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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Species V (Figs. 12A-13B) and Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 8-20, and 22 in the reply filed on July 28th, 2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claims 3, 5, 7, 21, and 23-43 and Figs. 1A-3G, 4A-6G, 7A-9G, 10A-11B are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention Group and Species Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on July 28th, 2026.
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 4 and 10 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 4 recites the limitation "the flexible material" in ln. 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no “a flexible material” to refer back to for this limitation in the claim.
The term “generally” in claim 10 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “generally” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The specification and claims do not define what would be considered as a generally linear channel of generally uniform width, or a generally annular channel of generally uniform width. For examination purposes, it will be interpreted that a generally linear channel of generally uniform width is a linear channel of uniform width, and a generally annular channel of generally uniform width is an annular channel of uniform width.
Regarding claim 13, the phrase "optionally" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the term are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). For examination purposes, it will be interpreted that the limitations following the term optionally are not part of the claimed invention.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the flexible material" in ln. 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no “a flexible material” to refer back to for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the flexible material" in ln. 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. There is no “a flexible material” to refer back to for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6, 11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kuhn (US 5364027).
Regarding claim 1, Kuhn discloses a cartridge (1, Figs. 1-2) for a scent dispenser, the cartridge (1, Figs. 1-2) comprising:
a reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) for containing a liquid (Col. 1, Ln. 40-44); and
at least one porous member (4, wick 4 can be a porous material, Fig. 3, Col. 2, Ln. 45-46);
wherein the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is disposed at a first end of the at least one porous member (bottom end of wick 4, not explicitly shown in Figs. 1-2, but wick 4 would be disposed in dispenser 1 with the leg 15 in immersion tube 10 and crosspiece 16 around nozzle 8, shown in Fig. 3, Col. 2, Ln. 45-53), wherein the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is in fluid communication with the first end of the at least one porous member (bottom end of wick 4, Fig. 3) via a first passageway (passage within channel 10, shown in Figs. 1-2, Col. 2, Ln. 45-53) and wherein the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is in fluid communication with a second end of the at least one porous member (top end of wick 4, Fig. 3) via a second passageway (passage within channel 9, shown in Fig. 2, Col. 2, Ln. 45-53); and
wherein the first passageway (passage within channel 10, Figs. 1-2) is provided with a valve mechanism (12, Fig. 2) allowing the first passageway (passage within channel 10, Figs. 1-2) to be selectively opened or closed (Col. 2, Ln. 22-53).
In regards to claim 2, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is formed from a flexible material (container has a wall that is at least locally resiliently deformable, Col. 1, Ln. 30-39).
Regarding claim 4, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1, comprising:
a rigid body (annotated in Figs. 1-2), a recess (interpreting as indentation, Merriam-Webster Dictionary, annotated in Figs. 1-2) being defined in the rigid body (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2); and
a flexible membrane (annotated in Fig. 1, container 2 has a wall that is at least locally resiliently deformable, Col. 1, Ln. 30-39), sealed to the rigid body (annotated and shown in Fig. 1), wherein at least a portion of the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is formed by the recess (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2) and the flexible material (interpreting as the flexible membrane, annotated and shown in Fig. 1).
PNG
media_image1.png
417
689
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
397
535
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 6, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1, wherein the first passageway (passage within channel 10, Figs. 1-2) and the second passageway (passage within channel 9, Fig. 2) are at least partially formed by channels (9, 10, Figs. 1-2) in the rigid body (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2).
In regards to claim 11, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1, further comprising a liquid to be dispensed (Col. 1, Ln. 40-44).
With respect to claim 16, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1, comprising one or more valves (12, Fig. 2) arranged so as to allow the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) to be isolated from the at least one porous member (4, valve 12 can shut off flow in the channel 10 which wick 4 is disposed in, Fig. 3, Col. 2, Ln. 4-18, 36-43).
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 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Ivri (US 20140252128 A1).
With respect to claim 8, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1. However, Kuhn does not disclose the second passageway is provided with a valve mechanism allowing the second passageway to be selectively opened or closed.
Ivri teaches the second passageway (119, Fig. 3A) is provided with a valve mechanism (140, Fig. 3A) allowing the second passageway to be selectively opened or closed (control valve 140 connects to second passageway 119, and when control valve 140 is in an on position, it allows fluid from passageway 119 to be dispensed and when it is in a normal rest position, it prevents it from being dispensed, Paragraphs 0050, 0080).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the valve mechanism taught in Ivri’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to have better control over dispensing of fluid (Ivri, Paragraphs 0007-0008).
Claims 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Uchiyama (US 20060231641 A1).
With respect to claim 9, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1. However, Kuhn does not disclose one or more walls partially divide the reservoir into a first portion and a second portion adjacent to the second passageway.
Uchiyama teaches one or more walls (shown in Fig. 2) partially divide the reservoir (6, 7, Fig. 2) into a first portion (7, shown in Fig. 2) and a second portion (6, shown in Fig. 2) adjacent to the second passageway (10, shown in Fig. 2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the one or more walls taught in Uchiyama’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to provide a structure that allows for any suitable type of flow (Uchiyama, Paragraph 0061).
In regards to claim 10, Kuhn, as modified by Uchiyama, discloses the cartridge of claim 9. Uchiayama teaches the second portion (6, Fig. 2) of the reservoir (6, 7, Fig. 2) comprises:
a generally linear channel (5, Fig. 2) of generally uniform width (shown in Fig. 2), the first portion (7, Fig. 2) being connected to the second portion (6, Fig. 2) only at one end of said generally linear channel (5, shown in Fig. 2).
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Gruenbacher et al. (US 20100314461 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1. However, Kuhn does not disclose a sealing mechanism for preventing the liquid from flowing through the at least one porous member and a seal breaking actuator operable to break said sealing mechanism.
Gruenbacher teaches a sealing mechanism (42, Fig. 6) for preventing the liquid from flowing through the at least one porous member (50, Fig. 6, Paragraph 0046); and
a seal breaking actuator (44, Fig. 6) operable to break said sealing mechanism (42, Fig. 6, Paragraph 0046).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the sealing mechanism and the seal breaking actuator taught in Gruenbacher’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to allow fluids to travel within the device without leaking in between parts (Gruenbacher, Paragraph 0046).
Regarding claim 13, Kuhn, as modified by Gruenbacher, discloses the cartridge of claim 12. However, Kuhn does not disclose the liquid is disposed in a sealed capsule and wherein the cartridge further comprises a piercing member movable between a first, storage position and second, actuated position in which it extends into and ruptures the sealed capsule and optionally wherein the reservoir defines a chamber for receipt of the sealed capsule, the chamber having an opening to allow the piercing member to move into the chamber and to allow the liquid to flow out of the chamber.
Gruenbacher teaches the liquid is disposed in a sealed capsule (38, Fig. 6, Paragraph 0046) and wherein the cartridge (10, Fig. 6) further comprises a piercing member (48, 58, Fig. 6) movable between a first, storage position and second, actuated position in which it extends into and ruptures the sealed capsule (38, movable portion 48 can engage the seal 42 to pierce the seal to allow release of the volatile composition and prevent release of the volatile composition when not engaged with the seal, Fig. 6, Paragraphs 0050-0051).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the sealed capsule and the piercing member taught in Gruenbacher’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to allow fluids to travel within the device without leaking in between parts (Gruenbacher, Paragraph 0046).
With respect to claim 14, Kuhn, as modified by Gruenbacher, discloses the cartridge of claim 12. Kuhn discloses a storage reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2), wherein the liquid is disposed in the storage reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2, Col. 1, Ln. 40-44) and a valve (12, Fig. 2) operable to isolate the storage reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) from the at least one porous member (4, valve 12 can shut off flow in the channel 10 which wick 4 is disposed in, Fig. 3, Col. 2, Ln. 4-18, 36-43), and as modified by Gruenbacher regarding claim 12 above would result in the sealing mechanism comprises a valve operable to isolate the storage reservoir from the at least one porous member.
In regards to claim 15, Kuhn, as modified by Gruenbacher, discloses the cartridge of claim 12. Kuhn discloses one or more valves (12, Fig. 2) operable to isolate the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) from the at least one porous member (4, valve 12 can shut off flow in the channel 10 which wick 4 is disposed in, Fig. 3, Col. 2, Ln. 4-18, 36-43), and as modified by Gruenbacher regarding claim 12 above would result in the sealing mechanism comprises one or more valves operable to isolate the reservoir from the at least one porous member.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Fehling (US 20130277456 A1).
Regarding claim 17, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 16. However, Kuhn does not explicitly disclose a biasing member arranged to bias a valve member of the or each valve towards a closed configuration in which the reservoir is isolated from the at least one porous member.
Fehling teaches a biasing member (6, Fig. 1) arranged to bias a valve member of the or each valve (15, Fig. 4) towards a closed configuration in which the reservoir (2, Fig. 1) is isolated from the at least one porous member (12, spring 6 presses valve plate 5 against the inner side of housing wall section 12 to close inlet and outlet openings 3, 4 and seals off container 2, shown in Fig. 5, Paragraph 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the biasing member taught in Fehling’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to prevent unintentional release of fluid from the container and resulting in contamination (Fehling, Paragraph 0007).
In regards to claim 18, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 17, further comprising:
a rigid body (annotated in Figs. 1-2), a recess (annotated in Figs. 1-2) being defined in the rigid body (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2); and
a flexible membrane (annotated in Fig. 1, container has a wall that is at least locally resiliently deformable, Col. 1, Ln. 30-39), sealed to the rigid body (annotated and shown in Fig. 1), wherein at least a portion of the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is formed by the recess (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2) and the flexible material (annotated and shown in Fig. 1).
However, Kuhn does not disclose a rigid plate connected to the rigid body so as to form a two-part housing for the valve member and the biasing member.
Fehling teaches a rigid plate (5, Fig. 1) connected to the rigid body (1, Fig. 1) so as to form a two-part housing for the valve member (15, Fig. 4) and the biasing member (6, shown in Fig. 1, Paragraph 0039).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the rigid plate taught in Fehling’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to prevent unintentional release of fluid from the container and resulting in contamination (Fehling, Paragraph 0007).
Claims 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Gruenbacher et al. (US 20100314461 A1) as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Fox et al. (US 6482357).
Regarding claim 19, Kuhn, as modified by Gruenbacher, discloses the cartridge of claim 15. However, Kuhn and Gruenbacher do not teach the or each valve member defines an engagement feature which, in use, can be acted on by an actuator of a scent dispenser.
Fox teaches the or each valve member (5, Fig. 1) defines an engagement feature (14, Fig. 1) which, in use, can be acted on by an actuator (18, Fig. 1) of a scent dispenser (entire structure, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the engagement feature taught in Fox’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to have improved efficiency of the spray by providing direct control of the valve with the actuator (Fox, Col. 1, Ln. 46-51, Col. 6, Ln. 12-24).
Regarding claim 20, Kuhn, as modified by Gruenbacher, discloses the cartridge of claim 15. Kuhn discloses a rigid body (annotated in Figs. 1-2), a recess (annotated in Figs. 1-2) being defined in the rigid body (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2); and
a flexible membrane (annotated in Fig. 1, container has a wall that is at least locally resiliently deformable, Col. 1, Ln. 30-39), sealed to the rigid body (annotated and shown in Fig. 1), wherein at least a portion of the reservoir (2, Figs. 1-2) is formed by the recess (annotated and shown in Figs. 1-2) and the flexible material (annotated and shown in Fig. 1).
However, Kuhn and Gruenbacher do not teach a groove is defined on the rigid body for receipt of an actuator of a scent dispenser for acting on the valve member
Fox teaches a groove (22, Fig. 1) is defined on the rigid body (body of the spraying head, Fig. 1) for receipt of an actuator (18, Fig. 1) of a scent dispenser (entire structure, Fig. 1) for acting on the valve member (5, Fig. 1, Col. 6, Ln. 12-24).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the groove taught in Fox’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to have improved efficiency of the spray by providing direct control of the valve with the actuator (Fox, Col. 1, Ln. 46-51, Col. 6, Ln. 12-24).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kuhn (US 5364027) in view of Granja et al. (US 20220104546 A1).
In regards to claim 22, Kuhn discloses the cartridge of claim 1. However, Kuhn does not disclose the at least one porous member is formed from polypropylene.
Granja teaches the at least one porous member (20, Fig. 1) is formed from polypropylene (Paragraph 0029).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the at least one porous member taught in Granja’s cartridge to Kuhn’s cartridge, to have the motivation to have a device that is effective for evaporating fragrance into the environment (Granja, Paragraph 0029).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Anna T Ho whose telephone number is (571)272-2587. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 AM-5:00 PM, First Friday of Pay Period off.
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, Arthur O Hall can be reached at (571) 270-1814. 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.
/ANNA THI HO/Examiner, Art Unit 3752
/STEVEN M CERNOCH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3752
Prosecution Insights