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 .
Examiner's Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs and/or columns and line numbers and/or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner. The Examiner notes that it has been held that a recitation that a structural element is "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of, “arranged to”, “intended to” or “operable to” perform a function does not limit the claim to a particular structure and thus only requires the ability to so perform the function. (See In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. See also, MPEP 2111.04) As such, under the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims and the prior art, the recitations of "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of, “arranged to”, “intended to” or “operable to” will be deemed met by an element in the prior art capable of performing the function recited in connection with "adapted to", “configured to”, “capable of, “arranged to”, “intended to” or “operable to”. The examiner is aware of the functional language in various claims.
Disclaimer
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 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipman (US Patent No. 4,7023,720) in view of Lai (US Patent No. 6,379,124).
Regarding claim 1, Shipman teaches a liquid containing fixture comprising aquarium tank (12) containing water (66), supported on pedestal/base (32), the base defining an internal pressure chamber (70) and housing air pump (40). Shipman further teaches air passage (56) communicating pump supplied air through the bottom wall/interface of tank (12) via valve assembly (26) into the liquid, thereby producing bubbles in the liquid (see Figures 1-2). Shipman expressly discloses the pump (40) supplies air to chamber (70), from which pressurized air passes through valve assembly (26) into the lower portion of tank (12) to aerate water (66). Shipman does not expressly teach the claimed elongated hollow tube/topper configuration. Lai teaches a decorative water lamp comprising an elongated hollow transparent container (50), top cover (51), bottom/base (52), an air pump (1), air pipe (56), and a bubble producing arrangement whereby air is transported through pipe (56) into water containing container (50) (see Figure 4). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to configure Shipman’s pump driven aeration fixture in the elongated decorative water lamp as taught by Lai, including an elongated transparent container and upper cover, in order to provide Shipman’s known pump driven bubble effect in a decorative display configuration, yielding the predictable result of bubbles rising through an elongated liquid filled container.
Regarding claim 3, Shipman in view of Lai teaches the bubble tube fixture as discussed in claim 1 above. Lai further teaches illuminating the decorative water lamp using light source (55), positioned to project light through the transparent water containing container (50) and thereby provide a decorative visual effect. It would have been obvious to provide the decorative bubble fixture of Shipman with Lai’s illumination arrangement to illuminate the liquid and moving bubble, as expressly contemplated for decorative water lamp displays, thereby predictably enhancing the visual effect.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Yang (US Patent No. 6,447,138).
Shipman in view of Lai teaches the bubble tube fixture of claim 1 as set forth above. Yang further teaches a decorative liquid filled bubble display comprising speakers (21) associated with base case (20), electrically connected to controlling circuit (30), for producing an audible entertainment effect in conjunction with the visual water/bubble effect. It would have been obvious to provide the decorative bubble fixture of Shipman/Lai with Yang’s speaker arrangement in order to provide a audible entertainment effect coordinated with the visual bubble display, as expressly contemplated by Yang.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the references as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kelly et al. (US Patent No. 11,918,931).
Shipman in view of Lai teaches the bubble tube fixture of claim 1 as discussed above. Lelly further teaches a communication transmitter/receiver (126) associated with an electrically operated bubble producing device and teaches automatic/remote activation of the bubble producing device in response to communication with another device or controller. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to provide the pump driven bubble fixture of Shipman as modified by Lai with Kelly’s communication transmitter/receiver (126) in order to permit remote or automatic activation of the electrically operated bubble producing pump, as expressly contemplated by Kelly, thereby providing the predictable result of remotely controlled bubble generation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 4-6 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claims 9-20 are allowed.
The prior art of record, alone or in combination, fails to teach or suggest the particular structural and functional arrangements recited in claims 2, 4-6 and 9-20, including the differing weight submerged objected, liquid section pipe containing a stick LED, and the claimed arrangement of the liquid proof sheet, pump/channel/nozzle, LEDs, PCB and associated controlled components. These limitations, in combinations claimed, are considered to distinguish the allowable claims over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The following are suggested formats for either a Certificate of Mailing or Certificate of Transmission under 37 CFR 1.8(a). The certification may be included with all correspondence concerning this application or proceeding to establish a date of mailing or transmission under 37 CFR 1.8(a). Proper use of this procedure will result in such communication being considered as timely if the established date is within the required period for reply. The Certificate should be signed by the individual actually depositing or transmitting the correspondence or by an individual who, upon information and belief, expects the correspondence to be mailed or transmitted in the normal course of business by another no later than the date indicated.
Certificate of Mailing
I hereby certify that this correspondence is being deposited with the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage as first class mail in an envelope addressed to:
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
on __________.
(Date)
Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate:
________________________________________________________
Signature: ______________________________________
Certificate of Transmission by Facsimile
I hereby certify that this correspondence is being facsimile transmitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Fax No. (___)_____ -_________ on _____________. (Date)
Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate:
_________________________________________
Signature: ________________________________________
Certificate of Transmission via USPTO Patent Electronic Filing System
I hereby certify that this correspondence is being transmitted via the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) patent electronic filing system to the USPTO
on _____________.
(Date)
Typed or printed name of person signing this certificate:
_________________________________________
Signature: ________________________________________
Please refer to 37 CFR 1.6(a)(4), 1.6(d) and 1.8(a)(2) for filing limitations concerning transmissions via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, facsimile transmissions and mailing, respectively.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NINI F LEGESSE whose telephone number is (571)272-4412. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Friday 9 AM - 5:30 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, Nicholas J. Weiss can be reached at (571) 207-1775. 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.
/NINI F LEGESSE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
