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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6, 11, and 21 have been amended.
Claim 22 has been canceled.
Claim 23 has been newly introduced.
Claims 15 and 20 remain as previously canceled.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “each rear edge portion of the plurality of air guiding blades is disposed within a central portion of the front side of the hub,” of claim 1, and the “angle between the airflow concentration channel and an axis on which the rotation shaft is located is greater than or equal to 90° and less than 180°,” of claim 6, must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered. As noted in page 7 of Applicant’s Remarks of 2026.07.06, the rear edge portion of the instant invention is noted as element 244, shown adjacent to the outer circumrenal surface of the hub 24 in at least Figures 36 and 37. The specification described the angle between the airflow concentration channel and an axis on which the rotation shaft is located in at least [0191]; however, the angle is not shown in the Figures such that it is unclear where the angle is within the arrangement.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Election/Restrictions
Newly amended claims 2, and 11 – 14 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons: Claim 2 is directed towards an arrangement comprising blades wherein “an arc-shaped top surface of the second blade top portion is spatially and three-dimensionally twisted along an extending path of the second blade top portion, and an orientation of the arc-shaped top surface changes spatially and gradually from a junction with the first blade top portion to a junction with the rear edge portion,” while claim 11 is directed towards a set of concentric blades arranged as shown by the embodiment of at least Figures 47 – 48. This limitation is being interpreted as directing the invention to an arrangement comprising ternary blades, such as those of fan blades 80, disclosed in at least Figures 19 – 22 as discussed in at least [0157] of the instant specification. The instant independent claim, claim 1, is directed towards the embodiment disclosed by at least Figures 34 – 37 as noted by at least Pages 6 and 7 of Applicants Remarks of 2026.07.06 which directs their Arguments towards the arrangement comprising blades 24 in Figure 36.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 2, and 11 – 14 are withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 6 – 8, and 11 – 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “an angle between the airflow concentration channel and an axis on which the rotation shaft is located is greater than or equal to 90° and less than 180°;” however, the claim does not establish a frame of reference for determine the placement of the angle between the recited elements. The airflow concentration channel is presented as a circular chamber which surrounds the impeller, it is unclear what portion of the channel is used to establish an axis which is compares to the axis of the rotation shaft. The specification likewise recites the claim language in at least [0191] but also provides no frame of reference for making such a comparison, such that one of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to establish the arrangement of the claimed invention. It is further noted that the figures of the instant Application fail to show the recited feature such that the metes and bounds remain unclear.
Claim 11 recites the limitation “the plurality of air guiding blades comprises a plurality of first blades and a plurality of second blades; the plurality of first blades are extending from a central portion of the hub outwardly; and the plurality of second blades are disposed at and surround an outer periphery of the plurality of first blades.” These limitations are directed towards an arrangement of the fan assembly comprising two concentric rings of blades further comprising an airflow guiding structure and a partition plate arranged between the concentric rings, such that the fan assembly forms the recited first air inlet port and second air inlet port as further recited by claim 12. It is noted that such a structure is shown only by the embodiments of Figures 47 – 49 and additionally in Figure 4. The originally filed specification indicates the embodiment of Figures 47 – 49 as directed towards “embodiment II.” It is noted that Applicant’s Remarks of 2026.07.06 towards claim 1 are directed towards Figures 34, 36, and 37. The originally filled specification appears to indicate the embodiment of Figures 34 – 37 as directed towards “embodiment I.” The originally filled specification provides no support for including the newly recited feature of claim 1, directed towards a first embodiment of the invention, as being included with, or combinable with, a second embodiment of the invention as presented by claims 11 – 14. This is a new matter rejection. As no support for such a modification is provided, and no indication is provided on how such a modification is intended to be made, an art rejection for claims 11 – 14 is not provided herein. It is further noted that Applicant has pointed to [0184] as providing support to the amendments to claim 1, and that [0184] is directed to the embodiment as shown in Figures 34, 36, and 37 ([0184], “As shown in FIGS. 34, 36 and 37, in the present embodiment, each first blade top portion 2421 extends horizontally, and each second blade top portion 2422 extends in an arc shape.”).
Dependent claims not specifically rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement, are interpreted as being rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement, for depending from a rejected claim.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3 – 5, 9, 10, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 213931251, “Lai,” in view of US 2018/0328376, “Ishii.”
Regarding Claim 1: Lai discloses a portable wind blowing device (Figures 1 – 6), comprising: a hanging body portion (Generally interpreted as the “U-shaped” housing formed by shells 10 and 20; [0024]), having an air inlet portion (18, 32) (At least [0031] and [0040]) and a receiving cavity (Generally interpreted as the internal volume of the hanging body formed by at least the first accommodating cavity 17 and the air duct 16, shown receiving the fan in at least Figure 3); a fan assembly (40), received in the receiving cavity and disposed at a position corresponding to the air inlet portion (As shown in at least Figures 1 and 3); the fan assembly is configured to rotate to intake air from an outside of the portable wind blowing device through the air inlet portion to generate an airflow (As discussed in at least [0033] and as shown arranged in at least Figures 1 – 6). Lai discloses the fan assembly 40 comprises a centrifugal impeller ([0031], “first fan 40 is a centrifugal fan;”); however, Lai fails to explicitly disclose the details of the fan arrangement and as such is silent as to wherein the fan assembly comprises a hub and a plurality of air guiding blades arranged on a front side of the hub; each of the plurality of air guiding blades has a blade top portion disposed away from the front side of the hub and a front edge portion extending from and connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub; and a rear edge portion connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub and disposed away from a rotation shaft of the hub; each rear edge portion of the plurality of air guiding blades is disposed within a central portion of the front side of the hub; each blade top portion comprises a first blade top portion near the front edge portion and a second blade top portion near the rear edge portion; the front edge portion is inclined.
Ishii teaches fan assembly comprising a centrifugal impeller (18) (As shown in at least Figures 1 – 17), the assembly further comprising a hub (15, 56, 60) and a plurality of air guiding blades (52) arranged on a front side of the hub (As indicated by at least 562a in at least Figure 15, the side of the hub in the upwards direction as shown); each of the plurality of air guiding blades has a blade top portion (523a and the top portion extending to the circumferential outer edge, adjacent to the shroud ring 54, as shown in at least Figure 6) disposed away from the front side of the hub and a front edge portion (523b) extending from and connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub (As shown in at least Figure 15); and a rear edge portion (The rear edge portion is interpreted as the portion of the blade shown adjacent to the circumferential end portion 542 in at least Figure 6) connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub and disposed away from a rotation shaft of the hub (As shown in at least Figures 2 – 6 wherein the rotation shaft is shown arranged at the center line CL); each rear edge portion of the plurality of air guiding blades is disposed within a central portion of the front side of the hub (The rear edge portion as noted is shown arranged adjacent to the outer circumferential surface of the hub in an equivalent manner to the rear edge portion 244 of the instant invention as shown in at least Figures 36 and 37, such that the arrangement of Ishii is interepted as reading over the disclosed arrangement of the instant invention – see aforesaid Drawing Objection); each blade top portion comprises a first blade top portion (523a) near the front edge portion (As shown in at least Figure 6) and a second blade top portion (As shown in at least Figure 6; The portion of the top portion radially outside of the positive pressure protrusion 524a extending towards the rear edge portion) near the rear edge portion (As shown in at least Figure 6); the front edge portion is inclined (As shown in at least Figures 15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have modified the portable wind blowing device of Lai to have substituted the fan assembly with that of Ishii with the predicted results that such a fan assembly would be capable of use in the device of Lai and that such a modification amounts to a simple substitution of one know centrifugal blade assembly for that of another. Such a substitution would have been obvious since, an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 3: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 1; once combined, Ishii further teaches wherein, the front edge portion has a bottom end arranged on the front side of the hub and a top end connected with the blade top portion (The bottom end arranged adjacent to the hub 56 and the top end arranged adjacent the shroud ring 54); the bottom end of the front edge portion is disposed closer to a central portion of the hub (As shown in at least Figure 15; The bottom end is shown arranged at 523d, closer to the central portion of the hub); and the top end of the front edge portion is disposed away from the central portion of the hub and is extending approaching a circumferential edge of the hub (As shown in at least Figure 15; The top end of the front edge is shown at the connection point between 523b and the arc-shape 523e, and the front edge is shown angled away from the central portion and axis CL towards the circumferential outer edge, in the direction DRr, of the hub).
Regarding Claim 4: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 1; once combined, Lai further discloses wherein, the air inlet portion comprises a plurality of air inlet holes arranged in an array (As shown in at least Figures 1, 3, and 4; [0032], “The first air inlet 18 on the outer wall of the first shell 10 is composed of a number of small holes arranged in an array”); at least a portion of the plurality of air inlet holes are located corresponding to a central portion of the hub (As shown in at least Figures 1 – 4; The air inlet holes are shown formed in a grid or array such that at least a portion of the holes formed overlap with a central portion of the hub, generally interpreted as the portion of the hub interior to the front side of the blades as shown in at least Annotated Figure B and as discussed in the aforesaid rejection of claim 3.); and when the fan assembly is rotating, the front edge portion of each of the plurality of air guiding blades is configured to guide air intaken from the at least a portion of the plurality of air inlet holes corresponding to the central portion of the hub (Lai, At least [0032] and [0033]; Once combined the fan blades of Ishii will act in a manner analogous to the fan blades replaced in Lai such that the front edge portion of each blade will guide air drawn in from the air inlet hoes in a manner well known in the art).
Regarding Claim 5: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 4; once combined, Ishii further teaches wherein the plurality of air guiding blades are spirally extending from a circumferential edge of the hub towards the central portion of the hub (As best shown in at least Figures 5 and 5, and Annotated Figure B; The blades are shown in each figure extending spirally in a clockwise manner between the circumferential edge and the central portion of the hub).
Regarding Claim 9: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 4; Lai further discloses wherein orthographic projections of the at least the portion of the plurality of air inlet holes onto the front side of the hub are located within the central portion of the hub (As shown in at least Figures 2 and 3; At least a portion of the plurality of air inlet hors are shown arranged such that projections of the holes extending to the surface of the hub will overlap the central portion of the hub). One of ordinary skill in the art, when combining the impeller of Ishii into the apparatus of Lai would be motivated to maintain the placement of the impeller such that the shaft and central portion of the hub would be maintained, such that the relative placement to the plurality of air inlet holes would also be maintained, as such, Lai, in view of Ishii, makes obvious the claimed arrangement.
Regarding Claim 10: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 4; Lai further discloses wherein orthographic projections of the at least the portion of the plurality of air inlet holes onto the front side of the hub are located within a region enclosed by front edge portions of all of the plurality of air guiding blades (As shown in at least Figures 2 and 3; At least a portion of the plurality of air inlet hors are shown arranged such that projections of the holes extending to the surface of the hub will overlap the central portion of the hub in a region interior to the front edge portion of the plurality of air guiding blades). One of ordinary skill in the art, when combining the impeller of Ishii into the apparatus of Lai would be motivated to maintain the placement of the impeller such that the shaft and central portion of the hub would be maintained, such that the relative placement to the plurality of air inlet holes would also be maintained, as such, Lai, in view of Ishii, makes obvious the claimed arrangement.
Regarding Claim 16: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 1; once combined, Lai further discloses wherein the hanging body portion defines a plurality of air vent holes (19), each of the plurality of air vent holes penetrates from a side of the hanging body portion near a body part of a user to a side of the hanging body portion away from the body part (As shown in at least Figures 1, 4, and 5; Each of the air vent holes 19 is shown penetrating the hanging body between a side of the hanging body portion facing away from a body part (i.e. interior wall) to a side near a body part (i.e. exterior wall)).
Claim(s) 16 – 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN 213931251, “Lai,” in view of US 2018/0328376, “Ishii,” and CN 213931256, “Li.”
Regarding Claim 16: Lai, in view of Ishii, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 1; however, Lai, in view of Ishii fails to explicitly disclose wherein the hanging body portion defines a plurality of air vent holes, each of the plurality of air vent holes penetrates from a side of the hanging body portion near a body part of a user to a side of the hanging body portion away from the body part. It is noted that this rejection is provided in parallel to that of Claim 16, as shown in at least ¶25, and is provided as an alternative interpterion of the claim.
Li teaches a portable wind blowing device (Figures 1 – 6), comprising: a hanging body portion (Generally interpreted as the “u-shaped” body formed by blowing module 30 and temperature control module 10), a centrifugal fan (34) in an interior space of the hanging body portion, an air inlet portion (38, 40) (The air inlet portion of Li is arranged similarly to that of Lai with one portion comprising a plurality of holes and the second portion comprising a cover), and wherein the hanging body portion defines a plurality of air vent holes (39) (As shown in at least Figure 3 and 4), each of the plurality of air vent holes penetrates from a side of the hanging body portion near a body part of a user to a side of the hanging body portion away from the body part (As shown in at least Figures 3 and 4; Each of the air vent holes 39 is shown penetrating the hanging body between a side of the hanging body portion facing away from a body part (i.e. interior wall) to a side near a body part (i.e. exterior wall)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to have added the plurality of air vent holes, as taught by Li, into the device of Lai, with the predicted results that the air vent holes will act as additional air outlets which will provide increased cooling flow to the users neck as taught by Li (At least [0028]).
Regarding Claim 17: Lai, in view of Ishii, and Li, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 16; once combined, Li further teaches wherein at least one of the plurality of air vent holes is disposed at a side of the air inlet portion away from a free end of the hanging body portion (As shown in at least Figures 3 and 4; The air vent holes are arranged along the extension arm of the hanging body portion which comprises the centrifugal fan, this portion of the hanging body is interpreted as comprising the free end of the hanging body portion, the air vent holes are arranged at a side with the air inlet portion as interpreted as being located on the interior surface of the hanging body which comprises a portion of the air inlet portion as previously discussed with respect to claims 1 and 16).
Regarding Claim 18: Lai, in view of Ishii, and Li, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 17; once combined, Li further teaches wherein at least another one of the plurality of air vent holes is disposed at a side of the air inlet portion near the free end of the hanging body portion (As shown in at least Figures 3 and 4; The air vent holes are arranged along the extension arm of the hanging body portion which comprises the centrifugal fan, this portion of the hanging body is interpreted as comprising the free end of the hanging body portion, the air vent holes are arranged at a side with the air inlet portion as interpreted as being located on the interior surface of the hanging body which comprises a portion of the air inlet portion as previously discussed with respect to claims 1 and 16, air vent holes are shown located both near and further from the air inlet portion such that those located in closer proximity to the air inlet portion are interpreted as being near the free end of the hanging body portion).
Regarding Claim 19: Lai, in view of Ishii, and Li, teaches the portable wind blowing device according to claim 16; once combined, Li further teaches wherein each of the plurality of air vent holes is elongated and extending along a length of the hanging body portion (As shown in at least Figures 3 and 4; The air vent holes are shown formed of an ovular shape such that they are interpreted as being elongated and are further shown extending along the body portion along its length); once combined, Li further teaches wherein the plurality of air vent holes are spaced apart from each other along a length of the hanging body portion (As shown in at least Figures 3 and 4; The air vent holes are shown formed along the length of the body portion in an intermittent manner such that they are interpreted as being spaced apart from each other along the length of the body portion).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 2026.07.06 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues on pages 7 of their Remarks that Ishii discloses “part of the blade 52 […] disposed on the fan hub portion 56 and the other part of the blade 52 is disposed on the other end side plate 60,” such that Ishii fails to disclose the claim 1 features including “a front edge portion extending from and connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub, and a rear edge portion connecting the blade top portion to the front side of the hub.”
PNG
media_image1.png
148
616
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Applicant directs their Arguments to a narrow interpretation of the hub of Ishii which reads over only the hub portion 56 and fails to incorporate the hub portion 60 as mapped by the instant claim rejections. Applicant’s arguments to a narrower interpretation of which features comprise the hub are not supported by limitation in the claim, such that the interpretation of the hub provided herein, reading over at least elements 15, 56, and 60, is broadly interpreted as reading over the instant claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 and 23 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.
Claim 21 recites the limitation “a distance between the second blade top portion and the air inlet portion is in a range of 0.45 mm to 1.1 mm,” and claim 23 recites the limitation “a distance between the first blade top portion and the air inlet portion is in a range of 4.3 mm to 4.6 mm; and a distance between the second blade top portion and the cover is less than 1.1 mm and greater than 0 mm.” Lai, in view of Ishii, fails to explicitly disclose, teach, or suggest each of the aforesaid limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
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 the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN DOYLE whose telephone number is (571)270-5821. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 0900 - 1700.
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, Mark Laurenzi can be reached at 571-270-7878. 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.
/BENJAMIN DOYLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3746 2026.07.18
/MARK A LAURENZI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3746
7/20/2026
Prosecution Insights