CTNF 17/992,375 CTNF 91706 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 07-42-04 AIA 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 18DEC2025 has been entered. Response to Arguments The Amendment filed 04MAY2026 has been entered. No new matter has been entered (see par. [0041] “The electromagnets can be independently controlled and operated”). Applicant’s amendments have overcome each and every 112(b) rejections previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 23OCT2025. Applicant's arguments filed 04MAY2026 have been fully considered. The arguments do not reflect the claims as amended. Note new rejections below. 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. Claims 1-6,8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. Claim 1 line(s) 1,3 sets forth the limitation “an industrial plant […] an industrial plant”. It is unclear whether the industrial plant of line(s) 3 is the same or different from the industrial plant of line(s) 1. Claim 1 line(s) 4,7, sets forth the limitation “one or more magnetic elements […] an electromagnet”. It is unclear whether the electromagnet is the same or different from the magnetic elements. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA 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. 07-20-02-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-2,8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YEN (US 10010891) . Regarding Claim 1 , YEN teaches a magnetic filter (title, Figs.) including a method for trapping corrosion products in an industrial plant (corroded products in a process stream of a petroleum refinery or chemical plant; note that petroleum includes hydrocarbons; P8/L4-9), the method comprising: controlling a flow of a hydrocarbon fluid being processed by the industrial plant comprising a trap system (e.g. Fig. 3A) having: a magnetic element (Figs. 3A,B #226); an entry port (Figs. 3A,B #206), and; an exit port (Figs. 3A,B #210); wherein the industrial plant comprises a critical portion vulnerable to the corrosion products (that’s why the magnetic filter is employed as implied by the reference; in considering the disclosure of YEN, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom (MPEP 2144.01); configuring the trap system, by deploying an electromagnet (C6/L37-39) such that the hydrocarbon fluid flows in a variable pattern through the trap system before flowing to the critical portion (flowing from the inlet to the outlet in a random manner around the electromagnets and the paramagnetic metal packings; Fig. 3A,B #232; C6/L64-66); and selectively activating the electromagnet such that the corrosion products in the hydrocarbon fluid are retained by the trap system (Activating the current source to turn on the electromagnets and disconnecting the current source to turn off the magnetic field; C7/L15-19), sparing the critical portion of the industrial plant while the hydrocarbon fluid flows from the entry port to the exit port (trapping corrosion sludge; Figs. 3A,B; C8/L4-23). Regarding Claim 2 , YEN teaches arranging the magnetic elements that form a partial blockage of the hydrocarbon fluid flowing in the trap system (Figs. 3A,B). Regarding Claim 8 , YEN teaches extracting, from the trap system, the corrosion products retained by the magnetic elements (C5/L10-25; C7/L15-19). Regarding Claim 9 , YEN teaches installing a non-magnetic cover for each of the magnetic elements (C2/L13-14) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YEN (US 10010891) in view of DOWNIE (US 20130248433) . Regarding Claim 3 , YEN does not teach the hydrocarbon fluid to accelerate . However, DOWNIE teaches a dirt separator (title, Figs.) including a method for trapping corrosion products (e.g. magnetite; par. [0002]) in a plant, comprising: a trap system (e.g. Fig. 1) having: a magnetic element (Fig. 2 #58), an entry port (Fig. 1 #16), and an exit port (Fig. 1 #18); configuring the trap system such that the fluid flows in a pattern through the trap system (from the inlet to the outlet); activating the magnetic elements of the trap system such that the corrosion products in the fluid are retained by the magnetic elements and limited to portions of the plant while the fluid flows from the entry port to the exit port (par. [0041]); and, configuring the trap system such that the entry port and exit port are sized and shaped for the fluid flowing in the trap system to accelerate between the entry port and exit port (par. [0014]). DOWNIE teaches this acceleration of flow substantially prevents cavitation at the outlet (par. [0014]). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of YEN with fluid acceleration of DOWNIE in order to prevent cavitation at the outlet. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of magnetic separations. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YEN (US 10010891) in view of BEARD (US 20190093685) . Regarding Claim 4 , YEN does not teach the hydrocarbon fluid to decelerate . However, BEARD teaches a flow distributor (title, Figs.) including a method for trapping corrosion products (“magnetically susceptible particles”; par. [0004]) in a plant, comprising: a trap system (e.g. Fig. 1) having: a magnetic element (Fig. 1 #8), an entry port (Fig. 1 #4), and an exit port (Fig. 1 #6); configuring the trap system such that the fluid flows in a pattern through the trap system (from the inlet to the outlet); activating the magnetic elements of the trap system such that the corrosion products in the fluid are retained by the magnetic elements and limited to portions of the plant while the fluid flows from the entry port to the exit port (par. [0004]); and, configuring the trap system such that the entry port and exit port are sized and shaped for the fluid flowing in the trap system to decelerate between the entry port and exit port (par. [0003]). BEARD teaches this deceleration of flow provides effective filtering by trapping and holding particles (par. [0003]). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of YEN with fluid deceleration of BEARD in order to improve the effectiveness of magnetic filtration. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of magnetic separations. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over YEN (US 10010891) in view of YEN (US 20100065504) . Regarding Claims 5-6 , YEN ‘891 is silent as to a bypass. However, YEN ‘504 teaches a novel filtration method (title, Figs.) including a method for trapping corrosion products (“iron rust particulates”; abstract) in an industrial plant (e.g. refinery; abstract), comprising: controlling (via a trap) a flow of a hydrocarbon fluid being processed by an industrial plant (“refinery and chemical process streams from different industries”; abstract; see also par. [0004] referencing a hydrocarbon); the trap comprising, a trap system (e.g. Fig. 1A) having: a magnetic element (Fig. 1 #110), an entry port (Fig. 1 #130), and an exit port (Fig. 1 #132); configuring the trap system such that the hydrocarbon fluid flows in a pattern through the trap system (from the inlet to the outlet); the trap is placed before the corrosion products can reach critical portions of the industrial plant (“components that are detrimental to down-stream process units”; par. [0002]); and, selectively activating the magnetic elements of the trap system such that the corrosion products in the hydrocarbon fluid are retained by the magnetic element while the hydrocarbon fluid flows from the entry port to the exit port (installing the magnets for magnetic separation and removing the magnets for cleaning; par. [0020-0021]). Additionally, YEN teaches installing at a bypass channel for the hydrocarbon fluid flowing in the trap system so that the trap may be cleaned (deactivated) while fluid continues to flow (par. [0024]). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the method of YEN ‘891 with a bypass as taught by YEN ‘504 in order to allow the magnetic trap to be cleaned while fluid continues to flow as is known in the art. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of magnetic separations. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G). Telephonic Inquiries Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIAM A ROYCE whose telephone number is (571)270-0352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~08:00~15:00. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at (571)272-0475. 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. LIAM A. ROYCE Primary Examiner Art Unit 1777 /Liam Royce/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 2 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 3 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 4 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 5 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 6 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 7 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 8 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 9 Art Unit: 1777 Application/Control Number: 17/992,375 Page 10 Art Unit: 1777
Prosecution Insights