DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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
2. Applicant's election with traverse of species 1a and species 2a in the reply filed on 09 April 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that the pending claims do not cleanly segregate the identified species as all of the oxidizing agents and radiation may be applied at once to generate the claimed products, nor do the claims recite a specific end use. This is not found persuasive because the Examiner finds the broad category of oxidizing reactions to contain many types of reagents that can be non-obvious variants and the broad category of photon emissions to encompass many wavelengths that can be non-obvious to one another in certain applications. Further, the Examiner clarifies that the election of an end use for the oxidative products in Species 2a is helpful for determining the appropriate field of endeavor for examination by the Office.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
3. Claim 16 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected species as indicated by the limitation “generated endogenous x-ray photons”, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 09 April 2026.
Specification
4. The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Several well-known technical terms used throughout need not be capitalized, including x-ray (e.g., page 3 last par), electronically modified oxygen derivatives (page 13 second par), reactive oxygen species (page 13 second par), scattering (page 21 second par), colony forming units (page 28 last par), total external reflection (page 37 third par), and counter as in Geiger counter (page 48 first and second pars).
Equation 1 (page 2) includes scanned text that is illegible.
Page 8 first par: “a highly electronegative elements” should read --a highly electronegative element--.
Page 12 second par: “it’s derivatives” should read --its derivatives--.
Page 22 second par: “multi-proton absorption” should read --multi-photon absorption --.
Page 27 last par: “air borne” should read --airborne--.
Page 40 second par: “Ultra-Violet” should read “Ultraviolet” and “Reactive nitrogen species (RNS) is a subset of reactive oxygen species Trioxygen” should likely read --Reactive nitrogen species (RNS) is a subset of reactive oxygen species. Trioxygen”.
Page 47 third par: “Figure 11 is” appears as an unfinished sentence.
Appropriate correction is required.
5. The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Claim Objections
6. Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 7, “a target, a substance, or an area” should read --a target, a substance, and/or an area-- for consistency throughout the rest of the claims.
7. Claim 3 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “Light Emitting Diode” should read --light emitting diode--.
8. Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 6, “micro-organism present” should read --microorganisms present--.
9. Claim 21 is objected to because of the following informalities: in lines 2-3, “photon emissions” should read --the photon emissions--, to clearly refer to the photon emissions applied in claim 1.
10. Claim 23 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 3, “simultaneous” should read --simultaneously--. Further, the limitation “is or is not physically close to” in line 8 contains an unnecessary relative term (“close”) but does not affect the scope of the claim.
11. Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities: in line 2, “is” should read --are--, to match in number with the at least two elements in the subject of the clause.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
12. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
13. The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
14. This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “at least one oxidizing agent introducing component” in claim 21.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. The “at least one oxidizing agent introducing component“ is accordingly interpreted to include “a pump, mist, fog, spray, dripline, or any other suitable component” per page 11 of the Specification.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
15. 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.
16. Claims 1-15 and 17-30 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.
17. Regarding claim 1, the limitation “the reactions comprising one or more of oxidizing agents, reactive nitrogen species, hydrogen and/or its isotopes, oxygen and/or its isotopes, electronically modified oxygen derivatives, reactive oxygen species, trioxygen, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane and other free radicals” in lines 4-6 appears to recite these reaction constituents as a list of alternatives but includes the open transitional phrase “comprising” and the conjunction “and”. Thus, it is unclear whether the claim requires at least one of each of the claimed species, as indicated by the plain meaning of the language, or simply requires one or more of the alternatives. For purposes of examination, the list is interpreted as a Markush grouping of alternatives, which can be made proper by following acceptable formats as outlined in MPEP 2117.
Likewise, in lines 19-21, the limitation “the reactions comprising one or more of oxidizing agents, reactive nitrogen species, hydrogen and/or its isotopes, oxygen and/or its isotopes, electronically modified oxygen derivatives, reactive oxygen species, trioxygen, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane and other free radicals” in lines 4-6 appears to recite these reaction constituents as a list of alternatives but includes the open transitional phrase “comprising” and the conjunction “and”. Thus, it is unclear whether the claim requires at least one of each of the claimed species, as indicated by the plain meaning of the language, or simply requires one or more of the alternatives. For purposes of examination, the list is interpreted as a Markush grouping of alternatives, which can be made proper by following acceptable formats as outlined in MPEP 2117.
Claim 1 further recites the limitation "the at least one photon enhanced oxidizing agent" in line 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
18. Claims 2-15 and 17-30 are indefinite by virtue of their dependence on indefinite claim 1.
19. Claim 12 recites the limitation "the target". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as a target is not required in all instances of the method of claim 1. In the instances where a substance or area to be treated are chosen from the listed alternatives in line 7 of claim 1, it is unclear what adjusting a viscosity would entail.
20. Claim 13 recites the limitation "the amount" in line 1 and “the volume” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim, as none of the target/substance/area are defined to have a volume. Further, the recited range “from less than 1 part per million to 50 percent or more” has indefinite bounds, and is expressed in differing units of mass/volume and volume/volume. As such, a skilled artisan would not be apprised of the boundaries of the scope of the claim.
21. Claim 15 recites the limitation "the trioxygen, endogenous x-ray photons, hydrons, beta particles, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, trioxidane, and other reaction products" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as these species were introduced as alternatives in lines 19-21 of claim 1 thus would not necessarily all be present at once when carrying out the method.
Claim 15 further recites the limitation “the ionization reaction” in lines 5-6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as it is unclear whether this refers to the same reaction as “the oxidizing reaction” or other ionization reactions (presumably downstream of the oxidizing reaction) referenced in the preamble of claim 1.
22. Claim 17 recites the limitation “other analogous halogen compounds” in lines 5-6, which renders the claim indefinite because the claim includes elements not actually disclosed (as those having ordinary skill in the art may reasonably disagree what constitutes “analogous”), thereby rendering the scope of the claim unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Further, the limitation “and any other oxidizing agent or oxidizing agents” renders the claim indefinite by eliminating any ascertainable limit to the closed Markush group of alternatives. See MPEP 2117 for proper Markush claim construction.
23. Claim 20 recites the series “pH, temperature, salinity” without including a conjunction, and it is unclear whether the clause would require all of these or only one of these to meet the claim. Examiner recommends inserting an “and” or “or” before salinity as appropriate and will interprets this as an “or” for purposes of examination.
24. Claim 21 recites the limitation "the reaction sequences" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
25. Claim 23 recites the series “container, structure, area” without including a conjunction, and it is unclear whether the clause would require all of these or only one of these to meet the claim. Examiner recommends inserting an “and” or “or” before container as appropriate and will interprets this as an “or” for purposes of examination.
26. Claim 24 recites the limitation "the environment" in lines 5 and 11. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim, as it is unclear what the environment entails when the reaction is directed toward the target, substance, and/or area to be treated.
27. Regarding claim 28, the recited range “from less than 1 second to 30 minutes” has an indefinite lower bound, which leads to an indefinite scope for “the duration”. Further, in instances when emissions are pulsed or intermittent, it is unclear whether “the duration” would be defined for each pulse or as a total. For the above reasons, the claim is rendered indefinite.
28. Regarding claim 30, it is unclear what conditions must be present for the pH to be “optimized”, as skilled artisans may disagree what constitutes optimization of a process with regard to the variables of formation of a desired ROS and reduction in activity of a selected ROS.
29. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
30. Claims 4 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
31. Regarding claim 4, the limitation wherein the photon emissions are applied “directly or indirectly” includes all possibilities for applying photon emissions, and since photon emissions are already required to be applied per claim 1, lines 8-10, the claim fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1.
32. Regarding claim 26, the limitation wherein the at least one oxidizing agent and the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is a “liquid, solid, gas, plasma, or combination thereof, either independently or simultaneously” describes every possible combination of every state of matter at every possible time in the process, thus fails to further limit the subject matter of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
33. 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.
34. Claims 1-6, 8, 10-11, 13-15, and 17-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dabney (US 20190060492 A1) as evidenced by Takahashi et al (“Photodissociation Processes of Ozone in the Huggins Band at 308-326 nm:
Direct Observation of O(1D2) and O(3Pj) Products”, J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 4084-4089).
35. Regarding claim 1, Dabney discloses a method (method…for providing sterilization, decontamination, and therapeutic treatment, Abstract) for enhancing effectiveness of products generated (combination of the antimicrobial solution and the certain wavelength of radiation may create a synergistic reaction that causes an effect greater than the radiation or solution separately, Abstract) from at least photochemical reactions (hydrogen peroxide in combination with radiation of 360 nm to 500 nm may exhibit a synergistic reaction, par 0040), the reactions comprising one or more of at least oxidizing agents and reactive oxygen species (hydrogen peroxide, par 0040), the method comprising:
applying at least one oxidizing agent to a target, a substance, and/or an area to be treated (a misting, vaporizing, spraying, foaming or other dispensing apparatus to cover a person, an animal, a surface, an enclosure, a room or other structure with an antimicrobial solution, pars 0003-0004; antimicrobial solution may be an H2O2 solution, par 0040);
applying photon emissions at one or more wavelengths in a range from 0.01 nm to 845 nm to the oxidizing agent, the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (provide light radiation generally on the dispersing and delivery elements 104 as well as outward where the combined solution is being sprayed, par 0023);
performing an oxidizing reaction between the at least one photon enhanced oxidizing agent and the target and/or substance or area to be treated (an object, animal, person or room is saturated with an antimicrobial solution then exposed to a certain wavelength of radiation…this creates a synergistic reaction, par 0003) to produce at least photochemical reaction products (synergistic reaction between the solution and the radiation, par 0003), wherein the photochemical reaction products generate at least reactive oxygen species (e.g., hydrogen peroxide in combination with radiation, par 0015).
The limitation wherein wavelengths that photo-dissociate trioxygen are excluded is not explicitly addressed in the disclosure of Dabney, but by virtue of defining an exemplary wavelength range of 360 nm to 600 nm (pars 0015 and 0018) which excludes wavelengths known to dissociate trioxygen, particularly the strong absorption as evidenced by Takahashi in the Hartley band from 200-310 nm and the Huggins band from 310-360 nm (Takahashi pg 4084 col 1), the wavelength range defined and applied by Dabney reads upon the claim.
36. Regarding claim 2, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the excluded wavelengths that dissociate trioxygen are selected from the group consisting of: 197-198 nm, 263-264 nm, 307-308 nm, and 1118-1119 nm (solution may be exposed to radiation in a wavelength of 360 nm to 600 nm or any other wavelength that proves effective, pars 0015 and 0018).
37. Regarding claim 3, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied by an emission source selected from the group consisting of an electromagnetic radiation emitting bulb, light emitting diode, and laser (radiation source may be, for example, a light, light bulb, LED, or the like, par 0018).
38. Regarding claim 4, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied directly or indirectly to the oxidizing agent, the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (solution may be exposed to radiation in a wavelength of 360 nm to 600 nm or any other wavelength that proves effective, pars 0015 and 0018; an object, animal, person or room is saturated with an antimicrobial solution then exposed to a certain wavelength of radiation…this creates a synergistic reaction, par 0003).
39. Regarding claim 5, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising applying the at least one oxidizing agent to the target, substance, or area to be treated with an oxidizing agent dispenser or dispensers (antimicrobial solution may be dispensed from one or more spraying sources, par 0019) with at least one of a pump (one or more pumps, par 0025), a mister (such as a spray nozzle or mister, par 0019), a fogger (foggers or misters 204, pars 0025-0026), an atomizer and a diffuser (devices that aerosolize the combined solution, par 0026) that dispenses the oxidizing agent in a desired particle size (aerosolize a liquid through foggers or misters 204 to form a coating of the desired antimicrobial solution on any ambient features or elements of the room, par 0026; particular size would enable targeting of various size areas, par 0046).
40. Regarding claim 6, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising applying additional reactants at various stages to aid the oxidizing reaction, wherein the additional reactants comprise at least photons (at the same time, or at a predetermined time interval of time after the antimicrobial solution begins dispersing or is completed, one or more lights 206 may be activated to provide light in the wavelengths described above so that the synergistic effect of the combined lights and antimicrobial solution may take place, par 0026).
41. Regarding claim 8, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are antimicrobial agents (antimicrobial solution and desired wavelengths of light may substantially sterilize and decontaminate the room, par 0027).
42. Regarding claim 10, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are a catalyst, a reactant, or a substance providing at least reactive oxygen species (supercharged solution of hydrogen peroxide, par 0040).
43. Regarding claim 11, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied as a single wavelength or multiple wavelengths applied either independently or simultaneously (any number of lights 306, for example lights emitting the wavelength of light that produces the synergistic effect, par 0031; synergistic effects of combining the antimicrobial solution with the predetermined wavelengths of light, par 0048), applied either continuously or pulsed (lights may then remain illuminated during any misting or fogging and for a predetermined time thereafter, par 0026), and applied at an emission dose that is varied or not varied (provide the light irradiation for a set amount of time, par 0035).
44. Regarding claim 13, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the amount of the at least one oxidizing agent is in a range from less than 1 part per million to 50 percent or more of the volume of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (solutions of peroxide compounds may include hydrogen peroxide and/or carbamide peroxide and/or benzoyl peroxide in various organic carriers in concentrations that may range from about 0.001% to about 50% by volume, par 0042).
45. Regarding claim 14, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied to the at least one oxidizing agent before and/or while the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (at the same time, one or more lights 206 may be activated to provide light in the wavelengths described above so that the synergistic effect of the combined lights and antimicrobial solution may take place, par 0026).
46. Regarding claim 15, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied to the at least one oxidizing agent after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (lights 206 may be activated after the misting is complete, par 0026) so that the trioxygen, endogenous x-ray photons, hydrons, beta particles, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, trioxidane, and other reaction products are generated after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (so that the synergistic effect of the combined lights and antimicrobial solution may take place, resulting in sterilization and decontamination, par 0026), and the ionization reaction and/or oxidization reaction is readied but not initiated until a preset time or event (at a predetermined time interval of time after the antimicrobial solution is completed, par 0026).
47. Regarding claim 17, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of: at least hydrogen peroxide (par 0040).
48. Regarding claim 18, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising determining the formulation of the at least one oxidizing agent (H2O2 solution with concentration of 0.3 mM or any concentration of solution that may be suitable as an antimicrobial agent, pars 0040-0041), wherein the formulation is based on at least pH of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (pH of the solution may be adjusted so that tissue sensitivity may be minimized while the effectiveness of the solution may not be hampered, par 0041), and temperature of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated (solution may work best at a temperature of about 57 degrees Celsius but other chemicals may have different functional or desired temperatures, pars 0040-0041).
49. Regarding claim 19, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent further comprises at least one other substance that aids in a desired process when applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, the desired process selected from the group consisting of at least antimicrobial properties (antimicrobial solution may include nicotinic acid or nicotinamide, erythromycin base, clindamycin phosphate methyl 7-chloro-6,7,8-trideoxy-6-(1-5methyl-trans-4-propyl-L-2pyrrolidinecarboxamido)-1-thio-L-threo-α-D-galacto-octopyranoside 2-(dihydrogen phosphate), tetracycline hydrochloride, retinoids such as 6-[3-(1-adamantyl)-4-methoxy-phenyl] naphthalene-2-carboxylic acid, combinations of ethyl alcohol and propylene glycol, surface active agents such as lauryl ethers and lauryl esters, and other carriers effective for the desired purposes to increase the effectiveness of the treatment, pars 0015-0017)
50. Regarding claim 20, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein at least the photon emission wavelength, frequency, and duration is determined on the basis of conditions or properties of the environment of the target, the substance and/or area to be treated (solution may be exposed to radiation in a wavelength of 360 nm to 600 nm or any other wavelength that proves effective for a certain time that may range from 1 second to greater than 1 minute, par 0015), or location relative to the target and/or substance or area to be treated on the basis of conditions or properties of the environment of the target and/or substance or area to be treated (lights 406 may be formed on walls 410 and nozzles 408 may be positioned at a top portion of passageway 402, or any other desired locations in passageway, par 0037).
51. Regarding claim 21, Dabney discloses a system (system 400, par 0038, FIG. 4) configured to perform the method of claim 1 (method, system, and apparatus for providing sterilization, decontamination, and therapeutic treatment, Abstract), the system comprising:
a reaction area (user/passageway 402, pars 0037-0038, FIG. 4), in which the at least one oxidizing agent functions together with photon emissions to perform the oxidation reaction (hydrogen peroxide in combination with radiation of 360 nm to 500 nm may exhibit a synergistic reaction that kills 96% or more of bacteria exposed to this combination for 20 seconds, par 0040), so that products of the ionization reaction and/or oxidation reaction can be collected and separated at any time during the reaction sequences (any excess solution or runoff to be drained from passageway 402 [before or after synergistic effect of antimicrobial solution with light], par 0038);
at least one oxidizing agent introducing component for applying the at least one oxidizing agent to the target, the substance, or the area to be treated (antimicrobial solution may be dispensed from one or more spraying sources, such as a spray nozzle or mister, so as to cover a predetermined area or object, par 0019); and
at least one photon emission emitting component for creating and dispensing the photon emissions (radiation source may be, for example, a light, light bulb, LED, or the like, emitting at wavelengths from about 360 nm to about 600 nm, par 0018).
52. Regarding claim 22, Dabney discloses the system of claim 21, further comprising one or more sensors or other devices configured to indicate, detect, or inform of one or more properties of the target or storage or environment (associated motion sensor, par 0038) comprising: presence or absence of non-bacteria/biomass (motion sensor detects when a user walks into system, par 0038).
53. Regarding claim 23, Dabney discloses the system of claim 21, further comprising at least one photon emitting component (radiation source providing light radiation at predetermined wavelengths, par 0019), wherein the at least one photon emitting component has photon emissions from 0.01 nanometers to 845 nanometers (wavelength of 360 nm to 600 nm or any other wavelength that proves effective, pars 0015 and 0041).
54. Regarding claim 24, Dabney teaches the system of claim 23, wherein the at least one photon emitting component adjusts one or more of the generated photon emission wavelengths (predetermined wavelengths from about 360 nm to about 600 nm or from about 400 nm to about 500 nm, pars 0018 and 0046), frequency, duration (exposure time of the radiation may be about one minute but any desired duration of treatment may be selected, par 0046), or location relative to the target and/or substance or area to be treated (radiation sources may be fixed, adjustable, or moveable, par 0002). The adjustments may be made to enable targeting of various size areas (par 0046), thus are made on the basis of at least the environment.
55. Regarding claim 25, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein concentration, temperature and/or pH of the at least one oxidizing agent are adjusted to produce a desired reaction or results (concentrations that may range from about 0.001% to about 50% by volume of the carrier, par 0042; temperature of the solution may be adjusted to increase or optimize its effectiveness, par 0041; pH of the solution may be adjusted so that tissue sensitivity may be minimized while the effectiveness of the solution may not be hampered, par 0041).
56. Regarding claim 26, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent and the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is a liquid, solid, gas, plasma, or combination thereof, either independently or simultaneously .
57. Regarding claim 27, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the oxidation reaction is affected or initiated by the addition of other catalysts including exogenous and/or endogenous photon emissions of from 0.01 nm through 845 nm (system and method may utilize blue light, or another certain predetermined wavelength of radiation that may supercharge the solution, par 0040; predetermined wavelengths from about 360 nm to about 600 nm or from about 400 nm to about 500 nm, pars 0018 and 0046).
58. Regarding claim 28, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the duration of the photon emissions is in a range from 1 second to 30 minutes (exposure from about a few seconds to a few minutes, par 0040).
59. Regarding claim 29, Dabney discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent, target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is heated or cooled (antimicrobial storage container 106 may contain a heating element that heats or maintains the antimicrobial solution in a predetermined temperature range, par 0021; water supply 102 may be heated or cooled so as to effectively provide the antimicrobial solution at a desired temperature range, par 0021). The limitation to activate and/or inactivate enzymes present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is not explicitly addressed by the disclosure of Dabney, but Dabney teaches that the heating/cooling assists the antimicrobial process (par 0021) which inherently affects enzymes in the same manner as claimed.
60. Regarding claim 30, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the pH of the oxidizing agent, target, and/or substance or area to be treated is optimized to aid in reduction in activity of selected reactive oxygen species (pH of the solution may be adjusted so that tissue sensitivity may be minimized while the effectiveness of the solution may not be hampered, par 0041).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
61. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
62. Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dabney (US 20190060492 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Flick (US 20110305603 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are taught to “supercharge the solution” (par 0040), the solution including the reaction products. Dabney does not fully teach that the reaction products are used to precipitate and/or agglomerate material out of a liquid, plasma, air, or gas.
Flick teaches an analogous method for generating hydrogen peroxide in the presence of light (Abstract) wherein hydrogen peroxide is described as an excellent oxidizer and disinfectant and purifier and goes on to kill bacteria, algae, etc. in the water, as well as to precipitate hardness (par 0006).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to use the reaction products in the method of Dabney to precipitate and/or agglomerate material out of a liquid as taught by Flick, because this precipitation would advantageously, and with a reasonable expectation of success, remove impurities along with microorganisms (Flick par 0067). See MPEP 2143(I)(G).
63. Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dabney (US 20190060492 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lee et al (US 20190167832 A1) and Warren et al (US 20030100824 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, but although Dabney teaches photon emissions by a light, light bulb, LED, or the like (par 0018), Dabney does explicitly not teach generating photon-enhanced thermionic emission (PETE) products and multi photon absorption products.
Lee teaches an analogous methods for generating hydrogen peroxide gas (par 0021) for disinfection and microbial control (par 0005) using similar light sources that can include lasers, light emitting diodes, incandescent lamps, arc lamps, standard fluorescent lamps, UV lamps, and combinations thereof (par 0100). Lee teaches that the photocatalysis process produces free electrons depending on the intensity of light (par 0085), reading upon the claimed photon-enhanced thermionic emission products.
Warren teaches that during a laser pulse interaction with a material, thermionic emission occurs and electrons are ejected (par 0153) and when the laser may have insufficient time to couple into the substrate through photon-phonon interactions, ionization and multiphoton absorption also occur (par 0156).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to apply the photon emissions in the method of Dabney using a laser as taught by Lee because this would predictably produce photon-enhanced free electrons which advantageously promote hydroxyl radical production over reduction back to water (Lee pars 0013-0015) and involves simple substitution of known elements to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(B). Laser incidence would be reasonably expected to also generate multiphoton absorption products as taught by Warren, see MPEP 2143(I)(G).
64. Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dabney (US 20190060492 A1) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Conrad (US 20100119412 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Dabney teaches the method of claim 1, but Dabney does not teach adjusting viscosity of the target to aid the reactions.
Conrad teaches analogous methods for disinfecting a wide range of compounds and organisms (Abstract) by dispersing aerosolized sprays (pars 0198-0199) wherein disinfection solutions may include reactive oxygen species and/or hydrogen peroxide (pars 0112 and 0114) wherein the viscosity of the oxidizing agent solution can be adjusted to determine droplet size and retention on the target surface (par 0279) and should be designed to remain in contact with the toxant long enough to substantially complete the hydrolysis reaction (par 0151).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include within the method of Dabney a step of adjusting viscosity of the target as taught by Conrad, because this would predictably enable control of the retention of disinfecting solution on the surface to ensure the disinfection reaction is carried out and involves combination of prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. See MPEP 2143(I)(A).
Double Patenting
65. The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
66. A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
67. Claims 1-13 and 17-30 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-3, 5-12, 17-18, 20-25, and 27-30 of copending Application No. 18/346,304 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because of semantic differences that do not distract from the fact that the claims overlap to encompass nearly identical scope.
Below is a comparison of claim language, where claim language that differs is in bold:
Copending App. No. 18/346,304
Present
1. A method for enhancing effectiveness of products generated from ionization reactions, photon-enhanced thermionic emission (PETE) reactions, multi photon absorption (MPA) reactions, photo-oxidation reactions, photocatalytic reactions, photochemical reactions, and/or a combination of these reactions, the reactions comprising one or more of oxidizing agents, hydrogen and/or its isotopes, oxygen and/or its isotopes, electronically modified oxygen derivatives, reactive oxygen species, trioxygen, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane and other free radicals, the method comprising:
applying at least one oxidizing agent to a target or a substance or area to be treated;
applying photon emissions at one or more wavelengths in a range from 0.01 nm to 845 nm to the oxidizing agent, the target, and/or the substance or area to be treated, wherein wavelengths that photo-dissociate trioxygen may be excluded, and the photon emissions may be applied by the device to the oxidizing agent before, during, and/or after the oxidizing agent is applied to the target;
initiating and creating a reaction between the at least one photon enhanced oxidizing agent and the target and/or substance or area to be treated to produce ionization products, oxidation reaction products, reduction reaction products, photon-enhanced thermionic emission (PETE) products, multi photon absorption products, photo-oxidation reaction products, photocatalytic reaction products, photochemical reaction products, and/or a combination of these reaction products,
wherein the ionization reaction products, photon-enhanced thermionic emission (PETE) products, multi photon absorption products, photo oxidation reaction products, photocatalytic reaction products, photochemical reaction products, and/or combination of these reaction products generate at least one of trioxygen, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, hydroxyl radical, ROS, free radicals, x-ray photons, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane, free electrons and electronically modified oxygen derivatives.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the excluded wavelengths that dissociate trioxygen are selected from the group consisting of: 197 nm – 198 nm, 263 nm – 264 nm, 307 nm – 308 nm, 402 nm – 403 nm, 452 nm – 453 nm, 599 nm – 600 nm, and 1118 nm – 1119 nm.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying the photon emissions by an emission source or sources selected from one of an: x-ray generator, an electromagnetic radiation emitting bulb, a light emitting diode, an electrostatic charge generating device, and a laser.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying the at least one oxidizing agent to the target, substance, or area to be treated with an oxidizing agent dispenser or dispensers with at least one of a pump, a mister, a fogger, an atomizer, a diffuser, a piezoelectric atomizer, and an electrostatic sprayer that dispenses the oxidizing agent in a desired particle size.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising dispensing additional reactants at different intervals to aid the oxidizing reaction, wherein the additional reactants comprise at least one of enzymes, catalysts, stabilizers, ions, photons, beta particles, hydrons, reactive oxygen species, and flocculants.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products receive an electrostatic charge and are used to precipitate and/or agglomerate material out of a liquid, plasma, air, or gas.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are antimicrobial agents and/or bleaching agents.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising generating photon-enhanced thermionic emission (PETE) products and multi photon absorption products.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products provide hydroxyl radicals, trioxidane, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, electronically, modified oxygen derivatives (EMODS), beta particles, hydrons, free radicals and/or other reactive oxygen species.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising adjusting viscosity of the target.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein the amount of the at least one oxidizing agent is in a range from less than 1 part per million to 50 percent or more of the volume of the target and/or substance or area to be treated.
13. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying the exogenous photon emission to the at least one oxidizing agent before, and/or after, and/or while the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target and/or the substance or area to be treated, the target and/or the substance or area to be treated furthers the ionization reactions and/or oxidization reactions or produces one or more additional reactions, and the further or one or more additional reactions are not dependent on continued or additional application of the exogenous photon emissions by the device, wherein the further reactions are a result of endogenous generated x-ray photons generated from the displayed device’s associated reactions and the subsequently generated reactions and/or the various reaction products.
14. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying the exogenous photon emission to the at least one oxidizing agent after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target and/or substance or area to be treated so that trioxygen, endogenous x-ray photons, hydrons, beta particles, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, and trioxidane are generated after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target and/or substance or area to be treated, and the ionization reaction and/or oxidization reaction is readied but not initiated until a condition is met.
16. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent comprises at least one of oxygen (O2), trioxygen (O3), hydrogen (H), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), inorganic peroxides, Fenton’s reagent, fluorine (F2), chlorine (Cl2), halogens, nitric acid (HNO3), nitrate compounds, sulfuric acid (H2SO4), peroxydisulfuric acid (H2S2O8), peroxymonosulfuric acid (H2SO5), sulfur compounds, hypochlorite, chlorite, chlorate, perchlorate, other analogous halogen compounds, chromic acid, dichromic acid, calcium oxide, chromium trioxide, pyridinium chlorochromate (PCC), chromate, dichromate compounds, hexavalent chromium compounds, potassium permanganate (KMnO4), sodium perborate, permanganate compounds, nitrous oxide (N2O), nitrogen dioxide/dinitrogen tetroxide (NO2/N2O4), urea, potassium nitrate (KNO3), sodium bismuthate (NaBiO3), ceric ammonium nitrate, ceric sulfate, cerium (IV) compounds, peracetic acid, and lead dioxide (PbO2).
17. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining if one or more properties of the target and/or substance or area to be treated is under aerobic or anaerobic conditions, determining pH of the target and/or substance or area to be treated, determining temperature of the target and/or substance or area to be treated, determining salinity of the target and/or substance or area to be treated, determining consortium or population characteristics of organisms or micro-organism present, determining content of the target and/or substance or area to be treated, and/or determining content of any biofilms associated with the target and/or substance or area to be treated .
19. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining and selecting at least one of the photon emission wavelengths, frequency, intensity, duration, or location relative to the target and/or substance or area to be treated on the basis of any one or more of:
density and radiation absorption, scattering or reflection quality of the target and/or substance or area to be treated; a size, shape, or composition of a container containing the target and/or substance or area to be treated; conditions or properties of the environment of the target and/or substance or area to be treated; whether the target and/or substance or area to be treated is under aerobic or anaerobic conditions; pH, temperature, salinity of the target and/or substance or area to be treated;
consortium or population characteristics of any organisms or microorganisms present in the target and/or substance or area to be treated; microbial content of the target and/or substance or area to be treated; and microbial content of any biofilm present in the target and/or substance or area to be treated.
20. A system configured to perform the method claim 1, the system comprising:
a target or reaction area, in which the at least one oxidizing agent functions together with photon emissions to perform the ionization reaction and/or the oxidation reaction, so that products of the ionization reaction and/or oxidation reaction can be collected and separated at any time during the reaction sequences.
21. The system of claim 20, further comprising one or more sensors configured to indicate, detect, or inform one or more properties of the target or storage or environment comprising:
pH, photon emissions, pressure, temperature, salinity, density, trioxygen concentration, oxygen and oxygen ions concentration, hydrogen and hydrogen ions concentration, hydron concentration, oxidizing agent concentration, flow rate, microbial content, mass, oxidation or reduction potential, electrical potential, presence of ionizing radiation, presence or absence of bacterial species, presence or absence of corrosive metabolites or otherwise corrosive substance, identification of a gas, presence or absence of an aqueous environment, presence or absence of high, low, or otherwise concentration of bacteria or non-bacteria, biomass or non-biomass, or microbial content, and location of biofilms.
22. The system of claim 20, further comprising at least one photon emitting component, wherein the at least one photon emitting component has photon emissions from 0.01 nanometers to 845 nanometers.
23. The system of claim 22, wherein the at least one photon emitting component adjusts one or more of the generated photon emission wavelengths, frequency, intensity, duration, or location relative to the target and/or substance or area to be treated on the basis of one or more of the density and light transmission potential of the target.
24. The method of claim 1, wherein concentration, temperature, viscosity, and/or pH of the at least one oxidizing agent are adjusted or modulated by the device to produce a desired reaction or results.
25. The method of claim 1, further comprising affecting or initiating the ionization and/or oxidation reaction by adding of photon emissions of from 0.01 nm through 845 nm.
26. The method of claim 1, wherein the duration of the device generated photon emissions is in a range from 1 second to 30 minutes.
27. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying heating or cooling to modulate the reaction.
28. The method of claim 1, wherein the pH of the oxidizing agent, target, and/or substance or area to be treated is optimized by the device to aid in the formation of a desired reactive oxygen species and/or wherein the pH of the oxidizing agent, target and/or substance or area to be treated is optimized by the device to aid in elimination or reduction in activity of selected reactive oxygen species.
1. A method for enhancing effectiveness of products generated from ionization reactions, photon-enhanced thermionic emission reactions, multi photon absorption reactions, photo-oxidation reactions, photocatalytic reactions, photochemical reactions, and/or a combination of these reactions,
the reactions comprising one or more of oxidizing agents, reactive nitrogen species, hydrogen and/or its isotopes, oxygen and/or its isotopes, electronically modified oxygen derivatives, reactive oxygen species, trioxygen, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane, and other free radicals, the method comprising:
applying at least one oxidizing agent to a target, a substance, or an area to be treated;
applying photon emissions at one or more wavelengths in a range from 0.01 nm to 845 nm to the oxidizing agent, the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, wherein wavelengths that photo-dissociate trioxygen are excluded; and
performing an oxidizing reaction between the at least one photon augmented oxidizing agent and the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, which produces the ionization reaction products, photon-enhanced thermionic emission reaction products, multi photon absorption reaction products, photo-oxidation reaction products, photocatalytic reaction products, photochemical reaction products, and/or a combination of the reaction products thereof,
wherein the ionization reaction products, photon-enhanced thermionic emission reaction products, multi photon absorption reaction products, photo oxidation reaction products, photocatalytic reaction products, photochemical reaction products, and/or combination of the reaction products thereof generate at least one of trioxygen, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, hydroxyl radical, reactive oxygen species, free radicals, x-ray photons, beta particles, hydrons, trioxidane, free electrons, and electronically modified oxygen derivatives.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the excluded wavelengths that dissociate trioxygen are selected from the group consisting of: 197 nm - 198 nm, 263 nm - 264 nm, 307 nm - 308 nm, 402 nm- 403 nm, 452 nm- 453 nm, 599 nm- 600 nm, and 1118nm-1119 nm.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied by an emission source selected from the group consisting of an x-ray generator, electromagnetic radiation emitting bulb, Light Emitting Diode, and laser.
5. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated with an oxidizing agent dispenser selected from the group consisting of a pump, mister, fogger, atomizer, diffuser, and electrostatic sprayer.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising applying additional reactants at various stages to aid the oxidizing reaction, wherein the additional reactants are selected from the group consisting of enzymes, catalysts, stabilizers, ions, photons, beta particles, hydrons, reactive oxygen species, and
flocculants.
7. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are used to precipitate and/or agglomerate material out of a liquid, plasma, air, or gas.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are antimicrobial agents and/or bleaching agents.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of photon-enhanced thermionic emission products and multi photon absorption products are generated.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the reaction products are a catalyst, a reactant, or a substance providing hydroxyl radicals, trioxidane, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, electronically modified oxygen derivatives, beta particles, hydrons, free radicals, or reactive oxygen species.
12. The method of claim 1, wherein the viscosity of the target is adjusted to aid the reactions.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein the amount of the at least one oxidizing agent is in a range from less than 1 part per million to 50 percent or more of the volume of the target, the substance and/or the area to be treated.
14. The method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied to the at least one oxidizing agent before and/or while the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or
the area to be treated,
the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated furthers the ionization reactions, the oxidization reactions, and/or produces one or more additional reactions, and
the one or more additional reactions are not dependent on continued or additional application of the photon emissions.
15. The method of claim 1, wherein the photon emissions are applied to the at least one oxidizing agent after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated so that the trioxygen, endogenous x-ray photons, hydrons, beta particles, hydrogen and its ions, oxygen and its ions, trioxidane, and other reaction products are generated after the at least one oxidizing agent is applied to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, and the ionization reaction and/or oxidization reaction is readied but not initiated until a preset time or event.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent is selected from the group consisting of oxygen (02), trioxygen (03), hydrogen (H), hydrogen peroxide (H202), inorganic peroxides, Fenton's reagent, fluorine (F2), chlorine (Cl2), halogens, nitric acid (HNO3), nitrate compounds, sulfuric acid (H2SO4), peroxydisulfuric acid (H2S208), peroxymonosulfuric acid (H2SO5), sulfur compounds, hypochlorite, chlorite, chlorate, perchlorate, other analogous halogen compounds, chromic acid, dichromic acid, calcium oxide, chromium trioxide, pyridinium chlorochromate (PCC), chromate, dichromate compounds, hexavalent chromium compounds, potassium permanganate (KMnO4), sodium perborate, permanganate compounds, nitrous oxide (N20), nitrogen dioxide/dinitrogen tetroxide (N02/N204), urea, potassium nitrate (KNO3), sodium bismuthate (NaBiO3), ceric ammonium nitrate, ceric sulfate, cerium (IV) compounds, peracetic acid, and lead dioxide (PbO2) and any other oxidizing agent or oxidizing agents.
18. The method of claim 1, further comprising determining the formulation of the at least one oxidizing agent, wherein the formulation is based on one or more properties of whether the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is under aerobic or anaerobic conditions, pH of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, temperature of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, salinity of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated, consortium or population characteristics of organisms or micro-organism present, content of the target, the substance, and/or
the area to be treated, or content of any biofilms associated with the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated .
20. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the photon emission wavelength, frequency, intensity, duration, or location relative to the target, the substance and/or the area to be treated is determined on the basis of any one or more of:
the density and radiation absorbing, scattering or reflection quality of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; the size, shape, or composition of a container containing the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; conditions or properties of the environment of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated;
whether the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is under aerobic or anaerobic conditions; pH, temperature, salinity of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; consortium or population characteristics of any organisms or microorganisms present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; microbial content of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; microbial content of any biofilm present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; or a container containing the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated.
21. A system configured to perform the method of claim 1, comprising:
a reaction area, in which the at least one oxidizing agent functions together with photon emissions to perform the ionization reaction and/or the oxidation reaction, so that products of the ionization reaction and/or oxidation reaction can be collected and separated at any time during the reaction sequences;
at least one oxidizing agent introducing component for applying the at least one oxidizing agent to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; and
at least one photon emission emitting component for creating and dispensing the photon emissions.
22. The system of claim 21, further comprising one or more sensors or other devices to indicate, detect, or inform of one or more of the following properties of the target or storage or environment:
pH, photon emissions, pressure, temperature, salinity, density, trioxygen concentration, oxygen and its ions concentration, hydrogen and its ions concentration, hydron concentration, oxidizing agent concentration, flow rate, microbial content, presence or absence of bacterial species, presence or absence of corrosive metabolites or otherwise corrosive substance, identification of a gas, presence or absence of an aqueous environment, presence or absence of high, low, or otherwise concentration of bacteria or non-bacteria, biomass or non-biomass, or microbial content, and location of biofilms.
23. The system of claim 21, further comprising at least one photon emitting component, wherein the at least one photon emitting component emits, delivers, produces, or otherwise facilitates photon emissions from 0.01 nanometers to 845 nanometers independently, simultaneous, continuously, or intermittently, wherein the at least one photon emitting component is suspended, adjacent to, inside of, surrounding, or associated with a container, structure, area of the at least one oxidizing agent, the target, substance, and/or the area to be treated, and/or supported in a target container, and
wherein the at least one photon emitting component is or is not physically close to the at least one oxidizing agent, the target, the substance, and/or area to be treated.
24. The system of claim 23, wherein the at least one photon emitting component adjusts one or more of: the photon emission wavelengths, frequency, intensity, duration, or location relative to the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated on the basis of one or more of density, light absorbing, scattering, or reflection quality of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated;
the size, shape, or composition of the reaction area; conditions or properties of the environment;
whether the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is under aerobic or anaerobic conditions; pH, temperature, or salinity of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated;
consortium or population characteristics of any organisms or micro-organisms present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; microbial content of the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; microbial content of any biofilm present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated; the reaction area; or the environment.
25. The method of claim 1, wherein concentration, temperature, viscosity, and/or pH of the at least one oxidizing agent are adjusted to produce a desired reaction or results.
27. The method of claim 1, wherein the oxidation reaction is affected or initiated by the addition of other catalysts including exogenous and/or endogenous photon emissions of from 0.01 nm through 845 nm.
28. The method of claim 1, wherein the duration of the photon emissions is in a range from less than 1 second to 30 minutes, the photon emissions continuous, pulsed, or intermittent.
29. The method of claim 1, wherein the at least one oxidizing agent, target, the substance, and/or
the area to be treated is heated or cooled to activate and/or inactivate enzymes present in the target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated.
30. The method of claim 1, wherein the pH of the oxidizing agent, target, the substance and/or the area to be treated is optimized to aid in formation of a desired reactive oxygen species, and/or wherein the pH of the oxidizing agent, target, the substance, and/or the area to be treated is optimized to aid in elimination or reduction in activity of selected reactive oxygen species.
68. Regarding the textual differences above, the claim language of the present application differs from the reference application mainly in form with no non-obvious differences in scope. All limitations in claim 1 of the present application are recited by the reference application except for “reactive nitrogen species”, which Applicant admits is intended as a “subset of reactive oxygen species” (Specification page 40 second par) and thus is included within the scope of the reference claim. Further, there is no material difference between “performing an oxidizing reaction” and “initiating and creating a reaction” between an oxidizing agent and a target, as this is known to be an oxidizing reaction.
69. Regarding claims 18 and 21 of the present application, these claims recite elements that necessarily must be present to execute the reference method, as the elements are recited with a high degree of generality that is read upon by the functional language of the corresponding reference claim(s).
70. Regarding claims 20 and 23-24 of the present application, these claims include alternatives that simply broaden the scope of the corresponding reference claims, the reference claims read upon at least one limitation among the listed alternatives and therefore read upon the claims.
71. Regarding claims 4 and 26 not tabulated above, the claims are determined not to further limit the scope of claim 1 and therefore reflect a scope indistinct from reference claim 1, above. See rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) above.
72. Regarding claim 11 not tabulated above, the limitation wherein the photon emissions are applied as “a single wavelength or multiple wavelengths”, applied “either independently or simultaneously”, and applied “at an emission dose that is varied or not varied” does not further limit the scope of claim 1. The reference claim 1 reads upon wherein the photon emissions are applied “either continuously or pulsed” as the photon emissions may be applied by the device to the oxidizing agent before, during, and/or after the oxidizing agent is applied to the target, providing the option for continuous application.
73. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
74. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric Talbert whose telephone number is (703)756-5538. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 Eastern Time.
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, Maris Kessel can be reached at (571) 270-7698. 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.
/ERIC TALBERT/Examiner, Art Unit 1758
/MARIS R KESSEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1758
Prosecution Insights