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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed June 30, 2026 has been entered. Examiner acknowledges the cancellation of claim 6. Claims 2-4, 7-14, 18-20, and 23-32 remain pending in the application. Applicant amended claims 3, 7, 8, 10, 12, 14, 18, 23, and 31, and amended paragraphs [0018] and [0020] of the specification. The cancellation of claim 6 and amendment of claim 8 overcome the §112(b) rejections set forth in the prior office action. However, the amendments to claims 3 and 18 present, or do not otherwise repair clarity issues under 35 U.S.C. §112(b), as set forth below.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed June 30, 2026 have been fully considered. The cancellation of claim 6 and amendment of claim 8 overcome the §112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed January 27, 2026. Accordingly, those rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant’s remarks concerning the nonstatutory double-patenting rejection have also been considered. In view of the terminal disclaimer filed April 27, 2026, the nonstatutory double-patenting rejection is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 3 and 18 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 3, claim 3 recites “wherein either the anode electrode or the cathode electrode comprises titanium suboxide and the other anode electrode and the cathode electrode is selected from the group consisting of titanium suboxide, Mn02, Sn02, Pb02, and Ce-Pb02.” However, the phrase “the other anode electrode and the cathode electrode” is unclear. It is unclear whether the claim is intended to require the other of the anode electrode and the cathode electrode to be selected from the listed group, or whether both the anode electrode and the cathode electrode are being further limited. Accordingly, the metes and bounds of claim 3 are unclear.
The rejection may be overcome by amending claim 3 to clarify the intended relationship between the anode electrode and cathode electrode, for example by reciting “wherein one of the anode electrode and the cathode electrode comprises titanium suboxide, and the other of the anode electrode and the cathode electrode comprises a material selected from the group consisting of titanium suboxide, MnO2, SnO2, PbO2, and Ce-PbO2.”
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 recites “wherein the filter or sorbent comprises an ion-exchange resin including a lead contactor and a lag contactor.” Claim 2 recites flowing an influent liquid through “a filter or sorbent” and recirculating at least a portion of liquid treated by the EO reactor through “the filter or sorbent”. The specification described pre-filter 14 separately from ion-exchange resin lead contactor 16 and lag contactor 18. It is unclear whether claim 18 requires the filter to comprise the ion-exchange resin including the lead contactor and lag contactor, the sorbent to comprise the ion-exchange resin including the lead contactor and lag contactor, or either alternative. The metes and bounds of claim 18 are therefore unclear.
The rejection may be overcome by amending claim 18 to recite, for example, “wherein the filter or sorbent is the sorbent, and wherein the sorbent comprises an ion-exchange resin including a lead contactor and a lag contactor.”
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2, 4, 7-14, 19, 20 and 23-32 are allowable. Claims 3 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §112(b) for the reasons set forth above. Accordingly, the application is not in condition for allowance.
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
/PATRICK ORME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights