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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.1 7(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/28/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-17 have been amended. Claims 5 and 7 have been cancelled. No new claim has been added. Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-17 are pending. Claims 1-4, 6 and 8-17 are examined herein.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Remarks/Arguments and Amendments to the Claims both filed 01/28/2026 have been fully considered. Applicant argues that the claim 1 and its dependent claims are not anticipated nor prima facie obvious over cited prior art(s), Sanna et al. (WO 2018/146597 Al) and/or Keeton, JR. (US 2006/0186042 A1). Applicant argues that: claim 1 is amended to recites “wherein both said first dispensing means and said second dispensing means are constrained integrally secured to said hollow body” in the context of a structure adapted to be at least partially immersed in a liquid to be purified as recited in claim 1 of claimed invention. Such features are neither taught nor fairly suggested in Sanna and/or Keeton, JR. The novel technical effect of these above-mentioned distinguishing features missing from Sanna is to allow for the creation of optimal conditions, as a function of the actual needs AND where needed, to treat the liquid. Indeed, in the context of claim 1, the Extra-cellular Polymeric Substances (EPS) production can be controlled by adjusting the flow rate of the first dispensing means, and the mixing of the liquid outside the hollow body can be controlled by adjusting the flow rate of the second dispensing means. Also, the claimed structure and thus also the first dispensing means and the second dispensing means integrally secured thereto can be moved where needed. See Remarks, pages 5-8.
In response, the applicants’ arguments direct a newly amended claim limitation which is a new issue. Therefore, the arguments are considered moot. Applicant's amendment necessitated a modified/new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Upon further consideration and search, a modified ground of rejections to claims 1-4, 6 and 8-17 are presented in the instant Office action.
MODIFIED REJECTIONS
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 1-4, 6 and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanna et al. (WO 2018/146597 Al, hereinafter “Sanna”), in view of Keeton, JR. (US 2006/0186042 A1), and as evidenced by Yoon (KR20150109551A, see the English translation document and Figures in the original Korean document, hereinafter “Yoon”).
In regard to claim 1, Sanna discloses an apparatus for degrading the organic fraction of a liquid, in particular sewage, by means of active biomass, in particular active sludge particles (page 8, lines 24-26), comprising (Fig. 1; page 8, line 24 thru page 12, line 8):
(i) a hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1 and a ballast 63, Fig. 1 located at the bottom of the side wall) provided with at least one inlet opening (61, Fig. 1) and at least one outlet opening (62, Fig. 1) for the liquid;
(ii) first dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) adapted to dispense an oxygen-containing gas (air), arranged so as to generate a flow of fluid, in particular of a mixture of sewage and said gas, towards said at least one outlet opening; and
(iii) second dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) adapted to dispense an oxygen-containing gas (air), arranged so as to generate a flow of fluid, in particular of a mixture of sewage and said gas, outside the hollow body.
PNG
media_image1.png
701
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The examiner designates the combination of (1) a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with (2) a side wall 67, Fig. 1 and (3) a ballast 63, Fig. 1 located at the bottom of the side wall as the recited “a hollow body”. This is considered prima facie obvious because this simply involves selecting known combination of subcomponents in a known apparatus for degrading the organic fraction of a liquid (a left-hand side of the Fig. 1 is excerpted from Sanna for clarification, set forth below).
[AltContent: oval][AltContent: textbox (A hollow body)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: oval][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: arrow]
[AltContent: oval]
Regarding the limitation “wherein both said first dispensing means and said second dispensing means are integrally secured to said hollow body”, as shown in the Fig. 1, set forth above, it is noted that the dispenser 70 is integrated to the ballast 63, Fig. 1 located at the bottom of the side wall. Moreover, it is well known in the art that gas dispensing mean(s) is/are integrally secured to the hollow body as evidenced by Yoon (KR20150109551A, see the gas dispensing means comprising pump 110, suction pipe 110, inlet 115 and outlet 120 in Fig. 1 are integrally secured to a hollow tube in a wastewater treatment system). Therefore, the recitation “wherein both said first dispensing means and said second dispensing means are constrained integrally secured to said hollow body” are considered prima facie obvious over the teachings of Sanna, and as evidenced by Yoon.
In addition, choosing more than one dispenser (70, Fig. 1) of multiple dispensers as the “first dispensing means”, and the remaining dispensers as “the second dispensing means” is considered prima facie obvious because this simply involves selecting known dispenses in a known apparatus for degrading the organic fraction of a liquid.
Sanna discloses one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged radially further inward with respect to the edge of the hollow body which delimits said at least one inlet opening (the dispensing mean 70 is located at the center of the circle overlapping inlet opening (61, Fig. 1)), and one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged inside the hollow body (please refer to the dispensing means 70, Fig. 1 located inside of the hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1)). Sanna discloses one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged outside the hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1) (please refer to Fig. 1 showing the dispensing mean 70 is located outside of the hollow body). The teachings of Sanna regarding the locations of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) with respect to the hollow body, renders the recitation “wherein said first dispensing means are arranged inside the hollow body and said second dispensing means are arranged outside the hollow body” obvious.
But Sanna does not explicitly discloses the feature of the gas flow rate which can come out of said first dispensing means and the gas flow rate which can come out of said second dispensing means can be adjusted independently of each other.
However, Keeton, JR. discloses a system and method for treating domestic and industrial biological waste using diffusers to force circulation and aerate a treatment lagoon (Abstract). Keeton, JR. discloses an embodiment of a two-lagoon digestion system (Fig. 1; Fig. 2). Keeton, JR. discloses an illustration an embodiment 200 (Fig. 2) of a cross-section of a typical lagoon 202. A manifold 204 is connected to a pipe 206 that is in communication with a diffuser 208. Keeton, JR. discloses that: a smaller diffuser may be used in larger lagoons where the diffusers are placed closer together. In some cases, a smaller diffuser may be used in the middle of the lagoon and a large diffuser may be used in the corner of a lagoon. In some embodiments, an adjustable flow control may be used to individually control the amount of air flowing to a particular diffuser. A flow control may be adjusted to decrease flow on a diffuser that is generating turbulent or slug flow. A flow control may be adjusted to increase flow to a diffuser where solid waste is building up near the diffuser. In some embodiments, the oxygen requirements for a secondary lagoon may be smaller than that of a primary lagoon, therefore the diffusers in the secondary lagoon may be restricted to deliver less air than the diffusers of the primary lagoon (paragraph [0044]).
It is noted that both the Sanna and Keeton, JR. references direct an apparatus for degrading the organic fraction of a liquid, in particular sewage.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Sanna to provide the feature of the gas flow rate which can come out of said first dispensing means and the gas flow rate which can come out of said second dispensing means can be adjusted independently of each other as taught by Keeton, JR., this is because it is preferable to "individually control the amount of air flowing to a particular diffuser with multiple air diffuser system" and “a flow control may be adjusted to decrease/increase flow on a diffuser that is generating turbulent or slug flow and in some embodiments, the oxygen requirements for a secondary lagoon may be smaller than that of a primary lagoon, therefore the diffusers in the secondary lagoon may be restricted to deliver less air than the diffusers of the primary lagoon” as taught by Keeton, JR. (paragraph [0044]).
In regard to claims 2-4, Sanna discloses air delivery means 7, 70 adapted to introduce air inside said at least one structure 6, 106, 206 (page 9, lines 1-2). Sanna also discloses that in this case the superoxidation potential of the bell may be adjusted by varying the amount of air insufflated by means of the diffuser/s 70 (page 16, lines 18-19).
As set forth above, the teachings of Sanna, in view of Keeton, JR., render the limitation “the gas flow rate which can come out of said first dispensing means and the gas flow rate which can come out of said second dispensing means can be adjusted independently of each other” prima facie obvious. Consequently, the teachings of Sanna, in view of Keeton, JR., imply the presence of adjusting adjustment means adapted to adjust said gas flow rate which can come out of said first dispensing means and said gas flow rate which can come out of said second dispensing means independently of each other.
The features of the first adjustment means being distinct from the second adjustment means, and said adjustment means comprise or consist of one or more valves are considered obvious since the gas flows are controlled by valves as evidenced by Keeton, JR. (paragraphs [0028]; [0077]).
In regard to claim 6, Sanna discloses one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged radially further inward with respect to the edge of the hollow body which delimits said at least one inlet opening (the dispensing mean 70 is located at the center of the circle overlapping inlet opening (61, Fig. 1)), and one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged inside the hollow body (please refer to the dispensing means 70, Fig. 1 located inside of the hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1)).
In regard to claim 8, Sanna discloses one or more of the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are arranged radially outside with respect to the hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1) (please refer to Fig. 1 showing the dispensing mean 70 is located outside of the hollow body).
In regard to claims 9 and 10, Keeton, JR., discloses the diffusers (106, Fig. 1) are adapted to produce laminar columns of fine bubbles (paragraph [0029]) which directs a presence of multiple pores that produce bubbles. The mechanism of bubble generation and configuration of diffusers of shown in Fig. 1 taught by Keeton, JR. in conjunction with the dispenser (70, Fig. 1) taught by Sanna, directs said openings of the first dispensing means are present at least or only on one upper portion of the first dispensing means and wherein said openings of the second dispensing means are present at least or only on an upper portion of the second dispensing means.
In regard to claims 11 and 12, Sanna discloses a ballast (63, Fig. 1) for stabilizing the structure (6, Fig. 1) of an apparatus fastened to the edge (page 15, lines 5-7), and further discloses the ballast body (63, Fig. 1) is preferably provided at the lower part of the structure (6, Fig. 1), so as to ensure the vertical positioning of the structure (6, Fig. 1) inside the tank (1, Fig. 1) (page 12, lines 6-8). Sanna discloses more than one dispenser (70, Fig. 1) of multiple dispensers are constrained (limited or restricted) to said hollow body (a tank structure 6, Fig. 1 with a side wall 67, Fig. 1) which directs the more than one dispenser (70, Fig. 1) of multiple dispensers are constrained (limited or restricted) to the ballast (63, Fig. 1).
In regard to claim 13, Sanna discloses the dispensing means (70, Fig. 1) are located vertically different position with respect to the structure (6, Fig. 1) as shown in Fig. 1. This meets the feature of the distance between said first dispensing means and said at least one outlet opening is less than or equal to the distance between said second dispensing means and said at least one outlet opening.
In regard to claims 14 and 15, Sanna discloses the structure (6, Fig. 1) preferably has a ratio between the inlet section (61, Fig. 1), or area of the inlet opening (61, Fig. 1), and the outlet section (62, Fig. 1), or area of the outlet openings (62, Fig. 1), of the liquid which may vary preferably from 100:1 to 100:10 in accordance with the oxidation potential required (col. 14, lines 22-26). This addresses the recited recitation of said hollow body is provided with a section narrowing at or close to said at least one outlet opening. The ratio between the inlet section (61, Fig. 1), or area of the inlet opening (61, Fig. 1), and the outlet section (62, Fig. 1), or area of the outlet openings (62, Fig. 1) taught by Sanna meets the recited ratio of the area of said at least one outlet opening to the area of said at least one inlet opening.
In regard to claim 16, Sanna discloses a deflector (4, Fig. 1) facing said at least one outlet opening (62, Fig. 1) and spaced apart from said at least one outlet opening (62, Fig. 1), adapted to direct the flow of liquid which may come out from said at least one outlet opening (62, Fig. 1) transversely (page 10, lines 3-20).
In regard to claim 17, Sanna discloses at least one floating body (60, Fig. 1), preferably wherein the structure is configured so that, when it is immersed in the liquid, said at least one outlet opening is adapted to remain below the surf ace of the liquid (page 10, lines 29-32).
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 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.
/YOUNGSUL JEONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772