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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112
2. 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.
3. Claims 1-11 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.
Regarding claim 1, in lines 30-31, the phrase “the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port” is indefinite as it is unclear how a plurality of first blowoff ports can each be the first blowoff port. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 7, in lines 3-5, the phrases “a plurality of first flow channels each being the first flow channel” and “a plurality of second flow channels each being the second flow channel” are indefinite because it is unclear how a plurality of first and second flow channels can each be the first and second flow channel. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 7, in lines 11-12, the phrase “the first air streams each being the first air stream” is indefinite because it is unclear how a plurality of first air streams can all be the first air stream. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 7, in lines 17-18, the phrase “the plurality of second blowoff ports each being the second blowoff port” is indefinite as it is unclear how a plurality of second blowoff ports can each be the second blowoff port. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 11, lines 30-32, the phrase “the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports arranged in one direction, the plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port” is indefinite as it is unclear how a plurality of first blowoff ports can each be the first blowoff port. Thus, the scope of the claim is unclear.
Dependent claims 2-6 and 8-10 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on a rejected claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
4. Claims 1-11 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
5. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: the prior art, alone or in combination, fails to teach or fairly suggest the combination of structural features of the active ingredient generation device as recited in independent claims 1 and 11.
Specifically, regarding claim 1, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in the claimed environment, that a width of the first blowoff port is smaller than a width of the first flow channel, the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port, a pair of wall portions that guide the first air stream to one of the plurality of first blowoff ports are arranged inside the body, a distance between the pair of wall portions decreases toward the one of the plurality of first blowoff ports, and the one of the plurality of first blowoff ports is closest to the second blowoff port, among the plurality of first blowoff ports.
Regarding claim 11, the prior art does not teach or suggest, in the claimed environment, that the second blowoff port is disposed at a location where the active ingredient blown out from the second blowoff port is drawn by the first air stream blown out from the first blowoff port, a width of the first blowoff port is smaller than a width of the first flow channel, the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports arranged in one direction, the plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port, and the plurality of first blowoff ports have different widths and are arranged in descending order of width from one side to another side.
The closest prior art to the claimed invention is Homma et al. (WO 2022/123888 A1). Homma et al. discloses (see para [0157]-[0207]; figures 20-28) an active ingredient generation device (54) that is attached to the ceiling (11) of a vehicle (1), the device (54) comprising a body; a first air blower (549b) that is provided in the body and generates a first air stream; an active ingredient generator (particle generator 541a) that is disposed inside the body and generates an active ingredient; a first flow channel (from blower 549b to first blow out port 543a) through which the first air stream generated by the first air blower flows, the first flow channel being disposed inside the body (see figure 28); and a second flow channel (from blower 549b to second blow out port 543b) through which the active ingredient generated by the active ingredient generator flows, the second flow channel being disposed inside the body (see figure 28), wherein the body includes: a first blowoff port (543a) from which the first air stream flowing through the first flow channel is blown out, the first blowoff port being in communication with the first flow channel and an outside of the body; and a second blowoff port (543b) from which the active ingredient flowing through the second flow channel is blown out, the second blowoff port being in communication with the second flow channel and the outside of the body (see figure 28), the second blowoff port (543b) is disposed at a location where the active ingredient blown out from the second blowoff port is drawn by the first air stream blown out from the first blowoff port (see figure 28).
However, Homma et al. does not teach or suggest, with regards to claim 1, that a width of the first blowoff port is smaller than a width of the first flow channel, the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port, a pair of wall portions that guide the first air stream to one of the plurality of first blowoff ports are arranged inside the body, a distance between the pair of wall portions decreases toward the one of the plurality of first blowoff ports, and the one of the plurality of first blowoff ports is closest to the second blowoff port, among the plurality of first blowoff ports.
Homma et al. also does not teach or suggest, with regards to claim 11, that the second blowoff port is disposed at a location where the active ingredient blown out from the second blowoff port is drawn by the first air stream blown out from the first blowoff port, a width of the first blowoff port is smaller than a width of the first flow channel, the body includes a plurality of first blowoff ports arranged in one direction, the plurality of first blowoff ports each being the first blowoff port, and the plurality of first blowoff ports have different widths and are arranged in descending order of width from one side to another side.
Therefore, claims 1-11 are allowable over the prior art.
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.”
Conclusion
6. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN E CONLEY whose telephone number is (571)272-8414. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, 8:30am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mike Marcheschi can be reached on 571-272-1374. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/SEAN E CONLEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights