DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the amendments and arguments filed on 05/04/2025, and any subsequent filings.
Notations “C_”, “L_” and “Pr_” are used to mean “column_”, “line_” and “paragraph_”.
Claim 29 is canceled. Claims 21, 23-27 and 34-37 are withdrawn. Claims 21, 23-28 and 30-37 are pending.
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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 05/09/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant's arguments filed 05/04/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim 28
In response to applicant's argument that Petrus does not teach a biogas collector that is elevated to an elevated location with respect to a basin to reduce pressure within the collector chamber (pg. 7), a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
The Applicant argues that reference Petrus does not teach a vacuum source (pgs. 7-8). This is unpersuasive because Petrus was not relied upon to teach a vacuum source.
The Applicant argues that reference Petrus does not teach using negative pressure to promote release of biogas from wastewater within the collector chamber nor that the combination of the vacuum source and the elevated location are operable to maintain a negative pressure at the wastewater-biogas interface within the collector chamber to promote release of biogas from the wastewater (pgs. 7-8). This is unpersuasive because this is directed towards the amended claim.
The Applicant argues that references Lubbe, Bonde and/or Josse do not teach or suggest modifying Petrus to arrive at the limitations of independent claim 28 (pg. 8). This is unpersuasive because this is directed towards the amended claim.
Response to Amendment
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 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.
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 invention.
Claims 28, 30 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2015/0344326 ('Petrus') in view of U.S. Patent US4696718A (‘Lasater’) and in further view of U.S. Publication US20060006055A1 (‘Bonde’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards a method.
Regarding Claims 28, 30 and 32, Petrus teaches a method for capturing biogas from wastewater in a wastewater processing system ([0010]), comprising the steps of:
1) providing an apparatus for capturing biogas from wastewater (Fig, [0025]), the apparatus comprising:
a) a biogas collector (Fig, [0025-0026], stripper column 1) having a collector chamber adapted to collect biogas released from wastewater passing through the collector chamber ([0026]);
c) a biogas disposer (Fig, [0040], gas desulfurisation unit 3) in fluid communication with the headspace of the collector chamber to dispose of biogas withdrawn from the collector chamber ([0039-0040]); and
d) a basin (Fig, [0017], mixing zone 40) in fluid communication with the collector chamber for receiving wastewater from the collector chamber ([0027-0028]);
2) introducing wastewater into the collector chamber through a first pathway (Fig, [0035], line from exit 28 to inlet 14 of stripper unit 1);
3) removing biogas from the wastewater as it passes through the collection chamber ([0063]);
4) removing wastewater from the collector chamber through a second pathway and conveying the wastewater to the basin (Fig, [0027], liquid line 18); and
5) removing biogas from the collector chamber through a third pathway (Fig, [0039-0040], line between outlet 13 and inlet 31) and conveying the biogas to the biogas disposer (Fig, [0039-0040]);
6) wherein the biogas collector is elevated to an elevated location with respect to the basin (Fig, [0017] and [0019], mixing tank 40 is below stripper column 1) such that a wastewater-biogas interface within the collector chamber is between 15 and 30 feet (See annotated Fig. below) above the surface of the wastewater in the basin.
PNG
media_image1.png
478
640
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The distance between liquid surface level 101 and liquid outlet 17 may be between 5% and 20% of the height ([0026], indicated by annotation of orange arrow with square shaped end on the annotated Fig. above). The distance between outlets 17 and 18 can be 5-20% of the height ([0027], indicated by annotation of yellow arrow on the annotated Fig. above), where the height is between 5 and 50 m ([0011]). Thus, the distance between the liquid surface level 101 and outlet 18 is between 10% and 40% of the height (sample calculation: 5% + 5% = 10% and 20 % + 20% = 40%), or between 0.5 m and 20 m when calculated (sample calculations: (5 m)(10%) = 0.5 m, (50 m)(40%) = 20 m), or 1.64 ft and 65.6 ft when converted (sample calculation: (0.5 m)(3.28 ft/m) = 1.64 ft).
Petrus does not teach:
b) a biogas controller adapted to control withdrawal of biogas from the biogas collector, the biogas controller including a vacuum source in fluid communication with a headspace of the collector chamber;
whereby the elevated location is operable to reduce pressure within the collector chamber;
7) wherein the combination of the vacuum source and the elevated location are operable to maintain pressure at the wastewater-biogas interface within the collector chamber between negative 0.15 bar gauge pressure and negative 1.014 bar gauge pressure to promote release of biogas from the wastewater within the collector chamber.
Lasater also relates to a method for capturing biogas (C2, 64-68) from wastewater in a wastewater processing system (C1, L5-7), an apparatus comprising:
b) a biogas controller (Fig. 1, C4, L5-10, vacuum pump 66) adapted to control withdrawal of biogas from the biogas collector (Fig. 1, C4, L5-10, degasification container 22 (Fig. 1, C3, L1-5) has interior chamber 24), the biogas controller including a vacuum source in fluid communication with a headspace of the collector chamber (Fig. 1, C7, L7-16);
whereby the elevated location is operable to reduce pressure within the collector chamber (C2, L3-12);
7) wherein the combination of the vacuum source and the elevated location (C13, L66-C14, L2 and C14, L20-24, falling water level maintains partial vacuum and vacuum pump may be used intermittently, if desired, to further increase the rate at which the exhaust gases leave) are operable to maintain pressure at the wastewater-biogas interface within the collector chamber to promote release of biogas from the wastewater within the collector chamber (C2, L3-12).
Bonde also relates to a method for capturing biogas from wastewater in a wastewater processing system (abstract), wherein the pressure at the wastewater-biogas interface within the collector chamber (degassing unit, [0256]) is between negative 0.15 bar gauge pressure and negative 1.014 bar gauge pressure (vacuum between 0.6-0.8 bar, [0256], is interpreted as negative 0.6 – negative 0.8 bar)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the biogas controller of Lasater and the method of Petrus so the lowered atmospheric pressure causes dissolved gasses within the impure water to almost immediately leave the water (Lasater, C4, L5-10). It would have been obvious to combine the pressure of Bonde and the method of Petrus so that the vacuum is sufficient to remove gases from liquid (Bonde, [0256]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 30: a dissolved concentration of a component of the biogas in the wastewater passing through the collector chamber is reduced to less than about 80% (desulfurized liquid, Petrus, ([0047]) has a lowered sulfide content, the lowering is preferably at least a factor of 10 (Petrus, [0020]), or by at least 90% when converted) of the component saturation concentration at ambient pressure and at a wastewater temperature (Petrus, [0053]) of the wastewater, the component selected from a group consisting of carbon dioxide, methane, hydrogen sulfide (Petrus, [0020]), mercaptan, nitrate, nitrite, nitrous oxide, and ammonia.
Claim 32: the apparatus further comprises a biogas separator (separator, Petrus, [0027]) included as a portion of the biogas controller (separator controls the downward flow, Petrus, [0027]), the biogas separator defines a separator chamber (separator separates degassing zone from mixing zone, Petrus, [0027]) in fluid communication with the collector chamber (separator in stripping unit 1, Petrus, [0027]) to receive a mixture of water combined with biogas withdrawn from the collector chamber, wherein the mixture is separated into biogas and water within the separator chamber (degassing zone where gas is separated off from the anaerobic effluent and the influent, Petrus, [0022]).
Claims 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2015/0344326 ('Petrus'), U.S. Patent US4696718A (‘Lasater’) and U.S. Publication US20060006055A1 (‘Bonde’) as applied to claim 28 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication 20160/230193A1 (‘Josse’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 31, the combination of Petrus, Lasater and Bonde teaches the method of Claim 28, except that the vacuum source comprises an eductor.
Josse also relates to a method for capturing biogas ([0042]) from wastewater (digestate stream, [0034]) in a wastewater processing system ([0011]), where the vacuum source comprises an eductor ([0040]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the vacuum source of the combination of Petrus, Lasater and Bonde can be an eductor, as demonstrated by Josse, to create a vacuum and draw gas from the headspace of the biogas collector (Josse, [0040]).
Claims 33 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication 2015/0344326 ('Petrus'), U.S. Patent US4696718A (‘Lasater’) and U.S. Publication US20060006055A1 (‘Bonde’) as applied to claim 32 above, and further in view of International Publication WO 2012/078044A1 ('Lubbe').
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 33, the combination of Petrus, Lasater and Bonde teaches the method of Claim 32, except that the vacuum source is in fluid communication with the separator chamber to withdraw biogas from the separator chamber.
Lubbe also relates to a method for capturing biogas from wastewater in a wastewater processing system (abstract), wherein the vacuum source (Fig. 1, pg. 12, L5-7, outlet of collection sump 3 can have a vacuum extraction device) is in fluid communication with the separator chamber (Fig. 1, pg. 15, L24-25, collection sump 3 can be cascades or weir meshes. Note that the separator of Petrus can be a perforated plate ([0027])) to withdraw biogas from the separator chamber (pg. 12, L7-8).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the vacuum source and the separator chamber to be in fluid communication, as demonstrated by Lubbe, in the method of the combination of Petrus, Lasater and Bonde to transport the recovered gas phase (Lubbe, pg. 12, L5-10) because the transfer of gases from the liquid effluent to the gas phase may be improved by operating under sub-atmospheric pressure conditions (Lubbe, pg. 16, L1-5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-4613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779