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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120 as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 16838357, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. The prior-filed application does not support a pre-treatment subassembly, further specified as containing either a water softener or reverse osmosis technology. These limitations are included in the dependent claims 8 and 13, thus the limitations continue to the remaining claims further dependent upon claims 8 and 13. Accordingly, Claims 8 and 13-15 are not entitled to the benefit of the prior application.
Claim Status
Rejected Claims: 1-15
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 13 JANUARY 2026 has been entered.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the amendment of claims 1-4, 6-7, 9-10, and 12 have been acknowledged.
In view of the amendment to claims 1-4, 6, 9-10, and 12, the objections to the claims have been withdrawn.
In view of the amendment to claim 7, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) has been withdrawn.
In view of the amendment to claims 1 and 2, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been modified to include the newly amended limitations from the currently cited art and have been sustained.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed on 13 JANUARY 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, regarding the rejection of claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. as being unpatentable over Kelada (US Patent No. 6099735 A) hereinafter Kelada in view of Cabados (US Patent Application No. 20090242485 A1) hereinafter Cabados in view of Lutterbach (US Patent Application No. 20200283318 A1) hereinafter Lutterbach in view of Boukari (US Patent Application No. 20180085796 A1) hereinafter PRODOSE SARL, that the prior art describes water treatment systems with the purpose of creating cleaned water for human consumption rather than for cleaning and any hot water generated is not intended to use for cleaning and so they are not relevant to the claimed invention (Arguments filed 13 JANUARY 2026, Page 7 to Page 8, Paragraph 3).
In response to applicant's argument that the mobile device of instant claims 1-2 pertains to generating cleaning water rather than drinking water, 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 mobile device of claims 1-2 pertains to a mobile water treatment system, from which the water may preferentially be used for cleaning. As summarized below, Kelada teaches a general flow pattern of sediment filter (Fig. 3, #24) to reverse osmosis (Fig. 3, #28) to ion exchange (Fig. 3, #30) to storage tank (Fig. 3, #34) to the outlet (Fig. 3, #168, small non-number designated arrows starting at #100) with the addendum that the water heating means, the corrective chemical/medication cartridges, and the electric water heater can be included in the flowboard and that the device can be made portable. Therefore the apparatus is capable of supplying treated water which can be used for drinking or cleaning. The overall unit operations of the device are taught by Kelada, including the addition of chemicals after water softening and reverse osmosis, with the specifics of the boiler and order of operations being taught by Cabados, Lutterbach, and PRODOSE SARL.
Applicant argues that the ordering of the filtration module that feeds the boiler first subassembly that outputs water to a second subassembly that injects solid treatment product, that is then fed to a third subassembly where cold water is injected is important such that the solid tablets do not form precipitates when injected and so these features are novel (Arguments filed 13 JANUARY 2026, Page 8, Paragraphs 4-9).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Kelada teaches all of the given elements, and then Cabados teaches that filtering, boiling, and then remineralization should occur in that order, so that the resulting water is free of debris (from the filter) and free of living organisms (from the boiling) and has a desirable amount of minerals. As such, the device of instant claims 1-2 is not novel, as dissolving solid substances after filtering/water softening and heating is well known in the art of water treatment. Typically, this is because the purification processes remove desired dissolved elements as well as undesired dissolved elements.
Applicant argues, regarding the rejections of claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boukari (US Patent Application No. 20200317551 A1) hereinafter Boukari in view of Pyle (US Patent No. 10696575 B1) hereinafter Pyle, that claims 1 and 2 retain their priority date and thus cannot be rejected using Boukari (Arguments filed 13 JANUARY 2026, Page 9).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, claims 1 and 2 were not and are not rejected by themselves in view of Boukari. The priority section describes that claims 8 and 13 (and claims 14-15 because they depend upon claims 8 and 13) do not have priority, but claims 8 and 13 depend upon claims 1 and 2 respectively, and so claims 8 and 13 include, in their entirety, claims 1 and 2. Therefore, all of the limitations of claims 1 and 2 must be present is claims 8 and 13 as well. The rejection has been modified for clarity with the limitations of claim 1 being included in the claim 8 rejection and the limitations of claim 2 being included in the claim 13 rejection, but the rejections have not been modified outside of the addition of the newly amended limitations which are also taught in Boukari.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claims 1-8, 10-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelada (US Patent No. 6099735 A) hereinafter Kelada in view of Cabados (US Patent Application No. 20090242485 A1) hereinafter Cabados in view of Lutterbach (US Patent Application No. 20200283318 A1) hereinafter Lutterbach in view of Boukari (US Patent Application No. 20180085796 A1) hereinafter PRODOSE SARL.
Regarding Claim 1, Kelada teaches a reverse osmosis water purification system (i.e., a device configured to provide heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water, said device comprising) comprising a water storage vessel (i.e., a fluid recovery tank; Fig. 2A, #34), that includes a flowboard (Fig. 2A, #12) and mounting blocks (i.e., an internal chassis) for attaching a sediment filter cartridge (i.e., wherein said device further comprises a filtration module configured to filter the water; Fig. 2A, #24; Col. 9, Line 54 to Col. 10, Line 38) and a reverse osmosis filter (Fig. 2A, #28) that can be made portable (i.e., a mobile device) and includes water heating means (i.e., a first subassembly configured to receive and heat water to generate hot water to a temperature for cleaning; Col. 22, Lines 13-21) and cartridges that dispense medications or corrective chemicals to arrive at a finally desired chemical composition (i.e., a second subassembly ; Col. 22, Lines 33-62) where the cartridges containing material to be introduced would dissolve the material at a controlled rate (i.e., inject and meter a treatment product into the hot water to generate treated hot water; wherein the second subassembly is configured to treat liquid by dissolution of a solid treatment product in a flow of said liquid, said solid treatment product being packaged as tablets stacked in interchangeable cartridges being removably fastened in a base of the second subassembly; Col. 23, Lines 16-24) while also including an electric water hot water heater to the flowboard (i.e., to generate regulated treated hot water; Col. 22, Line 63 to Col. 23, Line 11) where the cartridges are connected to the flowboard by cartridge mounting assemblies (Figs. 12-16, #51-53; Col. 9, Lines 33-53) where these mounting blocks are designed to properly drain spills (Col. 15, Line 66 to Col. 16, Line 11) to the vent/drain gap cup (i.e., the base into which said cartridge is inserted being equipped with a tank configured to recover the water capable of leaking during changing of the cartridge; Fig. 6, #46). Kelada teaches a general flow pattern of sediment filter (Fig. 3, #24) to reverse osmosis (Fig. 3, #28) to ion exchange (Fig. 3, #30) to storage tank (Fig. 3, #34) to the outlet (i.e., an outlet duct connected to an outlet of the third subassembly, the outlet duct supplying heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water; Fig. 3, #168, small non-number designated arrows starting at #100) with the addendum that the water heating means, the corrective chemical/medication cartridges, and the electric water heater can be included in the flowboard.
Kelada does not explicitly teach a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first subassembly for heating, and a second subassembly configured to receive the hot water from the first subassembly.
However, Cabados teaches a water purification system (Abstract) which includes a combination of a reverse osmosis filter (i.e., a filtration module; Fig. 4, #15) which flows to a distiller (i.e., the first subassembly; Fig. 4, #40) which then flows to a remineralizer (i.e., a second subassembly; a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first subassembly for heating, and a second subassembly configured to receive the hot water from the first subassembly; Fig. 4, #25; Paragraph 0039) with the purpose of providing clean, debris- and living organism-free water with a desirable amount of minerals (Paragraph 0013).
Cabados is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a water purification system for use in vending machine applications (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system as taught by Kelada with the order of reverse osmosis followed by distilling and then remineralization because the particular order would create a water product that is clean and has the desired amount of minerals in the end product.
Kelada in view of Cabados does not explicitly teach a third subassembly configured to receive the treated hot water and to perform metered injection of cold water to the treated hot water.
However, Lutterbach teaches the storage of final treated liquid that has been heated within a vessel labeled “hot” (Fig. 2, #44) and final treated liquid that has been cooled in a vessel labeled “cold” (Fig. 2, #50) where the different temperature waters can be combined for the purpose of producing a suitable temperature water for various applications (Paragraph 0029).
Lutterbach is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to systems for purifying liquids (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados with the dual storage of hot and cold water as taught by Lutterbach because the temperature of the water can then be adjusted to be suitable for a wide range of applications.
Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach does not teach a first subassembly with at least one condensing boiler associated with at least one module for supplying gas formed by a plurality of gas cylinders storing the gas in internal volumes thereof, the gas being in a liquid state in a lower part of said internal volumes and in a gaseous state in an upper part of said internal volumes, said gas cylinders being disposed in the internal chassis substantially horizontally and with an opening orifice oriented upwards so that an end of a pipe for passage of the gas opens onto a larger elongated gaseous part and wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system.
However, PRODOSE SARL teaches a condensing gas boiler (i.e., a first subassembly with at least one condensing boiler; Fig. 2, #110) with a gas-supply subassembly (i.e., associated with at least one module for supplying gas; Fig. 2, #200) that accommodates two gas bottles (i.e., formed by a plurality of gas cylinders storing the gas in internal volumes thereof; Fig. 5, #210 and 220) each associated with valves (i.e., said reservoirs each being equipped with a pipe for passage of the gas; Fig. 5, #211 and 221) wherein the bottles are oriented horizontally (i.e., said gas cylinders being disposed in the internal chassis substantially horizontally) and the valves are oriented with a vertical flow path (Fig. 5) and the bottles feed a reservoir (i.e., with an opening orifice oriented upwards so that an end of a pipe for passage of the gas opens onto a larger elongated gaseous part; Fig. 5, #240) which serves as a buffer reservoir to ensure a good mixing and volume of gas (Paragraphs 0070-0071) with the advantages of providing a large volume of water to a high temperature at a quick speed (Paragraph 0016). While PRODOSE SARL does not explicitly teach which gas is used for the boiler, the gas bottles are capable of holding a standard fuel gas such as propane which will contain a mixture of liquid and gas within the bottle (i.e., the gas being in a liquid state in a lower part of said internal volumes and in a gaseous state in an upper part of said internal volumes). PRODOSE SARL further teaches that the invention can be used to clean the pipes in an aircraft (i.e., wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system; Abstract).
PRODOSE SARL is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a mobile device for producing hot liquid for cleaning (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach with the condensing gas boiler as taught by PRODOSE SARL because the condensing gas boiler would provide a large volume of heated water in a short time.
Regarding Claim 2, Kelada teaches a reverse osmosis water purification system (i.e., a device configured to provide heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water, said device comprising) comprising a water storage vessel (i.e., a fluid recovery tank; Fig. 2A, #34), that includes a flowboard (Fig. 2A, #12) and mounting blocks (i.e., an internal chassis) for attaching a sediment filter cartridge (i.e., wherein said device further comprises a filtration module configured to filter the water; Fig. 2A, #24; Col. 9, Line 54 to Col. 10, Line 38) and a reverse osmosis filter (Fig. 2A, #28) that can be made portable (i.e., a mobile device) and includes water heating means (i.e., a first subassembly configured to receive and heat water to generate hot water to a temperature for cleaning; Col. 22, Lines 13-21) and cartridges that dispense medications or corrective chemicals to arrive at a finally desired chemical composition (i.e., a second subassembly ; Col. 22, Lines 33-62) where the cartridges containing material to be introduced would dissolve the material at a controlled rate (i.e., inject and meter a treatment product into the hot water to generate treated hot water; wherein the second subassembly is configured to treat liquid by dissolution of a solid treatment product in a flow of said liquid, said solid treatment product being packaged as tablets stacked in interchangeable cartridges being removably fastened in a base of the second subassembly; Col. 23, Lines 16-24) while also including an electric water hot water heater to the flowboard (i.e., to generate regulated treated hot water; Col. 22, Line 63 to Col. 23, Line 11) where the cartridges are connected to the flowboard by cartridge mounting assemblies (Figs. 12-16, #51-53; Col. 9, Lines 33-53) where these mounting blocks are designed to properly drain spills (Col. 15, Line 66 to Col. 16, Line 11) to the vent/drain gap cup (i.e., the base into which said cartridge is inserted being equipped with a tank configured to recover the water capable of leaking during changing of the cartridge; Fig. 6, #46). Kelada teaches a general flow pattern of sediment filter (Fig. 3, #24) to reverse osmosis (Fig. 3, #28) to ion exchange (Fig. 3, #30) to storage tank (Fig. 3, #34) to the outlet (i.e., an outlet duct connected to an outlet of the third subassembly, the outlet duct supplying heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water; Fig. 3, #168, small non-number designated arrows starting at #100) with the addendum that the water heating means, the corrective chemical/medication cartridges, and the electric water heater can be included in the flowboard.
Kelada does not explicitly teach a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first subassembly for heating, and a second subassembly configured to receive the hot water from the first subassembly.
However, Cabados teaches a water purification system (Abstract) which includes a combination of a reverse osmosis filter (i.e., a filtration module; Fig. 4, #15) which flows to a distiller (i.e., the first subassembly; Fig. 4, #40) which then flows to a remineralizer (i.e., a second subassembly; a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first subassembly for heating, and a second subassembly configured to receive the hot water from the first subassembly; Fig. 4, #25; Paragraph 0039) with the purpose of providing clean, debris- and living organism-free water with a desirable amount of minerals (Paragraph 0013).
Cabados is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a water purification system for use in vending machine applications (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system as taught by Kelada with the order of reverse osmosis followed by distilling and then remineralization because the particular order would create a water product that is clean and has the desired amount of minerals in the end product.
Kelada in view of Cabados does not explicitly teach a third subassembly configured to receive the treated hot water and to perform metered injection of cold water to the treated hot water.
However, Lutterbach teaches the storage of final treated liquid that has been heated within a vessel labeled “hot” (Fig. 2, #44) and final treated liquid that has been cooled in a vessel labeled “cold” (Fig. 2, #50) where the different temperature waters can be combined for the purpose of producing a suitable temperature water for various applications (Paragraph 0029).
Lutterbach is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to systems for purifying liquids (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados with the dual storage of hot and cold water as taught by Lutterbach because the temperature of the water can then be adjusted to be suitable for a wide range of applications.
Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach does not teach a first subassembly with at least one condensing boiler associated with at least one module for supplying gas formed by a plurality of gas reservoirs, each one of said gas reservoirs having an internal volume storing the gas therein, said gas being in a liquid state in a lower part of the internal volume and in a gaseous state in an upper part of the internal volume, said reservoirs each being equipped with a pipe for passage of the gas, said pipe connecting an opening orifice to the upper part containing the gas in the gaseous state and wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system.
However, PRODOSE SARL teaches a condensing gas boiler (i.e., a first subassembly with at least one condensing boiler; Fig. 2, #110) with a gas-supply subassembly (i.e., associated with at least one module for supplying gas; Fig. 2, #200) that accommodates two gas bottles (i.e., formed by a plurality of gas reservoirs, each one of said gas reservoirs having an internal volume storing the gas therein; Fig. 5, #210 and 220) each associated with valves (Fig. 5, #211 and 221) wherein the bottles are oriented horizontally and the valves are oriented with a vertical flow path (Fig. 5) and the bottles feed a reservoir (i.e., said reservoirs each being equipped with a pipe for passage of the gas, said pipe connecting an opening orifice to the upper part containing the gas in the gaseous state; Fig. 5, #240) which serves as a buffer reservoir to ensure a good mixing and volume of gas (Paragraphs 0070-0071) with the advantages of providing a large volume of water to a high temperature at a quick speed (Paragraph 0016). While PRODOSE SARL does not explicitly teach which gas is used for the boiler, the gas bottles are capable of holding a standard fuel gas such as propane which will contain a mixture of liquid and gas within the bottle (i.e., said gas being in a liquid state in a lower part of the internal volume and in a gaseous state in an upper part of the internal volume). PRODOSE SARL further teaches that the invention can be used to clean the pipes in an aircraft (i.e., wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system; Abstract).
PRODOSE SARL is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a mobile device for producing hot liquid for cleaning (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach with the condensing gas boiler as taught by PRODOSE SARL because the condensing gas boiler would provide a large volume of heated water in a short time.
Regarding Claim 3, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada further teaches that the system simply requires attachment to water supply and electrical power for installation (i.e., further comprising: at least one inlet duct for connection to a source for supplying water, and electrical cables for connection to a source for supplying electricity; Col. 22, Lines 22-32).
Regarding Claim 4, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada further teaches that the reverse osmosis water purification can be made portable and intended for travel (Col. 22, Lines 13-21). Lutterbach further teaches that purification systems are known to be mounted in a trailer so that the system can be transported to areas that would not normally be able to produce a purified liquid (i.e., further comprising: a vehicle, said chassis disposed inside a volume of said vehicle; Paragraph 0038).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL to be located in a trailer as taught by Lutterbach because then the system would be able to be transported to areas that cannot normally produce purified liquids.
Regarding Claim 5, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada further teaches that larger embodiments are more suitable for different applications (Col. 22, Lines 13-21). Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL does not explicitly teach wherein the first subassembly for producing hot water comprises a plurality of independent condensing gas boilers. However, Kelada teaches that sizing should be accounted for when applying the system to different application. Furthermore, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960))(See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with a plurality of independent condensing boilers because the plurality of condensing boilers would support larger embodiments for applications that require more water.
Regarding Claim 6, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada teaches an inlet water port (Fig. 3, #100) and a water dispensing spigot (Fig. 1, #16), where non-heated water comes into the device and water may be heated in the device (i.e., further comprising: a duct for inlet of the cold water, an order of supply of the cold water to the boilers being inverse to an order of outlet of the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water from the outlet duct; Col. 6, Lines 39-47).
Regarding Claim 7, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada further teaches that a pump can be used to assist with dispensing (Col. 7, Lines 7-20). Lutterbach further teaches that liquid is pumped into the hot and cold tanks so that they can combined for different applications (i.e., wherein the third subassembly for metered injection of cold water comprises a cold-water metering pump configured for injecting the cold water into the outlet duct of the device to regulate flow and temperature; Paragraph 0029).
Regarding Claim 8, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada further teaches that the pre-treatment includes (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment subassembly comprising) water softening (i.e., at least one of a water softener; Col. 6, Lines 15-25) and the system includes reverse osmosis (i.e., a reverse osmosis filter; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 10, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 2. Kelada further teaches that the system simply requires attachment to water supply and electrical power for installation (i.e., further comprising: at least one inlet duct for connection to a source for supplying water, and electrical cables for connection to a source for supplying electricity; Col. 22, Lines 22-32).
Regarding Claim 11, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 2. Kelada further teaches that larger embodiments are more suitable for different applications (Col. 22, Lines 13-21). Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL does not explicitly teach wherein the first subassembly for producing hot water comprises a plurality of independent condensing gas boilers. However, Kelada teaches that sizing should be accounted for when applying the system to different application. Furthermore, the court held that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960))(See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B)). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with a plurality of independent condensing boilers because the plurality of condensing boilers would support larger embodiments for applications that require more water.
Regarding Claim 13, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 2. Kelada further teaches that the pre-treatment includes (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment subassembly comprising) water softening (i.e., at least one of a water softener; Col. 6, Lines 15-25) and the system includes reverse osmosis (i.e., a reverse osmosis filter; Abstract).
Regarding Claim 14, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Lutterbach further teaches that the outlet of pre-filter units may be held in a tank (Fig. 2, #38) before being delivered to the purification vessels, which utilize heating and evaporation (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment tank disposed downstream of the pre-treatment subassembly; Paragraphs 0023 and 0028) for the purpose of preheating the feedstock (Paragraph 0028). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with the tank as taught by Lutterbach because the tank would enable preheating of water prior to the boiling/evaporation step.
Regarding Claim 15, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 2. Lutterbach further teaches that the outlet of pre-filter units may be held in a tank (Fig. 2, #38) before being delivered to the purification vessels, which utilize heating and evaporation (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment tank disposed downstream of the pre-treatment subassembly; Paragraphs 0023 and 0028) for the purpose of preheating the feedstock (Paragraph 0028). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification system made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with the tank as taught by Lutterbach because the tank would enable preheating of water prior to the boiling/evaporation step.
Claims 9 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL as applied to claims 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Rawlings (US Patent No. 8562310 B1) hereinafter Rawlings.
Regarding Claim 9, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 1. Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL does not teach further comprising: a module for supplying electricity equipped with a means for controlling polarity verifying that said polarity is compatible with a power supply of the boilers, said module configured to activate a rectifier in a condition where said polarity is determined to be incompatible with said power supply.
However, Rawlings teaches the use of a full wave rectifier which is interposed between a direct current motor and an electrical source that will whereby only a desired polarity of current flows to the motor for the purpose of ensuring that the motor will not rotate backwards (i.e., further comprising: a module for supplying electricity equipped with a means for controlling polarity verifying that said polarity is compatible with a power supply of the boilers, said module configured to activate a rectifier in a condition where said polarity is determined to be incompatible with said power supply; Col. 6, Lines 14-30).
Rawlings is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to pumping liquid (Abstract) in common applications such as water treatment (Col. 1, Lines 32-40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification device made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with the full wave rectifier as taught by Rawlings because the full wave rectifier would prevent direct current motors from rotating in an undesired direction.
Regarding Claim 12, Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL makes obvious the device of claim 2. Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL does not teach further comprising: a module for supplying electricity equipped with a means for controlling polarity verifying that said polarity is compatible with a power supply of the boilers, said module configured to activate a rectifier in a condition where said polarity is determined to be incompatible with said power supply.
However, Rawlings teaches the use of a full wave rectifier which is interposed between a direct current motor and an electrical source that will whereby only a desired polarity of current flows to the motor for the purpose of ensuring that the motor will not rotate backwards (i.e., further comprising: a module for supplying electricity equipped with a means for controlling polarity verifying that said polarity is compatible with a power supply of the boilers, said module configured to activate a rectifier in a condition where said polarity is determined to be incompatible with said power supply; Col. 6, Lines 14-30).
Rawlings is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to pumping liquid (Abstract) in common applications such as water treatment (Col. 1, Lines 32-40). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the reverse osmosis purification device made obvious by Kelada in view of Cabados in view of Lutterbach in view of PRODOSE SARL with the full wave rectifier as taught by Rawlings because the full wave rectifier would prevent direct current motors from rotating in an undesired direction.
Claims 8/1, 13/2, and 14-15 are alternatively rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boukari (US Patent Application No. 20200317551 A1) hereinafter Boukari in view of Pyle (US Patent No. 10696575 B1) hereinafter Pyle.
Regarding Claim 8, which contains all of the limitations of claim 1 upon which it depends and are included here, Boukari teaches a device (Fig. 1, D) for services related to providing hot water, to water treatment, to the cleaning of any fixed or mobile surfaces, wherein the device is mobile, comprises an internal chassis (Fig. 1, #120) housing in the lower part a tank (Fig. 1, #100) for recovering possible fluids and a subassembly (Fig. 2, #300) for producing hot water with at least one condensing boiler (i.e. to a temperature for heating; Fig. 2, #320a) associated with at least one module (Fig. 2, #330a) for supplying gas formed by a plurality of gas cylinders of the carburation type (Fig. 2, #331a, 332a) storing in their internal volume the gas in the liquid state in the lower part and in the gaseous state in the upper part, said gas cylinders being disposed in the internal chassis (Fig. 1, #120) substantially horizontally and with the opening orifice oriented upwards so that the end of the pipe for passage of the gas opens onto a larger elongated gaseous part (Claim 1). Boukari also teaches a subassembly for metered injection of cold water (Fig. 2, #500; Page 3, Paragraph 0063) and the treatment of a liquid by dissolution of a solid treatment product in the flow of the liquid with the solid treatment being in the form of tablets and stored in interchangeable cartridges (Fig. 2, #400, 410, 420, 430; Page 2, Paragraph 0035; Page 3 Paragraph 0061), a duct for outlet of hot water from the device (Paragraph 0034), and a tank for recovering possible fluids in an internal chassis in the lower part (Abstract) and a filtration module (i.e., a filtration module; Fig. 2, #630) to filter the water coming from the inlet (i.e., a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first sub assembly for heating; Paragraph 0053). Boukari further teaches that the outlet duct that connects to the potable water network of a vehicle such as an aircraft (i.e., wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system; Paragraphs 0018-0019).
Boukari does not teach further comprising a pre-treatment subassembly comprising at least one of a water softener and a reverse osmosis filter.
However, Pyle teaches a reverse osmosis (RO) subsystem (Fig. 1A-1B, #24) for the treatment of non-potable water to create potable water (Col. 1, Lines 24-27) for the purpose of supplying drinking/potable water that is safe for human contact, such as showering, and consumption (Col. 1, Lines 60-67 – Col. 2, Lines 1-5).
Pyle is analogous to the claimed invention because both are mobile vehicles providing water treatment services (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to add the water treatment apparatus taught by Pyle to the beginning of the apparatus taught by Boukari because then the output water of the combined apparatus would be safe for human contact.
Regarding Claim 13, which contains all of the limitations of claim 2 upon which it depends and are included here, Boukari teaches a device (Fig. 1, D) for services related to providing hot water, to water treatment, to the cleaning of any fixed or mobile surfaces, wherein the device is mobile and comprises an internal chassis (Fig. 1, #120) housing in the lower part a tank (Fig. 1, #100) for recovering possible fluids and a subassembly (Fig. 2, #300) for producing hot water with at least one condensing boiler (i.e., to a temperature for cleaning; Fig. 2, #320a) associated with at least one module (Fig. 2, #330a) for supplying gas formed by a plurality of gas reservoirs storing in their internal volume the gas in the liquid state in the lower part and in the gaseous state in the upper part, said reservoirs each being equipped with a pipe for passage of the gas connecting the upper part containing the gas in the gaseous state to an opening orifice (Claim 2). Boukari also teaches a subassembly for metered injection of cold water (Fig. 2, #500; Page 3, Paragraph 0063) and the treatment of a liquid by dissolution of a solid treatment product in the flow of the liquid with the solid treatment being in the form of tablets and stored in interchangeable cartridges (Fig. 2, #400, 410, 420, 430; Page 2, Paragraph 0035; Page 3 Paragraph 0061), a duct for outlet of hot water from the device (Paragraph 0034), and a tank for recovering possible fluids in an internal chassis in the lower part (Abstract) and a filtration module (i.e., a filtration module; Fig. 2, #630) to filter the water coming from the inlet (i.e., a filtration module configured to filter the water before being received by the first sub assembly for heating; Paragraph 0053). Boukari further teaches that the outlet duct that connects to the potable water network of a vehicle such as an aircraft (i.e., wherein said outlet duct is configured to provide the heated, treated, and regulated cleaning water as a water treatment to cleaning lines of a vehicle, including lines of an aircraft potable water system; Paragraphs 0018-0019).
Boukari does not teach further comprising a pre-treatment subassembly comprising at least one of a water softener and a reverse osmosis filter.
However, Pyle teaches a reverse osmosis (RO) subsystem (Fig. 1A-1B, #24) for the treatment of non-potable water to create potable water (Col. 1, Lines 24-27) for the purpose of supplying drinking/potable water that is safe for human contact, such as showering, and consumption (Col. 1, Lines 60-67 – Col. 2, Lines 1-5).
Pyle is analogous to the claimed invention because both are mobile vehicles providing water treatment services (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art to add the water treatment apparatus taught by Pyle to the beginning of the apparatus taught by Boukari because then the output water of the combined apparatus would be safe for human contact.
Regarding Claim 14, Boukari in view of Pyle makes obvious the mobile device for treating water from claim 8. Pyle further teaches that the distribution subsystem (Fig. 1B, #26) contains a tank (i.e., pretreatment tank; Fig. 1B, #T3) that is downstream of the RO subsystem (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment tank disposed downstream of the pre-treatment subassembly; Fig. 1B, #24; Col. 3, Lines 37-48).
Regarding Claim 15, Boukari in view of Pyle makes obvious the mobile device for treating water from claim 13. Pyle further teaches that the distribution subsystem (Fig. 1B, #26) contains a tank (i.e., pretreatment tank; Fig. 1B, #T3) that is downstream of the RO subsystem (i.e., further comprising a pre-treatment tank disposed downstream of the pre-treatment subassembly; Fig. 1B, #24; Col. 3, Lines 37-48).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 2020/0317551 A1 in view of Pyle (US Patent No. 10696575 B1).
Regarding Claims 1-13, the instant limitations of Claims 1-13 of the pending application are either anticipated by or obvious over Claims 1-13 of reference patent 2020/0317551 A1 with or without Pyle. The only difference between the reference patent 2020/0317551 A1 and the pending application is the pre-treatment subassembly, further specified as containing either a water softener or reverse osmosis technology. Pyle teaches the reverse osmosis technology (Fig. 1A-1B, #24; Col. 1, Lines 24-27) as a pre-treatment for water to be consumed or otherwise in contact with humans by creating potable water out of non-potable water (Col. 1, Lines 60-67 – Col. 2, Lines 1-5). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the mobile hot water, water treatment, and cleaning device taught by patent 2020/0317551 A1 with the reverse osmosis pre-treatment technology taught by Pyle because potable water is more suitable for human contact than non-potable water.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
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 at (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 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.
/A.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/Ryan B Huang/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777