DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
2. Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, “at” is pasted twice. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
3. 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.
4. Claims 1-10, 12, and 26-27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koponen et al. (US 20190328916 A1), further in view of Igarashi (US 20190192709 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Koponen teaches a bacteria or viruses inactivation device (1, Fig. 1-2 and 4) comprising:
a first light source (LED unit 7, Fig. 4) that emits ultraviolet light (UV LEDs 8, Fig. 4);
a housing body that houses the first light source (control unit 2 housing, Fig. 4); and
a light guide body (optical fiber element 5 portion shown in Fig. 4) that has an elongated shape and guides the ultraviolet light emitted from the first light source in a longitudinal direction ([0010]), part of the light guide body, including a first end that is an end on a side close to the light source (end of optical fiber element 5 portion directly adjacent to spacers 11a, Fig. 4), being positioned in the housing body (screwed on within the housing walls of control unit 2, Fig. 4),
wherein the light guide body is disposed in such a manner that a second end (opposite end from the mapped “first end” of optical element 5 portion, Fig. 4), which is an end on a side opposite to the first end, projects outside the housing body (optical element 5 projects outside of the control unit 2 housing, Fig. 4).
Koponen teaches the emission of UV light, but is silent to the UV light having a principal wavelength band at least part of which is within a range of 200 nm or more and less than 240 nm.
Igarashi teaches a similar bacteria or viruses inactivation device (Fig. 1) utilizing UV light from a KrCl excimer lamp (20, Fig. 1-2 and [0006]) to disinfect target microbes ([0037]). The UV light has a peak/center wavelength of 222 nm achieved via the KrCl excimer lamp and an optical wavelength filter (40, Fig. 1) in order to prevent damage to human cells but still sterilize target microbes such as bacteria ([0006]). It is important to note that Igarashi’s light transmission synthetic quartz glass window (11, Fig. 1) is identical to Koponen’s fused silica element (10, Fig. 4), in that the function and structure is identical (i.e., function of transmitting UV light, where fused silica is synthetic quartz glass). The optical filter of Igarashi is directly adjacent and optically downstream to the transmission window/silica element.
Koponen and Igarashi are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of UV light sources to sterilize/disinfect target microbes.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to: one, substitute the UV LEDs of Koponen with Igarashi’s entire KrCl excimer lamp, and two, modify an optical filter positioned directly adjacent to and optically downstream of the transmission window/silica element as taught by Igarashi, because doing so would: one, sterilize target microbes such as bacteria (Igarashi, [0006]), and two, collectively prevent damage to human cells simultaneously (Igarashi, [0006]) with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 2, modified Koponen teaches wherein the light guide body (5, Fig. 4) includes an optical member that guides the ultraviolet light to the second end (three fused silica optical fibers 11 making up the optical element 5 portion, [0011] and [0044]). The limitation of “by internal total reflection” appears to be an intrinsic result of a quartz-based light guide element as provided by Applicant’s Specification [0088], to which Koponen’s fused silica optical fibers are materially identical and thus meet this limitation.
Regarding claim 3, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches an optical filter (Igarashi, optical filter 40, Fig. 1) that is disposed at the second end of the light guide body (Igarashi’s optical filter 40 of is positioned directly adjacent to and optically downstream of the transmission window/silica element 11 of Fig. 1, to which the claim 1 modification incorporates said optical filter directly adjacent to and optically downstream from Koponen’s transmission window/silica element 10 of Fig. 4, which is at the mapped “first end”) to prevent travel of a wavelength component within a range of 240 nm or more and less than 280 nm that the ultraviolet light contains (Igarashi, “optical filter for blocking transmission of ultraviolet light having a wavelength of lower than 190 nm and more than 230 nm”, [0006]).
Regarding claim 4, modified Koponen teaches wherein the second end of the light guide body is convex outward (the optical element protrudes externally from the control unit housing 2 and is thus convex outward, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 5, modified Koponen teaches a flexible member (remaining optical fiber element 5 portion shown in Fig. 1 that extends from Fig. 4’s optical fiber element portion 5, including the second end 5b) that covers the second end of the light guide body (the remaining optical fiber element 5 portion including second end 5b covers and further extends the light transmission, Fig. 1) and has permeability to the ultraviolet light ([0011]).
Regarding claim 6, modified Koponen teaches wherein the light guide body (optical fiber element 5 portion of Fig. 4) includes, at a region closer to the second end than the first end, a region whose outer diameter decreases toward the second end (outer diameter of screw-thread first end 5a is bigger than the outer diameter of the mapped “second end” in claim 1, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 7, modified Koponen teaches wherein the light guide body (optical fiber element 5 portion of Fig. 4) is formed by connecting a plurality of light guide members in series to each other (three optical fibers 11 in series, Fig. 4).
Regarding claim 8, modified Koponen teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of light guide members constituting the light guide body (11, Fig. 4), which is disposed at a position closest to the second end (fibers 11 are at mapped “second end” of claim 1), includes an optical fiber (fused silica optical fibers 11, Fig. 4 and [0044]).
Regarding claim 9, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches a light collection optical system (silica element 10, Fig. 4) that collects the ultraviolet light emitted from the first light source (Koponen’s light source 7 of Fig. 4 substituted for Igarashi’s KrCl excimer lamp 20 of Fig. 1-2) and guides it to the first end of the light guide body (mapped “first end” of claim 1 and see [0044]).
Regarding claim 10, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches wherein the first light source (Igarashi’s excimer lamp 20, Fig. 1-2, for the same modification purpose stated in claim 1 rejection above) is a lamp filled with a gas formed of a material containing at least one of KrCl (Igarashi, KrCl excimer lamp 20, Fig. 1-2 and [0047]).
Regarding claim 12, modified Koponen teaches wherein a treatment site (area/surface downstream of second end 5b, Fig. 1) is irradiated with the ultraviolet light emitted through the second end of the light guide body (the UV light is transmitted through entire optical fiber element 5 to second end 5b, through the mapped “second end” of claim 1).
Regarding claim 26, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches wherein the first light source (Koponen’s light source 7 of Fig. 4 substituted for Igarashi’s KrCl excimer lamp 20 of Fig. 1-2) is a lamp including a light-emitting tube (Igarashi, discharge container 21, Fig. 2) formed of a dielectric material (quartz glass, [0044]) and having an inside filled with a light-emitting gas ([0046-0047]), and the first end of the light guide body (mapped “first end” of claim 1) is connected to the light-emitting tube of the lamp (Koponen, fibers 9 and silica element 10, Fig. 4 and [0044]).
Regarding claim 27, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches wherein at least a region, which is on a side close to the first end (Koponen, optical fibers 11 on mapped “first end” side), in the light guide body (Koponen, optical fiber element 5 portion of Fig. 4) is formed of the same material as the light-emitting tube of the lamp (Koponen’s optical fibers 11 are fused silica, to which Igarashi’s discharge tube 21 of Fig. 2is made up of quartz glass which is fused silica).
5. Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Koponen et al. (US 20190328916 A1), further in view of Igarashi (US 20190192709 A1), as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Rosen et al. (US 20200215214 A1).
Regarding claim 11, the Koponen/Igarashi combination teaches a first light source housed in the housing body (Koponen’s light source 7 of Fig. 4 substituted for Igarashi’s KrCl excimer lamp 20 of Fig. 1-2), but fails to teach a second light source that is housed in the housing body and has a principal wavelength band that is out of a range of 200 nm or more and less than 240 nm but is within at least one of a visible light range and an infrared range,
wherein the light guide body guides light emitted from the second light source to the second end at a timing the same as or different from the ultraviolet light emitted from the first light source.
Rosen teaches a UV irradiation apparatus (20, Fig. 2B) with a UV lamp and optical filter assembly collectively emitting 222 nm radiation to disinfect a target area ([0025]), wherein a second light source that is housed in the housing body (visible light source that has to be located within the base/housing body 22 because “a single circle or a plurality of concentric circles may be provided (such as at a lens or mask through which the UV and visible light is emitted)”, Fig. 2B and [0033]) has a principal wavelength band that is out of a range of 200 nm or more and less than 240 nm but is within at least one of a visible light range and an infrared range (“e.g., white, green, red, etc.”, [0033]) in order to provide a visual indication of the area being sanitized ([0033]).
The Koponen/Igarashi combination and Rosen are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of UV sterilization devices emitting light at 222 nm via a UV light source and an optical filter.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the UV lighting device of the Koponen/Igarashi combination by incorporating a visible light source located within the housing body similar to the UV light source as taught by Rosen, because doing so would provide a visual indication of the area being sanitized (Rosen, [0033]) with a reasonable expectation of success.
With this modification, the instant combination would teach “wherein the light guide body guides light emitted from the second light source to the second end at a timing the same as or different from the ultraviolet light emitted from the first light source” because at any time the visible light is emitted, it is “at a timing the same as or different from the ultraviolet light emitted”.
The visible light source in the housing would also mean the fused silica optical fibers of Koponen would also transmit visible light, because the limitation of “herein the light guide body guides light emitted from the second light source to the second end” appears to be an intrinsic result of a quartz-based light guide element as provided by Applicant’s Specification [0088], to which Koponen’s fused silica optical fibers are materially identical and thus meet this limitation.
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Aham Lee whose telephone number is (703)756-5622. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Thursday, 10:00 AM - 8:00 PM EST.
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, Maris R. Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/Aham Lee/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights