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.
Claims 1-15 are 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 1 line 1, the phrase "in particular " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Claims 2-15 depend on claim 1 and hence are also rejected.
Regarding claim 1 line 4, the phrase "in particular " renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 1 line 8 recites “at least one electrode that is or can be connected”. Examiner respectfully submits the limitations “can be” does not positively set forth the scope of the limitations and therefore is indefinite.
Claim 2 lines 2-3 recites “a first electric potential is or can be applied”. Examiner respectfully submits the limitations “can be” does not positively set forth the scope of the limitations and therefore is indefinite.
Claim 4 lines 3-4 recites “a negative or positive potential difference(voltage potential can be or is applied”. Examiner respectfully submits the limitations “can be” does not positively set forth the scope of the limitations and therefore is indefinite.
Claim 5 recites “within the a range of “. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the a range” in previous claim limitations.
Claim 6 recites “the range of”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for “the range” in previous claim limitations.
Claim 10 line 9 recites “preferably”. The word “preferably” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the word are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
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.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al(3915676).
German reference in figures 1 and 2 teaches an air filter through which a flow path for an air flow passes, wherein the air filter contains an ionizer(grid electrostatic charging device 2 and separating device 1) in the flow path for ionizing the air flow and a filter element(filter device 6) downstream of the ionizer in the flow path for filtering the air flow, such that the air flow can pass through the ionizer and the filter element , wherein the ionizer contains at least one electrode(grid 2 equivalent to an electrode) that is connected to a high voltage source(para 0011 stating “it has been proven advantageous if the electrostatic charging device is subjected to a pulsed high voltage”) for the air filter to generate a corona discharge in the air flow(para 0014 stating “the collecting electrode can also be called corona or charging electrode”), and at least one counter electrode(collecting electrode 3) dedicated to the at least one electrode. German reference is silent as to wherein the filter element is electrostatically charged, and wherein that the at least one counter electrode is electrically connected to an electrically conductive filter layer in the filter element.
Reed et al in figures 1 and 2 teaches an air filter through which a flow path for an air flow passes, wherein the air filter contains an ionizer(electrostatic precipitator 14) in the flow path for ionizing the air flow, the ionizer including an electrode(corona electrode 24) and a counter electrode(collector screen 18 as a counter electrode; column 8 lines 2-3 stating “screen 18 is connected to a relatively positive potential”; column 8 lines 19-21 stating “the portion of the apparatus comprising corona electrode 24, tube 37, and screen 18 is essentially a tubular coaxial electrostatic precipitator”) and a filter element(filter 40) downstream of the ionizer in the flow path for filtering the air flow, such that the air flow can pass through the ionizer and the filter element, wherein the filter is an electrostatically charged filter element, and wherein at least one counter electrode is electrically connected to an electrically conductive filter layer in the filter element(column 8 lines 32-35 stating “the gas is moved by fan 7 from precipitator means 14 through filter means 40 of foraminous material while an electric field is applied to filter means 40”). It would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the counter electrode of German reference electrically connected to an electrically conductive filter layer in the filter element of German reference so that providing an electrostatically charged filter element provides better dust collection than would be achieved by either precipitator means alone or filter means alone(column 8 lines 66-67, column 9 line 1 of Reed et al). Examiner notes German reference includes filter device having a particle filter 62 and an activated carbon filter 64, wherein the particle filter includes a dielectric layer, and Reed et al in column 8 lines 58-61 states “the provision of filter means 40 in this field produces an interaction between the field and the dielectric structure”).
With regards to claim 2, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein when the air filter is in operation, a first electric potential is or can be applied to the at least one electrode, and a second, different, electric potential is or can be applied to the at least one counter electrode and the filter layer(para 0037 of German reference stating “charging device 2 is negatively charged and the collecting electrode is positively charged”).
With regards to claim 3, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the first electric potential is a supply potential, and the second electric potential forms a counter potential to the supply potential (para 0037 of German reference stating “charging device 2 is negatively charged and the collecting electrode is positively charged”).
With regards to claim 4, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein when the air filter is in operation, a negative or positive potential difference can be or is applied between the at least one electrode and the at least one counter electrode and the filter layer.
With regards to claim 5, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the negative potential difference is approximately 20kV( para 0033 of German reference), however is silent as to within the a range of between -5 kV to -15 kV. Examiner respectfully submits negative potential difference range is a result effective variable which is able to be modified through routine experimentation, therefore it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art, through routine experimentation, to adjust a negative potential difference to a range of between -5 kV to -15 kV in order to provide for an optimal negative potential difference between the electrode and counter electrode of German reference.
With regards to claim 6, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the ionizer is at a distance to the downstream filter element within the range of 0 mm to 30 mm(Examiner noting in Reed et al that the filter 40 is directly adjacent to the electrostatic precipitator 14, therefore Reed et al teaches provide the ionizer of German reference within a range of 0 mm to 30 mm to the filter device 6 of German reference.
With regards to claim 7, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the filter element contains a dielectric layer (particle filter 62 of German reference) for filtering out particles.
With regards to claim 8, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the dielectric layer is placed on the filter layer on a side of the filter element facing the ionizer and the air flow, and/or the dielectric layer is placed on the filter layer on a side of the filter element facing away from the ionizer and the air flow.
With regards to claim 9, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the filter layer contains or is formed by an electrically conductive layer(activated carbon filter 64 in German reference).
With regards to claim 10, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the at least one electrode has a needle or cone-shaped electrode body with a central axis(embodiment of figure 2 of German reference including charging electrodes 21,22; para 0039 stating “the charging electrodes 21,22 are electrically connected to the charging device 2 and can, for example, extend longitudinally to behind the collecting electrode 3”), the at least one counter electrode has an annular or cylindrical counter electrode body that delimits an interior volume , wherein the electrode body is placed in the counter electrode body such that the central axis of the electrode body is parallel and preferably coaxial to the central axis of the counter electrode body, wherein the electrode body is substantially entirely, or entirely, inside the interior volume of the counter electrode body, and wherein a tip of the needle or cone-shaped electrode body faces the air flow.
With regards to claim 11, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein there are two or more electrodes(charging electrodes 21,22 of German reference and two or more counter electrodes(collecting electrodes 3,31 of German reference) dedicated to the respective electrodes , wherein the electrodes are electrically connected to one another, wherein the counter electrodes are electrically connected to one another.
With regards to claim 12, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches a vehicle air conditioner that is equipped with at least one air filter according to claim 1(para 0005 of German reference stating “it is known to supply a vehicle interior with fresh air via an activated carbon filter”, wherein a statement of supplying a vehicle interior with fresh air provides for a vehicle air conditioner).
With regards to claim 13, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the potential difference is -7 kV.
With regards to claim 14, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the ionizer is at a distance to the downstream filter of 7 mm.
With regards to claim 15, German reference(DE102009026010A1) taken together with Reed et al further teaches wherein the filter layer contains or is formed by an active carbon layer(activated carbon filter 64 of German reference).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT A HOPKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-1159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 6am-4pm.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 5712707872. 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.
/ROBERT A HOPKINS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
July 6, 2026
Prosecution Insights