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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 3, line 1, “dual-layer gear” should read “a dual-layer gear”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not 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 not 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 function without reciting 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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “lighting element” in claim 7.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
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.
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.
Claim 6 is 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites “the transmission gear”, and there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 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.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-12, 15 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li (CN107781358).
PNG
media_image1.png
356
514
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a fan structure, comprising: a housing (15) arranged along a first axis, a fan blade (17) rotatably arranged within the housing and along the first axis, and a gear assembly (Fig. 2) including: a sun gear (10) coaxially arranged with the fan blade, a ring gear (11) arranged on an inner wall of the housing, a plurality of planet gears (92) meshing between the sun gear and the ring gear, and a decorative plate (8, considered decorative because it attractively made) arranged on the planet gears, wherein when the fan blade is driven to generate airflow, the driven fan blade rotates the sun gear, the rotating sun gear drives the planet gears to revolve between the sun gear and the ring gear, and the revolving planet gears drive the decorative plate to rotate.
Regarding claim 2, Li teaches a transmission gear (91) meshing with the planet gears.
Regarding claim 4, Li teaches the transmission gear is coaxially positioned with the sun gear, and the transmission gear is rotatably positioned on the fan blade.
Regarding claim 5, Li teaches the decorative plate is driven by the transmission gear through the planet gear.
Regarding claim 6, Li teaches a rotating area of the decorative plate covers a rotating area of the transmission gear.
Regarding claim 8, Li teaches the rotation of the decorative plate defines a circular area.
Regarding claim 9, Li teaches the decorative plate is axially arranged on the top of the housing.
Regarding claim 10, Li teaches the decorative plate is coaxially arranged with the fan blade.
Regarding claim 11, Li teaches the decorative plate is axially positioned beyond a rotation area of the fan blade.
Regarding claim 12, Li teaches the decorative plate is axially positioned opposite to the fan blade.
Regarding claim 15, Li teaches a fan assembly, comprising: a housing (15); a fan rotor (17) rotatably arranged within the housing; a sun gear (10) coaxially connected to the fan rotor; a ring gear (11) secured relative to the housing; a plurality of planet gears (92) meshing with the sun gear and the ring gear; a transmission gear (91) meshing with the planet gears; and a decorative plate (8) coupled to the transmission gear, wherein rotation of the fan rotor drives the sun gear to rotate, the rotation of the sun gear propels the planet gears to revolve between the sun gear and the ring gear, the revolving planet gears drive the transmission gear to rotate, and the rotating transmission gear drives the decorative plate to rotate about the first axis.
Regarding claim 18, Li teaches the transmission gear is coaxially arranged with at least one of the sun gear and the fan rotor.
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 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 of this title, 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.
Claims 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Villella (US2013/0149147).
Regarding claims 7 and 19, Li teaches the fan structure of claim 1 and the fan assembly of claim 15, but fails to teach a lighting element positioned within the housing.
In an analogous art, Villella teaches a planetary geared fan. Vilella teaches a lighting element (3) positioned in the fan housing for use as a lamp.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fan of Li and change it so that a lighting element is positioned within the housing as taught by Villella for use as a lamp.
Claims 13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li in view of Santoro (US2014/0155218).
Regarding claims 13 and 20, Li teaches the fan structure of claim 1 and the fan assembly of claim 15, but fails to teach a rotating speed ratio of the decorative plate relative to the sun gear is 1:200.
In an analogous art, Santoro teaches a fan with planetary gearing. Santoro teaches the gear ratio can be selected that is suitable for the desired application (paragraph [0031]). Thus, Santoro establishes the planetary gear ratio as a result effective variable.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fan of Li and change it so that a rotating speed ratio of the decorative plate relative to the sun gear is 1:200 to optimize a result effective variable to make the gear ratio suitable for the desired application.
Claims 14 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li.
Regarding claims 14 and 16, Li teaches the fan structure of claim 1 and fan assembly of claim 15, but fails to explicitly teach the sun gear is secured to the fan blade via snap-fit or riveting.
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the fan of Li and change it so that the sun gear is secured to the fan blade via snap-fit or riveting because snap fitting and riveting are well known connection methods in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 and 17 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See the PTO-892 for a listing of planetary geared fans.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAMERON A CORDAY whose telephone number is (571)272-0383. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4 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, Courtney Heinle can be reached at (571) 270-3508. 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.
/CAMERON A CORDAY/Examiner, Art Unit 3745
/COURTNEY D HEINLE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3745
Prosecution Insights