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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has not been filed of parent App. No. CN 202321578720.7.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species 2 in the reply filed on 07/10/2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-20 are examined.
Applicant is reminded that upon the cancellation of claims to a non-elected invention, the inventorship must be corrected in compliance with 37 CFR 1.48(a) if one or more of the currently named inventors is no longer an inventor of at least one claim remaining in the application. A request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.48(a) must be accompanied by an application data sheet in accordance with 37 CFR 1.76 that identifies each inventor by his or her legal name and by the processing fee required under 37 CFR 1.17(i).
Claim Objections
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-7, 10-17, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 5, change: “arranged on the [[fan]] housing or the handheld…”
Claim 1, line 6, change: “display a [[currently]] current airflow speed level…”
Claim 2, line 4, change: “a user performs [[an]] the action…”
Claim 4, line 1, change: “wherein, [[the]] a number of levels…”
Claim 6, line 3, change: “gradually increases. [[3]]”
Claim 7, line 2, change: “according to [[the]] a number of pulses…”
Claim 10, line 3, change: “airflow speed adjustment knob is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 11, line 3, change: “airflow speed adjustment roller is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 12, lines 2-3, change: “button is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 13, lines 3-4, change: “is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 14, line 4, change: “a preset time [[unit]] period;”
Claim 15, line 3, change: “within the preset time [[unit]] period,”
Claim 15, line 6, change: “within the preset time [[unit]] period,”
Claim 16, line 5, change: “arranged on the [[fan]] housing or the handheld…”
Claim 16, line 6, change: “display a [[currently]] current airflow speed level…”
Claim 17, line 3, change: “is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 17, line 5, change: “is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 17, line 8, change: “is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 17, line 11, change: “is [[faster]] increased,…”
Claim 20, line 4, change: “a preset time [[unit]] period;”
Claim 20, line 7, change: “preset time [[unit]] period,”
Claim 20, line 10, change: “preset time [[unit]] period,”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretations
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:
a. Claims 1, 16, and 18 - “airflow speed regulator” read as a regulator [means] for regulating airflow speed.
has/have been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because they use generic placeholders:
a. Claims 1, 16, and 18 – “regulator”
coupled with functional language:
a. “for regulating airflow speed”
without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation:
a. Corresponding structure is found in [0042]-[0046].
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.
Claims 1-20 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1, 16, and 18, each recites the limitation "a changing trend". It is unclear of the “trend” that is changing if the “trend” refers to the “control instruction” that is changing or if the instruction results in a “trend” in the speed that changes. The ambiguity and lack of clarity with respect to the use of the terms “a changing trend” in the context of the claim language renders the claim indefinite because the metes and bounds cannot be determined.
Dependent claims are also rejected due to their dependency of a rejected independent 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 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hu (CN 217481566, with citations cited from translation cited as NPL in PTO-892).
Regarding claim 1, Hu discloses a portable fan ([0001], Fig. 1), comprising:
a handheld portion (1);
a housing (2 and 3, which houses the motor, [0037]), connected to the handheld portion (1, as shown in Fig. 1) and having an air inlet (4) and an air outlet (5) opposite to the air inlet (as shown in Fig. 1);
a display screen (9, [0039]), arranged on the fan housing or the handheld portion (1, i.e., arranged on the bottom of the handheld portion, as shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 3) and configured to display a currently airflow speed level and an adjustable airflow speed interval (the phrase “configured to display a currently airflow speed level and an adjustable airflow speed interval” merely represents an intended use or a manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed and does not differentiate the claimed apparatus (i.e., the display screen from the prior art display screen 9 disclosed in Hu). See MPEP 2114. MANNER OF OPERATING THE DEVICE DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE APPARATUS CLAIM FROM THE PRIOR ART), wherein the portable fan is preset with a plurality of airflow speed levels (i.e., the fan can be infinitely speed-adjusted, signifying there are a plurality of airflow speed levels or adjustments in which the fan speed can be set, [0039], lines 14-15), for forming the adjustable airflow speed interval (i.e., the duration of time at the airflow speed controlled by the user, [0043], lines 4-6; the necessary interval for the speed as required by the needs of the user, [0045]);
an airflow speed regulator (7, [0039]), configured to receive a control instruction (i.e., from the user, there is a mechanical switch 8 for controlling the motor and the speed controller 7, [0039], [0041], [0043]) that is in a continuous state (i.e., when the position of the switch 8 is at the position or controlling the motor and the speed controller 7, the speed of the airflow from the fan is always on in a continuous state and is enabled to be freely controlled by the user, [0039], lines 13-16; [0041], [0043]) or has a changing trend (i.e., the user can selectively change the speed (i.e., infinite speed adjustment, [0039], lines 15-16) and configured to selectively perform (i.e., user can freely control and select the speed of the airflow for the fan), through the control instruction (i.e., via switch 8), a continuous adjustment (in the continuous operation of the fan, the user can infinitely adjust the speed, one example being a continuous adjustment as desired by the user as the user is free to control the airflow, [0039], lines 13-16) or an adjustment in a skip-level manner on the current airflow speed level within the adjustable airflow speed interval formed by the plurality of airflow speed levels; wherein, for the continuous adjustment, an adjustment magnitude in which the current airflow speed level is adjusted is one level (i.e., the user can set the speed to one level, i.e., one speed out of the infinitely speed adjustments, [0039], lines 15-16); and for the adjustment in the skip-level manner, the adjustment magnitude in which the current airflow speed level is adjusted is greater than or equal to two levels.
Regarding claim 2, Hu discloses wherein, the airflow speed regulator is configured to selectively perform the continuous adjustment (i.e., the user can selectively change the speed (i.e., infinite speed adjustment, [0039], lines 15-16, user can freely control and select the speed of the airflow for the fan during the continuous operation of the motor in the third position of the switch 8) or the adjustment in the skip-level manner according to a speed at which a user performs an action on the airflow speed regulator or according to a time length for which a user performs an action on the airflow speed regulator (i.e., the user is free to control the airflow for infinitely speed adjustments, [0039], lines 13-16 or for the duration of time to evaporate sweat, [0043], signifying that the time length of the operation for the speed will depend on the needs of the user, [0046]).
Regarding claim 7, Hu discloses wherein, the airflow speed regulator (7) is configured to selectively perform, according to the number of pulses generated per unit time based on the control instruction, the continuous adjustment or the adjustment in the skip-level manner. The phrase “configured to selectively perform, according to the number of pulses generated per unit time based on the control instruction, the continuous adjustment or the adjustment in the skip-level manner” merely represents an intended use or a manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed and does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus disclosed in Hu. See MPEP 2114. MANNER OF OPERATING THE DEVICE DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE APPARATUS CLAIM FROM THE PRIOR ART.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 and 8-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 3, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, when the speed at which the user performs the action on the airflow speed regulator or the time length for which the user performs the action on the airflow speed regulator is less than a preset threshold, the airflow speed regulator is configured to perform the continuous adjustment; and when the speed at which the user performs the action on the airflow speed regulator or the time length for which the user performs the action on the airflow speed regulator is greater than or equal to the preset threshold, the airflow speed regulator is configured to perform the adjustment in the skip-level manner.
Claim 4 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, Hu fails to disclose or suggest the claimed subject of the claim.
Claim 6 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 5.
Regarding claim 8, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, when the number of pulses generated per unit time is less than a preset number threshold, the current airflow speed level is adjusted by one level for each pulse; and when the number of pulses generated per unit time is greater than or equal to the preset number threshold, the current airflow speed level is adjusted by at least two levels for each pulse.
Claim 9 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 8.
Regarding claim 10, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, the airflow speed regulator is an airflow speed adjustment knob; and as a speed at which the user continuously rotates the airflow speed adjustment knob is increased, the adjustment magnitude is increased.
Regarding claim 11, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, the airflow speed regulator is an airflow speed adjustment roller; and as a speed at which the user continuously rotates the airflow speed adjustment roller is increased, the adjustment magnitude is increased.
Regarding claim 12, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, the airflow speed regulator is a touch control button; and as a speed at which the user slides on the touch control button is increased, the adjustment magnitude is increased.
Regarding claim 13, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, the airflow speed regulator is an airflow speed adjustment button or a touch control button; and as a time length for which the user performs an action on the airflow speed adjustment button or the touch control button is increased, the adjustment magnitude is increased.
Regarding claim 14, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein, for the adjustment in the skip-level manner, the adjustment magnitude in which the current airflow speed level is adjusted is a level difference between the current airflow speed level and a finally-reaching airflow speed level within a preset time period; and the level difference is equal to or greater than two levels.
Claim 15 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 14.
Claims 16 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Regarding claim 16, Hu fails to disclose or suggest of an adjustment of a preset adjustment magnitude on the current airflow speed level within the adjustable airflow speed interval formed by the plurality of airflow speed levels; wherein, the adjustment magnitude is positively correlated with a speed at which a user performs an action on the airflow speed regulator or positively correlated with a time length for which a user performs an action on the airflow speed regulator.
Claim 17 would be allowable due to its dependency on claim 16.
Regarding claim 18, Hu fails to disclose or suggest wherein the fan is preset with a plurality of threshold intervals; the airflow speed regulator is configured to: determine the adjustment magnitude according to a respective one of the plurality of threshold intervals in which an action speed or an action time length falls; and adjust the current airflow speed level according to the determined adjustment magnitude; wherein, the action speed is a speed at which a user performs an action on the airflow speed regulator, the action time length is a time length for which the user performs the action on the airflow speed regulator; the plurality of threshold intervals correspond to different adjustment magnitudes from each other.
Claims 19-20 would be allowable due to their dependency on claim 18.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-7928. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30 am- 5:00 pm EST alternating Fridays off.
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.
/ERIC J ZAMORA ALVAREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3745 07/27/2026
Prosecution Insights