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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group II, claims 5-7, in the reply filed on 09/25/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-4 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 09//25/2025.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/23/2022, 08/11/2023, 04/17/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
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 5-7 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 5 recites the limitation "the contents accommodated in the accommodation unit" in line 15. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The claim preamble states that the accommodation unit is “is configured to accommodate the culture solution and the microalgae as contents”; however, this represents a hypothetical use of the accommodation unit. The claim does not contain sufficient antecedent basis for the accommodation unit actually accommodating contents during the course of the claimed method.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the culturing tank selected from among the plurality of culturing tanks" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the claim does not provide sufficient antecedent basis for a culturing tank selected from the plurality.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the outside air temperature" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as the claim does not provide sufficient antecedent basis for outside air.
Dependent claims are rejected for the same reasons as the base claim upon which they depend.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boonaert et al. (WO2012080198A1) (machine translation).
Regarding claim 5, Boonaert et al. discloses a culture method using a culture device that cultures microalgae in a culture solution (para. 3, 46, 53),
wherein the culture device includes:
a culturing tank (first container) (para. 27) including an accommodation unit that transmits light and is configured to accommodate the culture solution and the microalgae as contents (e.g., the first container includes glass walls that transmit light and accommodate culture solution and microalgae, see para. 46, 53, 58, and 63-64, and Fig. 3); and
a water storage tank (second container) including a water storage unit which transmits light and in which stored water is stored (para. 27), the culturing tank being allowed to be installed inside the water storage unit (para. 27, 63) (Fig. 3),
the culture method comprising:
a determination step of determining an outdoor environment of an installation location in which the culture device is installed (para. 27, 36); and
a step of setting, based on a determination result of the determination step, a ratio of a content volume of contents accommodated in the accommodation unit (contents of first container) inside the water storage unit to a total volume of the content volume and a stored water volume of the stored water (inside of second container) (e.g., the prior art method comprises varying a water level within the second container based on the determination result, see para. 27, 57, 72-75, and Fig. 1, which necessarily sets the ratio or volume occupancy rate as it is also referred to in the claim; therefore, the prior art reads on the claimed volume occupancy rate adjustment step).
Regarding claim 7, Boonaert et al. discloses wherein, in the volume occupancy rate adjustment step, the volume occupancy rate is reduced (e.g., ratio of contents within the first container to a total volume of contents within the first and second containers is reduced, by adding more volume to the second container) as the outside air temperature increases (para. 27, 72).
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.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boonaert et al. (WO2012080198A1) (machine translation) in view of Meiser et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2012/0107452).
Regarding claim 6, Boonaert et al. discloses wherein the culture device includes a plurality of the culturing tanks (first containers) (para. 25) (Fig. 3).
Boonaert et al. is silent as to wherein capacities of the accommodation units of the plurality of culture tanks differ from each other, and in the volume occupancy rate adjustment step, the volume occupancy rate is set by disposing the culturing tank selected from among the plurality of culturing tanks, inside the water storage unit.
Meiser et al. discloses a culture device for culturing microalgae (Abstract, para. 116), and further discloses that the dimensions of the device can vary based on a variety of factors including “the biomass production capacity, the reactor material, the manufacturing process, the environmental conditions of the specific site, the selected photosynthetic or mixotrophic organism and other factors known in the art” (para. 77).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the plurality of culture tanks disclosed by Boonaert et al. such that capacities of the accommodation units thereof differ from each other, as the skilled artisan would understand from the teachings of Meiser et al. that an ideal device size for a particular application may vary based on a desired production capacity, environmental conditions, the particular microalgae strain being cultured, or other factors, and the skilled artisan would have been motivated to provide a variety of differently sized accommodation units to choose from for the application. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to further modify the method disclosed by Boonaert et al. to comprise disposing at least one particular culturing tank selected from among the plurality of culturing tanks inside the water storage unit, in order to use one or more particular culturing tank selected for its suitability for a desired purpose. As to the limitation of wherein, in the volume occupancy rate adjustment step, the volume occupancy rate is set by disposing the culturing tank selected from among the plurality of culturing tanks inside the water storage unit, the volume occupancy rate is a ratio of a volume inside the accommodation unit and the total volume (as defined in claim 5), and therefore disposing a selected culturing tank having a particular volume would necessarily serve to set the volume occupancy rate. Therefore, the method taught by Boonaert et al. in view of Meiser et al. necessarily reads on this limitation.
Citation of Pertinent Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Vermaas et al. (US Patent Application Publication 2011/0014683) is directed to immersing a transparent photobioreactor within a reservoir of cooling water.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HOLLY KIPOUROS whose telephone number is (571)272-0658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8.30-5PM.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at 5712721374. 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.
/HOLLY KIPOUROS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799