Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 16/571,342

PURE WATER SYSTEMS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 16, 2019
Examiner
POPOVICS, ROBERT J
Art Unit
1776
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Unger Marketing International, LLC
OA Round
7 (Non-Final)
55%
Grant Probability
Moderate
7-8
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
78%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 55% of resolved cases
55%
Career Allow Rate
411 granted / 747 resolved
-10.0% vs TC avg
Strong +23% interview lift
Without
With
+22.8%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
16 currently pending
Career history
763
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.3%
-39.7% vs TC avg
§103
25.3%
-14.7% vs TC avg
§102
25.5%
-14.5% vs TC avg
§112
43.2%
+3.2% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 747 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
DETAILED ACTION 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, 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 1-3, 6-12, 15-17, 19 and 22-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of LIND (US 2,087,157) and/or BOURGEOIS (US 6,132,612 – 2000) and/or MULLER (US 4,659,460) and/or WINKHAUS (DE 3,207,511) and/or GUDMUNDSEN (US 2,117,091) and/or FLEISCHMANN (US 106,530 - 1870) and/or WAGNER (US 2,593,227 - 1952). BOURGEOIS discloses a liquid deionizing twin bed apparatus of the type used in conjunction with a pressure vessel having an inlet for receiving untreated ionized liquid and an outlet through which the treated deionized liquid exits the vessel. The apparatus is comprised of at least one liquid permeable bag “28” or container having an anionic exchanger bed containing materials adapted to absorb one type of charged particle from the fluid and also having a cationic exchanger bed containing materials to absorb oppositely charged particles from the liquid flowing therethrough. The anionic and cationic beds are positioned in series in the liquid permeable container relative to fluid flow therethrough and the liquid permeable container is adapted to be removably housed within the vessel for removing spent anionic and cationic materials and replacing spent anionic and cationic materials by inserting a new liquid permeable container having unspent anionic and cationic materials into the vessel. Figure 1 has been annotated by the Examiner to call out the structures recited in claim 1 and independent claim 15. PNG media_image1.png 1068 438 media_image1.png Greyscale PNG media_image2.png 950 578 media_image2.png Greyscale With respect to claim 1, Lind discloses a water filter system (see FIG. 1) including a tank 7 having an inner surface, the tank defining a single chamber configured to receive water flow, a cover assembly 13 removably attachable to and forming a fluid tight connection with the tank when attached to the tank, a base (e.g., formed by a lower end of the tank including the feet shown in FIG. 1), and a porous filter bag 17 having a purification media 16 disposed therein, the filter bag being positioned in the single chamber and engaging the inner surface of the tank between the base and the cover assembly (see lines 28-30 of the first column of page 2), the porous filter bag being sized to maintain the purification media within the filter bag (i) prior to use, and (ii) during use (see lines 12-14 and 28-31 of the first column of page 2), the porous filter bag has a bottom region 19 that is seamless (see lines 16-17 of the first column of page 2 and FIG. 3). Lind discloses that the water treatment capacity of the water filter system can be adjusted by adjusting a number of bags and the quantity of material held in each bag (see lines 7-29 of the second column of page 2). Lind further discloses that a single bag can be installed in the tank (see claim 4). It would have been obvious to have modified the system of Lind so as to have included a single porous filter bag to provide a water treatment capacity for a particular application. Lind and Bourgeois fail to specify one or more wheels operably coupled to the base and configured to allow movement of the water filter system during use. Muller et al disclose an analogous water filter system that includes one or more wheels (e.g., associated with the trailer shown in FIG. 2) operably coupled to a base 14 of a tank 4 to allow movement of the water treatment system. Muller et al suggest that the wheels permit movement of the water filter system from one location to another. It would have been obvious to have modified the system of Lind and/or Bourgeois so as to have included one or more wheels coupled to the base as suggested by Muller et al in order to facilitate movement of the water filter system from one location to another. Lind, Muller et al. and Bourgeois fail to specify the single porous filter bag is made from a material that maintains the purification media under compression and operable to purify water after a 20% reduction in volume of the purification media due to use of the purification media for purification of the water flow through the single chamber. Winkhaus discloses a porous filter bag 7 made of a material (see the Figure and paragraph 35 of the machine translation) sized to maintain a purification material (e.g., a weakly acidic cation exchange resin, see paragraph 39 of the machine language translation) under compression within the filter bag prior to and during use, the filter bag being capable of purifying water after the purification media has been depleted and reduced in volume up to 20% since it is made of a flexible material (see paragraphs 16-28 of the machine language translation) and because the porous flexible filter bag prevents the formation of a liquid passage on the outside or inside of the porous bag during use (see paragraph 17 of the machine language translation). It would have been obvious to have modified the porous filter bag in the system suggested by Lind and Muller et al so as to have as to be formed of a material sized to maintain the purification material under compression as suggested by Winkhaus in order to prevent the formation of a liquid passage on the outside or inside of the porous bag during use. GUDMUNDSEN, in 1938, disclosed the use of a “compression band 10” or “another resilient material” to maintain the contents of the bag in a “proper state of compression”, “to prevent the formation of rivulets or channels and insure all portions of the zeolite material are being uniformly used”. Page 2, column 1, lines 5-30. In view of GUDMUNDSEN, it would have been obvious to modify the bags used in LIND or BOURGEOIS, by making them of a resilient material, in order to maintain a proper state of compression, and prevent the formation of rivulets or channels in the media, and ensure that all portions of the treatment material are being uniformly used, as taught to be desirable by GUDMUNDSEN. PNG media_image3.png 874 613 media_image3.png Greyscale From numbered page 2, left column of GUDMUNDSEN: PNG media_image4.png 541 768 media_image4.png Greyscale Applicants’ specification express similar sentiment: PNG media_image5.png 428 888 media_image5.png Greyscale Regarding claims 2-3, Muller et al discloses a deionizing resin that includes a mixed bed (e.g., the mixed bed ion exchange resin, see lines 15-16 of col. 3). Concerning claim 5, Lind includes a diffuser plate 10a in the tank having an inner area with a plurality of fluid passages (see FIG. 1), while Bourgeois discloses diffuser plate 32. As to claim 6, Lind includes a mesh covering the plurality of fluid passage openings (e.g., formed by a bottom piece 19 the bag 17). Regarding claims 7-8, Lind discloses the diffuser plate 10a as including an outer area (e.g., the outer peripheral edge) that is sealingly secured with the inner surface of the tank (see FIG. 1). Regarding claim 8, diffuser plate 32 of Bourgeois, is shown secured in tank 15 by an unnumbered ring encircling the plate. As to claim 9, Lind discloses the porous filter bag 17 as having an outer wall panel 18 that is a cylindrical tube 18 and a bottom panel 19 (see lines 12-17 of the first column of page 2 and FIG. 3). Regarding claim 10, Lind discloses the outer wall panel 18 as being secured to the bottom panel 19 by an internal seam that has a closure 20 on the open end of the outer wall panel (see lines 12-21 of the first column of page 2 and FIG. 3). Concerning claim 11, Lind discloses the bottom region of the porous filter bag as being defined by the bottom panel 19 (see FIG. 3). As to claim 12, Lind includes a base (e.g., the bottom of tank including the feet shown in FIG. 1) that is integrally formed with the tank 7. With respect to independent claim 15, Lind discloses a water filter system (see FIG. 1) including a tank 7 having an inner surface, the tank defining a single chamber capable of containing a single filter bag (e.g., in a case that only one filter bag is included) a cover assembly 13 removably attachable to and forming a fluid tight connection with the tank when attached to the tank, a base (e.g., formed by a lower end of the tank including the feet shown in FIG. 1), and a porous filter bag 17 having a purification media 16 disposed therein, the filter bag being positioned in the single chamber and engaging the inner surface of the tank between the base and the cover assembly (see lines 28-30 of the first column of page 2), the porous bag having a manual assistance element to assist a user when removing the porous bag from the tank (the limitation “the porous bag having a manual assistance element to assist a user when removing the porous bag from the tank” invoking the constraints under 35 U.S.C. 112(f), the generic placeholder “manual assistance element” being construed as the portion of the bag above the knot described in paragraph 160 of the specification and shown in FIG. 15 of the drawing, the structure being disclosed by Lin and formed by the tied upper end of the sack, see lines 21-27 of the first column of page 2 and FIG. 2 of Lin), the porous filter bag being sized to maintain the purification media within the filter bag (i) prior to use, and (ii) during use (see lines 12-14 and 28-31 of the first column of page 2). Lind discloses that the water treatment capacity of the water filter system can be adjusted by adjusting a number of bags and the quantity of material held in each bag (see lines 7-29 of the second column of page 2). Lind further discloses that a single bag can be installed in the tank (see claim 4). It would have been obvious to have modified the system of Lind so as to have included a single porous filter bag to provide a water treatment capacity for a particular application. Lind and Bourgeois fail to specify one or more wheels operably coupled to the base and configured to allow movement of the water filter system during use. Muller et al disclose an analogous water filter system that includes one or more wheels (e.g., associated with the trailer shown in FIG. 2) operably coupled to a base 14 of a tank 4 to allow movement of the water treatment system. Muller et al suggest that the wheels permit movement of the water filter system from one location to another. It would have been obvious to have modified the system of Lind and/or Bourgeois so as to have included one or more wheels coupled to the base as suggested by Muller et al in order to facilitate movement of the water filter system from one location to another. Lind, Muller et al. and Bourgeois fail to specify the single porous filter bag as being made from a material that maintains the purification media under compression and operable to purify water after a 20% reduction in volume of the purification media due to use of the purification media for purification of the water flow through the single chamber. Winkhaus discloses a porous filter bag 7 made of a material (see the Figure and paragraph 35 of the machine translation) sized to maintain a purification material (e.g., a weakly acidic cation exchange resin, see paragraph 39 of the machine language translation) under compression within the filter bag prior to and during use, the filter bag being capable of purifying water after the purification media has been depleted and reduced in volume up to 20% since it is made of a flexible material (see paragraphs 16-28 of the machine language translation) and because the porous flexible filter bag prevents the formation of a liquid passage on the outside or inside of the porous bag during use (see paragraph 17 of the machine language translation). It would have been obvious to have modified the porous filter bag in the system suggested by Lind and Muller et al so as to have as to be formed of a material sized to maintain the purification material under compression as suggested by Winkhaus in order to prevent the formation of a liquid passage on the outside or inside of the porous bag during use. GUDMUNDSEN, in 1938, disclosed the use of a “compression band 10” or “another resilient material” to maintain the contents of the bag in a “proper state of compression”, “to prevent the formation of rivulets or channels and insure all portions of the zeolite material are being uniformly used”. Page 2, column 1, lines 5-30. In view of GUDMUNDSEN, it would have been obvious to modify the bags used in LIND or BOURGEOIS, by making them of a resilient material, in order to maintain a proper state of compression, and prevent the formation of rivulets or channels in the media, and ensure that all portions of the treatment material are being uniformly used, as taught to be desirable by GUDMUNDSEN. Concerning claim 16, Lind discloses the porous filter bag as having a bottom region 19 that is seamless (see lines 16-17 of the first column of page 2 and FIG. 3). Regarding claim 17, Lind includes a diffuser plate 10a in the tank having an inner area with a plurality of fluid passages (see FIG. 1), the bottom region 19 being arranged in areas where the porous filter bag engages the diffuser plate (see FIG. 1). Regarding claim 19, Muller et al discloses a deionizing resin (e.g., in the form of a mixed bed ion exchange resin, see lines 15-16 of col. 3). The Amendment of August 18, 2025 amends independent claims 1 and 15 to specify: PNG media_image6.png 134 600 media_image6.png Greyscale It is noted that no such amendment was made to independent claim 21. Applicant asserts that this language is not taught by the combination of the references as combined above. FLEISCHMANN discloses upper and lower diffuser plates as depicted in the arrow annotated figure below. Since the unlabeled holes in the diffuser plates of FLEISHMANN do not perforate the perimeter of the plates and spaced from the edge, this disclosure is seen to meet the diffuser plate limitations added by the Amendment of August 18, 2025. WAGNER teaches the use of diffuser plates 40 having an inner area with holes 41 and an outer solid area without holes surrounding the inner area. WAGNER additionally discloses a protruding ring 42 to engage the filter, all of which is depicted in Figure 2 which is reproduced below and discussed in the excerpted text below. In view of the teachings of FLEISCHMANN and/or WAGNER, it would have been obvious to modify the apparatus of the references as combined above, to employ diffuser plates having an inner area with holes 41 and an outer solid area without holes surrounding the inner area in order to distribute/direct flow through the filter. With respect to newly added claims 22 and 23 which specify a “sealing rim”, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of the references as combined above, to employ the protruding ring 42 as taught by WAGNER, to engage the filter of those references in the manner and for the reasons disclosed by WAGNER and reproduced below. PNG media_image7.png 1006 620 media_image7.png Greyscale PNG media_image8.png 490 648 media_image8.png Greyscale PNG media_image9.png 792 673 media_image9.png Greyscale Claim 8 is alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of LIND (US 2,087,157) and/or BOURGEOIS (US 6,132,612 – 2000) and/or MULLER (US 4,659,460) and/or WINKHAUS (DE 3,207,511) and/or GUDMUNDSEN (US 2,117,091) and/or FLEISCHMANN (US 106,530 - 1870) and/or WAGNER (US 2,593,227 - 1952) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of ASTROM (US 1,656,896). Concerning claim 8, Lind arguably fails to specify the diffuser plate as being secured within the tank. Astrom discloses the concept of securing a diffuser plate 8 within a tank 1 by welding (see FIG. 1 and lines 78-84 of page 1). It would have been obvious to have secured the diffuser plate with the tank as suggested by Astrom in order to prevent movement of the diffuser plate during use of the tank. Claims 14 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combined teachings of LIND (US 2,087,157) and/or BOURGEOIS (US 6,132,612 – 2000) and/or MULLER (US 4,659,460) and/or WINKHAUS (DE 3,207,511) and/or GUDMUNDSEN (US 2,117,091) and/or FLEISCHMANN (US 106,530 - 1870) and/or WAGNER (US 2,593,227 - 1952) as applied to claims 1 or 15 above, and further in view of PETRUCCI et al (US 3,442,390). With respect to claims 14 and 18, Lind, Muller et al, Winkhaus, Fleischmann, and Wagner, fail to specify a release assembly comprising a pressure releasing function configured to release pressure from within the tank, wherein the release assembly includes a plunger that is movable to release pressure from within the tank. Petrucci et al disclose a release assembly 110 comprising a pressure releasing function configured to release pressure from within a tank 10, wherein the release assembly includes a plunger 110 that is movable to release pressure from within the tank (see FIG. 1 and lines 19-26 of col. 4). Petrucci et al disclose that the plunger enables the release of venting of air from the tank, the venting function being capable of releasing pressure from the tank. It would have been obvious to have modified the combination suggested by Lind, Muller et al, Winkhaus, Fleischmann, and Wagner so as to have included a plunger as suggested by Petrucci et al in order to permit the venting of air from the tank. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 21 is allowed. The prior art of record fails to teach or suggest the limitation of the handle of the cover assembly being positioned proximate an end of the pivot lever such that the handle shields fluid spray that results from the venting of the pressure as recited in instant claim 21. Response to Arguments of 18 August 2025 Applicants’ arguments with respect to the amendments pertaining to diffuser plates and details thereof, have been considered, but not found persuasive in view of WAGNER and FLEISCHMANN as now applied. Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114 A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 18 August 2025 has been entered. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT JAMES POPOVICS whose telephone number is (571) 272-1164. The examiner can normally be reached from 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM. 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, JENNIFER DIETERLE can be reached on (571) 270-7872. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /ROBERT J POPOVICS/Primary Examiner Art Unit 1776
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 16, 2019
Application Filed
Jan 14, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 19, 2021
Response Filed
May 20, 2021
Final Rejection — §103
Jun 23, 2021
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Jun 23, 2021
Examiner Interview Summary
Jun 29, 2021
Request for Continued Examination
Jul 03, 2021
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 12, 2021
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Sep 03, 2021
Response Filed
Oct 05, 2021
Final Rejection — §103
Jan 07, 2022
Notice of Allowance
Jan 21, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 02, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Jul 22, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Sep 30, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 01, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 03, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 03, 2022
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 21, 2023
Response after Non-Final Action
Feb 23, 2024
Request for Continued Examination
Feb 27, 2024
Response after Non-Final Action
Oct 06, 2024
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Jan 08, 2025
Response Filed
May 17, 2025
Final Rejection — §103
Aug 18, 2025
Request for Continued Examination
Aug 26, 2025
Response after Non-Final Action
Dec 30, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 01, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12595197
CONTAINER, CARTRIDGE, KIT AND METHOD FOR SLOW RELEASE OF ALGAECIDE IN SWIMMING POOLS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12589841
WATER SURFACE FLOATER COLLECTING SHIP
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583762
SCREENING DEVICE FOR USE IN COARSE MATTER SCREENING WELLS OF A WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569787
MULTI-PLATE OR LAMINATED SCREW PRESS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12571226
SUCTION POOL CLEANER
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

7-8
Expected OA Rounds
55%
Grant Probability
78%
With Interview (+22.8%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
High
PTA Risk
Based on 747 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month