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 § 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.
Claims 7-9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kester (US 2019/0170604).
As to claim 7, Kester discloses an air conditioning system comprising:
an air conditioner installed in a room independent of a living room (Fig. 3);
a refrigerant concentration sensor 190 that detects a refrigerant concentration of a refrigerant contained in an air conditioning room air;
a branch chamber 132 that branches an air conditioning air passage connected to the air conditioning room into an air sending passage 138B and an air exhausting passage 138C; and
a branch controller 170 that controls the branch chamber based on the refrigerant concentration detected by sensor 190 (paragraph 72).
As to claim 8, Kester discloses sending air to the living room when concentration is below a threshold and exhausting the air outdoors when concentration is above the threshold (Fig. 8; paragraph 72).
As to claim 9, Kester discloses controlling dampers 162-164 as claimed.
As to claim 11, Kester discloses an abnormality notification unit that notifies terminal devices owned by a user of the living room (paragraph 62).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kester as applied above, and further in view of Suzuki (US 2020/0056820).
As to claim 10, Kester does not explicitly teach a ventilator as claimed. However, Suzuki teaches using a ventilator 90 as claimed which acts as a total heat exchanger (paragraph 42). Therefore it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date, to modify Kester to incorporate a ventilator as claimed and taught by Suzuki in order to increase the operating efficiency of the system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 3, and 5-6 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art of record does not teach or suggest a state change cycling leakage detection control as required by claim 1.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-15, filed 7/15/2026, with respect to the claim rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 & 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kester (US 2019/0170604) as discussed above.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN BRADFORD whose telephone number is (571)270-5199. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:00 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, Jerry-Daryl Fletcher can be reached at (571)270-5054. 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.
/JONATHAN BRADFORD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3763
Prosecution Insights