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
`
`06W”
`
`1801 EAST 9TH STREET
`SUITE 1200
`
`CLEVELAND, OH 44114-3108
`
`HAMILTONFRANCES F
`
`3762
`
`PAPER NUMBER
`
`NOTIFICATION DATE
`
`DELIVERY MODE
`
`06/28/2019
`
`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)
`
`

`

`0/7709 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 g 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 12/19/2017.
`[:1 A declaration(s)/affidavit(s) under 37 CFR 1.130(b) was/were filed on
`
`2a)D 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 Expa/ie Quay/e, 1935 CD. 11, 453 O.G. 213.
`
`Disposition of Claims*
`
`5)
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are pending in the application.
`
`5a) Of the above claim(s)
`
`is/are withdrawn from consideration.
`
`E] Claim(s)
`
`is/are allowed.
`
`Claim(s) fl is/are rejected.
`
`[:1 Claim(s) _ is/are objected to.
`
`) ) ) )
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`
`
`are subject to restriction and/or election requirement
`[j Claim(s)
`9
`* 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)[:] The specification is objected to by the Examiner.
`
`11). The drawing(s) filed on 12/19/2017 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)D Some**
`
`C)D None of the:
`
`1.. Certified copies of the priority documents have been received.
`
`2.[:] Certified copies of the priority documents have been received in Application No.
`
`3:] 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)
`
`Information Disclosure Statement(s) (PTO/SB/08a and/or PTO/SB/08b)
`2)
`Paper No(s)/Mail Date_
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`
`3) C] 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 20190623
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 2
`
`/GREGORY L HUSON/
`
`Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762
`DETAILED ACTION
`
`Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
`
`1.
`
`The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor
`
`to file provisions of the AIA.
`
`Drawings
`
`2.
`
`Figure 7 should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is
`
`illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g). Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121 (d) are required
`
`in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be
`
`labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion
`
`of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and
`
`informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not
`
`be held in abeyance.
`
`The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
`
`Specifications
`
`Specification page 6, lines 20 — 22 read, “As shown in FIG. 4, sensor base 9a has a box shape
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`whose at least one surface is provided with opening 22... One side surface of the box shape is provided
`
`with discharge port 13 through which the air that has flowed in via opening 22 is discharged.” However,
`
`discharge port 13 is shown in figure 5, not figure 4.
`
`5.
`
`Please amend specification page 6, lines 20 — 22 read, “As shown in FIG. 4, sensor base 9a has a
`
`
`box shape whose at least one surface is provided with opening 22... As shown in FIG. 5 one One side
`
`surface of the box shape is provided with discharge port 13 through which the air that has flowed in via
`
`opening 22 is discharged.”
`
`6.
`
`Appropriate correction is required.
`
`7.
`
`The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. §112(b):
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 1 12
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 3
`
`(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.
`
`8.
`
`Claims 1 — 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b), 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.
`
`9.
`
`In re Claim 1, the limitation “a sensor base with a box shape having an opening ...a second sensor
`
`cap that has a second ventilation hole and covers the opening inside the first sensor cap” is unclear, as “a
`
`first sensor cap” and “a second sensor cap” cover the same *first sensor”; and they both cap an opening of
`
`a sensor base. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been understood as if to read:
`
`0
`
`.
`
`o
`
`a sensor base with a box shape having an opening;
`
`a sensor base first seriseic cap that has a fillet—ventilation hole and My covers the opening; and
`
`a sensor base second sensor cap that has a seeend—ventilation hole and My covers the
`
`opening, the second cap inside the first sensor cap.
`
`10.
`
`In re Claim 1, the limitation “an air exhaust channel that communicates the suction port and the
`
`exhaust port” is unclear. For purposes of examination, this limitation has been understood as if to read,
`
`“an air exhaust channel that eemmunieates fluidly connects the suction port and the exhaust port”.
`
`11.
`
`In re Claim 2, the limitation “wherein the first ventilation hole and the second ventilation hole do
`
`not overlap each other “ is unclear, as holes do not overlap. Plates could overlap, not holes. For purposes
`
`of examination, the limitation has been understood as if to read, “wherein the first ventilation hole and the
`
`second ventilation hole do not eveFlap—eaeh—etherajgfl”.
`
`12.
`
`In re Claim 3, the limitation “the first windbreak plate and the second windbreak plate include
`
`overlapping parts in which overlap each other when viewed from an inflow direction of the air” is unclear.
`
`For purposes of examination, the limitation has been understood as if to read, “the first windbreak plate and
`
`the second windbreak plate include overlapping parts in—whieh—eveiclap—eaeh—ether when viewed from an
`
`inflow direction ofthe air”.
`
`13.
`
`In re Claim 6, the limitation “wherein the sensor base has a discharge port that is provided in a
`
`side surface portion in contact with the opening” is unclear, as a port (an aperture) cannot contact the
`
`opening (an aperture). For purposes of examination, the limitation has been understood as if to read,
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 4
`
`“wherein the sensor base has a discharge port that is provided in a side surface portion, the discharge port
`
`in fluid communication in—eentaet with the opening”.
`
`14.
`
`In re Claim 8, the limitation “provided on a side outer than an outer peripheral edge of the orifice”
`
`is unclear, for at least the “a side” being indefinite. For purposes of examination, the limitation has been
`
`understood as if to read “provided in the housing and outside of a ena—sideeuteHhanan—euter peripheral
`
`edge of the orifice”.
`
`Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
`
`15.
`
`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.
`
`16.
`
`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.
`
`17.
`
`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 of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider
`
`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
`
`invenflon.
`
`18.
`
`Claims 1 — 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over Joseph
`
`(US 2018/0238571) in view of Yang et al (US 2019/0032951).
`
`19.
`
`In re Claim 1, Joseph discloses a ventilation fan (figs 3, 4: (114)) comprising:
`
`0
`
`a housing (102) in which a suction port (110) and an exhaust port (12) are provided;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 5
`
`a blowing part (114) that guides air to the exhaust port from the suction port;
`
`an orifice (perimeter of (120)) that guides air sucked from the suction port (110) to the blowing part
`
`(114) via an air exhaust channel (108) eemmunieates fluidly connects the suction port (110) and
`
`the exhaust port (112);
`
`a humidity sensor ((128), “The sensor can also be a humidity sensor” [0048]) for detecting humidity
`
`of air in the housing; and
`
`Humidity sensor case -
`
`a humidity sensor case (126) [0047] for accommodating the humidity sensor, wherein the humidity
`
`sensor case includes:
`
`0
`
`0
`
`a sensor base (proximal (108)) with a box shape having an opening;
`
`a sensor base first sensor cap (125) that has a first—ventilation hole and My covers the
`
`opening; and
`
`o
`
`a sensor base second sensor cap (123) that has a second—ventilation hole (130) and [My
`
`covers the opening, the second cap inside the first sensor cap.
`
`20.
`
`21.
`
`Joseph may be construed as lacking a sensor base cap.
`
`Yang et al teaches a ventilating device (figs 1 — 7), comprising:
`
`a housing (111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116) in which a suction port (“A” at (112)) and an exhaust port
`
`(“B” at 113) are provided;
`
`a blowing part (200) that guides air to the exhaust port from the suction port;
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 6
`
`.
`
`an orifice (220) that guides air sucked from the suction port (“A”) to the blowing part (114) via an
`
`air exhaust channel (fig 4) eomrnunieates fluidly connects the suction port (110) and the exhaust
`
`o
`
`.
`
`port (112);
`
`a humidity sensor (820) [880],
`
`a humidity sensor case (figs 5A - 7: (800)) for accommodating the humidity sensor [0085], wherein
`
`the humidity sensor case includes:
`
`0
`
`0
`
`a sensor base (proximal (108)) with a box shape having an opening;
`
`a sensor base first sensor cap (815) that has a first—ventilation hole (811) and My covers
`
`the opening; and
`
`o
`
`a sensor base second sensor cap (proximal (812)) that has a second-ventilation hole (812) and
`
`[My covers the opening, the second cap inside the first sensor cap.
`
`22.
`
`It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention ws
`
`made to modify Joseph as taught by Yan et al, such that the humidity sensor case comprises a sensor base
`
`first cap and sensor base second cap, for the benefit of simplifying replacing damaged sensors, to facility
`
`operations and maintenance.
`
`23.
`
`In re Claim 2, Yan et al discloses wherein the first ventilation hole (811) and the second ventilation
`
`hole (812) do not overlap—eaen—other a_|igfl when viewed from an inflow direction of air.
`
`24.
`
`In re Claim 3, Joseph discloses wherein:
`
`.
`
`the sensor base first sensor cap includes a first windbreak plate (125) that prevents inflow of air,
`
`and
`
`o
`
`the sensor base second sensor cap includes a second windbreak plate (123) that prevents inflow
`
`of air, wherein
`
`o
`
`the first windbreak plate and the second windbreak plate include overlapping parts rn—wnren-overlap
`
`eaen—other when viewed from an inflow direction of the air (as seen in fig 3).
`
`25.
`
`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.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 7
`
`26.
`
`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.
`
`27.
`
`In re Claim 5, see above, in re Claim 5, wherein it would have been an obvious matter of design
`
`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.
`
`28.
`
`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 discharge port in fluid communication in—eentaet
`
`with the opening and discharges air (indicated by flow arrow (138)) that has flowed into the humidity sensor
`
`case.
`
`29.
`
`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).
`
`30.
`
`In re Claim 8, Joseph discloses wherein the humidity sensori
`
`s provided in the housing and
`
`
`outside of a en—a—side—euteiethan—an—euter peripheral edge of the orifice (as seen in figure 3).
`
`Conclusion
`
`31.
`
`The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure
`
`can be found in the PTO-892: Notice of References Cited.
`
`Contact Information
`
`32.
`
`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 on M-F; 9-6.
`
`

`

`Application/Control Number: 15/846,335
`Art Unit: 3762
`
`Page 8
`
`33.
`
`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.
`
`34.
`
`If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor,
`
`Gregory Huson can be reached on 571.272.4887. The fax phone number for the organization where this
`
`application or proceeding is assigned is 571.273.8300.
`
`35.
`
`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.
`
`*‘k'k
`
`/Frances F Hamilton/
`
`Examiner, Art Unit 3762
`
`