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 1-12 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 3, 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 2-12 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).
Regarding claim 1 line 38, the phrase "for example" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 9 line 3 recites “this crossing point”. Examiner is unsure as to what is referred to by “this crossing point”. Examiner believes from claim 9 that at least two of the grid struts of each sub network form a crossing point, therefore limitations to “this crossing point” seem to refer to a specific crossing point as opposed to every crossing point. Claims 10 and 11 depend on claim 9 and hence are also rejected.
Regarding claim 11 line 3, 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).
Regarding claim 12 line 2 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).
Regarding claim 12 line 3 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).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claim 1 recites “Corrugated grid mat of an installation element comprising a stack of a plurality of such grid mats, of a device for treating a useful fluid by means of a working fluid, in particular for humidifying and/or cleaning and/or cooling a useful fluid, in particular a gas, by means of a working fluid, in particular sprayed water, comprising
- an upper side and a lower side,
- a first longitudinal edge and a second longitudinal edge which extend essentially parallel to each other and are connected by two transverse edges which extend transversely to these longitudinal edges and are also essentially parallel to each other,
- alternately adjacent depressions and elevations extending linearly at an angle not equal to 90° to both the longitudinal edges and the transverse edges with slopes connecting them,
- the elevations being arranged on the upper side and the depressions on the lower side,
- a rectilinear first grid strut extending along the elevations on the upper side and along the depressions on the lower side, and
- the first grid struts of a respective elevation and the depression adjacent thereto being connected by intersecting second and third grid struts which extend along the slopes and form first intersection points with one another and second intersection points with the first grid struts on the upper side and on the lower side respectively,
wherein
- each first grid strut extending up to the first longitudinal edge has a first interruption section, the center point of which has a first distance from the first longitudinal edge,
- each first grid strut extending up to the second longitudinal edge has a second interruption section, the center point of which has a second distance from the second longitudinal edge,
- the first distance being smaller than the second distance,
- the first grid struts of in each case two adjacent elevations and/or in each case two adjacent depressions are connected on both sides of their first and second interruption sections in each case by further grid struts forming sub- networks with one another,
- the sub-networks arranged next to one another along one of the longitudinal edges in each case being connected to one another by a fourth grid strut extending parallel to the respective longitudinal edge, which extends through the first or second interruption section and, for example, at the midpoint of the first or second interruption section, extends through the latter.”.
Ausner et al(12337292) in figures 1, 2c, 4a teaches a corrugated grid mat(structured cross-channel packing element 12) of an installation element comprising a stack of a plurality of such grid mats(stack in figure 1), of a device for treating a useful fluid by means of a working fluid, in particular for humidifying and/or cleaning and/or cooling a useful fluid, in particular a gas, by means of a working fluid, in particular sprayed water, comprising an upper side and a lower side, a first longitudinal edge and a second longitudinal edge which extend essentially parallel to each other and are connected by two transverse edges which extend transversely to these longitudinal edges and are also essentially parallel to each other, alternately adjacent depressions(valleys 28) and elevations(peaks 26) extending linearly at an angle not equal to 90° to both the longitudinal edges and the transverse edges with slopes connecting them, the elevations being arranged on the upper side and the depressions on the lower side, a rectilinear first grid strut(grid 38) extending along the elevations on the upper side and along the depressions on the lower side, and the first grid struts of a respective elevation and the depression adjacent thereto being connected by intersecting second and third grid struts which extend along the slopes and form first intersection points with one another and second intersection points with the first grid struts on the upper side and on the lower side respectively.
However Ausner et al does not teach or suggest wherein each first grid strut extending up to the first longitudinal edge has a first interruption section, the center point of which has a first distance from the first longitudinal edge, each first grid strut extending up to the second longitudinal edge has a second interruption section, the center point of which has a second distance from the second longitudinal edge, the first distance being smaller than the second distance, the first grid struts of in each case two adjacent elevations and/or in each case two adjacent depressions are connected on both sides of their first and second interruption sections in each case by further grid struts forming sub- networks with one another, the sub-networks arranged next to one another along one of the longitudinal edges in each case being connected to one another by a fourth grid strut extending parallel to the respective longitudinal edge, which extends through the first or second interruption section and, for example, at the midpoint of the first or second interruption section, extends through the latter.
Claims 2-12 depend on claim 1 and hence would also be allowable upon correction of the noted 112 second paragraph rejections in the current office action.
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 28, 2026
Prosecution Insights