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 .
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.
Claim 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 10 and 19-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532. Although the claims 1, 4-6, 8, 10-17 and 19-20 at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a similar system.
Regarding claim 21, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a system for disinfecting an object comprising: a gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator; and an air delivery system configured to: ingest ambient air; and direct the ambient air through the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to convert hydrogen and oxygen molecules in the ambient air into gaseous hydrogen peroxide to disinfect a surface of the object (see claims 10 and 19-20), since the use of the apparatus isn't limiting or the material the apparatus acts upon isn't limiting.
Regarding claims 22-24, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a system wherein the ambient air is treated by the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator prior to being directed through one or more conduits for delivery of the treated ambient air; wherein the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator is further configured to apply gaseous hydrogen peroxide directly to the object; and further comprising an ionizer to charge particles in the ambient air (see claims 10 and 19-20), since the use of the apparatus isn't limiting or the material the apparatus acts upon isn't limiting.
Regarding claim 25, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 fails to claim a system further comprising a housing to integrate one or more of the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, and the air delivery system.
However, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims one or more of the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, and the air delivery system (see claims 10 and 19).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to claim a system further comprising a housing to integrate one or more of the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, and the air delivery system, since it has been held that forming in one piece an article which has formerly been formed in two pieces and put together involves routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (V-A)).
Regarding claim 26, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims in another embodiment a system wherein the housing is a manifold to receive and contain the ambient air for treatment by the ionizer (see claims 1 and 4-6).
Because these two types of enclosure (housing and manifold) were art-recognized equivalents at the time the invention was made, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a manifold for a housing.
Regarding claim 27, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims in another embodiment a system further comprising an enclosure to contain one or more of the housing, the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, the air delivery system, the object, and the treated air during a disinfecting operation.
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have an enclosure to contain one or more of the housing, the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, the air delivery system, the object, and the treated air during a disinfecting operation, since applicant has not disclosed that having an enclosure to contain one or more of the housing, the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, the air delivery system, the object, and the treated air during a disinfecting operation solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform well with an enclosure to contain one or more of the housing, the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, the ionizer, the air delivery system, the object, and the treated air during a disinfecting operation.
Regarding claim 28, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims in another embodiment a system further comprising an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation (see claims 1 and 8).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation, since applicant has not disclosed that having an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform well with an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation.
Regarding claim 29, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 fails to claim a system wherein one of a position or an orientation of the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator is adjustable.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to have one of a position or an orientation of the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator is adjustable, since it has been held that the provision of adjustability, where needed, involves skill in the art (see MPEP 2144 (V-D)).
Regarding claim 30, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a system for disinfecting an object comprising: a gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator configured to: receive ambient air; convert hydrogen and oxygen molecules in the ambient air into gaseous hydrogen peroxide; and direct the gaseous hydrogen peroxide to the object to disinfect a surface of the object (see claims 10 and 19-20), since the use of the apparatus isn't limiting or the material the apparatus acts upon isn't limiting.
Regarding claim 31, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a system wherein the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator is a first gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator (see claims 10 and 19-20).
U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 fails to claim that the system further comprising a second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to receive the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the first gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have two gaseous hydrogen peroxide generators resulting in a first gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator and a second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-B)).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to receive the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the first gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding claim 32, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 fails to claim a system wherein the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator directs the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to the object to disinfect the surface of the object.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to receive the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the first gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator resulting in a system wherein the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator directs the gaseous hydrogen peroxide from the second gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator to the object to disinfect the surface of the object, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art (see MPEP 2144.04 (VI-C)).
Regarding claims 33-37 and 39-40, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims a system further comprising an air delivery system configured to: ingest ambient air; and direct the ambient air through the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator (see claims 10 and 19-20); wherein the air delivery system comprises an air delivery conduit to channel the ambient air toward the gaseous hydrogen peroxide generator (see claims 11 and 19-20); wherein the air delivery conduit comprises one or more of an air manifold or duct (see claim 14); further comprising an ionizer that includes an ionizing bar, the ionizer arranged within and extending through a portion of the air delivery conduit (see claims 10 and 12); wherein the air delivery conduit is configured to direct the ambient air across a portion of the ionizing bar and output the ambient air via an air knife (see claims 12-13 and 15); further comprising a Far ultraviolet (UV) emitter to degrade one or more contaminants on the surface of the object (see claim 16); and wherein the cover comprises one or more windows arranged to direct Far UV light or conditioned air from the air delivery system toward the object within a treatment area (see claim 17).
Regarding claim 38, U.S. Patent No. 12,285,532 claims in another embodiment a system further comprising an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation (see claims 1 and 8).
It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to have an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation, since applicant has not disclosed that having an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation solves any stated problem or is for any particular purpose and it appears that the invention would perform well with an exhaust system to remove treated air from a treatment area following a disinfecting operation.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (WO 2020/077263 A1) The present disclosure provides for and includes electrocatalytic devices and methods for the production of Dry Hydrogen Peroxide (DHP), a non-hydrated, gaseous form of hydrogen peroxide (see Abstract).
Riskin (WO 2020/065648 A1) discloses a method and apparatus for air disinfection resulting in producing hydrogen peroxide and having an ionizing portion (Abstract).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA E YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Wang Claire can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
NATASHA E. YOUNG
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/NATASHA E YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights