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 . This is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election of invention I, claims 1-5 without traverse in the reply filed on August 20, 2025 is acknowledged. Claims 6-20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 5 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 4 recites “claim 2, wherein in step S4, it is necessary to keep the slurry reactor always” in line 2. It is respectfully suggested to amend the limitation to “claim 2, wherein in step S4,
Claim 5 recites “claim 2, wherein in step S4, it is necessary to keep the liquid level in the clear liquid” in line 2. It is respectfully suggested to amend the limitation to “claim 2, wherein in step S4,
Appropriate corrections are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhu et al. (CN 110465111 A, please refer to the attached English translation document, hereinafter “Zhu”), in view of Zhang et al. (CN 102009003 A, please refer to the attached English translation document, hereinafter “Zhang”).
In regard to claim 1, Zhu discloses a method for extracting a clean liquid from a slurry reactor (page 1, Abstract), comprising the following steps (refer to Embodiment 1 and Embodiment 2 in pages 2-3 in conjunction with Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 of the original Chinese document):
(i) Step 1: sucking slurry from the slurry reactor (1, Fig. 1) into a material collecting pipe (2, Fig. 1), and then solid particles settle in the material collecting pipe (2, Fig. 1) and return to the slurry reactor (1, Fig. 2) through a discharging pipe (2, Fig. 1, the discharge pipe 2 is functioning both as a material collecting pipe and a discharging pipe);
(ii) Step 2: making supernatant in the discharging pipe (2, Fig. 1) flow upward along a settling pipe (the pipe upside of the discharging pipe (2, Fig. 1)), and then flow downward at a pipe intersection (the intersection point of the pipe upside of the discharging pipe and the clear liquid pipe (3, Fig. 1) into a clear liquid pipe (3, Fig. 1);
(iii) Step 3: making the supernatant in the clear liquid pipe (3, Fig. 1) flow into a clear liquid transition tank (4, Fig. 1), discharging the clean liquid from the clear liquid transition tank in an overflow mode (the clear liquid leaves the clear liquid transition tank (4, Fig. 1) at the top of the tank); and
(iv) Step 4: introducing gas in the material collecting pipe into an escape pipe (5, Fig. 1) at the pipe intersection and continuously discharging the gas to ensure that the liquid level in the escape pipe is always higher than the pipe intersection, so that the slurry reactor and the clear liquid transition tank are always communicated and the liquid levels are the same (page 3, 2nd paragraph from the top).
But Zhu does not explicitly disclose: (I) the presence of a settling tank, thereby spraying the slurry from the material collecting pipe into a settling tank; and (II) a clean liquid storage tank that collect the clean liquid.
However, regarding (I), Zhang discloses cyclone separator, slurry-bed reaction and separation system (page 1, Title and Abstract). Zhang discloses cyclone separator comprising a main body of the cyclone separator, a liquid discharging pipe, a solid discharging pipe and at least one sucking pipe, wherein one end of the liquid discharging pipe is positioned into the main body of the cyclone separator, the other end of the liquid discharging pipe passes through the top of the main body of the cyclone separator and is positioned outside the main body of the cyclone separator; the solid discharging pipe is connected to the bottom of the main body of the cyclone separator and is communicated with the internal space of the main body of the cyclone separator (pages 3-5; Fig. 1), wherein the system comprises a settling tank (1, Fig. 1), thereby spraying the slurry from the material collecting pipe (4, Fig. 1) into a settling tank (1, Fig. 1).
It is noted that both the Zhu and Zhang references direct a method for extracting a clean liquid from a slurry reactor.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Zhu to provide the feature of a settling tank, thereby spraying the slurry from the material collecting pipe into a settling tank as taught by Zhang, because the method of using a settling tank and spraying the slurry from the material collecting pipe into a settling tank in a slurry reactor system is a known, effective method as taught by Zhang (pages 3-5; Fig. 1).
In addition, the feature of including (II) a clean liquid storage tank that collect the clean liquid is considered prima facie obvious since one skilled in the art would have reasonably expected that a type of storage tank is needed to receive the clean liquid discharged from the clear liquid transition tank.
In regard to claim 2, Zhu discloses the slurry in the slurry reactor is sucked into the material collecting pipe in a siphon manner (i.e., a method of using a tube used to convey liquid upwards from a reservoir and then down to a lower level of its own accord) (page 2, 3rd paragraph from the bottom).
In regard to claim 3, Zhu discloses the slurry in the material collecting pipe first rises vertically and then falls obliquely, and the particles in the discharging pipe fall vertically; the slurry in the material collecting pipe and the slurry in the discharging pipe have a density difference due to different solid contents, thereby forming a directional circulating flow, so that the settled solid particles can quickly return to the slurry reactor (page 2, 1st paragraph from the bottom thru page 3, 1st paragraph from the top).
In regard to claim 4, Zhu discloses the feature of keeping the slurry reactor always communicated with the clear liquid transition tank, so that the liquid levels thereof are the same to ensure that the slurry can be siphoned (page 3, 2nd paragraph from the top).
In regard to claim 5, Zhu discloses the feature of keeping the liquid level in the clear liquid transition tank constant, so as to maintain the power required for siphoning (page 3, 2nd paragraph from the top).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOUNGSUL JEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1494. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/YOUNGSUL JEONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772