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
Claims 15-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/15/2026. Additionally, claim 11 is directed to non-elected species 6 and is there withdrawn from consideration.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) or 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Rol US 20190344105.
Rol discloses:
1. (Original) An air-moving device comprising: a blower bank 200 defining a linear airflow path between a first side of the blower bank and a second side of the blower bank opposite the first side (from inlet 242 to the outlet 243, or inlet 52 to outlet 62), the blower bank comprising: an inlet 242/52 at the first side of the blower bank; an outlet 243/62 at the second side of the blower bank; an array of one or more blower units 50 positioned between the inlet and the outlet, each blower unit being configured to eject a thrusted airflow from the outlet in substantially the same direction as an ingested airflow into the inlet (see e.g. Figs 1-2); and an articulating joint (223 in e.g. Figs 2-3) configured to rotate the blower bank around an axis of rotation; and a computing device communicatively coupled to the blower bank and comprising: one or more processors; and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to (see e.g. 0039-0041, 0162): modify a blowing angle of the blower bank at least by controlling rotation of the blower bank around the axis of rotation via the articulating and control operation of the one or more blower units of the blower bank (see e.g. 0169).
4. (Original) The air-moving device of claim 1, wherein the inlet 52 has a bell mouth shape.
6. (Original) The air-moving device of claim 1, wherein the articulating joint comprises a stopper configured to limit rotation of the blower bank to a maximum degree of rotation around the axis of rotation (see e.g. 0098 wherein the structure has a limited range [physical constraints] in degrees and any portion of the structure which reaches this range limit can be considered a “stopper” wherein a stopper has no particular structure).
7. (Original) The air-moving device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the computing device to control operation of the one or more blower units at least by independently controlling each blower unit of the one or more blower units (only one blower unit is required in the claim).
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.
Claim(s) 2, 9-10, 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rol US 20190344105 in view of Mohr US 20070256842 in further view of Kinkead US 12144293.
Regarding claim 2, Rol does not disclose the limitation of claim 2.
However, Mohr discloses coupling a fan to a trailer for towing by a vehicle (see e.g. 0029) and Kinkead discloses the use of a trailer hitch 78 for trailers to tow fans (see e.g. Fig 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a trailer for mounting the fan 240 of Rol as taught by Mohr and to use a trailer hitch to do so as taught by Kinkead to gain the benefit of allowing the fan to be used by vehicles that do not have existing fans.
Rol discloses:
9. (Original) A tow-behind blower comprising: a blower bank 240 defining a linear airflow path between a first side of the blower bank and a second side of the blower bank opposite the first side (from inlet 242 to the outlet 243, or inlet 52 to outlet 62) and comprising an array air-moving devices 50 configured to ingest an airflow from the first side of the blower bank and eject a thrusted airflow from the second side of the blower bank; an articulating joint configured to rotate the blower bank around an axis of rotation (comprising 223 in e.g. Figs 2-3).
Rol does not disclose a tow hitch coupled to the blower bank between the first side of the blower bank and the second side of the blower bank and configured to couple to a vehicle.
However, Mohr discloses coupling a fan to a trailer for towing by a vehicle (see e.g. 0029) and Kinkead discloses the use of a trailer hitch 78 for trailers to tow fans (see e.g. Fig 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a trailer for mounting the fan 240 of Rol as taught by Mohr and to use a trailer hitch to do so as taught by Kinkead to gain the benefit of allowing the fan to be used by vehicles that do not have existing fans.
With this modification of Rol, Rol as modified above would disclose a tow hitch (78 of Kinkead) coupled to the blower bank between the first side of the blower bank and the second side of the blower bank (the fan of Rol would be coupled to the trailer [and thereby coupled to the hitch] via the articulating joint at 223 which couples to the fan between the inlet and outlet sides of the fan 240 as in Figs 3-4 of Rol) and configured to couple to a vehicle (see e.g. Fig 1 of Kinkead).
Rol as modified above discloses:
10. (Original) The tow-behind blower of claim 9, further comprising: a control unit (120 of Rol) configured to control operation of the array of air-moving devices (see e.g. 0040-0041 of Rol); and a wheeled chassis attached to at least one of the control unit or the blower bank (see annotated Fig 3 of Mohr below).
Regarding the limitations “a control unit coupled to the blower bank and wherein the blower bank is positioned between the control unit and the tow hitch”, these limitations are directed to the location of the control unit 120 of Rol. MPEP 2144.04 V.I. C. makes it clear that a mere rearrangement of parts that does not modify operation of the pump is held obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art. Thus, a mere change in location of the control unit 120 of Rol as modified above without any change in operation of the blower is an obvious modification [see In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975)].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to locate the control unit such that the blower bank is positioned between the control unit and the tow hitch and coupled to the blower bank to gain the benefit of facilitation access to the controller from the back of the trailer to avoid passing traffic near roadways
PNG
media_image1.png
642
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
12. (Original) The tow-behind blower of claim 10, wherein the array of air-moving devices is powered by at least one of: a battery, an alternating current power source (see e.g. 0018 of Rol), an internal combustion engine, or a power take-off generator.
13. (Original) The tow-behind blower of claim 10, wherein: each air-moving device of the array of air-moving devices is configured to be independently operated (see e.g. 0164); and the control unit is configured to control operation of a combination of air-moving devices based on a blowing characteristic associated with the combination of air-moving devices (see e.g. direction control in 0166 of Rol) .
14. (Original) The tow-behind blower of claim 10, wherein the control unit comprises one or more of: a line laser; a sensor (see e.g. 0042, 0163 of Rol); or a camera configured to provide a visual indication of a blowing direction of the blower bank.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rol US 20190344105 in view of Kinkead US 12144293.
Regarding claim 3, Rol discloses the use of DC current (see e.g. 0018) to power the fan but does not specify the use of a battery and thus does not disclose the limitations of claim 3.
However, Kinkead discloses at least one battery 700 configured to power the one or more blower units.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a battery to power the fan of Rol as taught by Kinkead to utilize a known power source for fans.
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rol US 20190344105 in view of Beaulac US 10337782.
Rol does not disclose the limitations of claim 5.
Beaulac discloses: a grate 105 positioned upstream of the one or more blower units 103.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a grate at the inlet of the fan of Rol as taught by Beaulac to gain the benefit of stopping objects/debris from entering the fan.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rol US 20190344105 in view of Shi US 20260000034.
Regarding claim 8, Rol discloses the use of a controller with instructions for executing by the one or more processors to cause the computing device control the fan device (see e.g. 0039-0041, 0162) but does not disclose causing output of a visual indicator of an area receiving at least a portion of the thrusted airflow ejected from the outlet of the blower bank.
However, Shi discloses causing output of a visual indicator of an area receiving at least a portion of the thrusted airflow ejected from the outlet of the blower bank (see e.g. Fig 16 and 0135).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to utilize a light source for illuminating a blowing region as taught by Shi in the system of Rol to gain the benefit of illuminating the blowing region of the fan so it is more convenient to work with the blower in dim light and at night, thereby improving user experience as taught by Shi in 0057.
Conclusion
See form PTO-892 for additional prior art made of record but not relied upon that is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS ANDREW FINK whose telephone number is (571) 270-3373. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 9-7.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Mark Laurenzi can be reached on (571) 270-7878. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-4373.
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.
/Thomas Fink/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3746
Prosecution Insights