusaki does not teach that the frame portion includes a wall portion that extends towards the cover so as to surround the peripheral portion of the cover.
In a similar field of endeavor of ventilation device comprising a filter element, Erdogan demonstrates a variety of known designs to force air to flow around the perimeter of a cover member and through a filter in which the filter is held on the opposite side by a frame member (Fig. 1, 5, 6, Abstract). As seen in the figures it is known for the frame element to include a wall protruding towards the cover so as to surround the peripheral portion of the cover. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to have utilized a similar design as such designs are known alternatives for the arrangement presenting a reasonable expectation of success that still allows for air flow and presents a simple substitution of design shapes known in the art yielding a predictable result.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GALEN H HAUTH whose telephone number is (571)270-5516. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:30 AM to 6 PM EST.
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, Alexa Neckel can be reached at 571-272-2450. 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.
/GALEN H HAUTH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1743
Prosecution Insights