DETAILED ACTION
This is the first office action on the merits of the instant application, which was filed July 14, 2025 as a continuation of PCT/IB2023/063258, filed December 27, 2023, which claims priority to EP23152572.6, filed January 20, 2023. The application contains Claims 1-20.
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 .
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 Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: On lines 13-14, “that there that there” appears to be an editing error, and one instance of “that there” should be deleted. 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 1-12 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. In claim 1, the limitation beginning “optionally…”, on lines 12-14 renders the claim indefinite. It is unclear if this “optional” limitation is an alternative to the first condition of “determining that there is an air treatment demand at a demand vehicle”, or an alternative to the condition of “…determining that a traffic density…is above a predetermined density”, or if the limitation stands alone as a yes/no proposition. Claims 2-12 depend from claim 1, and stand rejected therewith.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ciachowski (DE 10 2017 209476 A1).
Ciachowski teaches, according to claim 20, a fleet of two or more vehicles, the two or more vehicles operably communicable with each other, wherein a first vehicle is configured to requesting a second vehicle to provide air treatment, and wherein the second vehicle is configured to receive the request and control an air treatment system of the second vehicle to increase a treatment capacity (Ciachowski, Claim 1, “A method for air filtering an ambient air of at least one motor vehicle (10), wherein the at least one motor vehicle (10) has means for establishing a radio link (13), characterized in that the at least one motor vehicle (10) is independent of a driving operation Air filtering system (11) is equipped and this is controlled by the radio connection (13) mediated control signals.”; and Claim 7, “Method according to one of the preceding claims, in which a control of the air filtration system (11) via a radio link (13) with another motor vehicle (10).”).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13-19 are allowed.
The prior art does not teach, alone or in combination, that a determination of whether current emissions of a vehicle below a pre-determined limit create an available capacity of performing air treatment, and controlling the airflow to utilize at least part of the available capacity, as required by claim 13.
Claims 1-12 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The prior art does not teach, alone or in combination, that the determination of an air treatment demand depends on a traffic density being above a pre-determined density, as required by claim 1.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fingland et al. (US 2019/0118140 A1) teaches increasing or decreasing the amount of air treatment (Fingland et al., at least para. [0031], “…The flow control structure 106 therefore forms an actively controlled front grill system or cover. In the open position, the grill shutters 120 allow ambient air to flow to the air treatment component 112. In the closed position, the grill shutters 120 block flow of ambient air to the air treatment component 112. The grill shutters 120 may also be moved to one or more intermediate positions between the open position and the closed position in order to increase or decrease air flow to the air treatment component 112…”).
Kruger (US 2020/0348033 A1) teaches recording a traffic volume as well as an effectiveness of an environmental air cleaner, but does not expressly teach that a traffic density above a pre-determined density is necessary to recognize a demand for air treatment (Kruger, at least para. [0074], “During operation, measured values are continuously determined at the air inlet 3 and the air outlet 8 by means of particulate matter sensors 17 and nitrogen oxide sensors 18 in order to be able to evaluate the cleaning effect of the air cleaning unit 1. Data about the current traffic volume is also recorded continuously during operation by means of a traffic camera 20. Both the data of the traffic camera 20 and the measured values of the particulate matter sensors 17 and nitrogen oxide sensors 18 are transmitted to the control unit 9. The control unit 9 uses the data and measured val[u]es firstly for operating the air cleaning unit 1 controlled by traffic and air pollution. Secondly, the control unit 9 transmits the data and measured values to the arrangement control unit 24 by means of the communications device for mobile communications networks (LTE) 19. The arrangement control unit 24 additionally receives measurement data from other air cleaning units 1 and non-central air measuring units 25 firstly used for coordinated operation of the air cleaning units 1 and secondly made available to users of a smartphone application by means of a server integrated in the arrangement control unit 24.”).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DONALD J. WALLACE whose telephone number is
(313) 446-4915. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
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.
/DONALD J WALLACE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
