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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 February 2, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed February 2, 2026, has been entered. Claims 1-20 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed February 2, 2026 have been fully considered and are partially persuasive.
Regarding claims 1-7, Applicant’s arguments concerning the prior combination of Goodwin, Sato, and Bonta are persuasive to the extent that the previously relied upon art does not adequately establish introduction of first-stage fluid to the filtration module for filtration via the claimed first endcap. Accordingly, that rejection is withdrawn. However, claims 1-7 are not allowable because new grounds of rejection are made below, including the rejection of claims 1-7 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), claims 5-6 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), and the applicable prior-art rejections set forth below.
Regarding claims 8-15, Applicant’s arguments are not persuasive. Applicant argues that Goodwin and Nibler fail to teach a membrane filter extending above the porous media and that such a modification would render Goodwin unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. However, the proposed combination already places the downstream filtration module vertically within the vessel while the porous media occupies the lower region and surrounds only a portion of the module. Further, Goodwin expressly contemplates operation of its porous filter body without particulate covering the entire filter body. Therefore, the rejection of claims 8-15 is maintained as modified herein.
Regarding claims 16-20, Applicant’s arguments are persuasive with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(2). Sugimoto does not disclose the newly recited arrangement wherein fluid flows downwardly through the first filtration stage and upwardly through the vertically oriented second filtration stage during filtration. Accordingly, the anticipation rejection of claims 16-20 is withdrawn. However, new grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 are made herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites that “fluid from the first filtration stage is introduced to the first filtration module for filtration via the first endcap.” However, the application as originally filed does not reasonably convey to one of ordinary skill in the art that Applicant had possession of a filtration module in which fluid from the first filtration stage is introduced for filtration via the first endcap. Rather, paragraph [0065] (US20230087869A1) describes the membrane filtration module 500 as comprising a top endcap 520 and a bottom endcap 530, wherein the top endcap 520 may be a “blind” endcap and may “isolate the membrane filtration module 500 from unfiltered water introduced to the first filtration stage 310”. Paragraph [0066] separately describes the bottom endcap 530 as a lateral endcap comprising a plurality of axial slits 535. Paragraph [0070] expressly describes the filtration flow as entering the second filtration stage “through the axial slits 535 of the membrane filtration module 500”, after which the fluid flows upward through membranes 540. The claims as originally filed are consistent with this disclosure. Original claim 5 expressly identifies the first endcap as a blind endcap and the second endcap as a lateral endcap comprising a plurality of slits. As written the original disclosure identifies the first endcap as the blind endcap that may isolate the membrane filtration module from unfiltered first-stage water, while fluid entering the membrane filtration module for filtration is expressly described as entering through the axial slits of the lateral second endcap. Accordingly, the application as originally filed does not provide adequate written description support for the presently claimed arrangement in which fluid from the first filtration stage is introduced to the first filtration module for filtration via the first endcap. Claims 2-7 depend directly or indirectly from claim 1 and therefore include the same unsupported limitation and thus are rejected for the same reason.
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 5-6 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.
Regarding claim 5, claim 1, from which claim 5 ultimately depends, requires that “fluid from the first filtration stage is introduced to the first filtration module for filtration via the first endcap.” Claim 5 further requires that “the first endcap is a blind endcap” and that “the second endcap is a lateral endcap comprising a plurality of slits.” These limitations render the scope of claim 5 unclear. The inherited limitation of claim 1 requires fluid from the first filtration stage to be introduced for filtration via the first endcap, while claim 5 identifies that first endcap as a blind endcap and separately identifies the second endcap as the lateral endcap comprising the plurality of slits. This ambiguity is further demonstrated by the terminology of the specification. Paragraph [0065) states that the blind endcap may isolate the membrane filtration module from unfiltered water introduced to the first filtration stage, whereas paragraph [0066] identifies axial slits 535 in the lateral endcap. Paragraph [0070] then expressly states that fluid enters the second filtration stage through those axial slits. Therefore, it is unclear whether claim 5 requires fluid from the first filtration stage to enter the filtration module through the blind first endcap, as required by the limitation inherited from claim 1, or through the slitted lateral second endcap, as otherwise recited in claim 5 and described in the specification. Claim 6 is rejected due to its dependency from claim 5.
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 1-4 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodwin (US-20060124527-A1) in view of Brown (US4990248) and Niermeyer (US5762789).
Regarding claim 1, Goodwin discloses a filtration assembly for an aquatic application, comprising: a vessel (Goodwin Fig. 7 #12 "container") comprising: a first filtration stage configured to capture particles of a first size (Goodwin par. [0035] #16 Fig. 7 "particulate"); and a second filtration stage comprising a first filtration module (Goodwin Fig. 1 #30 "filter device" par. [0035]), the second filtration stage, the second filtration stage downstream of the first filtration stage and in fluid communication with the first filtration stage, wherein the second filtration stage is configured to capture particles of a second size, the first size being larger than the second size (Goodwin par. [0035] describes that the porous body and particulate may be sized so that the particulate cannot pass through): wherein: the first filtration stage and second filtration stage both are entirely enclosed in the vessel (Goodwin par. [0035]), the first filtration module includes a first endcap (Goodwin Fig. 3 #80).
Goodwin does not explicitly disclose that wherein fluid from the first filtration stage is introduced to the first filtration module via the first end cap. Although Goodwin’s filtered water leaves particulate 16 and subsequently passes through filter segments 40, Goodwin’s end cap 80 is disclosed as a retainment structure for securing sleeve 52 to support structure 60 rather than as a feed structure through which the first stage filtrate is introduced to the filtration module.
Brown teaches a staged water-filtration arrangement in which fluid leaving a first filtration stage is routed by an endcap into a downstream membrane filtration stage. Brown provides a prefilter for initial removal of particulate matter before downstream membrane filtration, and expressly teaches that “prefiltered water from the prefilter 16 is directed by the removable end cap 46 in a downward direction to enter the reverse osmosis membrane permeator” (Brown col. 5). Brown further teaches in another embodiment that cartridge end cap 63 and the ends of prefilter 72 to the inlet of membrane permeator 70. Thus, Brown teaches routing fluid from an upstream first filtration stage at an endcap into a downstream membrane filtration stage for further filtration.
Niermeyer further teaches an actual membrane filtration module having an endcap through which feed is introduced to the module for filtration. Specifically, Niermeyer col. 5 discloses that a “filter module 1 includes end cap 10 with vent, feed and permeate ports 11, 12 and 13 respectively” and that liquid “to be filtered is introduced into feed port 12”, where central conduit 15 directs the feed to chamber 17 for distribution to membrane element 14, after which the “feed liquid is subsequently filtered through membrane element 14”. Niermeyer’s water purification embodiment similarly provides a membrane module having top endcap 30 and teaches that liquid introduced through center port 32 is routed to feed chamber 37 and thereafter through hollow-fiber membrane element 34 for filtration, teaching a filtration module including an endcap having a feed port through which fluid is introduced to the module and positively routed to the membrane for filtration.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Goodwin’s downstream filtration module so that fluid leaving Goodwin’s particulate first filtration stage is directed at the end of the module into the downstream filtration stage as taught by Brown, and to provide the downstream module with Niermeyer’s known endcap-feed construction so that the first-stage filtrate is introduced through the module endcap and positively routed to the filtration element. Brown teaches using prefiltration to remove particulate matter before and protect a downstream membrane, while Niermeyer teaches that its endcap-feed arrangement provides predictable benefits including easier connection and replacement, compact construction, uniform fluid distribution, and reduced dead volume. The resulting combination would therefore provide Goodwin’s known staged aquatic filtration system with a known, controlled means for introducing first-stage filtrate into the downstream filtration module for filtration while preserving Goodin’s sequential coarse-to-fine function.
Regarding claim 2, Goodwin in view of Brown and Niermeyer discloses the filtration assembly of claim 1, wherein the first filtration stage comprises a porous media selected from the group consisting of sand (Goodwin par. [0035]), crushed glass, activated media such as carbon, pea gravel, and combinations thereof.
Regarding claim 3, Goodwin in view of Brown and Niermeyer discloses the filtration assembly of claim 1, wherein the second filtration stage comprises one or more membrane filters retained in the first filtration module (Niermeyer Figs. 3a-3b and col. 6 describe water-purification module 3 containing UF polysulfone hollow-fiber membrane element 34 within the module formed by top endcap 30, bottom endcap 36a, and cylindrical shell 36b).
Regarding claim 4, Goodwin in view of Brown and Niermeyer discloses the filtration assembly of claim 3, wherein the first filtration module further comprises: a permeate pipe comprising a plurality of openings (Brown mounting tube 62 includes “a number of permeate flow apertures 73 spaced along its length and around its circumference”); one or more hollow fiber membranes surrounding the permeate pipe (Niermeyer Figs. 2a-2b, hollow-fiber membrane separation element 24 surrounds central permeate conduit 25, which collects the filtered permeate and directs it to permeate port 22); an outlet connected to and downstream of the permeate pipe (Niermeyer permeate port 22 receives permeate redirected by central conduit 25); and a second endcap, wherein the first endcap is positioned at a first end of the filtration module and the second endcap is positioned at a second end of the filtration module opposite the first end (Niermeyer Figs. 3a-3b provides top endcap 30 and opposite bottom endcap 36a). Brown further demonstrates the known use of a perforated central permeate-collection tube surrounded by a membrane element; therefore, it would have been obvious to employ Brown’s distributed permeate openings with Niermeyer’s hollow-fiber membrane module as a known means for collecting permeate from the surrounding membrane and conveying it to the module outlet.
Regarding claim 7, Goodwin in view of Brown and Niermeyer discloses the filtration assembly of claim 1, wherein the second filtration stage is a membrane filter selected from the group consisting of a membrane filter comprising one or more straight membranes surrounding a permeate pipe (Brown col. 7-8 discloses reverse-osmosis membrane permeator 70 comprising membrane material spirally wound around permeator mounting tube 62, where permeate passes through apertures 73 into tube 62), a membrane filter comprising one or more curved membranes surrounding a permeate pipe, a membrane filter comprising one or more membranes helically wound around a permeate pipe, and combinations thereof.
Claims 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goodwin (US-20060124527-A1) in view of Nibler (US-20110089094-A1).
Regarding claim 8, Goodwin discloses a filtration assembly for a swimming pool (Goodwin abstract and par. [0038]), comprising: a vessel (Goodwin Fig. 7 #12 “container”) comprising: a first filtration stage comprising a porous media (Goodwin par. [0035] #16 Fig. 7 “particulate”); and a second filtration stage in fluid communication with the first filtration stage comprising one or more membrane filters (Goodwin Fig. 7 #30 “filter device” par. [0035] and par. [0023] describes fabricating a membrane from the porous polypropylene or polyethylene), the porous media surrounding at least a portion of the one or more membrane filters (Goodwin Fig. 7 and par. [0035] particulate 16 surrounds and covers porous bodies 50 of filter device 30).
Goodwin does not expressly disclose the second filtration stage comprising a vertically arranged filtration module wherein a portion of the one or more membrane filters extends above the porous media of the first filtration stage.
Nibler discloses a pool filter for use in pool piping or other fluid conveyance system, including a housing defining a fluid chamber for receiving one or more filters (Nibler abstract), wherein the filter elements 210 are vertically arranged about manifold 200 (Nibler Fig. 5b).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Goodwin’s two-stage pool filtration apparatus by vertically arranging the downstream filter elements as taught by Nibler, with the particulate media of Goodwin surrounding a lower portion of the vertically arranged filter elements while an upper portion thereof extends above the particulate media. Nibler teaches the known vertical arrangement of filter elements within a pool-filter vessel, and such an arrangement applied to Goodwin would predictably permit the particulate media to surround and prefilter fluid entering a lower portion of the filter elements while allowing an upper portion of the vertically arranged filter elements to extend above the particulate media. Such a modification would not render Goodwin’s filter device inoperable or unsatisfactory for its intended purpose. Goodwin expressly teaches that the “porous body 50 can be effective for use in a fluid filter apparatus without particulate” and that, in such an embodiment, “the sole filtering function is carried out by the porous body” (Goodwin par. [0036]). Goodwin therefore establishes that its porous bodies remain operative as filters even where their filtering surface is not surrounded by particulate. Goodwin further explains that use of particulate in combination with the porous body provides the additional benefit of delaying loading of the porous body with debris (Goodwin par. [0036]). Accordingly, positioning particulate around a lower portion of the vertically arranged filter elements while leaving an upper portion exposed would retain Goodwin’s filtering function while employing Nibler’s known vertical filter arrangement, producing no more than the predictable result of combining known pool-filter structures according to their established functions.
Regarding claim 9, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein the vessel is pressurized (Goodwin par. [0031]).
Regarding claim 10, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein: the vessel comprises a first portion (Nibler par. [0023] “upper housing portion” #118) and a second portion (Nibler par. [0024] “lower housing portion” #120); and the first portion and the second portion are joined to form an enclosed container (Nibler par. [0024]).
Regarding claim 11, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 10, wherein the first portion and the second portion are joined by at least one of a circumferential retaining device, an elastomeric seal, or bolted fasteners (Nibler par. [0024] “clamp ring assembly” #124).
Regarding claim 12, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein the vessel comprises: an inlet port (Goodwin #18 Fig. 7 “fluid inlet” and par. [0037]); an inlet pipe downstream of the inlet port (Goodwin #19 Fig. 7 “conduit”); a diffuser downstream of the inlet pipe (Goodwin Fig. 7 #20 “spray head”), the diffuser configured to distribute a flow of unfiltered water to the first filtration stage (Goodwin par. [0038]).
Regarding claim 13, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein the vessel comprises: a manifold (Nibler par. [0047]) comprising: one or more module receivers configured to hold a membrane filter of the one or more membrane filters (Nibler Fig. 5b and par. [0046-0047]) each filter 164 includes an upper fluid outlet 214 which is fluidly connected to a corresponding fluid inlet 216 of filter manifold 218); the corresponding manifold inlets 216 receive the upper ends/outlets of the respective filters 164 and thereby provide module-receiving interfaces for the filters), each of the one or more module receivers including: a central opening configured to permit a flow of water into and out of the membrane filter (Nibler par. [0046]); an outlet pipe coupled to each of the one or more central openings (Nibler par. [0047] manifold 218 received filtered fluid from each manifold inlet 216, conveys the fluid through the manifold to common manifold fluid outlet 220, which is fluidly connected to outlet tube 222); and an outlet port downstream of the outlet pipe (Nibler pars. [0056], [[0058] outlet tube 222 is connected through outlet elbow 272 to outlet fitting 176c, which delivers the filtered fluid from the pool filter to the pool or other fluid system).
Regarding claim 14, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein the vessel comprises a relief valve positioned at a top portion of the vessel (Nibler par. [0029] “air release assembly” #166 shown at top in Figs. 1-5a).
Regarding claim 15, Goodwin in view of Nibler discloses the filtration assembly of claim 8, wherein the vessel comprises a drain port positioned at a bottom portion of the vessel (Nibler par. [0063] “drain fitting” #176d Fig. 10).
Claims 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sugimoto (US5244585) in view of Inoue (US4636307).
Regarding claim 16, Sugimoto discloses a pool filtration system (Sugimoto abstract “pool water purification apparatus and system), comprising: a swimming pool (Sugimoto col. 11 line 44); a pool pad (Sugimoto col. 26 lines 23-29 “platform”) in fluid communication with the swimming pool comprising: an inlet pipe (Sugimoto col. 37 line 49 “entry line” 426 in one embodiment, “entrance line” 20 col. 11 lines 31-32 in others) connected to and downstream of a drain positioned in the pool (Sugimoto col. 11 describes the entrance line (which is interpreted to mean an inlet pipe) for introducing water from a pool [lines 31-32] and that it connects part of the pool to the housing [lines 43-44], therefore where the opening of the entrance line connects to the pool with the valve open supplies a drain positioned in the pool from which the inlet pipe is downstream); a filter vessel (Sugimoto col. 11 line 31 “filtration system” fig. 1 of one embodiment and “water purifying apparatus” #414 and #502 of others) comprising a two-stage filter downstream of the inlet pipe, the two-stage filter comprising a first filtration stage (Sugimoto col. 26 lines 23-24 describes various kinds of water purifying means are positioned on the platform, each embodiment consisting of multiple stages. For examples the embodiment of col. 11 line 45 “prefilter” #34 of Fig. 1 provides a first stage, while the purifying apparatus described in Figs. 21 and 22 provides a first filtration stage consisting of a ceramic filter 436 [Sugimoto col. 39 line 14] which is coated with filter aids such as diatomaceous earth and other adsorbents) and a second filtration stage (Sugimoto col. 26 lines 23-24 describes various kinds of water purifying means are positioned on the platform, each embodiment consisting of multiple stages. For examples the embodiment of col. 11 line 47 “ceramic filter” #10 of Fig. 1 provides a second stage, while the purifying apparatus described in Figs. 21 and 22 provides a second filtration stage consisting of activated carbon 448 [Sugimoto col. 34 lines 44-45] which is then followed by a hollow fiber membrane 514a); a valve downstream of the filter vessel (Sugimoto col. 11 line 48 “exit line is fitted with a valve” #36); and an outlet pipe (Sugimoto col. 11 line 48 “exit line”) connected to the pool and positioned downstream of the valve, (Sugimoto col. 11 line 50, as the “exit line” is fitted with the valve at least a part of it is downstream of the valve).
Sugimoto does not disclose wherein fluid flows along a first flow path downwardly through the first filtration stage and along a second flow path upwardly through the second filtration stage as the fluid is filtered in the filter vessel. Rather, although Sugimoto teaches sequential filtration and a vertically oriented hollow-fiber membrane stage, Sugimoto does not provide the presently claimed successive downward-first-stage and upward-second-stage filtration flow arrangement.
Inoue teaches a water purification device having an upstream absorbent filtration stage and a vertically oriented downstream hollow-fiber filtration stage arranged to provide the missing flow relationship. In particular, Inoue discloses water purification device 65 comprising an absorbent module 67 containing absorbent 70 such as activated carbon and a vertically oriented hollow-fiber filtering module 68 received centrally within the absorbent module (Inoue Fig. 10). The absorbent module has an inlet 67a formed at the top of annular absorbent portion 78a and an outlet formed by perforations 81 at its lower portion, while hollow-fiber filtering module 68 has a lower inlet 83a disposed adjacent outlet 81 and an upper outlet 83b. In operation, water enters absorbent module 67 through upper inlet 67a, passes through absorbent 70 to lower outlet 81, thereafter enters hollow-fiber filtering module 68 through lower inlet 83a, is filtered by the hollow-fiber membrane, and exits through upper outlet 83b. Thus, Inoue teaches fluid flowing downwardly through a first filtration stage and thereafter upwardly through a vertically oriented second filtration stage as the fluid is filtered.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to arrange Sugimoto’s sequential filtration stages according to the known staged-filter configuration taught by Inoue, wherein fluid flows downwardly through an upstream filtration stage and thereafter upwardly through a vertically oriented hollow-fiber filtration stage. Inoue expressly teaches that this nested arrangement permits the absorbent and filtering modules to be connected in a compact manner, allows the amount and cross-sectional area of the first-stage absorbent to be increased, and subjects the activated carbon to minimum pressure drop. A person of ordinary skill in the art would therefore have been motivated to employ Inoue’s known flow arrangement in Sugimoto’s pool-water purification system to obtain these predictable benefits while retaining Sugimoto’s sequential first-stage filtration followed by finer hollow-fiber filtration.
Regarding claim 17, Sugimoto in view of Inoue discloses the pool system of claim 16, wherein the two-stage filter comprises: a housing (Sugimoto discloses many housings, the first of which is #430 Figs. 19, 20 and 22 and contains the multiple filtration stages) including: the first filtration stage provided in the form of a porous media (Sugimoto ceramic filter of first filtration stage of Fig. 22 is described as porous col. 34 line 3 and is optionally coated with diatomaceous earth col. 39 line 17); and the second filtration stage provided in the form of one or more membrane filters (Sugimoto [col. 39 lines 21-22] second filtration stage includes a hollow fiber membrane #514a of Fig. 22).
Regarding claim 18, Sugimoto in view of Inoue discloses in various embodiments the pool system of claim 16, further including a controller (Sugimoto col. 8 line 28 “control unit”) configured to control one or more components of the pool pad.
Regarding claim 19, Sugimoto in view of Inoue discloses in various embodiments the pool system of claim 18, wherein the controller is configured to operate the pool pad in a filtration mode (Sugimoto “circulation path” shown on Fig. 9), the filtration mode including cleaning a first stream of pool water by permitting water from the pool to flow from the drain into the inlet pipe (Sugimoto describes in Col. 22 lines 50-56 “when using the pool, the control unit 180 in the pool water purifying system shown in FIG. 9 opens switch valves V2, V3, V5, V8, V9, V10, V12, V13, VI5, V16, V34, V18 and V19 (V41, V42 and V44 are opened as required) while closing the other switch valves, thereby establishing the pool water circulation line indicated by a dashed line” which allows water into the inlet pipe), through the filter vessel (Sugimoto Fig. 9 filter vessel is contained in filtration tank #140 col. 19 lines 4-12), through the valve (filtration tank #140 which is accessed by valves V9 and V10 [col. 20 lines 14-15)), through the outlet pipe, and out to the pool (Sugimoto in the embodiment illustrated in Fig. 9 the circulation path leads to the pool after processing through many steps).
Regarding claim 20, Sugimoto in view of Inoue discloses in various embodiments the pool system of claim 18, wherein the controller is configured to operate the pool pad in a backwash mode (Sugimoto Fig. 10 “back wash line”), the backwash mode including cleaning the two-stage filter in a single pass by permitting a second stream of water to flow from the outlet pipe (Sugimoto col. 11 lines 39-42 “exit line” of which the backwash pine is a branch of), through the valve (Sugimoto col. 11 line 48 “exit line is fitted with a valve” #36), through the filter vessel (Sugimoto located in “filtration tank” 140), through the inlet pipe, and out to a waste collection area. (Sugimoto col. 24 lines 16-21 “backwashing fluid …leaves the filtration tank from the inlet pipe and passes through switch valves V9 and V24, drain pipe and switch valve to be discharged into the sedimentation tank”.)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM ADDISON GEISBERT whose telephone number is (703)756-5497. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:30-5:00 EDT.
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, Bobby RAMDHANIE can be reached at (571)270-3240. 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.
/W.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights