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 .
Examiner’s note: Please note that the following is Applicant’s second such notice of failure to provide amendments with only black text. A subsequent failure may result in a Notice of Non-Compliant Amendment.
Please provide future amendments with only black text, no color or greyscale. 37 CFR § 1.52 (b)(1)(i) requires the application to be “presented in a form having sufficient clarity and contrast” to permit “electronic capture by use of digital imaging and optical character recognition”; see 37 CFR § 1.52(a)(1)(v). To meet this requirement, the Patent Center guidelines suggest that Applicant submit all text in only black. In this case, it appears that Applicant has submitted amendments (i.e., claims containing underlines, strikethroughs, or “track changes”, etc.) with text/font/characters in color or greyscale, rather than only black. This results in issues which delay prosecution, because USPTO systems/tools for recognition/conversion do not handle well claims/text which contain color or greyscale. In the future, please follow Patent Center guidelines and provide claims and all text in only black. Thank you.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 10/20/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's remarks filed 10/20/2025 have been fully considered.
Regarding the prior drawing objections, specification objections, Applicant’s amendments overcome all prior objections.
Regarding the prior art rejections, in paragraph 4 of page 13 through paragraph 4 of page 14 of Applicant’s Remarks, Applicant’s arguments are directed to that the prior art fails to disclose, teach, or suggest the amended limitations of amended claims.
The arguments are not persuasive because each limitation is mapped to the same prior art of the previous office action. Please see mapping of amended limitations to prior art below for details.
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 following must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s):
“a flow rate distribution portion” and “a flow rate distributor” which are identified in claim 1 as two separate elements by the limitation “a flow rate distribution portion… comprising a flow rate distributor”.
“a blower” identified in claim 13. Note that this appears to be materially different than the blowing portion 40.
Note that 35 U.S.C. 113 identifies the requirement for drawings to be generally provided (“The applicant shall furnish a drawing where necessary for the understanding of the subject matter sought to be patented.”) and 37 CFR 1.83(a) identifies requirements for what those drawings must show (“The drawing in a nonprovisional application must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. However, conventional features disclosed in the description and claims, where their detailed illustration is not essential for a proper understanding of the invention, should be illustrated in the drawing in the form of a graphical drawing symbol or a labeled representation (e.g., a labeled rectangular box)”).
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.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because:
Reference character 90 is used, in Fig 5 at least, to designate both the “flow rate distributor” (e.g. top of page 2 of 15 of Applicant’s amendments filed on 10/20/2025 which is a spec amendment) and the “flow rate distribution portion” (e.g. top of page 2 of 15 of Applicant’s amendments filed on 10/20/2025 which is a spec amendment) which are claimed in claim 1 as two distinct structures by the limitation “a flow rate distribution portion… comprising a flow rate distributor”.
Specification
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required:
“a blower” identified in claim 13. It is suggested that claim 13 use terms that are consistent with claim 1, such as “separation wall”, to avoid such issues.
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.
Claim(s) 13-17 is/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.
Claim 13 (line 20) recites the limitation “the wall” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this references the blocking wall or the wall inside the body or a different wall. It is suggested that claim 13 and 19 use terms that are consistent with claim 1, such as “separation wall”, to avoid such issues.
Claim 15 (2 locations) recites the limitation “a side portion” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this references the same side portion recited in claim 13 or a different side portion. If the former, then it is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- the side portion --.
Claim 16 (2 locations) recites the limitation “a side portion” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear if this references the same side portion recited in claim 13 or a different side portion. If the former, then it is suggested that the limitation be rewritten as -- the side portion --.
Claim(s) 14-17 is/are also rejected by virtue of dependency.
In view of the 112(b) rejections set forth above, the claims are rejected below as best understood.
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.
Examiner's note: For the purposes of examining this patent application, the examiner's submitted English translation of CN 103292385 A (Cai), submitted with the office action mailed on 05/22/2025, is referenced hereinafter.
Examiner's note: For the purposes of examining this patent application, the examiner's submitted English translation of WO 2016027309 A1 (Anzawa), submitted with the office action mailed on 05/22/2025, is referenced hereinafter.
Examiner's note: For the purposes of examining this patent application, the examiner's submitted English translation of JP 2009030953 A (Takeda), submitted with the office action mailed on 05/22/2025, is referenced hereinafter.
Claim(s) 1, 4-5, 8-10, 13-16, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 203835761 U (hereinafter Dou) in view of CN 103292385 A (Cai).
Examiner’s note: All mapping below (references made to reference characters, figures, paragraphs, etc.) is with regard to the base reference (the first reference identified above) unless otherwise noted.
PNG
media_image1.png
617
447
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 2a
Regarding claim 1, Dou discloses:
A blowing device comprising:
a base portion (100; Fig 1) having an accommodation space therein (Fig 2 shows this);
an air inflow portion (120; Fig 1; Fig 2) disposed on one side of the base portion and through which air is introduced from outside (Fig 2 shows this);
a blowing body (200 combined with 230 and 130; Fig 1, Fig 2) extending in a first direction, the blowing body comprising:
a lower end (annotated Fig 2a) defining an opening fluidly communicative with the base portion (Fig 2 shows this);
a blocked upper end implemented as a blocking wall (Fig 1 shows this at the top of the tower);
and a side portion (annotated Fig 2a) having a cylindrical shape (Figs 1 and 2 show this at 230) extending in the first direction and connecting between the lower end and the blocked upper end (Fig 2 shows this);
a blowing portion (300; Fig 2) disposed in the base portion and configured to move the air introduced from the air inflow portion to the blowing body (Fig 2 shows this);
a first driving motor (310; Fig 2) configured to apply a driving force to the blowing portion;
a separation wall (213; Fig 2; Fig 4) disposed inside the blowing body and extending in the first direction to divide the inside of the blowing body into a first inner region (211; Fig 4) and a second inner region (212; Fig 4);
a first discharge portion (221; Fig 4) disposed on the side portion of the blowing body and configured to discharge air accommodated in the first inner region to the outside along a first flow path (Fig 4 shows all this) (a first flow path may be a flow path through chamber 211 in Figs 2 and 4);
a second discharge portion (222; Fig 4) disposed on the side portion of the blowing body and configured to discharge air accommodated in the second inner region to the outside along a second flow path (Fig 4 shows all this) (a second flow path may be a flow path through chamber 212 in Figs 2 and 4);
and a flow rate distribution portion (annotated Fig 2a) disposed between the blowing portion and the separation wall (Fig 2 shows this)
the flow rate distribution portion being configured to distribute the air moved from the blowing portion to the first inner region and to the second inner region (Fig 2 shows this)
Dou may not explicitly disclose:
and comprising a flow rate distributor disposed at a lower end of the separation wall and rotatable around an axis,
with rotation of the flow rate distributor around the axis adjusting relative amounts of the air moved from the blowing portion to the first inner region and from the blowing portion to the second inner region
such that a direction of an airflow of mixed air is determined by a balance of forces of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path, the mixed air is formed by a combination of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path.
However, Cai, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
and comprising a flow rate distributor (70a; Fig 14) disposed at a lower end of the separation wall and rotatable around an axis (Fig 14 shows all this),
with rotation of the flow rate distributor around the axis (Fig 14; para 0057: “plate 70a can rotate around the fixing rotating shaft”) adjusting relative amounts of the air moved from the blowing portion to the first inner region and from the blowing portion to the second inner region (evident from Cai Fig 14 and the written descriptions of Fig 14, e.g., Para 0056-0059 discusses how rotating the flow regulating plate 70a through its various states a0, a1, a2 in Fig 14 changes the air flow passing through channels 41a and 51a; functional limitation).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Cai’s teachings as described above, having a flat plate member disposed at a lower end of the separation wall to be rotatable around a central axis, in order to, according to the needs of the user, have exhaust air directed towards one side of the fan unit (paragraph 0057 which is lines 341-349) or a second side (paragraph 0058 which is lines 350-355), depending on a desired effect (lines 341-355).
This modification would result in the following limitations:
such that a direction of an airflow of mixed air (a direction of collective air emanating from Dou’s fan 1; also relevant is Cai’s paragraphs 0057-0058 which is lines 341-355 which addresses that a direction of the airflow of the mixed air changes) is determined by a balance of forces of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path (functional limitation), the mixed air is formed by a combination of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path (the collective air emanating from Dou’s fan 1 is as such).
Examiner’s note: Regarding limitations identified as “functional limitation”:
Courts have established that apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. See MPEP 2114(II).
It has also been held that where the claimed and prior art products are identical or substantially identical in structure or composition, or are produced by identical or substantially identical processes, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established. See MPEP 2112.01(I).
In this case, the device in the prior art reference has all the necessary structure and therefore performs the claimed function in the same manner as Applicant’s device. Since the prior art discloses all of the same structural elements which Applicant claims, the prior art structure would be expected to perform the same as Applicant’s structure. Particularly:
Cai’s plate being capable of adjusting relative amounts of the air moved from Dou’s blowing portion to the first inner region and from the blowing portion to the second inner region.
Dou’s fan as modified above being capable of resulting in having a direction of collective air emanating from the fan determined by a balance of forces of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path.
A claim containing a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. See MPEP 2114(II).
A recitation of the intended use, or intended result, of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Regarding claim 4, Dou, as modified above, discloses:
the first discharge portion comprises a 1-1 outer wall portion (annotated Fig 4a) and a 1-2 outer wall portion (annotated Fig 4a) spaced apart from each other in a thickness direction of a [the] side portion of the blowing body and a first release portion (annotated Fig 4a) disposed between the 1-1 outer wall portion and the 1-2 outer wall portion,
and the second discharge portion comprises a 2-1 outer wall portion (annotated Fig 4a) and a 2-2 outer wall portion (annotated Fig 4a) spaced apart from each other in a thickness direction of a [the] side portion of the blowing body and a second release portion (annotated Fig 4a) disposed between the 2-1 outer wall portion and the 2-2 outer wall portion.
PNG
media_image2.png
354
710
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Annotated Fig 4a
Regarding claim 5, Dou, as modified above, discloses:
the first discharge portion is disposed at 90 degrees or more and below 180 degrees counterclockwise along an outer circumferential surface of a side portion of the blowing body from one side of the separation wall (the configuration shown in Fig 4 is analogous to Applicant’s configuration),
and the second discharge portion is disposed at 90 degrees or more and less than 180 degrees clockwise along the outer circumferential surface of the side portion of the blowing body from the one side of the separation wall (the configuration shown in Fig 4 is analogous to Applicant’s configuration).
Regarding claim 8, Dou, as modified above, discloses:
operating the first drive motor (310; Fig 2);
transmitting the air introduced into the air inflow portion to the blowing body (Fig 2 shows this);
distributing a flow rate of the air transmitted to each of the first inner region and the second inner region using the flow rate distribution portion (Fig 2 shows all this);
adjusting relative amounts of the air transmitted to the first inner region and to the second inner region (evident from Cai Fig 14 and the written descriptions of Fig 14, e.g., Para 0056-0059 discusses how rotating the flow regulating plate 70a through its various states a0, a1, a2 in Fig 14 changes the air flow passing through channels 41a and 51a)
discharging air of a first flow path using the first discharge portion and discharging air of a second flow path using the second discharge portion (all this apparent from Fig 4);
moving the air of the first flow path and the air of the second flow path along the outer circumferential surface of the blowing body (apparent from Fig 4); and
forming an airflow of mixed air moving in a certain direction by mixing the air of the first flow path and the air of the second flow path (apparent from Fig 4),
wherein a direction of the airflow of mixed air is determined by a balance of forces of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path (see prior art rejection of claim 1 wherein this limitation is addressed in detail).
Regarding claim 9, Dou discloses all claim limitations (see above) except:
the flow rate distributor comprises a flat plate member extending along a plane,
However, Cai, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
the flow rate distributor (70a; Fig 14) comprises a flat plate member extending along a plane.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Cai’s teachings as described above, having a flat plate member disposed at a lower end of the separation wall to be rotatable around a central axis, in order to, according to the needs of the user, have exhaust air directed towards one side of the fan unit (paragraph 0057 which is lines 341-349) or a second side (paragraph 0058 which is lines 350-355), depending on a desired effect (paragraphs 0057-0058 which is lines 341-355).
Regarding claim 10, Dou, as modified above, further discloses:
adjusting an angle at which the flow rate distribution portion rotates around the central axis (Cai paragraphs 0057-0058 which is lines 341-355),
wherein:
a flow rate of air transmitted to each of the first inner region and the second inner region changes according to the angle at which the flow rate distribution portion rotates around the central axis (all of this apparent from Dou Fig 4).
Regarding claim 19, Dou, discloses:
A blowing device operating method, comprising:
operating a first drive motor (310; Fig 2);
transmitting air introduced into an air inflow portion (120; Fig 1; Fig 2) to first and second inner regions (211; Fig 4; 212; Fig 4) of a body (200 combined with 230 and 130; Fig 1), which has a cylindrical shape (Figs 1 and 2 show this at 230), via an opening of a lower end of the body (Fig 2 shows this);
distributing a flow rate of the air transmitted to each of the first and second inner regions using a flow rate distributor (annotated Fig 2a);
discharging air of a first flow path using a first discharge portion (221; Fig 4) aside the body and configured to discharge air accommodated in the first inner region (Fig 4 shows this);
discharging air of a second flow path using a second discharge portion (222; Fig 4) aside the body and configured to discharge air accommodated in the second inner region (Fig 4 shows this);
moving the air of the first flow path and the air of the second flow path along an outer circumferential surface of the body (Fig 4 shows this); and
forming an airflow of mixed air by mixing the air of the first and second flow paths (Fig 4 shows this).
Dou may not explicitly disclose:
adjusting an angle at which the flow rate distributor rotates to adjust relative amounts of the air transmitted to the first inner region and to the second inner region
However, Cai, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
adjusting an angle at which the flow rate distributor rotates to adjust relative amounts of the air transmitted to the first inner region and to the second inner region (evident from Cai Fig 14 and the written descriptions of Fig 14, e.g., Para 0056-0059 discusses how rotating the flow regulating plate 70a through its various states a0, a1, a2 in Fig 14 changes the air flow passing through channels 41a and 51a);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Cai’s teachings as described above, having a flat plate member disposed at a lower end of the separation wall to be rotatable around a central axis, in order to, according to the needs of the user, have exhaust air directed towards one side of the fan unit (paragraph 0057 which is lines 341-349) or a second side (paragraph 0058 which is lines 350-355), depending on a desired effect (lines 341-355).
This modification would result in the following limitations:
wherein a direction of the airflow of mixed air is determined by a balance of forces of the air along the first flow path and the air along the second flow path (see prior art rejection of claim 8 also claim 1 wherein this limitation is addressed in detail).
Regarding claim 20, Dou discloses all claim limitations (see above) except:
the flow rate distributor comprises a flat plate member extending along a plane and is disposed at a lower end of a wall separating the first and second inner regions (320) to be rotatable around an axis,
a flow rate of air transmitted to each of the first and second inner regions (320) changes according to the angle at which the flow rate distributor rotates around the central axis, and
a direction of the airflow of the mixed air changes.
However, Cai, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
the flow rate distribution portion (70a; Fig 14) comprises a flat plate member extending along a plane and is disposed at a lower end of the separation wall to be rotatable around a central axis (Fig 14 shows all this),
adjusting an angle at which the flow rate distribution portion rotates around an axis (Cai paragraphs 0057-0058 which is lines 341-355),
wherein:
a flow rate of air transmitted to each of the first inner region and the second inner region changes according to the angle at which the flow rate distribution portion rotates around the central axis (all of this apparent from Dou Fig 4),
and a direction of the airflow of the mixed air changes (Cai paragraphs 0057-0058 which is lines 341-355).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Cai’s teachings as described above, having a flat plate member disposed at a lower end of the separation wall to be rotatable around a central axis, in order to, according to the needs of the user, have exhaust air directed towards one side of the fan unit (paragraph 0057 which is lines 341-349) or a second side (paragraph 0058 which is lines 350-355), depending on a desired effect (lines 341-355).
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dou in view of Cai and WO 2016027309 A1 (Anzawa).
Regarding claim 2, Dou, as modified above, discloses:
the flow rate distributor comprises a flat plate member extending along a plane (Fig 14 shows this and para 0055 identifies the flow regulating plate 70a is a plate) and is drivable to be rotatable around the axis (0057: “70a can rotate around the fixing rotating shaft”).
Insofar as Applicant may disagree that Cai does not identify that the plate 70a is drivable, it is noted that Anzawa, in the same field of endeavor, flow adjustment devices, teaches:
A plate (5; Fig 4) which is integrated with a shaft (12; Fig 4), wherein the plate is reciprocated by a motor (claim 4), wherein the motor is controlled by a control device (claim 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou as modified above to include Anzawa’s teachings as described above, having a second driving motor configured to apply power so that the flow rate distribution portion is rotatable around the central axis and a controller configured to control the second driving motor, in order to adjust a flow rate of a fluid without requiring a complex design (abstract).
Note that Cai identifies that his plate 70a “can rotate” but Cai does not specify how his plate 70a rotates (e.g., by motor, by manual lever).
Claim(s) 6, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 203835761 U (Hereinafter Dou) in view of CN 100445569 C (hereinafter Fang).
Regarding claim 6, Dou further discloses:
the blowing portion comprises:
a first blowing fan (320; Fig 2);
a first fan housing (annotated Fig 2a); and
a second fan housing (annotated Fig 2a) disposed to surround the first blowing fan
the second fan housing comprises a suction hole (opening at the bottom; Fig 2) through which the air introduced from the air inflow portion is introduced in the first direction, and
the first fan housing comprises a discharge hole (opening at the top; Fig 2) through which the air introduced from the suction hole is discharged in the first direction.
Dou does not disclose:
a second blowing fan disposed on upper and lower portions of the blowing portion in the first direction;
However, Fang, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
In Fig 1 an axial fan configuration comprising two fan units.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Fang’s teachings as described above, having two fan units within the blowing portion, in order to improve fan efficiency (abstract).
This modification would result in a second fan housing disposed to surround the first blowing fan and the second blowing fan, and the second blowing fan disposed on upper and lower portions of the blowing portion in the first direction;
Claim(s) 7, 12, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 203835761 U (Hereinafter Dou) in view of JP 2009030953 A (Takeda).
Regarding claim 7, Dou discloses all claim limitations (see above) except:
a dust collection portion disposed between the air inflow portion (20) and the blowing portion;
and a photocatalyst portion disposed between the air inflow portion (20) and the blowing portion.
However, Takeda, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
a dust collection portion (lines 1666-1670);
and a photocatalyst portion (lines 1666-1670).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Takeda’s teachings as described above, having a dust collection element and a photocatalyst element within the blowing portion, in order to improve exhaust air quality (lines 22-31).
This modification would result in the dust collector disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion; and the photocatalyst disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion.
Regarding claim 12, Dou discloses all claim limitations (see above) except:
collecting fine dust from the air introduced into the air inflow portion; and
removing contaminants from the air introduced into the air inflow portion using a photocatalyst.
However, Takeda, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
a dust collection portion (lines 1666-1670);
and a photocatalyst portion (lines 1666-1670).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Takeda’s teachings as described above, having a dust collection element and a photocatalyst element within the blowing portion, in order to improve exhaust air quality (lines 22-31).
This modification would result in the dust collector disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion; and the photocatalyst disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion.
Regarding claim 18, Dou discloses all claim limitations (see above) except:
a dust collector disposed between the air inflow portion and the blower;
and a photocatalyst disposed between the air inflow portion and the blower.
However, Takeda, in the same field of endeavor, fans, teaches:
a dust collection portion (lines 1666-1670);
and a photocatalyst portion (lines 1666-1670).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Dou to include Takeda’s teachings as described above, having a dust collection element and a photocatalyst element within the blowing portion, in order to improve exhaust air quality (lines 22-31).
This modification would result in the dust collector disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion; and the photocatalyst disposed between the air inflow portion and the blowing portion.
Claim 13 recites substantially the same limitations as claim 1, thus is similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over the prior art (see prior art rejections of claim 1 above).
Claims 14, 15, 16, 17 (each depending from claim 13) are each substantially similar to claims 2, 4, 5, 6 (each depending from claim 1), respectively, thus are each similarly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 over the prior art (see prior art rejections of claims 2, 4, 5, 6 above).
The corresponding prior art rejections for claims 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 are not explicitly written out in order to save multiple pages worth of redundant information and writing which substantially corresponds to the disclosures, teachings, and rejections already discussed in detail above for claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 respectively.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Art Golik whose telephone number is (571)272-6211. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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, Nathaniel Wiehe can be reached at 571-272-8648. 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.
/Art Golik/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/NATHANIEL E WIEHE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745