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 .
Status of the Rejection
All rejections from the previous office action are withdrawn in view of the Applicant’s amendments. New grounds of rejection are necessitated by the amendments as outlined below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kaczur et al. (US 5167777).
Regarding claim 1, Kaczur et al. teaches a method of electrochemical to chlorination of water (i.e., electrochemically treating an aqueous solution comprising oxyhalide species such as chlorine and hypochlorous acid; Abstract, column 4, lines 20-34) comprising:
having electrochemical reactor with a cathode and an anode (see electrochemical cell of Fig. 1);
having water (i.e., aqueous solution) in the electrochemical reactor, wherein the water contains disinfectants where in the disinfectants contain inorganic chlorine (column 4 lines 28-34); and dechlorinating water by passing electrons to the inorganic chlorine.
Since Kaczur et al. teaches electrochemically reducing hypochlorous acid ions, the process of would inherently follow the chemical reaction as recited in claim 1.
Further addressing the limitation of passing electrons directly from an electrical grid, while this is not explicitly stated in Kaczur et al., one having ordinary would expect that the electrochemical process which requires electricity would inherently come from an electrical grid. In the alternative, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use electricity from the electrical grid for operating the electrochemical cell because it would be economical and convenient method of supplying electricity to an electrochemical cell.
Regarding claim 2, Kaczur et al. teaches wherein the cathode is a stainless steel cathode (column 5, line 65-57).
Regarding claim 3, Kaczur et al. teaches wherein the cathode and the anode are separated by a cation-exchange membrane (see separator 15 in Fig. 1, column 3, line 18).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments in the Remarks filed on 4/6/2026 have been fully considered but are moot in view of the new grounds of rejection. The rejection using Yuji has been withdrawn. Claims are now rejected over Kaczur et al. as outlined above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant's disclosure. US 5256268 and US 10538436 teaches in the process of electrochemically treating water. WO 2020085987 A1 teaches an electrochemical process of reducing chloramines for cleaning water in pools.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 LUAN V VAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8521. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00.
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, Patricia Mallari can be reached at (571) 272-4729. 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.
LUAN V. VAN
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 1795
/LUAN V VAN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1795
Prosecution Insights