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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: 10c (pg. 8). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 14; 44; 100. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
In addition to Replacement Sheets containing the corrected drawing figure(s), applicant is required to submit a marked-up copy of each Replacement Sheet including annotations indicating the changes made to the previous version. The marked-up copy must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheets” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings. See 37 CFR 1.121(d)(1). Failure to timely submit the proposed drawing and marked-up copy will result in the abandonment of the application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 29 recites the limitation "buffer vessel". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This term has previously been defined; it is not clear if it refers to the same or a different buffer vessel.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
Claims 23-25, 27-29, 31, 33-36, and 40-41 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by WO 2013/112047 by Schuur (Schuur).
In regard to claims 23, 29, and 41, Schuur teaches a skimmer (abstract; Figure 2, apparatus 1; P7/L4-17); capable of collecting a substance from a liquid surface.
Schuur teaches a buffer vessel provided with an open top end (abstract; Figure 2, collecting container 2, P7/L4-17); capable of at least temporarily holding a mixture of the substance to be removed and the liquid.
Schuur teaches a flotation element (Figure 2, fix top float 4; P6/L9-23); capable of being arranged on or at the buffer vessel to float on the liquid surface.
Schuur teaches at least one pump provide with at least one drainage connection capable of being connected with a drainage conduit (P7/L30-33; first discharge 6; P6/L9-24); capable of pumping the mixture from the buffer vessel through the drainage conduit to a drainage designation. Schuur teaches the buffer vessel comprises an outer edge that defines an inlet opening (P6/L9-24, circular passage slot 5); capable of accepting the mixture.
Schuur teahces the skimmer further comprises a mixture inspection element (P7/L33 to P8/L2). Schuur teaches the mixture inspection element comprises a sensor pipe connected to the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection (P7/L30 to P8/L2).
Regarding limitations recited in the claims which are directed to a manner of operating disclosed skimmer, it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. "[A]pparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does." Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc., 909 F.2d 1464, 1469, 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (emphasis in original). A claim containing a "recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus" if the prior art apparatus teaches all the structural limitations of the claim. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (Bd. Pat. App. & Inter. 1987). Claim analysis is highly fact-dependent. A claim is only limited by positively recited elements. Thus, "[i]nclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims." In re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935). This applies to the following limitations: “collecting a substance from a liquid surface”; “temporarily holding a mixture of the substance to be removed and the liquid”; “arranged on or at the buffer vessel to float on the liquid surface”; “pumping the mixture from the buffer vessel through the drainage conduit to a drainage designation; “accepting the mixture”; “drain a sample portion of the mixture from the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection to an open end of the sensor pipe” (claim 23); “configured for controlling an amount of the mixture that passes through the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection and/or the sensor pipe during use” (claim 27); “drain the pump and/or a buffer vessel after use thereof” (claim 29); “injecting liquid in the drainage conduit and increasing a flow velocity in the drainage conduit” (claim 33); “drain the pump and/or buffer vessel after use” (claim 41).
In regard to claim 24, Schuur teaches the mixture inspection element is operatively connected to the at least one drainage connection (P6/L9-24; P7/L30 to P8/L2; first discharge 6).
In regard to claim 25, Schuur teaches the skimmer further comprises the drainage conduit and the mixture inspection element is connected to the drainage conduit (P6/L9-24; P7/L30 to P8/L2; first discharge 6).
In regard to claim 27, Schuur teaches the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection and/or sensor pipe comprises a flow controller (P7/L4-9).
In regard to claim 28, Schuur teaches the sensor pipe extends partly within the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection (P7/L30 to P8/L2).
In regard to claim 31, Schuur teaches the floatation element comprises a float and a height adjuster (P5/L9-19); capable of adjusting a relative distance between the float and the buffer vessel. Schuur teaches the height adjuster comprises a hydraulic system (P4/L1-9).
In regard to claim 33, Schuur teahces the skimmer further comprises a liquid injection system (P3/L4-12); capable of injecting liquid in the drainage conduit and increasing a flow velocity in the drainage conduit (claim 33). Schuur teaches the water injection system is positioned between the mixture inspection element and an outer end of the drainage conduit (P3/L4-12).
In regard to claim 34, Schuur teaches the skimmer further comprises at least one liquid inlet connected to the buffer vessel and which is positioned under the liquid surface during use (P3/L4-12). Schuur teaches each of the at least one liquid inlet comprises a valve mechanism (P3/L4-12; P8/L10-18); capable of closing the inlet during pumping. Schuur teaches the one or more pump comprises a hydraulic pump and wherein the valve mechanism is connected to a hydraulics system of the at least one pump using a hydraulic manifold (P4/L18-22). Schuur teaches the valve mechanism is configured to close in correspondence with a use of the at least one pump (P3/L4-12; P8/L10-18; P4/L18-22).
In regard to claim 35, Schuur teaches at least one liquid inlet comprises a one-way valve (P4/L24-28); capable of being closed by pressure in one or more of the at least one pump, the at least one drainage connection, and/or the drainage conduit.
In regard to claim 36, Schuur teaches the buffer vessel is at least partly surrounded by a cage and/or an outer vessel (Figure 1, metal screen 3; P6/L9-16). Schuur teaches the outer vessel comprises one or more openings (Figure 1, metal screen 3; P6/L9-16). Schuur teaches a partly open space exists between the outer vessel and the buffer vessel (Figure 1, metal screen 3; P6/L9-16); capable of being filled with a liquid when the skimmer is deployed.
In regard to claim 40, Schuur teahces the sensor pipe extends partly within the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection (P7/L30 to P8/L2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2013/112047 by Schuur (Schuur), as noted above.
In regard to claim 30, Schuur teaches the limitations as noted above. Schuur does not teach the mixture inspection element comprises a transparent section of the drainage conduit.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to utilize a transparent section in the drainage conduit in order to visually observe the quality of the outlet stream. Further,
Claims 32 and 37 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2013/112047 by Schuur (Schuur), as noted above, in view of NL 2018452 by Tamminga.
In regard to claim 32, Schuur teaches the limitations as noted above. Schuur does not teach the height adjuster comprises a rod connected to the float and the buffer vessel; at least one of the connections between the float and the rod and the buffer vessel and the rod comprises a threaded connection.
Tamminga teaches the height adjuster comprises a rod connected to the float and the buffer vessel (Figure 4; P11/L5 to P12/L6). Tamminga teaches at least one of the connections between the float and the rod and the buffer vessel and the rod comprises a threaded connection (Figure 4; P11/L5 to P12/L6).
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate a heigh adjuster rod and threaded connection, as taught by Tamminga, in the skimmer of Schuur as these are known components of skimmers and utilized to adjust the design elements of the apparatus.
In regard to claim 37, Schuur teaches the limitations as noted above. Further, Schuur teaches the inlet opening defines an inlet channel (P6/L9-24, circular passage slot 5). Schuur teaches the inlet channel comprises a restriction over some distance (P6/L9 to P7/L2). Schuur teaches the inlet channel is defined by the buffer vessel and the floating element (P6/L9-24, circular passage slot 5).
Schuur does not teach the floating element comprises an edge having an edge surface that is at an angle of at least 70° to an average inflow direction of the mixture flowing in the buffer vessel.
Tamminga teaches the floating element comprises an edge having an edge surface that is at an angle of at least 70° to an average inflow direction of the mixture flowing in the buffer vessel (Figure 4; P11/L5 to P12/L6). It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to incorporate a 70° between the edge surface and inflow direction as it is a known alternative inflow configuration in the art of skimmers.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 11/18/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In regard to the Applicant’s argument sensor pipe is configured to drain a sample portion to gather insight on the mixture being pumped, a small part of the mixture will exit from one end of the sensor pipe; by inspecting the mixture to operator can determine whether the skimmer is draining the substance effectively; substance can be removed more efficiently and cost effectively , the Examiner does not find this persuasive. In regard to the Applicant’s argument Schuur does not teach a “sensor pipe connected to the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection, wherein the sensor pipe is configured to drain a sample portion of the mixture from the drainage conduit and/or the at least one drainage connection to an open end of the sensor pipe”, the Examiner does not find this persuasive.
The claims are directed towards the statutory category of an apparatus.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., small part of mixture, draining efficiently, cost effective) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
A recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim.
Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARA M PEO whose telephone number is (571)272-9958. The examiner can normally be reached 9 to 5:30.
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, Vickie Kim can be reached at 571-272-0579. 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.
/KARA M PEO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777