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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species I featuring the ball bearing mechanism in the reply filed on 6/22/2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in the Republic of India on 5/29/2025 and 5/27/2025. It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the IN202421041769 & IN202523051016 applications as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 8/11/2025. These drawings are accepted.
Claim Objections
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the reference character 110 is not in parenthesis and is the only one listed. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 18 objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “the type-5 blades are incline towards backward direction,” is missing an article preceding the term “backward direction,” a for example would be proper. Appropriate correction is required.
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 8, 11, & 16-19 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 8 recites the limitation "the speed of the motor member". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 proports to claim dependency to one of the preceding claims however fails to list which one as such it is not clear or apparent to one of ordinary skill what the meets and bounds of the claim are.
Claim 16 recites the limitations "the air of the surrounding environment" in lines 18-19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 17-19 fail to remedy such deficiency.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the middle" in line 5 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitations "the top and… the bottom of the blades" in line 8 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
Claim 18 recites the limitation "the top… the bottom of the blades" in lines 13-14 of the claim. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 11 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 11 proports to claim dependency to one of the preceding claims however fails to list which one, as such it has been deemed to be in improper dependent form and for failing to include all limitations of the claim upon which it is dependent, since one is not listed.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “wherein the annular rotating mechanism is selected from a first mechanism” which has been previously recited in the claim from which it depends 16.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
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.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) 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(s) to avoid it/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(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Re claim 16, For the annular rotating mechanism being a first mechanism:
The claim limitation uses the word “mechanism” as a generic place holder for the term means for performing the claimed function of annular rotation
The generic placeholder is modified by the functional language “is a”
The generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for preforming the claimed function of annular rotation
As such under 112(f), the annular rotating mechanism is being limited to the structure disclosed or a functional equivalent thereof, specifically a ball-bearing assembly, a rotating facilitator, and a plurality of first-motored gears of the specification. Claim 17 does not require such interpretation under 112(f) upon the further detail to the structure. Claims 18-19 have the limitation being interpreted under 112(f).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-7, 9-10, & 13-15 are allowed.
Claims 8, 11, & 16-18 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112, set forth in this Office action.
Claim 19 is 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.
With regard to claim 1, the prior art of record fails to show or fairly render obvious the combined limitations of the invention specifically, the combination of the rotatable mount comprising a plurality of mounting structures, having each blade of the plurality of blades is coupled to a respective mounting structure of the plurality of mounting structures to extend upwardly from the rotatable mount, and having the outer profile of the bearing member being engaged with the rotatable mount. As such, the examiner has come to the determination that either alone or in combination with the prior art of record it would not have been obvious to meet the overall claim without impermissible hindsight.
With regard to claim 16, the prior art of record fails to show or fairly render obvious the combined limitations of the invention specifically, the combination of the first base having a first wall rising from the first outer periphery, the structure of the annular rotating mechanism being a first mechanism, the plurality of blades detachably attached to the outer surface of the shell the defines the annular fan arragnment, and the annular fan arrangement being secured on the annular rotating mechanism and around the inner pot. As such, the examiner has come to the determination that either alone or in combination the prior art of record it would not have been obvious to meet the overall claim without impermissible hindsight.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent No. 5,397,382 A which discloses air-circulating apparatus for a pot, the air-circulating apparatus comprising:
a base plate (12/112; the lower base/base, fig. 1-5/6-7) having a mounting assembly (35/135; the fan chamber, fig. 3/6);
a rotating assembly (37/137; the motor, fig. 1-5/6-7) coupled on the base plate (col 6; 45-53 & col 8; 48-65, the motor is secured to the base plate via the screw fastener assembly and the bottom wall);
a rotatable mount (col 6; 54-57 & col 8; 48-49, the shaft and other rotating elements mounted thereto) rotatably coupled around the mounting assembly on the base plate (col 6; 45-54 & col 8; 48-49, the shaft and fan are designed to rotate around the fan camber) and rotatable by the rotating assembly around the mounting assembly along a direction of rotation (col 6; 45-54 & col 8; 48-49, the shaft and fan are designed to rotate around the fan camber in either direction), wherein the rotatable mount comprises a plurality of mounting structures (fig. 3-4/6-7, the ends of the shaft);
a stationary mount (11/111; the pot, fig. 1-5/6-7) coupled to the mounting assembly (col 7; 14-22 & col 9; 57-61, wherein the pot is fastened to the baseplate and fan chamber via a bayonet fitting);
at least one blade (col 2; 9-14, the blade of the squirrel cage fan is secured to prevent injury), coupled to a respective mounting structure of the plurality of mounting structures to extend upwardly from the rotatable mount (fig. 3-5/6-7, the upper end of the shaft attached to the fan) and be rotatable with the rotatable mount (col 6; 45-54 & col 8; 48-49, the shaft and fan are designed to be rotatable via the motor).
U.S. Patent No. 3,561,891 A which discloses an air-circulating apparatus comprising:
a base plate (2; the protective housing, fig. 3) having a mounting assembly (9/12; the stator/stationary shaft, fig. 1/1-3);
a rotating assembly (6/11; the motor/rotor, fig. 1) coupled on the base plate (fig. 3 and col 2-3; 60-6 & col 3; 11-37, the motor is secured within the casing and the rotor formed by the elements of the magnetic circuit and projecting collars are all secured on the stationary shaft of the base plate, see col 3; 19-20);
a rotatable mount (5; the inner annular flange of the impeller, fig. 1-2) rotatably coupled around the mounting assembly on the base plate (col 2-3; 60-34, the inner annular flange is driven by the rotor of the motor about the stationary shaft) and rotatable by the rotating assembly around the mounting assembly along a direction of rotation (see id.), wherein the rotatable mount comprises a plurality of mounting structures (fig. 1, the inner diameter of the inner annular flange and the outer portion of said impeller flange that supports the structure of the impeller; 3 over the stator winding; 33 and blades; 4 in the area between the inner flange of the casing; 10 and the peripheral annular flange of the casing; 7);
a plurality of blades (4; the blades, fig. 1-2), wherein each blade of the plurality of blades is coupled to a respective section of a mounting structure of the plurality of mounting structures (fig. 1, the outer portion of said inner impeller flange that supports the positioning of the impeller and blades within the fan) be rotatable with the rotatable mount (col 2-3; 60-6 and col 3; 8-9, the blades are rotatable with the rotatable mount); and
a bearing member (13; the ball bearings, fig. 1-3) having an inner profile (fig 1 & 3, the profile mounted about the stationary shaft) and an outer profile (14; the outer rings of the ball bearing, fig. 1-3) coupled to each other with a plurality of balls (fig. 1-3), wherein the inner profile is engaged to the mounting assembly (fig. 1-3 and col 3; 21-23, the inner ring of the bearing is mounted about the stationary shaft) and the outer profile is engaged to the rotatable mount to be rotatably coupled around the mounting assembly (fig. 1 and col 3; 24-69, via a plurality of components, fit, and adhesive the inner annular flange is fastened to the outer rings of the ball bearings to support rotation of the impeller and blade by the rotor of the motor).
Further relevant art includes: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0232967 A1 which discloses a centrifugal fan utilizing a ball bearing assembly. U.S. Patent No. 1,143,365 A which discloses a centrifugal fan where the blades are mounted thereto. U.S. Patent No. 1,378,008 A which discloses a centrifugal fan where the blades are mounted thereto. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2023/0280055 A1 which discloses a plant pot with an air purifier. U.S. Patent No. 9,480,247 B2 which discloses a bug catching apparatus which includes a funnel for drawing the insects to the collecting bin.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Parker MacCrate whose telephone number is 571-272-5215. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 7:30am - 4pm EST.
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, Joshua J Michener can be reached at 571-272-1467. 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.
Nicole MacCrate
/NM/
/JOSHUA J MICHENER/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3642
Prosecution Insights