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 .
Response to Amendments
The Amendment filed 6/2/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-8 were amended. Thus, claims 1-8 are pending in the application.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
The drawings are objected to because Fig. 3 contains unlabeled text boxes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and as such require a descriptive text label (e.g. box 1 could have the text label “main unit”, and box 7 could have “microcontroller”) (see MPEP 608.02(d)(a)).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 6-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 recites “the atmospheric pressure sensors” in line 4 and is suggested to read --the one or more atmospheric pressure sensors-- in order to more clearly refence how this limitation was originally claimed.
Claim 7 recites “a PID” in line 3 and is suggested to read --a Proportion Integration Differentiation (PID)-- in order to clearly define the acronym.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are: “the conversion module is configured to receive…and convert…” in claim 1 line 10, and “the comparison module is configured to receive…calculate…compare…” in claim 1 line 12-13.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
According to the Applicant’s specification para. [0017], “the conversion module is configured to receive…and convert…” in claim 1 line 10 is being interpreted as a conditioning circuit, or an equivalent structure thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recite sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-8 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 limitation “the comparison module is configured to receive…calculate…compare…” in claim 1 line 12-13 invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the chamber of the main unit" in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Any remaining claims are rejected based on their dependency on a rejected base claim.
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.
Claims 1 and 3-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen et al. (US 2023/0414976 A1) in view of Nakano et al. (US 2021/0020884 A1), Hashimoto et al. (KR 2018/0064284 A, see attached translation), Sheeks et al. (US 2018/0198294 A1), and Anstine et al. (US 2003/0223877 A1), or alternatively over Jensen in view of Nakano, Hashimoto, Sheeks, Anstine, and Duquette et al. (US 2015/0007815 A1).
Regarding claim 1, as best understood, Jensen discloses an atmospheric pressure compensation control system for a powered air-purifying respirator (powered air purifying respirator, i.e. PAPR, controlled by sensed pressure) (abstract), comprising a main unit and a battery pack (whole PAPR 500 device except the battery 514 as the main unit, and the battery 514 as the battery pack) (Figs. 3-5, 8; para. [0067]), wherein
a collection module (inlet pressure sensor 542 and/or outlet pressure sensor 543) (Figs. 3-5, 8; paras. [0067-0068]), and the chamber of the main unit contains a control module (PAPR 500 would have a housing with space inside for its components; motor controller 512 is inside the PAPR 500) (Figs. 3-5, 8; paras. [0067-0068]);
the collection module is configured to perform real-time detection of an actual atmospheric pressure (inlet pressure sensor 542 can continuously sense the current ambient air pressure) (Figs. 3-5, 8; para. [0052]; para. [0068]);
the control module is configurable to dynamically adjust a speed of a fan in real time based on the pressure difference under different environmental conditions (motor controller 512 has a control algorithm 522 that adjusts a motor speed 504 for fan 502 based on readings from the inlet and outlet pressure sensors 542, 543, which include the pressure differential/pressure drop between the two pressure sensors which would occur at various environmental conditions such as changes in temperature; motor speed can be based on a received pressure drop) (Figs. 3-9; para. [0045]; para. [0067-0068]; para. [0075]; para. [0139]);
and the collection module comprises one or more atmospheric pressure sensors (inlet and outlet pressure sensors 542, 543) (Figs. 3-5, 8; para. [0067]), and the one or more atmospheric pressure sensors, the control module and the motor drive circuit are configured to automatically control the respirator, to enable real-time acquisition of atmospheric pressure data and automatic compensation (the motor controller 512, the control algorithm 522, and the inlet and outlet pressure sensors 542, 543 are all used in combination to automatically and continuously adjust the fan motor speed as needed; pressure sensors 542, 543 continuously collect current pressure data) (Figs. 3-9; para. [0045]; para. [0052]; para. [0067-0068]; para. [0075]; para. [0139]).
Jensen does not disclose at least one through hole is formed in an outer shell of the battery pack, and a waterproof breathable membrane is installed over the at least one through hole.
However, Nakano teaches a battery pack (Nakano; abstract) including at least one through hole is formed in an outer shell of the battery pack, and a waterproof breathable membrane is installed over the at least one through hole (battery pack has a gas discharge hole 3 though its outer case 1, with a breathable waterproof sheet 5 over hole 3) (Nakano; Fig. 3; paras. [0009-0010]).
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 Jensen battery pack to include at least one through hole formed in an outer shell of the battery pack, and a waterproof breathable membrane is installed over the at least one through hole, as taught by Nakano, for the purpose of enabling high-temperature gas to be ejected from the battery with a waterproof structure (Nakano; para. [0010]), thereby helping to protect the battery pack internals.
Jensen does not disclose a collection module is arranged inside a chamber of the battery pack; the collection module comprises one or more atmospheric pressure sensors installed inside the chamber of the battery pack.
However, Jensen does teach ambient pressure readings can be taken from an external source other than the inlet pressure sensor 542 built into the fan inlet (Jensen; para. [0068]; para. [0070]). Moreover, Hashimoto teaches a respiratory protective device (Hashimoto; translation para. [0001]) wherein a collection module is attached to the battery pack; the collection module comprising one or more pressure sensors (pressure sensor 7 can be attached to the battery unit 13) (Hashimoto; Fig. 2; translation para. [0043]). Furthermore, Sheeks teaches a battery pack (Sheeks; abstract) wherein a collection module is arranged inside a chamber of the battery pack; the collection module comprises one or more atmospheric sensors installed inside the chamber of the battery pack (battery pack 105, 205 can have an ambient air sensor inside a chamber of the housing 110, 210 to monitor outside of the housing 110, 210) (Sheeks; Fig. 4A; para. [0089]).
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 Jensen collection module by including a pressure sensor to be attached to the battery pack, as taught by Hashimoto, for the purpose of providing the collection module with an alternate suitable location which one of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably expect to perform similarly well for the pressure sensor (Hashimoto; translation para. [0043]). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the modified Jensen collection module or pressure sensor attached to the battery pack to be arranged inside a chamber of the battery pack; the collection module comprising one or more atmospheric sensors installed inside the chamber of the battery pack, as taught by Sheeks, for the purpose of providing the collection module with an even more specific location on the battery pack which one of ordinary skill in the art could feasibly expect to perform reasonably well for sensing atmospheric parameters (Sheeks; para. [0089]).
With this modification, the modified Jensen would thus teach a collection module is arranged inside a chamber of the battery pack; the collection module comprises one or more atmospheric pressure sensors installed inside the chamber of the battery pack (the Jensen ambient pressure sensor is attached inside the chamber of the Jensen battery pack 512 as taught by Hashimoto and Sheeks) (Jensen, Figs. 3-5 and 8, para. [0030], para. [0067], para. [0070]; Hashimoto, Fig. 2, translation para. [0043]; Sheeks, Fig. 4A, para. [0089]).
Jensen does not disclose the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module and a comparison module; the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal; the comparison module is configured to receive the electrical signal, calculate a specific atmospheric pressure value under current environmental conditions, and compare the specific atmospheric pressure with a laboratory standard atmospheric pressure to output a pressure difference; the control module is configured to dynamically adjust a speed of a fan in real time based on the pressure difference to maintain a constant internal and external pressure differential of the respirator under different environmental conditions; the control module is provided with a motor drive circuit inside, and a microcontroller in the main unit uses the motor drive circuit to adjust the speed of the fan in real time, and is capable of automatically adjusting the speed of the fan based on preset parameters and environmental conditions.
However, Anstine teaches a closed-loop blower (Anstine; abstract) wherein the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module (information from the external pressure transducer 42 is converted to an electrical signal, and so would require an internal structure inside the device 10 housing to perform such a conversion) (Anstine; Figs. 1-5; para. [0020]) and a comparison module (controller 40 and its associated circuitry to receive ambient pressure readings and temperature readings for pressure adjustments would be inside the device 10 housing) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0017]; para. [0021]; para. [0024]); the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal (information from the external pressure transducer 42 is converted to an electrical signal, and so would require a structure to perform such a conversion) (Anstine; Figs. 3-5; para. [0020]); the comparison module is configured to receive the electrical signal, calculate a specific atmospheric pressure value under current environmental conditions (controller 40 has circuitry to receive and process ambient pressure readings from the pressure transducer 42) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0017]; para. [0021]; para. [0024]), and compare the specific atmospheric pressure with a laboratory standard atmospheric pressure to output a pressure difference (the received pressure readings use look-up tables, i.e. standards, to adjust their values according to the temperature readings, and from that outputs an adjusted measured pressure differential value) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0017]; para. [0021]; para. [0024]); the control module is configured to dynamically adjust a speed of a fan in real time based on the pressure difference to maintain a constant internal and external pressure differential of the respirator under different environmental conditions (the controller 40 maintains the desired pressure differential by adjusting the fan motor speed after comparing the desired pressure differential to the measured pressure differential value adjusted by temperature) (Anstine; Fig. 5; paras. [0024-0025]); the control module is provided with a motor drive circuit inside (control circuit board 30 for the motor 14 and fan 16 would have associated circuity for them) (Anstine; Fig. 3; para. [0016]), and a microcontroller in the main unit uses the motor drive circuit to adjust the speed of the fan in real time, and is capable of automatically adjusting the speed of the fan based on preset parameters and environmental conditions (controller 40 may be a micro-controller, and is inside the blower assembly 10; controller 40 of the control circuit 30 uses hardware and software to control the operation of the motor 14; controller increases, decreases, or maintains the fan motor speed according to the current measured pressure differential, which can be affect by environmental conditions such as temperature which is also considered, versus the desired pressure differential) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0016]; paras. [0022-0025]).
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 Jensen system’s main unit, collection module, and control module, such that the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module and a comparison module; the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal; the comparison module is configured to receive the electrical signal, calculate a specific atmospheric pressure value under current environmental conditions, and compare the calculated current atmospheric pressure with a laboratory standard atmospheric pressure to output a pressure difference; the control module is configured to dynamically adjust a speed of a fan in real time based on the pressure difference to maintain a constant internal and external pressure differential of the respirator under different environmental conditions; the control module is provided with a motor drive circuit inside, and a microcontroller in the main unit uses the motor drive circuit to adjust the speed of the fan in real time, and is capable of automatically adjusting the speed of the fan based on preset parameters and environmental conditions, as taught by Anstine, for the purpose of providing the system with a precise means for controlling the motor via pressure sensing and feedback, and which takes into account pressure adjustments needed for ambient air temperature and/or the temperature of temperature-critical components (Anstine; para. [0017]; para. [0024]; para. [0026]).
Alternatively, if Anstine is not seen as definitively teaching the conversion module according to the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation, such that the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module, and the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal, Duquette teaches a modular ventilator (Duquette; abstract) including the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module, and the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal (pressure sensors 4420A, 4420B inside the flow cassette 4200 housing each include conversion circuitry to provide a signal directly to the processor 4252) (Duquette; Fig. 34; para. [0168]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the modified Jensen device such that the Anstine external pressure transducer 42 has a conversion module according to the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) interpretation, such that the chamber of the main unit contains a conversion module, and the conversion module is configured to receive the actual atmospheric pressure and convert a pressure signal into an electrical signal, as taught by Duquette, for the purpose of providing the Anstine external pressure transducer 42 with a specific conversion module structure which one of ordinary skill in the art could reasonably expect to perform similarly well to convert pressure sensor information into an electrical signal.
Regarding claim 3, the modified Jensen teaches wherein the electric signal comprises an analog signal, a digital signal or a communication signal (conditioning and conversion circuitry to convert the measured pressure value into analogue or digital form) (Duquette; para. [0076]).
Regarding claim 4, the modified Jensen teaches wherein a conditioning circuit is arranged in the conversion module, and the conditioning circuit is used for converting the pressure signal into the electrical signal (conversion circuitry to convert the measured pressure value into a signal) (Duquette; para. [0168]).
Regarding claim 5, the modified Jensen teaches wherein the conditioning circuit is integrated on the collection module (conversion circuitry is integrated on the pressure sensors 4420A, 4420B) (Duquette; para. [0168]).
Regarding claim 6, the modified Jensen teaches a control method of the atmospheric pressure compensation control system for a powered air-purifying respirator according to claim 1 (method of using the modified Jensen device as taught in the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection of claim 1 above), comprising the following steps:
controlling the atmospheric pressure sensors to acquire an actual atmospheric pressure in real time (external pressure transducer 42 measures the pressure from outside the blower) (Anstine; Figs. 3-5; para. [0020]; para. [0022]);
converting the acquired atmospheric pressure signal through a conditioning circuit to obtain the corresponding electrical signal (Duquette conversion circuitry on the Anstine pressure sensor transducer 42 to convert the measurement to the electrical signal) (Anstine, Figs. 3-5, para. [0020], para. [0022]; Duquette, para. [0168]);
based on the electrical signal obtained through conversion, calculating the specific atmospheric pressure value under current conditions (controller 40 has circuitry to receive and process ambient pressure readings from the pressure transducer 42) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0017]; para. [0021]; para. [0024]), and comparing the specific atmospheric pressure with the laboratory standard atmospheric pressure to output the pressure difference (the received pressure readings use look-up tables, i.e. standards, to adjust their values according to the temperature readings, and from that outputs an adjusted measured pressure differential value) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; para. [0017]; para. [0021]; para. [0024]);
and dynamically adjusting the speed of the fan in real time based on the pressure difference to maintain the constant internal and external pressure differential of the respirator under different environmental conditions (the controller 40 maintains the desired pressure differential by adjusting the fan motor speed of the blower after comparing the desired pressure differential to the measured pressure differential value adjusted by temperature) (Anstine; Fig. 5; paras. [0024-0025]).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of Nakano, Hashimoto, Sheeks, Anstine, and Duquette as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tumu et al. (US 2021/0379308 A1) and Mian et al. (US 2007/0062299 A1).
Regarding claim 2, the modified Jensen teaches the invention as previously claimed, but does not teach wherein a power supply circuit is arranged in the main unit, and the power supply circuit is connected with the battery pack, and is used for adjusting an output voltage of the battery pack to a proper value to supply power to each module.
However, Tumu teaches a method for operating a blower (Tumu; abstract) wherein a power supply circuit is arranged in the main unit, and the power supply circuit is connected with the battery pack, and is used for adjusting an output voltage of the battery pack to a proper value to supply power (voltage control circuitry 307 in device 10 would be electrically connected to the removable power source, which can be a battery; voltage control circuitry 307 is used to adjust a motor voltage for powering the blower to according to the desired motor speed) (Tumu; Fig. 3; para. [0040]; para. [0049]). Moreover, Mian teaches a monitoring device for monitoring properties such as pressure (Mian; abstract; para. [0067]) wherein the power supply circuit is used for adjusting an output voltage a proper value to supply power to each module (processing module 60 adjusts the amount of power the power module 68 distributes to each of the other modules based on desired functionality) (Mian; para. [0064]).
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 Jensen system to include a power supply circuit is arranged in the main unit, and the power supply circuit is connected with the battery pack, and is used for adjusting an output voltage of the battery pack to a proper value to supply power to each module, as taught by Tumu, for the purpose of ensuring the blower motor speed remains substantially consistent with a desired flowrate (Tumu; para. [0036]; para. [0049]). Moreover, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Tumu power supply circuit such that it is used for adjusting an output voltage a proper value to supply power to each module, as taught by Mian, for the purpose of conserving the available power while ensuring desired functionality (Mian; para. [0064]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of Nakano, Hashimoto, Sheeks, Anstine, and Duquette as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Birk et al. (US 2018/0045206 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the modified Jensen teaches the invention as previously claimed, but does not teach wherein the microcontroller within the main unit is configured to control a drive motor using a PID algorithm to manage the speed of the fan.
However, Birk teaches an air filtration device (Birk; abstract) wherein the microcontroller within the main unit is configured to control a drive motor using a PID algorithm to manage the speed of the fan (controller can be a microprocessor; controller controls fan speed by supplying the fan motor with electrical current according to a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) control module) (Birk; para. [0144]; para. [0259]).
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 modified Jensen microcontroller such that the main unit is configured to control a drive motor using a PID algorithm to manage the speed of the fan, as taught by Birk, for the purpose of ensuring the fan is accurately controlled to operate at a desired speed (Birk; abstract).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jensen in view of Nakano, Hashimoto, Sheeks, Anstine, and Duquette as applied to claim 6 above, and further in view of Webb et al. (US 2022/0080228 A1).
Regarding claim 8, the modified Jensen teaches the invention as previously claimed, including wherein the pressure difference is compared with a set pressure difference to determine a target fan speed, and based on the target fan speed and a current atmospheric pressure compensation status within the respirator, the speed of the fan is dynamically adjusted in real time (the measured pressure difference is compared to a desired differential pressure in step 214 to determine the needed motor speed; the current atmospheric pressure compensation status being the determination of whether the actual pressure is less than, more than, or equal to desired, as it steps 216, 220, 224, which is done before the determination of if/how motor speed should be adjusted) (Anstine; Figs. 3, 5; paras. [0022-0025]), but does not teach wherein an absolute value of the pressure difference is compared with a set pressure difference threshold.
However, Webb teaches a computing device for a respirator (Webb; abstract) wherein an absolute value of the pressure difference is compared with a set pressure difference threshold (a device is determined to be unsatisfactory if the absolute differential air pressure between ambient air and air pressure in a sealed space falls below a threshold) (Webb; [0063]).
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 modified Jensen method such that it includes an absolute value of the pressure difference is compared with a set pressure difference threshold, as taught by Webb, for the purpose of providing the system with one calculation that can be used to determine if a differential air pressure is unsatisfactory for a device, regardless of whether that air pressure difference is positive or negative (Webb; [0063]), thereby helping to simplify or streamline the method calculations.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/2/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-8 in the “Drawings”, “Specification”, and “Claim Objection” sections of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that the drawings, specification, and claims have been amended to overcome the objections of the previous office action. The Examiner partially agrees, and has thus withdrawn those objections that were addressed by the amendments. However, the drawing objections that were not addressed are being maintained as detailed above. Moreover, the new amendments have raised new claim objections as detailed above.
On page 8 in the “Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 112” section of the Applicant’s remarks, the Applicant argues that the claims have been amended to overcome the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections of the previous office action. The Examiner partially agrees, and has thus withdrawn those rejections that were addressed by the amendments, while the unaddressed rejections are being maintained as detailed above. Moreover, the new amendments have raised new 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejections as detailed above.
Applicant’s arguments on pages 8-12 in the “Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. 103” section of the Applicant’s remarks with respect the newly amended claim limitations of the through hole, waterproof breathable membrane, and collection module in the battery pack, particularly with regards to the Choi reference, have been considered but are moot in view of new grounds of rejection with new additional Nakano, Hashimoto, and Sheeks references being used in the current rejection 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 JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-7032. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00-4:00.
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, Justine Yu can be reached at 571-272-4835. 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.
/JACQUELINE M PINDERSKI/Examiner, Art Unit 3785
/RACHEL T SIPPEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3785
Prosecution Insights