DETAILED ACTION
08/24/2026Notice 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 § 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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishida
et al [US 2019/0310275] in view of Nagura et al [US 2025/0035544]
Claim 1. Ishida et al fails to disclose an analysis device for analyzing an analysis target
gas by using ultraviolet light. However,
Ishida et al teaches that the ultraviolet light intensity for analyzing reagent sample
components "chemically bonded species, in particular", see abstract, Figs. 1, 2, 9, para
[0004, 0011, 0031-0035, 0038-0043, 0045, 0054]).
Nagura et al suggests that the gas analysis device 100 includes a light irradiation
unit 1, a sample cell 2 into which sample gas is introduced and which causes light from
the ultraviolet light irradiation unit 1 to undergo multiple reflections, a light detection
unit 3 that detects light emitted from the sample cell 2, and an information processing
device 4 that analyzes the measurement target component in the sample gas based on
the light intensity signal detected by the light detection unit 3 (see Fig. 1, abstract, para
[0047, 0048, 0088]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the invention to use or substitute the ultraviolet light to detect sample gas of Nagura et al for the ultraviolet light to detect reagent sample of Ishida et al since the reagent components are chemically bonded species, which is including in a particular gas structure such as gaseous fuel, natural gas, carbon oxide CO, gaseous asphyxiant, irritant or exhaust gases, poisonous gas, or toxic gases, etc., which can be analyzed by the ultrasonic light as desire.
the analysis device comprising:
a measurement cell to which the analysis target gas is introduced (as the combination
of target gas between Ishida et al and Nagara et al above, and the measurement cell
reads upon the reagent container 1, see Figs. 1, 6-9, para [0069, 0086]);
an LED light source cell (the LEDs 6, see Fig. 1, para [0027-0031]) configured to output
the ultraviolet light toward the measurement; and
a control unit (the control section 11, see Fig. 1, para [0029, 0031]) configured to control
the LED light source, wherein the control unit supplies a constant first current to the
LED light source, and
Ishida et al fails to disclose when intensity of the ultraviolet light output from the LED
light source supplied with the first current decreases to a predetermined threshold value
or less, the control unit supplies the LED light source with a second current larger than
the first current. However,
Ishida et al teaches that the control section 11 controls any of a current supplied to the
ultraviolet LEDs 6, a voltage, and current-carrying time, or a combination thereof to an
appropriate value on the basis of the remaining amount of the reagent of which the
control section 11 is notified by the analysis section 5. The control section 11 here
controls any of the current, the voltage, and the current-carrying time, or the
combination thereof in such a manner that the irradiation light intensity of the ultraviolet
light becomes smaller as the remaining amount of the reagent is smaller (see Fig. 1,
para [0031]).
The illuminance of the generated ultraviolet light becomes higher as a current value or a voltage value is larger. In addition, the illuminance of the generated ultraviolet light
becomes higher as the current-carrying time is longer. A length of the current-carrying
time is variable depending on a length of a pulse width corresponding to the current-
carrying time. As a result of these combined factors, the irradiation light intensity of
the ultraviolet light changes. It is noted that the substrate 7 can assume part of or all of
functions of the control section 11 (see para [0032]).
The control section 11 controls any of the current supplied to the ultraviolet lamp 15 or LEDs 6, the voltage, and the current-carrying time or the combination thereof based on the remaining amount of the reagent. In this case, control section 11 exercises control in such a manner that the irradiation light intensity of the ultraviolet light generated from the ultraviolet lamp 15 or LEDs is equal to or higher than the irradiation light intensity of ultraviolet light per unit amount necessary for sterilization of the reagent and equal to or lower than the irradiation light intensity of ultraviolet light corresponding to the upper limit of the allowable range for change in properties of the reagent (see Figs. 1, 3, 5, 9, para [0053, 0064]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art to recognize that the claim limitation meet the control section 11 to control of changing current to low or decreasing value as to equal or lower than the ultraviolet light corresponding to the upper limit (threshold value) of the allowable range for changing in properties of the reagent/gas and the control 11 controls to increasing values (larger/higher current) for adjusting the allowable range of ultraviolet LEDs intensities according to the changing amount of gas/reagent and to preventing of failure.
Claim 2. (Currently Amended) The analysis device according to claim 1, further
comprising an input unit configured to receive a user's predetermined operation,
wherein when the predetermined operation is performed on the input unit, the control
unit changes the current supplied to the LED light source from the first current to the
second current (read upon the control section 11 controls "or input" any of the current
supplied the ultraviolet LEDs 6, the voltage, the current-carrying time or the combination
thereof in such a manner that the junction temperature of the ultraviolet LEDs 6
measured indirectly through the temperature sensor does not exceed a predetermined
value. (see Fig. 3, para [0049]).
Claim 3. Ishida et al fails to disclose further comprising an alarm generation unit
configured to generate an alarm when the ultraviolet light output from the LED light
source becomes a predetermined threshold value or less. However,
Ishida et al teaches that the control section 11 is controlling the ultraviolet LEDs 6 but
also a signal line for a temperature sensor such as a thermistor and a signal line
for notifying the control section 11 of states of the ultraviolet LEDs 6. Furthermore, the
automatic analyzer 100 has a display section 12 that notifies a user of execution of
appropriate reagent sterilization or detection of an abnormality. It is noted that an
interface used to operate or control the automatic analyzer 100, the analysis result, an
analyzer state may be displayed on the display section 12. Contents of notification
include, for example, whether the appropriate sterilization has been executed and
detection of the abnormality such as out of limit of allowable range. See Figs. 1, 5, para
[0037, 0064]).
Nagura et al suggests that the warning output unit 45 compares the relative value of
the light intensity at calibration with respect to the reference light intensity to a
predetermined warning threshold value which can be set in advance, and if the relative
value of the light intensity at calibration exceeds (or falls below) the threshold value,
outputs a warning signal urging maintenance of the gas analysis device 100 to
the display D or the like. Here, the warning threshold value is made to be 50%, but it
may also be set at a plurality of levels, such as 65% and 50%. As for the content of the
warning signal, it may indicate, for example, that maintenance should be performed
right away, or that the time to perform maintenance is approaching, etc. (see Figs. 1, 4,
para [0065]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the invention to substitute the warning display D of Nagura et al for the
notification display of Ishida et al for notifying or warning user about maintenance of the
analysis device and to prevent out of range abnormal.
Claim 4. (Currently Amended) The analysis device according to any one of claims
claim 1, further comprising an introducing unit configured to alternately introduce the
analysis target gas (as the combination of the target gas between Ishida et al and
Nagura et al in respect to claim 1 above) and
a reference gas into the measurement cell at a predetermined period (read upon the
number of ultraviolet LEDs 6 disposed at the same height position is not limited to four
but may be one, two, three, or equal to or greater than five. It is noted that the ultraviolet
LEDs 6 are not necessarily disposed equidistantly and it is desirable to adjust an
interval in response to a shape of the reagent container 1 attached to the analyzer body
(see Fig. 8, para [0079]).
Claim 5. (Currently Amended) An analysis method for analyzing an analysis target
gas by using ultraviolet light, the method comprising: introducing the analysis target gas
into a measurement cell; supplying a constant first current to an LED light source
configured to output the ultraviolet light to output the ultraviolet light from the LED light
source toward the measurement cell; and supplying the LED light source with a second
current larger than the first current, when intensity of the ultraviolet light output from the
LED light source supplied with the first current decreases to a predetermined threshold
value or less (as the combination of the target gas between Ishida et al and Nagura et
al in respect to claim 1 above, see Figs. 1-8).
Claim 6. (Currently Amended) A program that causes a computer to perform an
analysis method for analyzing an analysis target gas by using ultraviolet light, the
analysis method comprising: introducing the analysis target gas into a measurement
cell; supplying a constant first current to an LED light source configured to output the
ultraviolet light to output the ultraviolet light from the LED light source toward the
measurement cell; and supplying the LED light source with a second current larger than
the first current, when intensity of the ultraviolet light output from the LED light source
supplied with the first current decreases to a predetermined threshold value or less (as
the combination of the target gas between Ishida et al and Nagura et al in respect to
claim 1 above, see Figs. 1-8).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 08/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Because,
Applicants’ arguments:
(A) There is no disclosure or suggestion in Ishida of determining the UV light intensity being produced by the emitting device for a first constant current, or of increasing the emitting device current to a second constant current when the UV light intensity decreases below a threshold.
(B) The proposed Ishida/Nagura combination taken as a whole does not disclose or suggest supply of an increased constant current to the LED light source illuminating a measurement cell when the LED light source intensity decreases to a predetermined threshold or less.
Response to the arguments:
(A) It is obvious to one skill in the art to recognize that the control section 11 of Ishida et al is operating and controlling the current values to illuminate the ultraviolet light intensities based on changing of the reagent or gas, since the control section 11 to control of changing current to low or decreasing value as to equal or lower than the ultraviolet light corresponding to the upper limit (threshold value) of the allowable range for changing in properties of the reagent/gas and the control 11 controls to increasing values (larger/higher current) for adjusting the allowable range of ultraviolet LEDs intensities according to the changing amount of gas/reagent and to preventing of failure.
(B) Ishida et al alone obviously meets the claim limitation as discussed in claim 1 and section (A) above. It is obvious to combine the ultraviolet light for detecting of reagent and/or gas compounds between Ishida et al and Nagura et al because the reagent chemical agents composition may include of different gases such as gaseous fuel, natural gas, carbon oxide CO, gaseous asphyxiant, irritant or exhaust gases, poisonous gas, or toxic gases, etc..
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Chen discloses the collecting device connected with the analyzing device, processing device and storage device and adopts a suction fan to absorb the toxic gas. The analyzing device carries out reagent detection on composition and content of poison gas. The processing device is capable of reacting or absorbing toxic gases.
[CN 106448078 A]
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 99number is (571) 2722972. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Wang Quan-Zhen can be reached on (571) 272-3114.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786- 9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VAN T TRIEU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
09/03/2026
Prosecution Insights