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 .
Specification
35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are:
Paragraph [0015] discloses: “…[T]he plate-shaped tube-screen scrubber is in a shape of a rectangular plate like a string curtain of commercial product as shown in fig. 3, consisting of a number of tubes lined up along the longitudinal axes of frames are placed at regular spacing between the adjacent tubes along the ring-shaped hole perforated frames. The tube near the edge of the plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubber frame is apart from the edge of the frame by 1/4 tube regular spacing (interval between adjacent tubes on the longitudinal axis of the ring-shaped hole perforated frame), while the one near the other side apart by 3/4 tube regular spacing, and the other tubes in the middle frame are apart from each other at the regular spacing as shown in Fig. 3. Such arrangement of the tubes on the longitudinal axis of the plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubber provides the ring-shaped holes and tubes to be arranged in zigzag arrangements on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates and in the tube-screen-scrubber pack, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2, when a plenty of the plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubbers are assembled to fabricate the tube-screen-scrubber pack by assembling side by side of the plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubbers with horizontally rotating of every other plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubbers by 180 degree.”
It appears that the word “frames” underlined above, should be “plates” in order to maintain language consistency and avoid confusion. Further, the phrase “when a plenty” should be “when a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0006] discloses: “…[T]he material is made of by making a plenty of small or large tunnel holes…” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0008] discloses :”…[T]o fabricate a film-fill pack, a plenty of such corrugated film-fill plates…” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0009] discloses: “…[T]he gas passing through the channel holes is obstructed at a plenty of cold-slag-walls…” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0012] discloses: “…[T]he interactions of the flowing air with the water film flowing down over the surfaces of all tubes occur a plenty of times…” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0013] discloses: “[T]he working solution supplying box is schematically drawn as shown in fig. 4, which is in the shape of a flat sqaure box…” The correct word is “square”.
Paragraph [0014] discloses: “…[T]he ring holes on the top and bottom perforated plates are positioned on the same locations and lined up transversly to the air flowing direction and also they are arranged in zigzag shaped along the air flowing direction. The squauare-box-shaped tube-screen-scrubber pack is fabricated by assembling of a plenty of plate-shaped…” The correct word should be “transversely” instead of “transversely”, and “square” instead of “squaure”. Further, the phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0015] discloses: “…[S]uch arrangement of the tubes on the longitudinal axis of the plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubber provides the ring-shaped holes and tubes to be arranged in zigzag arrangements on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates and in the tube-screen-scrubber pack, respectively, as shown in Fig. 2, when a plenty of the plate-shaped…” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0018] discloses: “…[T]he PVC film-fill pack is made of by joining side by side of corrugated PVC film plates attached by a plenty of push buttom connectors provided on both side surfaces of the film plates.” The phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear. Further, the correct word is “button” instead of buttom.
Paragraph [0027] discloses: “…[F]ig. 3 schematically illustrates a picture of plate-shaped tube-screen-scrubber consisting top and bottom perforated frames and a plenty of tubes are suspended between the top and bottom perforated frames like a string curtain.” The preposition “of” is missing after the word “consisting”. Further, the phrase “a plenty” should be “a plurality”, to make the language clear.
Paragraph [0028] discloses: …57 air speed of 500 ft/min and air fllow rate of 5500-8000 ft3/min, 58 air speed 500 ft/min and air flow rate 178,000-23,000 ft3/min, 59 square trapezoidla-duct, 60 trapezoidal top, 4.5(H)x4.5(W) ft2, of sqaure trapezoidal-duct, 61 trapezoidal base, 7(H)x6.6(W) fL2, of sqaure trapezoidal-duct, 62 height, 6.6ft, of sqaure trapezoidal-duct…” The correct words are “flow”, “trapezoidal”, and “square”.
Paragraph [0033], line 1031 discloses: “The auxiliary circulation pipe 97 consistes primary components of a wet-fine-dust-filter…” The correct phrase should be “consists of”.
Paragraph [0037] discloses: “…[T]he NH3 gas and fine dust particle contaminated air stream pass transversly through the vertical…” The correct word should be “transversely” instead of “transversely”.
The above examples are non-limiting, and therefore, the specification should be revised carefully and corrected in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incomplete phrase.
Claim 1 recites: “…a trapezoidal-duct adjusting to deliver a high flow rate in high speed of air stream passing the ventilation to a low speed of air…” It appears that the word “through” is missing between the word “passing” and the word “the”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incorrect spelling.
Claim 1 recites: “…a hydrogen sulfide gas adsorber device for removing of the hydrogen sulfide gas from the exhaused air stream…” The correct word is “exhausted”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incorrect spelling.
Claim 1 recites: “…a dust filter device for removal of the dust particales to protect local residential healths and for safe operations of the hydrogen sulfide adsorber and amonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber devices.” It appears that the correct words are “particles”, “health”, and “ammonia”.
Claim 1 recites: “…a trapezoidal-duct adjusting to deliver a high flow rate in high speed of air stream passing the ventilation fan to a low speed of air passing a large cross secion of the tube-screen-scrubber device to deliver a same flow rate of air;” It appears that the correct word is “section”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incorrect spelling.
Claim 1 recites: “…a ventillation fan blowing air contaminated…” The correct word is “ventilation”.
Claim 1 recites: “…an auxiliary system controlling to circulate working solution through the expanded poultry ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber device equipped in the poultry ammonia gas, hydrsogen sufide gas, and dust removal system.” This phrase is spelled incorrectly. It appears that the correct phrase is “hydrogen sulfide”.
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incorrect spelling.
Claim 2 recites: “The tube-screen-scrubber device comprising a tube-screen-scrubber pack, working solution supply box, and working solution collectin sump, wherein the working solution supply box and the working solution collection sump are attached on the top and bottom of tube-screen-scrubber pack, and wherein the working solution supply box consistes the working soluiton supply box cover with working solution supplying port on top and the bottom mesh net with working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net, and wherein the working solution collection sump consistes a square box with open top and upper rim of the sump able to be fit with the bottom sqaure plate of the tube-screen-scrubber pack and a working solution oulet port on the bottom plate of the sump.” There are various spelling errors in this claim limitation underlined above.
Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: Incorrect grammar.
Claim 3 recites: “…wherein the ring-shaped holes on the top and bottom perforated plates and the tubes suspended in the tube-screen-scrubber pack are lined up transversly to the air flowing direction and the ring holes and tubes are arranged in zigzag shaped along the air flowing direction, and wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack is assembled side by side of a plenty of tube-screen-scrubbers.” This limitation is grammatically incorrect. The correct word is “transversely”. Further, It appears that applicant means to disclose “a plurality” instead of “a plenty”.
Claim 5 is objected to because of the following informalities: Missing prepositions “of” and “the”.
Claim 5 recites: “…wherein the trapezoidal-duct is in a shape of a square duct reducer consisting an air inlet large open cross section and an air outlet small square open cross section, wherein the air inlet large square open cross section and the outlet small square open cross section of the trapezoidal-duct are same with the air outlet…” The preposition “of” is missing between the word “consisting” and the word “an”, and the preposition “the” is missing between the word “are” and the word “same”
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret Claim 5 as reciting: “…wherein the trapezoidal-duct is in a shape of a square duct reducer consisting of an air inlet large open cross section and an air outlet small square open cross section, wherein the air inlet large square open cross section and the outlet small square open cross section of the trapezoidal-duct are the same as the air outlet…”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “…a trapezoidal-duct adjusting to deliver a high flow rate in high speed of air stream passing the ventilation fan to a low speed of air…” There is no mention of a ventilation fan previously in claim 1. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation: “…an auxiliary system controlling to circulate working solution through the expanded poultry ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber device equipped in the poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system.” There is no mention of an expanded poultry ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber device in claim 1. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation: “…an auxiliary system controlling to circulate working solution through the expanded poultry ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber device equipped in the poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system.” This limitation is considered indefinite because it is unclear as to what applicant refers to. How is this auxiliary system controlling? Is the auxiliary system a controller or controlling unit which controls the circulation of working solution? When looking into the specification, it is unclear as to how the auxiliary system controls to circulate the working solution.
Claim 2 recites: “The tube-screen-scrubber device comprising a tube-screen scrubber pack…” This claim is considered indefinite because the way it is claimed, it appears to be an independent claim. However, it appears that it is intending to limit the subject matter of claim 1, since it is providing further limitations related to the tube-screen-scrubber device.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 2 as depending on claim 1. Further, claim 2 will be interpreted as reciting: “The system as claimed in claim 1, wherein the tube-screen-scrubber device further comprises a tube-screen scrubber pack, working solution supply box, and working solution collecting sump, wherein the working solution supply box and the working solution collection sump are attached on the top and bottom of tube-screen-scrubber pack, and wherein the working solution supply box consists the working solution supply box cover with working solution supplying port on top and a bottom mesh net with working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net, and wherein the working solution collection sump consists a square box with open top and upper rim of the sump able to be fit with the bottom square plate of the tube-screen-scrubber pack and a working solution outlet port on the bottom plate of the sump.”
Claim 2 recites: “…and wherein the working solution supply box consists of the working solution supply box cover with working solution supplying port on top and the bottom mesh net with working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net, and wherein the working solution collection sump consists of square box…” There is no mention of a working solution supply box cover, a bottom mesh net, a working solution uniform distributer and a square box previously in claim 1. Therefore, there is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 2 as reciting: “…wherein the working solution supply box consists of a working solution supply box cover with a working solution supplying port on top and a bottom mesh net with a working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net, and wherein the working solution collection sump consists of a square box…”
Claim 3 recites: “The tube-screen-scrubber pack comprising top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates…” This claim is considered indefinite because the way it is claimed, it appears to be an independent claim. However, it appears that it is intending to limit the subject matter of claim 2, since it is providing further limitations related to the tube-screen-scrubber pack.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 3 as depending on claim 2. Further, claim 3 will be interpreted as reciting: “The system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack further comprises top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates…”
Claim 3 recites: “…a plurality of tubes vertically suspended between the top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates and fixed through the ring-shaped holes on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates, wherein the ring-shaped holes on the top and bottom perforated plates and the tubes suspended in the tube-screen-scrubber pack are lined up transversely to the air flowing direction and the ring holes and tubes arranged in zigzag shaped along the air flowing direction, and wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack is assembled side by side of a plenty of tube-screen-scrubbers”. Firstly, there is no mention of ring-shaped holes previously in any of the claims which claim 3 depends from. Secondly, there is no mention of ring holes previously in any of the claims which claim 3 depends from. Therefore, there is no antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret claim 3 as reciting: “The system as claimed in claim 2, wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack further comprises top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates and a plurality of tubes vertically suspended between the top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates and fixed through ring-shaped holes on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates, wherein the ring-shaped holes on the top and bottom perforated plates and the tubes suspended in the tube-screen-scrubber pack are lined up transversely to the air flowing direction and the ring-shaped holes and tubes arranged in zigzag shaped along the air flowing direction, and wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack is assembled side by side of a plurality of tube-screen-scrubbers”.
Claim 4 recites: “The tube-screen-scrubber comprising top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated frames and multiple tubes suspended between the top and bottom ring-shaped hole perorated frames, wherein the ring-shaped holes on the ring-shaped hole perforated frame are formed by surrounding the end plugged portion of the tubes positioned at the center of the ring-shaped holes and lined up along the longitudinal axis of frame are placed at a tube regular spacing between the adjacent tubes along the ring-shaped hole perforated frame, and wherein the tube near the one edge of the tube-screen-scrubber frame is apart from the edge of the frame by a quarter length of the tube regular spacing, while the one near the other side edge apart by three quarter length of the tube regular spacing, and the other tubes in the middle frame are apart from each other by the tube regular spacing.” This claim is considered indefinite because the way it is claimed, it appears to be an independent claim. However, it appears that it is intending to limit the subject matter of claim 3, since it appears to be providing further limitations related to the tube-screen-scrubber pack. Further, there is no disclosure in any of the claims which claim 4 depends from that recite top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated frames. It appears that applicant meant to refer to top and bottom ring-shape hole perforated plates, as claimed in claim 3. Furthermore, as underlined above, there are various limitations that are not previously mentioned in any of the claims which claim 4 depends from. Also, it appears that applicant meant to further limit the subject matter related to the tube-screen-scrubber pack of claim 3.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret Claim 4 as reciting: “The system as claimed in claim 3, wherein the ring-shaped holes on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates are formed by surrounding an end plugged portion of the tubes positioned at a center of the ring-shaped holes and lined up along a longitudinal axis of the plate and placed at a tube regular spacing between the adjacent tubes along the ring-shaped hole perforated plates, and wherein the tube near an edge of the tube-screen-scrubber pack is apart from an edge of the plate by a quarter length of the tube regular spacing, while another tube near the other side edge is apart by three quarter length of the tube regular spacing, and the other tubes in the center of the plate are apart from each other by the tube regular spacing.”
Claim 5 recites: “…the air inlet cross section of a ventilation fan, respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is as long as possible.” This limitation is considered indefinite because it is unclear if applicant is referring to the same ventilation fan as recited in claim 1 or if it is a different/additional ventilation fan. It appears that applicant meant for the ventilation fan to be the same of claim 1.
For purposes of examination, examiner will interpret Claim 5 as reciting: “…the air inlet cross section of the ventilation fan, respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is as long as possible.”
Claim 5 recites: “…the air inlet cross section of a ventilation fan, respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is as long as possible.” The term “as long as possible” is a relative term that renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear as to what the meets and bounds of the claim is. How much is “as long as possible”? What is an appropriate height to determine that the height is “as long as possible”.
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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, C. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2014/0338539, hereinafter Park) in view of Zhao et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2015/0086435, hereinafter Zhao) and Foody et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 2021/0275961, hereinafter Foody).
In regards to Claim 1, Park discloses a trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system (#1) for removing of poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust-particles from an exhausted air stream emitting from poultry production houses and litter storages comprises;
a tube-screen-scrubber device (#2 air and water contactor AWC) for removing of the ammonia gas from an exhausted air stream by contacting of the exhausted air and working solution streams (#6) on the surfaces of tubes equipped in the tube-screen-scrubber device (see figures 1, 4, and 6-11-2 and paragraphs [0023]-[0024], [0033], [0064]);
a hydrogen sulfide gas adsorber device for removing of the hydrogen sulfide gas from the exhausted air stream (ammonia gas removal and evaporative air cooling apparatus removes ammonia and hydrogen sulfide gas) (see figures 1, 4, and 6-11-2 and paragraphs [0023]-[0026] and [0033]);
a trapezoidal-duct (#4) adjusting to deliver a high flow rate in high speed of air stream passing a ventilation fan (#3) to a low speed of air passing a large cross secion of the tube-screen-scrubber device (AWC) to deliver a same flow rate of air (see figures 1, 4, and 6-11-2 and paragraphs [0033] and [0035] and [0064]);
ventilation fan (#3) blowing air contaminated with poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust out of the poultry houses and litter storages (see figures 1, 4 , and 6-11-2, and paragraphs [0033] and [0035]);
an auxiliary system controlling to circulate working solution through the expanded poultry ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber device equipped in the poultry ammonia gas, hydrsogen sufide gas, and dust removal system (see figures 13-14 and paragraphs [0044] and [0077]-[0079]).
Park fails to disclose:
a dust filter device for removal of the dust particles to protect local residential healths and for safe operations of the hydrogen sulfide adsorber and amonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber devices; and
wherein the hydrogen sulfide gas adsorber device for removing of the hydrogen sulfide gas from the exhausted air stream removed the hydrogen sulfide gas by adsorbing the hydrogen sulfide gas on the surfaces of hydrogen sulfide adsorbent pellets loaded in the device.
In regards to (1), Zhao teaches a device (#1) for removing ammonia from a contaminated gas stream of air from a composting house (#14), i.e. poultry house, for poultry waste. The device (#10) comprises a trapezoidal duct, a ventilation fan (#20) for blowing the contaminated gas stream of air (#22) from the composting house (#14), and a tube-screen scrubber device (scrubber #66 with conduits #18) for removing ammonia gas from the contaminated gas stream (#22) by contacting the exhausted air with a working solution from nozzles (#30) into the conduits (#18) on the surfaces of tubes equipped in the tube-screen scrubber device (see figure 1 and paragraph [0015]). It is advantageous to use a filter (#26) in the gas stream to prevent particulate matter from entering the conduits (#18) (see figure 1 and paragraph [0015]).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system as disclosed by Park by further adding a dust filter device for removal of dust particles to protect local residential health and for safe operations of the hydrogen sulfide adsorber and ammonia gas removal tube-screen-scrubber devices, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Zhao teaches a device for removing ammonia from a contaminated gas stream of air from a composting house, i.e. poultry house, for poultry waste, wherein the device comprises a trapezoidal duct, a ventilation fan for blowing the contaminated gas stream of air from the composting house, a tube-screen scrubber device for removing ammonia gas from the contaminated gas stream by contacting the exhausted air with a working solution from nozzles into the conduits on the surfaces of tubes equipped in the tube-screen scrubber device, and wherein it is advantageous to use a filter in the gas stream to effectively prevent particulate matter from entering the conduits and hence, increase the lifespan of the system (see figure 1 and paragraph [0015]).
Park, in view of Zhao, fails to disclose (2) wherein the hydrogen sulfide gas adsorber device for removing of the hydrogen sulfide gas from the exhausted air stream removed the hydrogen sulfide gas by adsorbing the hydrogen sulfide gas on the surfaces of hydrogen sulfide adsorbent pellets loaded in the device.
However, Foody teaches a method and system for upgrading biogas. Biogas is mainly composed of a mixture of several gases, which depends on the origin of the organic matter from which it is derived, and may contain dust particles, small amounts of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, and can be derived from farm waste (see paragraph [0003]-[0004] and [0026]). Ammonia may be removed by physical technologies (e.g. water scrubbing), hydrogen sulfide may be removed from biogas by adsorption on iron oxide pellets or physical absorption (e.g. water scrubbing), and dust may be removed using mechanical filters (see paragraphs [0077], [0079] and [0081]).
Since Foody clearly teaches that hydrogen sulfide may be removed by physical absorption, such as water scrubbing, and by adsorption on iron oxide pellets and both are equally operable, it would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system as disclosed by Park, in view of Zhao, by substituting a known hydrogen sulfide gas removal system for another known and equally operable hydrogen sulfide gas removal system such as a hydrogen sulfide gas adsorber device for removing hydrogen sulfide gas from the exhausted air stream by adsorbing the hydrogen sulfide gas on the surfaces of the hydrogen sulfide adsorbent pellets loaded in the device, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Foody teaches a method and system for upgrading biogas, which is mainly composed of a mixture of several gases, such as small amounts of ammonia and hydrogen sulfide, and can be derived from farm waste, wherein ammonia may be removed by physical technologies (e.g. water scrubbing), and hydrogen sulfide may be equally removed from biogas by adsorption on iron oxide pellets or physical absorption (e.g. water scrubbing) (see paragraphs [0077], [0079] and [0081]).
In regards to Claim 5, Park, in view of Zhao and Foody, discloses the trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system of claim 1. Zhao further teaches wherein the trapezoidal-duct is in a shape of a square duct reducer consisting of an air inlet large square cross section and an air outlet small square open cross section, wherein the air inlet large square open cross section and the outlet small square open cross section of the trapezoidal-duct are the same as the air outlet cross section of the tube-screen scrubber device (#66) and the air inlet cross section of the ventilation fan (#20), respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is long (see figure 1 below and paragraphs [0015] and [0019]).
PNG
media_image1.png
625
583
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system as disclosed by Park, by further having the trapezoidal-duct to have the shape of a square duct reducer consisting of an air inlet large square cross section and an air outlet small square open cross section, wherein the air inlet large square open cross section and the outlet small square open cross section of the trapezoidal-duct are the same as the air outlet cross section of the tube-screen scrubber device and the air inlet cross section of the ventilation fan, respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is long, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Zhao further teaches wherein the trapezoidal-duct is in a shape of a square duct reducer consisting of an air inlet large square cross section and an air outlet small square open cross section, wherein the air inlet large square open cross section and the outlet small square open cross section of the trapezoidal-duct are the same as the air outlet cross section of the tube-screen scrubber device (#66) and the air inlet cross section of the ventilation fan (#20), respectively, and wherein the height of the trapezoidal-duct is long, thereby obtaining a system having improved purification efficiency (see figure 1 below and paragraphs [0015] and [0019]).
Claims 2-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park, in view of Zhao and Foody, and further in view of Christians et a. (EP3087335B1, hereinafter Christians).
In regards to Claim 2, Park discloses wherein the tube-screen-scrubber device (AWC) further comprises a tube-screen scrubber pack (#20), working solution supply box (#6), and working solution collecting sump (#41), wherein the working solution supply box (#6) and the working solution collection sump are attached on the top and bottom of tube-screen-scrubber pack (#20), and wherein the working solution supply box (#6) consists of a working solution supply box cover with working solution supplying port on top and, and wherein the working solution collection sump consists of a square box with open top and upper rim of the sump able to be fit with the bottom square plate of the tube-screen-scrubber pack and a working solution outlet port (#7) on the bottom plate of the sump (see figure 1 below and figures 6-7 and paragraph [0064]).
PNG
media_image2.png
358
664
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Park fails to disclose a bottom mesh net with working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net.
However, Christians teaches a distributor for falling film evaporator. The distributor (#30), i.e. working solution supply box, includes a cover (#80), i.e. working solution supply box cover, with working solution supplying port on top (#48), and a bottom mesh net (#74), i.e. plurality of distribution openings forming a mesh net in distribution sheet, with working solution uniform distributer (#58), i.e. distribution sheet formed of a C-shaped piece of sheet metal material, placed on the mesh net (#74) (see figure 5 and paragraph [0013]).
It would have been obvious by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention to modify the trapezoidal-duct assisting poultry ammonia gas, hydrogen sulfide gas, and dust removal system as disclosed by Park, in view of Zhao and Foody, by further having a bottom mesh net with working solution uniform distributer placed on the mesh net, as claimed by the applicant, with a reasonable expectation of success, as Christians teaches a distributor for falling film evaporator comprising a distributor, i.e. working solution supply box, which includes a cover, i.e. working solution supply box cover, with a working solution supplying port on top, and a bottom mesh net, i.e. plurality of distribution openings forming a mesh net in distribution sheet, with working solution uniform distributer, i.e. distribution sheet formed of a C-shaped piece of sheet metal material, placed on the mesh net, thereby obtaining a system with improved working solution distribution efficiency throughout the tube-screen-scrubber pack (see figure 5 and paragraph [0013]).
In regards to Claim 3, Park discloses wherein the tube-screen-scrubber-pack (#20) comprises top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates (#21, #22) and a plurality of tubes (#19) vertically suspended between the top and bottom ring-shaped hole perforated plates (#21, #22) and fixed through ring-shaped holes (#18) on the ring-shaped perforated plates (#21, #22), wherein the ring-shaped holes (#18) on the top and bottom perforated plates (#21, #22) and the tubes (#19) suspended in the tube-screen-scrubber-pack (#20) are lined up transversely to the air flowing direction and the ring-shaped holes (#18) and tubes (#19) are arranged in zigzag shapes along the air flow direction, and wherein the tube-screen-scrubber pack (#20) is assembled side by side a plurality of tube-screen-scrubbers (see figures 1, 6-7 and 8-1 and paragraph [0037]).
In regards to Claim 4, Park discloses wherein the ring-shaped holes (#18) on the ring-shaped hole perforated plates (#21, #22) are formed by surrounding an end plugged portion of the tubes (#19) positioned at the center of the ring-shaped holes (#18) and lined up along the longitudinal axis of the plate are placed at a tube regular spacing between the adjacent tubes (#19) along the ring-shaped hole perforated plate (#21, #22), and wherein the tube (#19) near the one edge of the tube-screen-scrubber pack (#20) is apart from the edge of the plate by a quarter length of the tube regular spacing, while another tube (#19) near the other side edge is apart by three quarter length of the tube regular spacing, and the other tubes (#19) in the center of the plate are apart from each other by the tube regular spacing (see figures 6-7 and 8-1 and paragraph [0037]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JELITZA M PEREZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8139. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-6:00pm.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571) 270-1051. 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.
/JELITZA M PEREZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774