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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, and 6-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,090,399. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The limitations of instant claim 1 are in claim 1 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 2 are in claim 6 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 3 are obvious over at least claim 1 of ‘399 as this occurs when a suitable sized object is selected for use with the device.
The limitations of instant claim 4 are in claim 7 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 5 are in claim 8 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 6 are in claim 9 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 7 are within the range of claim 1 of ‘399 as claim 1 of ‘399 states there are at least two modular units for each of the sets forming the recited walls which overlaps 4.
The limitations of instant claim 8 are in claim 10 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 9 are in claim 11 of ‘399 as UVC light overlaps with the recited range.
The limitations of instant claim 10 are in claim 12 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 11 are in claim 13 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 12 are in claim 14 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 13 are in claim 15 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 14 are in 16 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 15 are in claim 17 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 16 are in claim 18 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 17 are in claim 19 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 18 are in claim 20 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 19 are in claim 4 of ‘399.
The limitations of instant claim 20 are in claim 1 of ‘399.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,233,175. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
The limitations of instant claims 1-20 are claimed in claims 1-20 of ‘175.
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.
Claims 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hill et al. (US 2013/0216438) in view of Romo et al. (US 2015/0367008) and Potember et al. (US 2006/0104858).
With regards to claim 1, Hill et al. teaches a kit comprising a plurality of modular units (wall and ceiling panels 22 and 24) coupleable to one another (via frame members 62) to form a plurality of walls that collectively define a chamber sized to receive an object (space inside where an object or objects can be enclosed) the plurality of walls include a top (ceiling 42), a back (back side 38), and a set of side walls (side walls 32 and 34), the plurality of modular units including: a first set of modular units coupleable to each other to form a first side walls from the set of side walls (three modular units 22 for the first side wall 32), a second set of modular units coupleable to each other to form a second side wall from the set of side walls (three modular units 22 for the second side wall 34), and a third set of modular units coupleable to each other to form at least one of the top wall or the back wall (three modular units 22 forming the back wall and three modular units forming the ceiling) (abstract; fig 1; and para [0025]-[0028]).
Hill et al. teaches using the chamber to provide a disinfection chamber and teaches using vaporized hydrogen peroxide (abstract). Hill et al. does not teach a plurality of energy sources as claimed. Romo et al. teaches placing UV light sources on each wall panel of a portable disinfection chamber that provide UV light at an intensity to sterilize the chamber (abstract; fig 9; para [00147]). Potember et al. teaches that hydrogen peroxide and UV light, while both alone can sterilize, have beneficial effects when used together (para [0097]). A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have added UV light sources to each of the plurality of modular units in order to provide different means of sterilization (UV and hydrogen peroxide can each sterilize on their own through their own pathways) and to create a synergistic beneficial affect with hydrogen peroxide.
The combination results in a plurality of energy sources as claimed.
With regards to claim 2, Romo et al. teaches employing reflective structures on each panel to help direct UV light all over the chamber as desired (para [0235] and [0237]). A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have added at least one reflective surface on each modular unit to help direct UV light around the chamber as desired. The combination results in a plurality of reflective surfaces including at least one reflective surface disposed on each modular unit from the plurality of modular units, each reflective surface from the plurality of reflective surfaces configured to reflect energy provided by at least one energy source from the plurality of energy sources, such that the energy can be directed toward the object when the object has been received within the chamber.
With regards to claim 3, this limitation is met depending on the object that is selected for use with the kit. Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have sized the modular units as desired in order to treat the desired amount/size of items and the desired portability of the modular units (para [0044] of Hill et al.; size affects ease of portability). Further, see MPEP 2144.04.
With regards to claim 4, a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have sized the modular units as desired in order to treat the desired amount/size of items and the desired portability of the modular units (para [0044] of Hill et al.; size affects ease of portability). Further, see MPEP 2144.04.
With regards to claim 5, a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have sized the modular units as desired in order to treat the desired amount/size of items and the desired portability of the modular units (para [0044] of Hill et al.; size affects ease of portability). Further, see MPEP 2144.04.
With regards to claim 6, Hill et al. teaches that the chamber has front, back, and side walls are 12ft by 8ft and that the top wall is 12ft by 12 ft. All the lengths and widths are multiples of the common value of 4 (4 x 2 = 8 and 4 x 3 = 8). Additionally, a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have sized the modular units as desired in order to treat the desired amount/size of items and the desired portability of the modular units (para [0044] of Hill et al.; size affects ease of portability). Further, see MPEP 2144.04.
With regards to claim 7, Hill et al. teaches a fourth set of modular units that includes 2 modular units (three panels 22) that make up the back wall. Hill et al., however, teaches that the first through third sets have three and not four modular units. A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have added more modular units to each of the sets motivated by an expectation of providing a larger enclosure as desired.
With regards to claim 8, Romo et al. teaches that the energy source is at least one of a mercury based lamp and a LED (para [0124]).
With regards to claim 9, Romo et al. teaches that the energy source emits UVC light (para [0124]).
With regards to claim 10, Hill et al. teaches a fluid dispenser (vaporized hydrogen peroxide generator 220) configured to dispense disinfecting agent into the chamber and an exhaust unit (circulation system 110) that is configured to vent the disinfecting agent out from the chamber (exits chamber and is broken down in the filter element 152) (para [0031], [0033], [0037]; fig 1 and 2).
With regards to claim 11, the fluid dispenser is capable of being disposed on at least one modular unit (it is so disposed in fig 1).
With regards to claim 12, the disinfecting agent is hydrogen peroxide (para [0037]).
With regards to claim 13, the fluid dispenser is capable of the intended use of dispensing neutralizing agent after dispensing the disinfecting agent to reduce degradation caused by the disinfecting agent (the VHP generator 220 can vaporize the liquid hydrogen peroxide and then can be filled with water which can then be vaporized as well; water is a neutralizing agent) (para [0037]).
With regards to claim 14, Hill et al. teaches wherein each modular unit from the plurality of modular units has a surface (side surface) that is configured to cooperatively engage a surface (side) of at least one other modular unit from the plurality of modular units (engages via the frame 62; which can be considered a surface of a modular unit or one of the modular units as well) such that a seal is formed between that modular unit and the at least one other modular unit, the seal configured to prevent energy emitted by at least one energy source from the plurality of energy sources from exiting the chamber (taught to prevent hydrogen peroxide and would also prevent at least some of the UV light, is opaque) (para [0027] and fig 4).
With regards to claim 15, Hillet al. teaches a power source (electrical cables 66 that connect to external power) (para [0027]). A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have connected the UV sources on the panels to the power sources motivated by an expectation of successfully powering the UV lights.
With regards to claim 16, the combination results in each modular unit including an electrical connector (wire or connection to the UV lights)that is configured to connect via an electrical path to the power source such that the power source can supply power to the UV light on each unit (energy source).
With regards to claim 17, the connector connecting to the UV light source results in the connector being at least in part on a surface of the modular unit facing an interior of the chamber (the surface where the UV light is and the UV lights face inward).
With regards to claim 18, Hill et al. further teaches a transport unit (beds, stretchers, wheel chairs, IV poles) that are capable of the intended use of moving the object into the chamber to be disinfected by the set of energy sources and to move the object out of the chamber after being disinfected by the set of energy sources (para [0047]).
With regards to claim 19, Hill et al. teaches at least one foldable panel section configured to function as a door into the chamber (door 52 is part of a panel 22 and fold in/out to open), the at least one foldable panel section transitionable between an open configuration in which the object can be received into the chamber and a closed configuration in which the chamber is sealed from a surrounding environment (open and close the door) (para [0026] and fig 5).
With regards to claim 20, Hill et al. teaches an apparatus comprising a plurality of modular units (wall and ceiling panels 22 and 24) coupleable to one another (via frame members 62) to form a plurality that collectively define a chamber sized to receive an object (space inside where an object or objects can be enclosed) the plurality of walls include a top (ceiling 42), a back (back side 38), and a set of side walls (side walls 32 and 34), the plurality of modular units including: a first set of modular units coupleable to each other to form a first side walls from the set of side walls (three modular units 22 for the first side wall 32), a second set of modular units coupleable to each other to form a second side wall from the set of side walls (three modular units 22 for the second side wall 34), and a third set of modular units coupleable to each other to form at least one of the top wall or the back wall (three modular units 22 forming the back wall and three modular units forming the ceiling) (abstract; fig 1; and para [0025]-[0028]). Each modular unit is coupleable to at least two other modular units.
Hill et al. teaches using the chamber to provide a disinfection chamber and teaches using vaporized hydrogen peroxide (abstract). Hill et al. does not teach a plurality of energy sources as claimed. Romo et al. teaches placing UV light sources on each wall panel of a portable disinfection chamber that provide UV light at an intensity to sterilize the chamber (abstract; fig 9; para [00147]). Potember et al. teaches that hydrogen peroxide and UV light, while both alone can sterilize, have beneficial effects when used together (para [0097]). A person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed would have found it obvious to have added UV light sources to each of the plurality of modular units in order to provide different means of sterilization (UV and hydrogen peroxide can each sterilize on their own through their own pathways) and to create a synergistic beneficial affect with hydrogen peroxide.
The combination results in a plurality of energy sources and a plurality of walls as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD R SPAMER whose telephone number is (571)272-3197. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday from 9-5.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (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 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.
/DONALD R SPAMER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799
Prosecution Insights