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 .
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.
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 1-15 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 1 recites “the second end part is positioned on a line different from the first end part based on an air inflow direction” in lines 13-14. It is unclear because the claim does not define the line associated with the first end part or explain how the line is established relative to the air inflow direction. Accordingly, it is unclear what positional relationship between the first end part and the second end part is required by the claim.
Claims 2-15 depend on claim 1; and hence are likewise rejected.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claim(s) 1-6 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by MacDonald et al (US 20150135661; hereinafter MacDonald).
As regarding claim 1, MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for an eliminator comprising: a first cover (13) and a second cover (27) spaced apart from each other while facing each other; and a plurality of blades (9) provided between the first cover and the second cover, the plurality of blades being spaced apart from each other (figs. 6-7), wherein each blade includes: a first end part (84) configured to guide an inflow of air; a second end part (85) configured to guide an outflow of air; and a guide part (185) connecting the first end part and the second end part, and wherein the second end part is positioned on a line different from the first end part based on an air inflow direction (figs. 6-7).
As regarding claim 2, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the guide part has a curved surface (figs. 8-14).
As regarding claim 3, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the second end part of each blade extends from the guide part at an angle for guiding an air outflow to be in a same direction as an air inflow direction (figs. 8-14).
As regarding claim 4, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the first end part and the second end part of each blade are configured to guide the air flow in a same direction (figs. 8-14).
As regarding claim 5, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the second end part of each blade is positioned at a rear of the first end parts of adjacent blades of the plurality of blades, based on the air inflow direction (figs. 8-14).
As regarding claim 6, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the second end part of each blade is positioned between a rear of the first end part of the corresponding blade and a rear of first end part of another adjacent blade, based on the air inflow direction (figs. 6-7).
As regarding claim 14, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for a collecting member (78) located on an outer surface of the guide part of each blade, the collecting member being configured to filter moisture from the air passing between the blades.
As regarding claim 15, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the collecting member is positioned at a rear of the first end part of another adjacent blade, based on the air inflow direction (fig. 7).
As regarding claim 16, MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for an eliminator comprising: a first cover and a second cover that are spaced apart from each other; and a plurality of blades located between the first cover and the second cover and spaced apart from each other, each blade including: a first end part defining one end of the blade; a second end part defining the other end of the blade; and a guide part located between the first end part and the second end part, wherein an interval between the first end parts of each of adjacent blades of the plurality of blades and an interval between the second end parts of each of adjacent blades of the plurality of blades are equal, and wherein the guide part of each blade is formed to gradually approach the guide part of another adjacent blade in a direction from the first end part to the second end part, and then gradually move away from the guide part of the adjacent blade while passing through a bent portion of the blade (figs. 6-7).
As regarding claim 17, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein each blade further includes a collecting member (78) located on an outer surface of the guide part, the collecting member being configured to filter moisture from the air passing between the blades.
As regarding claim 18, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the collecting member (78) is located at the bent portion in the guide part of each blade.
As regarding claim 19, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein the bent portion is located between a rear of the first end part of a blade and a front of a second end part of another blade (figs. 6-9).
As regarding claim 20, MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for a blade for an eliminator, the blade comprising: a first end part defining one end of the blade; a second end part defining an other end of the blade; and a guide part located between the first end part and the second end part, wherein the second end part of the blade extends from the guide part at an angle for guiding an air outflow to be in a same direction as an air inflow direction (figs. 6-14).
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.
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(s) 7-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MacDonald et al (US 20150135661; hereinafter MacDonald) as applied supra, and further in view of Regehr et al (US 4581051; hereinafter Regehr).
As regarding claim 7, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention for wherein each blade further includes: a first coupling member (80) located at the first end part of the blade, the first coupling member being bent in a direction opposite to an extending direction of the first end part.
MacDonald does not disclose a second coupling member located at the second end part of the blade; the second coupling member being bent in a direction opposite to an extending direction of the second end part, the first coupling member and the second coupling member each being coupled to the first cover and the second cover. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a second coupling member located at the second end part of the blade; the second coupling member being bent in a direction opposite to an extending direction of the second end part, the first coupling member and the second coupling member each being coupled to the first cover and the second cover in order to enhance eliminator performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Regehr (10 of fig. 2).
As regarding claim 8, MacDonald as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the first coupling member and the second coupling member are bent in a same direction from each respective first end part and second end part of the blade (fig. 2).
As regarding claim 9, MacDonald discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the plurality of blades are arranged to form a plurality of rows along the air flow direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the plurality of blades are arranged to form a plurality of rows along the air flow direction in order to enhance eliminator performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Regehr (figs. 2-3).
As regarding claim 10, MacDonald as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein among the blades in each row, the first end part of a blade in a rear row is positioned at a rear of the second end part of a blade in a front row, based on the air inflow direction (Regehr - figs. 2-3).
As regarding claim 11, MacDonald as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein among the blades in each row, the second end part of the blade in the rear row is positioned at a rear of the first end part of the blade in the front row, based on the air inflow direction (Regehr - figs. 2-3).
As regarding claim 12, MacDonald as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein among the blades in each row, the second end part of a blade in a rear row is positioned between a rear of the first end part of a blade in a front row and a rear of the first end part of another blade in the front row, based on the air inflow direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein among the blades in each row, the second end part of a blade in a rear row is positioned between a rear of the first end part of a blade in a front row and a rear of the first end part of another blade in the front row, based on the air inflow direction in order to enhance eliminator performance, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
As regarding claim 13, MacDonald as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. MacDonald as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein among the blades in each row, the first end part of a blade in a rear row is positioned between a rear of the second end part of a blade in a front row and a rear of the second end part of another blade in the front row, based on the air inflow direction. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein among the blades in each row, the first end part of a blade in a rear row is positioned between a rear of the second end part of a blade in a front row and a rear of the second end part of another blade in the front row, based on the air inflow direction in order to enhance eliminator performance, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights