6638Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 06/17/2025 has been entered.
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.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 06/17/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-7, 9-10, 12-18, and 20-23 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Specification and Claims have
addressed every objection rejection previously set forth in the Office Action mailed 12/17/2024.
Note: the status identifier of Claim 21 is inaccurate. Amendments to the claims filed on or after July 30, 2003 must comply with 37 CFR 1.121(c).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 06/17 /2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 and 17 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues “Gettman does not disclose that its backwash function flows water through the entirety of its filtration system, only that it flows water through one single component, the sodium ion exchange system.” (See Remarks p 9 ¶2).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., backwash function flows water through the entirety of its filtration system) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant’s further arguments, see Remarks, filed 06/17/2025 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of reasoning and teaching applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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.
Claim(s) 1-7, 9-10, 16, 18, 20, 22 and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over US 2004/0262206-Al, hereinafter Gettman, in view of UMA ( University of Massachusetts Amherst. Ion Exchange Treatment of Drinking Water Supplies : CAFE : Center for Agriculture, Food, and the Environment (CAFE) at UMass Amherst. June1, 2007 . Accessed 12/22/2025. https://www.umass.edu/agriculture-food-environment/cafe/fact-sheets/ion-exchange-treatment-of-drinking-water-supplies), hereinafter UMA.
Regarding Claim 1, Gettman teaches a mobile water purification system (“a mobile field water treatment system capable of supplying multiple water needs”, [0001]), comprising: a movable trailer (“the entire apparatus is highly mobile via the vehicle which may be trailer pulled by another vehicle”, [0006]; Fig 9 Element 1000); a storage tank positioned within the trailer (Fig 2 Element 310 or 320, within element 1000); a water filtration and treatment system positioned at least partially within the trailer and configured to purify source water; (Fig 7 any or all of treatments 100, 200, and 400); a water dispensing system positioned at least partially within the trailer configured to dispense the purified water; (Fig. 7 Element 700);
a monitor configured to monitor in real-time (“Numerous sensors may be installed throughout the apparatus to continuously monitor, and record”, [0019]);
Gettman teaches the monitor is configured to continuously record water characteristics at various points in the apparatus, (“Numerous sensors may be installed throughout the apparatus to continuously monitor, and record, the characteristics of the water at various points in the apparatus”, [0019]); While Gettman does not explicitly state which points throughout the system are monitored, Gettman further provides motivation that sensors are used at locations relevant to determining the water quality difference between the source and the final water “ Such a central control system may allow the user to select the source from where the input water is to be drawn, the quality of the final water, and where the final water is to be stored. Such system may include numerous sensors installed throughout the apparatus to continuously monitor, and record, the characteristics of the water at various points in the apparatus” [0054].
However, UMA teaches monitoring water before and after treatment “After installation, retest both the raw water (prior to treatment) and the treated water at a state certified laboratory to ensure it is working properly and removing the contaminants. You should continue to test the quality of both the raw and treated water annually or more frequently (quarterly or semi-annually) if high levels of contaminants are present in the raw water. Frequent testing will also help you determine how well your treatment system is working and whether maintenance or replacement of components may be necessary” (p. 3 ¶5) and further gives a motivation of adjusting water characteristics to improve system effectiveness: “The effectiveness of this system may also require that raw water be pre-treated to adjust pH levels and filter sediments or other impurities before entering the ion exchange system.” (p. 3 ¶4)
Gettman is considered analogous art because Gettman is in the same field of mobile water treatment systems.
UMA is considered analogous because UMA addresses the problem of water treatment system effectiveness and monitoring.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to configure the continuously monitoring sensors of Gettman to be placed at various points relevant to determining a comparative change in water quality, such as at least before and after treatment, as taught by UMA. Doing so would “help you determine how well your treatment system is working” (UMA p 3 ¶5) as well as provide data for the unique water and design needs of the user “The effectiveness of this system may also require that raw water be pre-treated to adjust pH levels” (UMA p 3 ¶4).
Gettman further teaches one or more solar panels coupled to the trailer (Fig. 7 Element 1100) trailer and configured to generate electricity for powering the system (“solar 1100 energy collection system in electrical communication with at least the mobile electrical power system 900. The solar energy collection system 1100 may be used to maintain the charge of any batteries associated with the mobile power system 900 or the vehicle 1000”, p 17 [0049]). This embodiment is silent to backwash functions.
However, another embodiment of Gettman teaches an automated backwash function configured to clean various filters in the water filtration and treatment system by flowing water through the water filtration and treatment system in reverse order (“pressure filter systems with automated backwash features may also be incorporated”, [0008]), and supports the automated backwash function further being configured to cause the reverse flow of water to occur over a backwash interval that is adjustable based on a quality of the water (“The softener tank 220 may include the controls necessary for regeneration of the resin bed and for backwashing.”, [0039]), given that poor quality water would necessitate deployment of backwashing protocols to regenerate the resin bed at an interval different from water of enhanced quality.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to combine the embodiments of the Gettman system. Doing so would ensure “the controls necessary for regeneration of the resin bed and for backwashing.” (Gettman [0039]).
Alternatively, another embodiment of Gettman also teaches a water dispensing system positioned at least partially within the trailer configured to dispense purified water; (Fig. 6; “the apparatus 50 may incorporate a distillation system 1300 to guarantee that the water is free of organics, undissolved solids, biological contaminants … The distillation system 1300 may incorporate … a solar distillation system 1330, seen in FIG. 6”, [0043]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to incorporate distillation as a Gettman component configured to dispense purified water. Doing so would ensure “that the water is free of organics, undissolved solids, biological contaminants.” (Gettman [0043]).
Regarding Claim 2, Gettman teaches the water filtration and treatment system includes one or more filters configured to remove undesirable matter from the water (“The RO pre-filter serves to remove suspended solids”, [0010]).
Regarding Claim 3, Gettman teaches the water filtration and treatment system includes (i) a screening filter, (ii) a sand filter, (iii) a sediment filter, (iv) a carbon filter, (v) a water softener, (vi) a reverse osmosis filter (“a RO membrane to produce high purity water.”, [0010]), (vii) a granular activated carbon (GAC) filter, (viii) an ultraviolet (UV) filter, or (ix) any combination of (i)-(viii).
Regarding Claim 4, Gettman teaches the water dispensing system includes one or more pumps, a tubing system, and one or more faucets (“The apparatus would be self-contained as to the necessary electrical generation capacity; pumping, piping, valving, hoses, sprayers and other distribution means”, [0003]; “The distribution system may incorporate final point of consumption devices, such as shower heads, spigots, and drinking fountains”).
Regarding Claim 5, Gettman teaches the water filtration and treatment system includes a first portion and a second portion (“Generally the water leaving the sodium ion exchange system will either be directed to the storage system or to the reverse osmosis system”, [0010]; First portion: Fig 7 Elements 100, 200, and optionally 400; Second portion: Fig. 7 Elements 500, 1400 and optionally 400).
Regarding Claim 6, Gettman teaches the tubing system includes a first portion fluidly coupling the first portion of the water filtration and treatment system to a water source (“the vehicle will be located next to a lake or stream such that one may attach a hose from the raw water filtration system to a submersible pump that is placed in the lake or stream”, [0007]).
Regarding Claim 7, Gettman teaches an end of the first portion of the tubing system is configured to be disposed within a natural water source to fluidly couple the first portion of the water filtration and treatment system to the natural water source (“the vehicle will be located next to a lake or stream such that one may attach a hose from the raw water filtration system to a submersible pump that is placed in the lake or stream”, [0007]) and/or
coupled to an artificial water source to fluidly couple the first portion of the water filtration
and treatment system to the artificial water source (“Water may enter the raw water filtration system in any number of ways such as, by way of example and not limitation, rainwater collection systems, fluid containment and recovery systems, and essentially any standing water source …one may attach a hose from the raw water filtration system”, [0007]).
Regarding Claim 9, Gettman teaches the tubing system includes a second portion fluidly coupling the first portion of the water filtration and treatment system to the storage tank (“The water flow path leaving the sodium ion exchange system depends upon the desired quality of the water. Generally the water leaving the sodium ion exchange system will either be directed to the storage system or to the reverse osmosis system.”, [0010]; “The storage system consists of at least one storage tank”, [0011]).
Regarding Claim 10, Gettman teaches the tubing system includes a third portion fluidly coupling the storage tank to a second portion of the water filtration and treatment system (Fig 7 the arrows connecting either 400 and 300 or 300 to 500) and a fourth portion fluidly coupling the second portion of the water filtration system to the one or more faucets (Fig 7 the arrows connecting 1400 to 700; “The water may then proceed to the distribution system 700. The distribution system 700 may incorporate final point of consumption devices, such as shower heads 710, spigots, and drinking fountain”, [0048]).
Regarding Claim 16, Gettman teaches one or more batteries disposed in the movable trailer, the one or more batteries being configured to store at least a portion of the generated electricity (The solar energy collection system 1100 may be used to maintain the charge of any batteries associated with the mobile power system 900, wherein the generated electricity directly powers one or more portions of the water filtration and treatment system, one or more portions of the water dispensing system, or both (“the mobile electrical power system 900 generates electrical power for use by all the power consuming devices in the apparatus…The solar energy collection system 1100 may be used to maintain the charge of any batteries associated with the mobile power system 900”, [0049]).
Regarding Claim 18, Gettman teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the water dispensing system includes: one or more faucets; and one or more tubes fluidly coupling the one or more faucets to the storage tank, wherein the one or more faucets are configured to be removably stored within the trailer (“The apparatus would be self-contained as to the necessary … valving, hoses, sprayers and other distribution means; while containing all the above in a mobile platform”, [0003]; “The water may then proceed to the distribution system 700. The distribution system 700 may incorporate final point of consumption devices, such as shower heads 710, spigots, and drinking fountains”, [0048]).
Regarding Claim 20, Gettman teaches one or more basins coupled to the movable trailer, the one or more basins being configured to collect rainwater (“The solar distillation system 1330 may be mounted on the roof of the vehicle”, [0045]).
Regarding Claim 22, Gettman teaches a storage tank unit includes:
a raw water storage tank storing water capable of being provided to the water filtration and treatment system for filtration and treatment; and a purified water storage tank storing water filtered and treated by the water filtration and treatment system (“The storage system 300 consists of at least one storage tank 310, more commonly at least two storage tanks; at least one potable water tank 310 and at least one non-potable water tank 320”, [0041]).
Regarding Claim 23, the combination of Gettman and UMA regarding claim 1 teaches “Such system may include numerous sensors installed throughout the apparatus to continuously monitor, and record, the characteristics of the water at various points in the apparatus 50” (Gettman [0054]), and “The effectiveness of this system may also require that raw water be pre-treated to adjust pH levels and filter sediments or other impurities before entering the ion exchange system.” (UMA p. 3 ¶4).
The above combination of Gettman and UMA supports a pH meter to test the pH of the water, given pH is a characteristic of water to be monitored that impacts the effectiveness of an ion exchange softening system.
The above combination of Gettman and UMA provides motivation for the pH of water being adjustable with materials stored on the trailer, given the continuous monitoring of the Gettman sensors in an integrated filtration- ion exchange system and the potential design need of UMA to adjust the pH of water before ion exchange.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use continuously monitoring sensors to monitor the pH as a characteristic of the water of Gettman. Doing so would at least allow for appropriate water softening treatment data to be collected for pH adjustments to be made as needed, as taught by UMA. It would have been obvious to store pH adjustment materials directly on the trailer with Gettman sodium ion exchange system 200 for convenient access.
Claim(s) 12 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Gettman in view of UMA, as applied to the claims above, further in view of US-2019/0321784-Al, hereinafter Dunham, further in view of Beckett (Submersible Pump Owners Manual- 92109-revG M pumps 2015), hereinafter Beckett, as evidenced by Beckett.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Gettman discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. Gettman teaches the first portion of the water filtration and treatment system includes a screening filter (“The RO pre-filter serves to remove suspended solids”, [0010]), a sand filter (“The raw water filtration system may be as simple as gravity sand or diatomaceous earth filters.”, [0008]), a sediment filter (“polishing filters gradually filtering the water of particles down to 5 microns in size”, [0008]), a carbon filter (“one prefilter will include a replaceable carbon cartridge to reduce the amount of chlorine”, [0010]), a water softener (“to the sodium ion exchange system which will reduce the mineral content, specifically the calcium and magnesium content, of the water by a process of ion exchange”, [0009]; “softened by the sodium ion exchange system”, [0011]), and a reverse osmosis filter (“a RO membrane to produce high purity water.”, [0010]);
the second portion of the water filtration and treatment system includes a granular activated carbon (GAC) filter (“final polishing by activated carbon”, [0010]) and an ultraviolet (UV) filter (“The disinfection system may include… an ultraviolet light disinfection system”, [0010]); and water from the water source is capable of travelling through the first portion of the water filtration and treatment system before being stored in the storage tank (Fig. 7 piping system 75), the water being stored in the storage tank (Fig. 7 Storage tank unit 300) after the water passes through the reverse osmosis filter (Fig. 7 reverse osmosis system 400), and then the water is capable of travelling through the second portion of the water filtration and treatment system before being dispensed (Fig. 7 piping system 75), the water is capable of passing through the GAC filter and the UV filter (Fig. 7 Disinfection system 1400) when the water is dispensed (Fig. 7 Distribution system 700).
While the RO filter and GAC filter of Gettman may reasonably be associated with either the first portion or the second portion, shifting the portion of these filters one way or the other would not have modified the operation of the device (See MPEP 2144.04(VI)(C)).
While Gettman does not positively teach a screen filter, Gettman does teach a submersible pump “Most commonly the vehicle will be located next to a lake or stream such that one may attach a hose from the raw water filtration system to a submersible pump that is placed in the lake or stream. Such raw water is then pumped into the raw water filtration system.” ([0007]), which may have a screen filter, as taught by Beckett (“Submersible pump owners manual”, Beckett title; all models illustrated with intake screens).
However, Dunham teaches a screen filter (“A pump 108 may …used to convey … water to the holding tank. The pump 108 may comprise, for example, a 130 gallon per hour (GPH) pool cover pump, available from BECKET ®of lrving, Tex., USA”, [0015]) as evidenced by Beckett (models M130A and M130AS illustrated with intake screens).
Gettman is considered analogous art because Gettman is in the same field of mobile water treatment systems.
Beckett is considered analogous art because Beckett is the maker of the submersible pumps used in Dunham.
Dunham is considered analogous art because Dunham is in the same field of “A portable water collection, filtration and power generation system” (Dunham [0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the specific materials of Dunham (the Beckett submersible pump of Dunham [0015]) in the Gettman system. Doing so would ensure the raw water is delivered with minimal debris, reducing downstream equipment failure.
Regarding Claim 13, while Gettman does not positively teach food-grade materials, Gettman does provide motivation for safe dispensing methods for drinking water (“The distribution system 700 may incorporate final point of consumption devices, such as shower heads 710, spigots, and drinking fountains, as well as mechanisms for connection to other bulk distribution equipment, such as quick-connect hose couplings. Such final point of consumption devices may incorporate a number of safety features including, but not limited to, scald protection”, [0048])
However, Dunham teaches (i) at least one of the one or more pumps, (ii) at least a portion of the tubing system, (iii) at least one of the one or more faucets, (iv) the storage tank, or (v), any combination of (i)-(iv) are formed from food-grade material (“The collected water 102 may be transferred to the holding tank 104 using hoses, piping, conduits, connections, fittings, valving, etc. that are compliant with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) safety regulations. Indeed, all of the hoses, piping, conduits, connections, fittings, valving, etc. used in the system 100 may be compliant with current FDA and/or EPA safety regulations. …some or all of the hoses, piping, or conduits used in the system 100 may comprise a braided stainless steel flex line commonly used in commercial or residential filter systems”, [0014]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the specific materials of Dunham in the Gettman system. Doing so would ensure the potable water is delivered in a safe manner “using hoses, piping, conduits, connections, fittings, valving, etc. that are compliant with U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) safety regulations” (Dunham [00014]).
Claim(s) 14- 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Gettman in view of UMA further in view of Dunham, further in view of and as evidenced by Beckett, as applied to the claims above, and further in view of TPW (The Perfect Water. GAC Inline Carbon Filter-Activated Carbon Filter, April 29, 2017), hereinafter TPW.
Regarding Claim 14, modified Gettman discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. While Gettman teaches the final polishing using activated carbon ([0010]), Gettman is silent on the process used to make the activated carbon.
However, TPW teaches GAC filter is made from organic material including coconut shells, coal, wood, lignite, and/or petroleum products (“Inline Carbon GAC Filter “Final Stage” Polishing Filter …Specifications The GAC inline activated carbon water filter uses coconut granulars to reduce chlorine taste”, p 1; “5 micron coconut shell granular activated carbon Certified to NSF standard 42…removes up to 95% of VOCs, TOCs, chlorine, chemicals, pesticides, disinfectants, and other contaminants”, p 2 bullets 3-4).
TPW is analogous art because TPW is in the same field of polishing filters using GAC.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the specific material and parameters suggested by TPW in the polishing stage of Gettman as it would provide “cleaner, better tasting water” (TPW p 2 bullet 2).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Gettman in view of Dunham, further in view of and as evidenced by Beckett, further in view of TPW, as applied to the claims above, and further in view USEPA (EPA. Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet Ultraviolet Disinfection. EPA 832-F-99-064, September 1999), hereinafter USEPA, as evidenced by WHO (W.H.O. Radiation: Ultraviolet (UV) radiation. 9 March 2016), hereinafter WHO.
Regarding Claim 15, modified Gettman discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. Gettman teaches the GAC filter includes a 5-micron GAC filter (“the final filter consists of a number of polishing filters gradually filtering the water of particles down to 5 microns in size”, Gettman [0008]), and wherein the UV filter includes a UV lamp (“The disinfection system may include… an ultraviolet light disinfection system”, [0010]).
Gettman is silent on the quantitative percentage of removal capability of the GAC filter and on the wavelength of the UV lamp.
Dunham is silent on the quantitative percentage of removal capability of the GAC filter.
However, TPW teaches a GAC filter including a 5-micron GAC filter is capable of removing at least about 85% of material that is 5 microns or larger (“5 micron coconut shell granular activated carbon Certified to NSF standard 42…removes up to 95% of VOCs, TOCs, chlorine, chemicals, pesticides, disinfectants, and other contaminants”, TPW p 2 bullets 3-4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the specific material and parameters suggested by the 5 micron GAC filter of TPW for the 5 micron filter in the polishing stage of Gettman as it would provide “cleaner, better tasting water” (TPW p 2 bullet 2).
The combination of Gettman, Dunham and TPW does not explicitly teach the wavelength of the UV lamp of Gettman.
However, USEPA teaches the UV filter includes a UV lamp configured to emit UV-C light (“a wavelength of 253.7 nm”, USEPA p 2 Cp; 1 ¶1), as evidenced by WHO (UVC (100-290nm), p 3 bullet 3) having a wavelength between about 254 nanometers and about 265 nanometers (“The main components of a UV disinfection system are mercury arc lamps, a reactor, and ballasts. The source of UV radiation is either the low-pressure or medium-pressure mercury arc lamp with low or high intensities”, USEPA p 1 Col 1 ¶4; “The optimum wavelength to effectively inactivate
microorganisms is in the range of 250 to 270 nm….Low-pressure lamps emit essentially monochromatic light at a wavelength of 253.7 nm… Medium-pressure lamps are generally used for large facilities.”, USEPA p 2 Cp; 1 ¶1-2).
USEPA is analogous art because USEPA is in the same field of disinfection using optimum wavelengths of UV light.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the low-pressure lamp and wavelength range suggested by USEPA in the disinfection system of Gettman as it would be “The optimum wavelength to effectively inactivate microorganisms” (USEPA p 2 Col 1 ¶1) and preferable to the alternative of USEPA which “are generally used for large facilities” (USEPA p 2 Col 1 ¶2). Furthermore, “UV disinfection equipment requires less space than other methods” (USEPA p 2 Col 2 bullet 6).
Claim(s) 17 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Gettman in view of UMA, as applied to the claims above, and further in view of US-6436283-Bl, hereinafter Duke.
Regarding Claim 17, modified Gettman discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. Gettman is silent on the solar panel 1100 being movably coupled to the trailer.
However, the alternative embodiment of Gettman that teaches a water dispensing system positioned at least partially within the trailer configured to dispense purified water (Fig. 6) further teaches a solar device positioned with sufficient access to sunlight, movably coupled to the trailer (“The solar distillation system 1330 may be mounted on the roof of the vehicle or it may be field assembled”, [0045]), being positioned generally horizontal on top of the trailer in the stowed position (Fig. 6 Element 1330). This provides motivation to arrange the solar panel 1100 of Gettman similarly such that the solar panel would be conveniently mounted to have access to sunlight.
Gettman does not positively teach that solar panels are generally extended away from the top of the trailer in the deployed position.
However, Duke teaches the one or more solar panels are movably coupled to a housing (Fig. 3 solar panels 28 mounted to rainwater collection panels 20, coupled to system housing 2) and configured to move between a stowed position and a deployed position and being positioned generally extended away from the top of the trailer in the deployed position (“When the
rainwater collection panels 20 are so deployed in the sloped, functional configuration on the system housing 2” Col 7 ln 4-7).
Duke is analogous art because Duke is in the same field of solar-powered water collection and treatment.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the specific solar panel deployment system of Duke on top of the trailer of the Gettman system to extend and angle the solar panels as desired. Doing so would allow for flexible positioning of the panels to optimize solar energy capture.
Regarding Claim 21, modified Gettman discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above. Gettman teaches the one or more solar devices are attached to the trailer (“The solar distillation system 1330 may be mounted on the roof of the vehicle”, [0045]). While Gettman does not teach telescoping rods, Gettman provides motivation for support materials other than the housing or trailer itself (“The solar distillation system 1330 …may be field assembled”, [0045])
However, Duke teaches the one or more solar panels include more than two solar panels that extend both on one side of the trailer and above a top of the trailer (Fig. 3 solar panels 28 mounted to rainwater collection panels 20, coupled to system housing 2; “a pair of water collection panels typically hinged to the housing, which water collection panels can be pivoted from … respective sides of the housing and deployed in a sloped configuration on the housing for receiving falling rainwater or other precipitation”, Col 3 ln 26-30).
Alternatively, another embodiment of Duke teaches solar panels are attached to the trailer via rods that are extendable such that an angle of the one or more solar panels is adjustable (Figs. 5-6 Elements 11 and 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effectively filed date, to use the adjustably angled solar panels of Duke in the Gettman system. Doing so would allow for flexible placement of the panels angles to optimize solar energy capture.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US-8808537-B1 teaches a solar-powered self-contained transportable water treatment system
US-20130098816-A1 teaches a solar-powered mobile water purification station
In US-20150096937-A1, a portable water purification system is disclosed. The system
can have a water storage receptacle, a reverse osmosis filter, a pump, and a solar panels array group.
US-20140183107-A1 teaches a portable power generation and water filtration unit
Submersible Pump Screens - Underwater Warehouse August 2013 teaches submersible pump including screens.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARRIAH ELLINGTON whose telephone number is (703)756-1061. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:00 am - 4:00 pm EST.
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, Ben Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
MARRIAH ELLINGTON
Examiner
Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773