www.uspto.gov
`
`UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 2231371450
`
`15/846,335
`
`12/19/2017
`
`Daisuke KANEMATSU
`
`PIPMN-SSSSZ
`
`3745
`
`759°
`52°“
`PEARNE & GORDON LLP
`
`01’07’2020
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`HAMILTONFRANCES F
`
`3762
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`01/07/2020
`
`ELECTRONIC
`
`Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
`
`The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
`
`Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above—indicated "Notification Date" to the
`
`following e—mail address(es):
`
`patdoeket@pearne.eom
`
`PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
`
`

`

`017/09 A0170” Summary
`
`Application No.
`15/846,335
`Examiner
`Frances F Hamilton
`
`Applicant(s)
`KAN EMATSU et al.
`Art Unit
`AIA (FITF) Status
`3762
`Yes
`
`- The MAILING DA TE of this communication appears on the cover sheet wit/7 the correspondence address -
`Period for Reply
`
`A SHORTENED STATUTORY PERIOD FOR REPLY IS SET TO EXPIRE 3 MONTHS FROM THE MAILING
`DATE OF THIS COMMUNICATION.
`Extensions of time may be available under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136(a). In no event, however, may a reply be timely filed after SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing
`date of this communication.
`|f NO period for reply is specified above, the maximum statutory period will apply and will expire SIX (6) MONTHS from the mailing date of this communication.
`-
`- Failure to reply within the set or extended period for reply will, by statute, cause the application to become ABANDONED (35 U.S.C. § 133).
`Any reply received by the Office later than three months after the mailing date of this communication, even if timely filed, may reduce any earned patent term
`adjustment. See 37 CFR 1.704(b).
`
`Status
`
`1). Responsive to communication(s) filed on 27 September 2019.
`El A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)[:] This action is FINAL.
`
`2b)
`
`This action is non-final.
`
`3)[:] An election was made by the applicant in response to a restriction requirement set forth during the interview
`on
`; the restriction requirement and election have been incorporated into this action.
`
`4):] Since this application is in condition for allowance except for formal matters, prosecution as to the merits is
`closed in accordance with the practice under Expade Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s)
`
`flis/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above Claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`[:1 Claim(ss)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(ss) 1_—8 is/are rejected.
`
`D Claim(ss)_ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`
`
`S)
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[:1 Claim(s
`* If any claims have been determined aflowable. you may be eligible to benefit from the Patent Prosecution Highway program at a
`
`participating intellectual property office for the corresponding application. For more information, please see
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init events/pph/index.jsp or send an inquiry to PPeredback@uspto.gov.
`
`Application Papers
`
`10)|:l The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 26 September 2019 is/are: a). accepted or b)[:| objected to by the Examiner.
`Applicant may not request that any objection to the drawing(s) be held in abeyance. See 37 CFR 1.85(a).
`Replacement drawing sheet(s) including the correction is required if the drawing(s) is objected to. See 37 CFR 1.121 (d).
`
`Priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119
`
`12). Acknowledgment is made of a claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119(a)-(d) or (f).
`Certified copies:
`
`a). All
`
`b)C] Some**
`
`c)C] None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2C] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3D Copies of the certified copies of the priority documents have been received in this National Stage
`application from the International Bureau (PCT Rule 17.2(a)).
`
`** See the attached detailed Office action for a list of the certified copies not received.
`
`Attachment(s)
`
`1)
`
`Notice of References Cited (PTO-892)
`
`2) C] Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) E] Interview Summary (PTO-413)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date
`4) CI Other-
`
`PTOL-326 (Rev. 11-13)
`
`Office Action Summary
`
`Part of Paper No./Mai| Date 20200101
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit23762
`
`Page2
`
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-A IA orAIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined underthe first inventor
`
`to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Response to Arguments, Remarks
`
`2.
`
`Applicant is thanked for the remarks filed September 27, 2019 in response to the Non Final Office
`
`Action filed June 28, 2019.
`
`In particular, Applicant is thanked for amending the Drawings and Specification
`
`as requested. Accordingly the Objections have been overcome.
`
`3.
`
`What is paramount, Applicant is thanked for providing an English language translation of the
`
`Japanese Patent Application No.2016-254974,satisfying the enablement and description requirements of
`
`35 USC 112(a), and eliminating Yang et al (US 2019/0032951) as appropriate art under35 USC 102(a)(1).
`
`4.
`
`Accordingly, the Rejections ofClaims 1 —8 as being unpatentable over Joseph (US 2018/0238571)
`
`in view of Yang et al (US 2019/0032951) have been withdrawn.
`
`5.
`
`A second Non Final Office Action, is as follows.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §112(b):
`
`6.
`
`(b) CONCLUSION—The specification shall concludewith one or more claimsparticularly pointing outand
`distinctly claiming thesubject matterwhichthe inventororajoint inventor regardsasthe invention.
`
`7.
`
`Claims1—8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §1 12(b), as being indefinite for tailingto pa rticulany
`
`point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-
`
`AIA the applicant regards asthe invention.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`In re Claim 1, the amended limitation “a first sensor cap. . .and; a second sensor cap” is unclear.
`
`Simply put, the (humidity) sensordoes not have a first cap and a second cap: it is the casethat
`
`has a first cap and a second cap.
`
`It has been understood that Applicant intends to claim a case comprising
`
`a base, a first cap and a second cap. Accordingly, this portion of Claim 1 is equally understood as:
`
`.
`
`a first sensor—capthat has a first ventilation hole and partially covers the opening; and a second
`
`sensor cap that has a second ventilation hole and partially covers the opening; or
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit23762
`
`Page3
`
`.
`
`a first sensor case cap that has a first ventilation hole and partially covers the opening; and a
`
`second sensor case cap that has a second ventilation hole and partially covers the opening
`
`10.
`
`In re Claim 1, the amended limitation “the second sensor cap being inside the first sensor cap” is
`
`unclear. Rather, the application discloses that the second (sensor) cap is inside the base; it is not inside
`
`the first (sensor) cap. It appears that Applicant intends to claim that the first cap is an exterior cap and the
`
`second cap is an interior cap. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been understood as if to
`
`read:
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`a sensor base with a box shape having an opening;
`
`a first sensercap that has a first ventilation hole and th_at partially covers the opening; and
`
`a second sensor cap that has a second ventilation hole and th_at partially covers the opening, the
`
`second sensor cap being inside the first- sensor eap base.
`
`Claim Rejections- 35 USC §103
`
`11.
`
`In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to NA 35 U.S.C. §102 and
`
`§103 (or as subject to pre-AlA 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.
`
`12.
`
`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 fora claimed invention may notbe obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not
`identically disclosed asset forth in section 102 ofthistitle, ifthe differencesbetweenthe claimed invention and
`the prior art are such that the claimed invention asa whole would have been obvious before the effective filing
`date ofthe claimed inventionto a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains.
`Patentability shall not be negated bythe mannerin which the invention wasmade.
`
`13.
`
`This application currently names joint inventors.
`
`In considering patentability of the claims the
`
`examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective
`
`filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the
`
`obligation under 37 CFR 1 .56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not
`
`commonly owned as ofthe effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit:3762
`
`Page4
`
`the applicability of 35 U.S.C. §102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(2) prior art against the later
`
`invention.
`
`14.
`
`Claims1 — 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Joseph
`
`(US 2018/0238571) in View of Terasaki (US 2009/0159765) in View of Chen et al (US 2012/0260747)
`
`15.
`
`In re Claim 1, Joseph discloses aventilation fan (figs 3, 4: (1 14)) comprising:
`
`a housing (102) in which a suction port (110) and an exhaust port (12) are provided;
`
`a blowing part (114) that guides airto the exhaust port from the suction port;
`
`an orifice (perimeter of (120)) that guides air sucked from the suction port (1 10) to the blowing part
`
`(114) via an air exhaust channel (108) fluidly connects the suction port (1 10) and the exhaust port
`
`(112);
`
`a humidity sensor ((128), “The sensor can also be a humidity sensor” [0048]) for detecting humidity
`
`of airin the housing; and
`
`
`
`a humidity sensor case (126) [0047] for accommodating the humidity sensor, wherein the humidity
`
`sensor case includes:
`
`0
`
`0
`
`o
`
`a sensor base (proximal (108)) with a box shape having an opening;
`
`a first sensor cap (125) that has a first-ventilation hole and partially covers the opening; and
`
`a second sensorcap (123) that has a second-ventilation hole (130) and partially covers the
`
`opening, the second sensor cap inside the first sensor cap.
`
`Joseph may be construed as lacking a sensor base cap.
`
`Terasaki teaches a sensor device (figures 4 — 7: (20)), the device comprising:
`
`16.
`
`17.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit23762
`
`PageS
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`a sensor (21)
`
`a sensor base (22)
`
`a sensor base cap (24)/(27)
`
`18.
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was
`
`made to modify Joseph in view of Terasaki, such that the sensor is contained within a protecting enclosure,
`
`thereby protecting it from collisions with a foreign objects and spatter [0025], for the benefit of a protecting
`
`cap that can be easily attached and detached in connection with attaching and detaching a sensor [0046],
`
`to simplify alignment, calibration and replacement.
`
`19.
`
`Chen et al teaches a sensing device ((100): second embodiment) that can be provided with sealed
`
`and open-type chambers in various conditions for accommodating different types of sensing structural
`
`components (fig 18), comprising:
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`afirst cover (150) has afirst ventilation hole (152)
`
`the first cover partially covers an opening (chamber (136));
`
`a second cover (121) has second ventilation holes (194)
`
`the second cover partially covers the opening (136), the second cover being inside the first cover
`
`. wherein the first ventilation hole (152) and the second ventilation hole (194) do not min when
`
`viewed from an inflow direction of air.
`
`[0036 - 0037]
`
`20.
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art atthe time the invention was
`
`made to modify the proposed system as taught by Chen et al, such that the humidity sensorcase comprises
`
`a sensor base first cap and sensor base second cap, for the benefit of simplifying replacing damaged
`
`sensors, to facility operations and maintenance.
`
`21.
`
`Accordingly, the proposed system would yield wherein
`
`.
`
`.
`
`a first sensor-cap that has a first ventilation hole and that partially covers the base opening; and
`
`a second sensor-cap that has a second ventilation hole and that partially covers the base opening,
`
`the second sensor—cap being inside the first sensor cap base.
`
`22.
`
`In re Claim 2, see above, In re Claim 1, wherein the proposed combination comprisesthe first
`
`ventilation hole and the second ventilation hole do not align when viewed from an inflow direction of air.
`
`23.
`
`In re Claim 3, Joseph discloses wherein:
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit23762
`
`Page6
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.
`
`the first sensor cap includes a first windbreak plate (125) that prevents inflow of air, and
`
`the second sensor cap includes a second windbreak plate (123) that prevents inflow of air, wherein
`
`the first windbreak plate and the second windbreak plate include overlapping parts when viewed
`
`from an inflow direction ofthe air (as seen in fig 3).
`
`24.
`
`In re Claim 4, Joseph discloses comprising a design panel (120) that covers the suction port and
`
`has a design surface in which a suction opening (110) for sucking air is provided; however Joseph lacks
`
`wherein the design panel includes a double lattice structure.
`
`25.
`
`Alternatively, Joseph teaches all the elements of the claim including the design panel, except
`
`disclosing that the design panel has a double lattice structure. However,
`
`it would have been an obvious
`
`matter of design choice to provide a double lattice structure on the design panel since the applicant had not
`
`shown that the limitation is for a particular reason or solves a particular problem, and the proposed system
`
`would perform equally well in either configuration.
`
`26.
`
`In re Claim 5, see above, in re Claim 5, wherein it would have been an obvious matter ofdesign
`
`choice to provide wherein the double lattice structure comprises:
`
`.
`
`.
`
`an upstream side crosspiece located on an upstream side in the suction opening; and
`
`a downstream side crosspiece located on a downstream side of the upstream side crosspiece in
`
`the suction opening.
`
`27.
`
`In re Claim 6, Joseph discloses wherein the sensor base (proximal (108)) has a discharge port
`
`(132/134) that is provided in a side surface portion, the side surface portion extending from incentactwith
`
`the opening and discharges air (indicated by flow arrow (138)) that has flowed into the humidity sensor
`
`case.
`
`28.
`
`In re Claim 7, Joseph discloses wherein the discharge port (132/134) is provided in a side surface
`
`of the sensor base, the side surface facing a detection surface of the humidity sensor (128).
`
`29.
`
`In re Claim 8, Joseph discloses wherein the humidity sensor case is provided in the housing and
`
`outside of a peripheral edge of the orifice (as seen in figure 3).
`
`Conclusion
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`ArtUnH23762
`
`Page7
`
`30.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
`
`can be found in the PT0-892: Notice of References Cited.
`
`Contact Information
`
`31.
`
`Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be
`
`directed to Frances F. Hamilton whose telephone number is 571.270.5726. The examiner can normally be
`
`reached Monday — Friday, 9am — 6pm.
`
`32.
`
`Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a US PTO
`
`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.
`
`33.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
`
`Edelmira Bosques can be reached on 571.270.5614. The fax phone number for the organization where
`
`this application or proceeding is assigned is 571.273.8300.
`
`34.
`
`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 Representati\e
`
`or access to the automated information system, call 800.786.9199 (in USA or Canada) or 571 272.1 000.
`
`/Frances F. Hamilton/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3762
`
`/STEVEN B MCALLISTER/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit
`3762
`
`