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 fil e provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 2-8 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 claims 2-8, “the moisture absorbing device for dehumidifiers” lacks antecedent basis in light of “the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers” of claim 1. The examiner suggests using consistent language for the sake of clarity.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi US 20220095421 A1 in view of Lee US 20140318369 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Ohashi teaches a moisture absorbing device for humidifiers represented by electrically heated support 1 (Fig. 1, [0030]). The electrically heated support 1 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A honeycomb structure represented by honeycomb structure 2 (Fig. 1, [0030]).
An outer peripheral wall represented by outer peripheral portion 21 and outer peripheral wall 22 (Fig. 1, [0034]).
Partition walls disposed on an inner side of the outer peripheral wall, the partition walls defining a plurality of cells, each of the cells extending from a first end face to a second end face to form a flow path represented by central portion 20, partition wall 20d, plurality of cells 20c, end face 20a, and end surface 20b wherein “the central portion 20 has a partition wall 20d for defining a plurality of cells 20c that penetrate from one end face 20a to the other end surface 20b of the central portion 20 to form flow paths” (Fig. 1, [0035]).
The honeycomb structure having a thickness of each of the partition walls of 0.089 mm to 0.140 mm represented by “each partition wall 20d forming each cell 20c preferably has a thickness of from 0.05 to 0.31 mm” (Fig. 1, [0038]).
The honeycomb structure has a cell density of 62.0 cell/cm2 to 93.0 cell/cm2 represented by “the honeycomb structure 2 preferably has a cell density of from 150×103 to 1400×103 cells/m2” (Fig. 1, [0039]). One m2 is equivalent to 10,000 cm2 hence rendering the cell density of the art to be 15 cell/cm2 to 140 cell/cm2.
Ohashi fails to teach a moisture absorbing material containing layer provided on a surface of each of the partition walls.
Lee teaches a moisture absorbing material containing layer provided on a surface of each of the partition walls represented by “a desiccant (not shown) such as silica gel, zeolite or LiCI is coated on the walls defining the air paths through the desiccant rotor 110. The desiccant adsorbs moisture from the air passing through the desiccant rotor 110” (Fig. 3, [0034]). The desiccant is beneficial to absorb moisture from the air passing through the moisture absorbing device.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ohashi with the teachings of Lee to incorporate the moisture absorbing material containing layer to help absorb moisture from the air passing through the moisture absorbing device.
Regarding claim 3, Ohashi teaches the thickness of each of the partition walls is 0.101 mm to 0.138 mm represented by “each partition wall 20d forming each cell 20c preferably has a thickness of from 0.05 to 0.31 mm” (Fig. 1, [0038]).
Regarding claim 5, Lee teaches the moisture absorbing material containing layer being capable of absorbing moisture and odorous components represented by “a desiccant (not shown) such as silica gel, zeolite or LiCI is coated on the walls defining the air paths through the desiccant rotor 110” (Fig. 3, [0034]). It is well known in the art that the aforementioned desiccants absorb moisture and odorous components from the air. Furthermore, the aforementioned desiccants overlap with the material of the moisture absorbing material containing layer as described by the specification of the current invention: “Examples of the functional material that can also adsorb the odorous components include zeolite, silica gel, activated carbon, alumina, silica, low crystalline clay, amorphous aluminum silicate complexes, and the like.”
Regarding claim 6, Ohashi in view of Lee teaches all the limitations of the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers according to claim 1.
Ohashi fails to teach a dehumidifier comprising the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of claim 1.
Lee teaches a dehumidifier represented by air conditioning apparatus 300 wherein the air conditioning apparatus 300 includes a desiccant rotor 340 (Fig. 5, [0054]). The air conditioning apparatus 300 is beneficial to “keep temperature, humidity, air stream, bacteria, dust and harmful gas in the best conditions for persons or objects indoors” [0005].
The desiccant rotor 340 does not comprise of all the limitations of the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of claim 1. However, substituting the desiccant rotor 340 with the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of Ohashi (as modified) would yield predictable results and would not modify the operation of the air conditioning apparatus 300 of Lee.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ohashi with the teachings of Lee to incorporate a dehumidifier comprising the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of claim 1 to keep temperature in the best conditions for persons or objects indoors as it is merely simple substitution of parts.
Regarding claim 7, Ohashi in view of Lee teaches all the limitations of the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers according to claim 1.
Ohashi further teaches the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers can be heated by applying a voltage represented by “when a voltage is applied to the electrode terminals 3, the honeycomb structure 2 can be heated by Joule heat” [0051].
Ohashi fails to teach a dehumidifier comprising the moisture absorbing device for dehumidifiers of claim 1.
Lee teaches a dehumidifier represented by air conditioning apparatus 300. The air conditioning apparatus 300 comprises of the following elements of the current invention:
A casing represented by first casing 310 and second casing 320 (Fig. 5, [0054]).
A dehumidification flow path represented by first channel 311, 311’, and 311’’ (Fig. 5, [0055]).
A regeneration flow path represented by third and fourth channels 321 and 322 (Fig. 5, [0056]).
A first fan disposed in the dehumidification flow path represented by fan 371 (Fig.5, [0060]) . The reference is silent as to the first fan sucking ambient air to discharge the air dehumidified by the moisture absorbing device for dehumidifiers to the surroundings. However, the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114).
A second fan disposed in the regeneration flow path represented by fan 372 (Fig. 5, [0060]). The reference is silent as to the second fan circulating the air dehumidified by the moisture absorbing device for dehumidifiers. However, the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114).
A heat exchanger disposed in the regeneration flow path represented by condensing unit 360 wherein “the condensing unit 360 is a sort of heat exchanger…” (Fig. 5, [0059]). The reference is silent as to the heat exchanger cooling and condensing the air dehumidified by the moisture absorbing device for dehumidifiers. However, the claim limitation is functional only. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114).
A tank for storing condensed water generated by the heat exchanger represented by water tank 390.
The air conditioning apparatus 300 is beneficial to “keep temperature, humidity, air stream, bacteria, dust and harmful gas in the best conditions for persons or objects indoors” [0005].
Lee further teaches the air conditioning apparatus 300 includes the desiccant rotor 340 (Fig. 5, [0054]). The reference teaches the desiccant rotor 340 is rotatably disposed across the dehumidification flow path and the regeneration flow path represented by “a desiccant rotor rotatably installed in the second casing to be placed crossing the adjacent first and fourth channels” (Fig. 5, [0020]).
The desiccant rotor 340 does not comprise of all the limitations of the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of claim 1. However, substituting the desiccant rotor 340 with the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers of Ohashi (as modified) would yield predictable results and would not modify the operation of the air conditioning apparatus 300 of Lee.
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ohashi with the teachings of Lee to incorporate a dehumidifier comprising of the aforementioned elements to keep temperature in the best conditions for persons or objects indoors as it is merely simple substitution of parts.
Regarding claim 8, Ohashi teaches the voltage applied to the moisture absorbing device for humidifiers is 12 V or more and less than 200 V represented by “the applied voltage is preferably from 12 to 900 V” [0051].
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohashi US 20220095421 A1 in view of Lee US 20140318369 A1 and in further view of Morita et al. US 20220240352 A1.
Regarding claim 2, Ohashi in view of Lee teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Ohashi further teaches “the honeycomb structure 2 is a pillar shaped member made of ceramics” (Fig. 1, [0031]).
The references are silent as to the partition walls being made of a material having a PTC property.
Morita et al. teaches the partition walls being made of a material having a PTC property represented by “the pillar shaped honeycomb structure 10 is composed of a ceramic having a PTC property” (Fig. 1, [0023]). Morita et al. teaches the material having a PTC property is beneficial as PTC property is “a property in which electric resistance increases as a temperature increases” [0003].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ohashi in view of Lee with the teachings of Morita et al. to incorporate the partition walls being made of a material having a PTC property to increase electrical resistance as temperature increases.
Regarding claim 4, Ohashi in view of Lee teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Ohashi in view of Lee does not teach a pair of electrodes provided on opposing surfaces of the outer peripheral wall parallel to an extension direction of the cells and terminals connected to the electrodes.
Morita et al. teaches a pair of electrodes provided on opposing surfaces of the outer peripheral wall parallel to an extension direction of the cells and terminals connected to the electrodes represented by electrode layers (14a and 14b) and electrode terminals (15a and 15b) (Fig. 2, [0043-0051]). The reference teaches electrode layers 14a and 14b are disposed “on the surface of the outer peripheral wall 12 so as to face each other across the central axis of the pillar shaped honeycomb structure 10” and “each of the electrode layers 14a, 14b is preferably provided on the outer surface of the outer peripheral wall 12 so as to extend in the form of strip in the circumferential direction and in the extending direction of the cells 16” (Fig. 2, [0045-0049]). The reference further teaches “the electrode terminals 15a, 15b are arranged on the electrode layers 14a, 14b, respectively, and are electrically connected” (Fig. 1, [0051]). The terminals are beneficial to apply voltage to the electrodes and “generate heat by Joule heat” [0051]. The electrodes being disposed in this configuration is beneficial to “uniformly heat” the honeycomb structure [0045].
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Ohashi in view of Lee with the teachings of Morita et al. to incorporate a pair of electrodes provided on opposing surfaces of the outer peripheral wall parallel to an extension direction of the cells and terminals connected to the electrodes to uniformly heat the moisture absorbing device.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMMAD BUTT whose telephone number is (571)272-6550. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7-5PM.
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 (571) 270-7872. 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.
/AMMAD W BUTT/ Examiner, Art Unit 1776 /Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights