DETAILED ACTION
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
Applicant’s amendment filed on December 23, 2025 has been received and carefully considered. Claims 2-4 are canceled. Claims 1 and 5-14 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 23, 2025 have been fully considered.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1-4, 13, and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crater (US 2,363,834), Applicant (at page 7) argues,
“Crater does not explicitly disclose the inlet and outlet configurations; however, when interpreted based on the drawings and the description of Crater, both the inlet of the outer jacket and the inlet of the inner jacket are positioned at a lower portion, and both the outlet of the outer jacket and the outlet of the inner jacket are positioned at an upper portion. Accordingly, Crater is structurally distinct from amended claim 1.”
The Office respectfully disagrees.
In terms of structure, a refrigerant inlet or a refrigerant outlet is merely a port or opening that provides fluid communication with the interior of the refrigerant jacket. Whether a port or opening functions as a refrigerant inlet through which a refrigerant enters or a refrigerant outlet through which the refrigerant exits is thus directed to an intended manner of operating the apparatus which does not impart further structural limitation to the claim.
In the reactor of Crater (see FIG. 1), the lower port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 was used as a refrigerant inlet and the upper port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 was used as a refrigerant outlet, such that the flow of the refrigerant through the inner refrigerant jacket 6 and the flow of the refrigerant through the outer refrigerant jacket 11 were in the same direction (i.e., in a direction from the lower end to the upper end). However, the reactor of Crater structurally meets the claims because the reactor would have been capable of operating in the recited manner. For instance, during operation of the reactor, the flow direction of the refrigerant through the inner refrigerant jacket 6 could be reversed from what is shown by feeding the refrigerant into the inner refrigerant jacket 6 via its upper port instead of its lower port, and by removing the refrigerant from the inner refrigerant jacket 6 via its lower port instead of its upper port, such that the flows of the refrigerant in the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and in the inner refrigerant jacket 6 were in opposite directions to each other.
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. See MPEP § 2114. Also, expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the claim. See MPEP § 2115.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1-4 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takizawa et al. (JP 57-045333 A), Applicant (at pages 7-8) argues,
“In Takizawa, the inlet of the outer jacket, the inlet of the inner jacket, and the outlet of the inner jacket are all positioned at a lower portion, whereas only the outlet of the outer jacket is positioned at an upper portion. Accordingly, Takizawa is structurally distinct from amended claim 1.”
The Office respectfully disagrees.
In the reactor of Takizawa et al., the inner refrigerant jacket was interpreted as the inner jacket layer of the guide cylinder 4 which comprises a double-jacket 16. In other words, the double-jacket 16 comprises two jackets, including an inner jacket layer (i.e., facing the central space) and an outer jacket layer (i.e., facing the annular space), and the inner refrigerant jacket was interpreted as the inner jacket layer. As shown in FIG. 3, the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16 comprises a refrigerant inlet at its upper end and a refrigerant outlet at its lower end, such that outer refrigerant inlet 13 and the inner refrigerant outlet 18 are positioned at the lower end, and the outer refrigerant outlet 14 and the inner refrigerant inlet (i.e., at the upper end of the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16) are positioned at the upper end.
Regarding the rejection of claims 1-2 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takada et al. (JP 04-016229 A) and the rejection of claims 5-9 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takada et al. (JP 04-016229 A) in view of Ashe et al. (US 2005/0161205 A1), Applicant (at page 8) argues that the rejections are moot in view of the amendment to claim 1, which incorporated the subject matter originally presented in claims 3-4.
The argument is considered persuasive, and therefore, the rejections are withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Crater (US 2,363,834).
The instant “reactor” claims are considered apparatus claims.
Regarding claim 1, Crater discloses a reactor (see FIG. 1), comprising:
a reactor tank (shown) having an accommodation space therein for performing a reaction of a reactive fluid;
an outer refrigerant jacket (i.e., an exterior jacket 11) positioned outside the reactor tank for flowing a refrigerant (i.e., a cooling medium) therethrough; and
an inner refrigerant jacket (i.e., a hollow baffle 6) positioned inside the reactor tank for flowing a refrigerant (i.e., a cooling medium as the heat transfer medium) therethrough;
wherein the outer refrigerant jacket 11 comprises a lower port (opening) used as an outer refrigerant inlet through which the refrigerant enters the outer refrigerant jacket and an upper port (opening) used as an outer refrigerant outlet through which the refrigerant is discharged (see direction of flow arrows);
wherein the inner refrigerant jacket 6 comprises a lower port (opening) used as an inner refrigerant inlet through which the refrigerant enters the inner refrigerant jacket and an upper port (opening) used as an inner refrigerant outlet through which the refrigerant is discharged (see direction of flow arrows);
wherein the lower port of the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the upper port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 are positioned on opposite sides of the reactor tank and spaced apart in a vertical direction;
wherein the upper port of the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the lower port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 are positioned on opposite sides of the reactor tank and spaced apart in the vertical direction; and
wherein the lower port of the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the lower port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 are positioned at the lower end of the reactor tank, and wherein the upper port of the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the upper port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 are positioned at the upper end of the reactor tank.
The limitation of the reactor tank being used “for performing a polymerization reaction of a reactive fluid” is considered a recitation of an intended use of the apparatus that does not impart further structural limitation to the claim. Furthermore, in terms of structure, a refrigerant inlet or a refrigerant outlet is merely a port or opening that provides fluid communication with an interior of a refrigerant jacket. Whether a port or opening functions as a refrigerant inlet through which refrigerant enters or a refrigerant outlet through which refrigerant exits is thus directed to an intended manner of operating the apparatus which does not impart further structural limitation to the claim.
In the reactor of Crater, the lower port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 was used as the refrigerant inlet and the upper port of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 was used as the refrigerant outlet, such that the flow direction of the refrigerant through the inner refrigerant jacket 6 and the flow direction of the refrigerant through the outer refrigerant jacket 11 were in the same direction (i.e., from the lower end of the reactor tank to the upper end of the reactor tank). However, the reactor of Crater structurally meets the claim because the reactor was capable of operating in the recited manner. For instance, during operation, the flow direction of the refrigerant through the inner refrigerant jacket 6 could be reversed from what is shown by introducing the refrigerant into the inner refrigerant jacket 6 via its upper port instead of its lower port and by removing the refrigerant from the inner refrigerant jacket 6 via its lower port instead of its upper port, such that the flows of the refrigerant in the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the inner refrigerant jacket 6 are in opposite directions to each other.
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. See MPEP § 2114. Also, expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof during an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the claim. See MPEP § 2115.
Regarding claim 13, Crater (FIG. 1) discloses a first inlet (i.e., an inlet connected to a metering device 5) for supplying a first material to the accommodation space; and a second inlet (i.e., an inlet connected to a metering device 10) for supplying a second material to the accommodation space. The further limitations with respect to specific materials to be supplied to the accommodation space by the inlets (i.e., a monomer/solvent for the first material or a catalyst for the second material) do not impart further structural limitations to the claim. See MPEP §2115. Depending on the selected flow directions for the refrigerant through the outer refrigeration jacket 11 and the inner refrigeration jacket 6 during an intended operation of the apparatus, the first and second inlets can be configured such that they are provided on the sides on which the outer refrigerant inlet and the inner refrigerant inlet are positioned.
Regarding claim 14, depending on the selected flow directions for the refrigerant through the outer refrigeration jacket 11 and the inner refrigeration jacket 6 during an intended operation, the first inlet (i.e., the inlet connected to metering device 5) can be on the same side of the reactor tank as the inner refrigerant inlet (i.e., such as when the cooling medium is supplied to the upper port of the hollow baffle 6), and the second inlet (i.e., the inlet connected to metering device 10) can be on the same side of the reactor tank as the outer refrigerant inlet (i.e., such as when the cooling medium is supplied to the upper port of the exterior jacket 11).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Takizawa et al. (JP 57-045333 A).
The instant “reactor” claims are considered apparatus claims.
Takizawa et al. discloses an apparatus (i.e., a stirring apparatus for high viscosity fluids; see FIG. 3-4 and translation) comprising:
a tank (i.e., a main body 1) having an accommodation space therein for accommodating a fluid to be processed;
an outer refrigerant jacket positioned outside the tank for flowing a refrigerant therethrough (i.e., an exterior jacket 10 for a cooling heat medium, e.g., refrigerant); and
an inner refrigerant jacket positioned inside the tank for flowing a refrigerant therethrough (i.e., interpreted as the inner jacket layer of a guide cylinder 4 comprising a double-jacket 16);
wherein the refrigerants of the outer refrigerant jacket and the inner refrigerant jacket flow in opposite directions to each other (i.e., in use, a refrigerant is supplied to the jacket 10 via an inlet 13 and discharged from the exterior jacket 10 via an outlet 14, such that the refrigerant flows in a generally upward direction through a flow path 12; and a refrigerant is supplied to the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16 via an inlet to the inner jacket layer located at the upper end of the inner jacket layer and discharged from the inner jacket layer via an outlet 18, such that the refrigerant flows in a generally downward direction through a flow path 15 formed in the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16);
wherein the outer refrigerant jacket 10 comprises an outer refrigerant inlet 13 through which refrigerant enters the outer refrigerant jacket and an outer refrigerant outlet 14 through which refrigerant is discharged, and the inner refrigerant jacket (i.e., the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16) comprises an inner refrigerant inlet (i.e., at the upper end of the inner jacket layer) through which refrigerant enters the inner refrigerant jacket and an inner refrigerant outlet 18 through which refrigerant is discharged;
wherein the outer refrigerant inlet 13 and the inner refrigerant inlet (i.e., at the upper end of the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16) are positioned on opposite sides of the tank and spaced apart in a vertical direction, and the outer refrigerant outlet 14 and the inner refrigerant outlet 18 are positioned on opposite sides of the tank and spaced apart in the vertical direction; and
wherein the outer refrigerant inlet 13 and the inner refrigerant outlet 18 are positioned at the lower end of the tank, and the outer refrigerant outlet 14 and the inner refrigerant inlet (i.e., at the upper end of the inner jacket layer of the double-jacket 16) are positioned at the upper end of the tank.
The recitation of the intended use of the apparatus as a “reactor”, in which the tank is used “for performing a polymerization reaction of a reactive fluid”, does not impart further structural limitations to the claim. The apparatus of Takizawa et al. would be capable of operating in the recited manner by providing a reactive fluid in the accommodation space and operating under the required polymerization reaction conditions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crater (US 2,363,834) in view of Ashe et al. (US 2005/0161205 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Crater (see FIG. 1) fails to disclose that the outer refrigerant jacket 11 and the inner refrigerant jacket 6 each comprise a pipe through which the refrigerant flows.
Ashe et al. discloses an apparatus having utility as a reactor (see paragraphs [0002], [0254]), wherein the apparatus comprises a tank having an accommodation space for accommodating a fluid to be processed (i.e., a reactive fluid in the case of a reactor), and one or more heat exchangers, wherein heat exchangers can include an outer refrigerant jacket (i.e., an external cooling jacket or external cooling half coils; see prior art FIG. 1-2) and an internal heat exchanger (i.e., an internal cooling coil; see prior art FIG. 3). Specifically, Ashe et al. discloses an improvement over prior art apparatuses, wherein the heat exchangers comprise pipes for the flow of refrigerant (i.e., fully contained pipes or conduits, see, e.g., FIG. 11-12; paragraphs [0009]-[0010]). The pipes can be used for constructing both external heat transfer elements and internal heat transfer elements (see paragraphs [0204]-[0210], [0230]-[0233]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outer refrigerant jacket and the inner refrigerant jacket in the reactor of Crater to comprise pipes, as taught by Ashe et al., because the pipes would provide good heat transfer, an even distribution of the cooling fluid whilst maintaining small hold up volumes of the cooling fluid, a fast temperature control response, and an increased heat transfer capacity (see, e.g., paragraph [0031], [0244]-[0245]).
Regarding claim 6, Ashe et al. further discloses that pipes can be wound in a coil shape (i.e., as an external coil, see paragraph [0208]; as an internal coil, see paragraph [0231]).
Regarding claim 7, Ashe et al. further discloses that the pipes can have a quadrangular cross-section for increasing the heat transfer area (see FIG. 12; paragraph [0209]).
Regarding claim 8, Crater (see FIG. 1) discloses that the inner refrigerant jacket 6 has a partition wall so that two flow paths are formed, including a first flow path (I.e., a central flow path) on the inside of the refrigerant jacket 6 and a second flow path (i.e., an annular flow path) on the outside of the inner refrigerant jacket 6, wherein the outside of the inner refrigerant jacket 6 faces the walls of the reactor tank.
Regarding claim 9, Crater further discloses an impeller (i.e., a stirring device 14; see FIG. 1) disposed in the accommodation space for inducing directionality of the reactive fluid.
Claims 5-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Takizawa et al. (JP 57-045333 A) in view of Ashe et al. (US 2005/0161205 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Takizawa et al. fails to disclose that the outer refrigerant jacket and the inner refrigerant jacket comprise a pipe in which the refrigerant flows.
Ashe et al. discloses an apparatus comprising a tank having an accommodation space for accommodating a fluid to be processed, and one or more heat exchangers which can include an outer refrigerant jacket (i.e., an external cooling jacket or half coils; see prior art FIG. 1-2) and an internal heat exchanger (i.e., an internal cooling coil; see prior art FIG. 3). Specifically, Ashe et al. discloses an improvement over the prior art, wherein the heat exchangers comprise pipes for the flow of refrigerant (i.e., fully contained pipes or conduits, see, e.g., FIG. 11-12; paragraphs [0009]-[0010]). The pipes can be used for constructing both external heat transfer elements and internal heat transfer elements (see paragraphs [0204]-[0210], [0230]-[0233]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the outer refrigerant jacket and the inner refrigerant jacket in the apparatus of Takizawa et al. to comprise pipes, as taught by Ashe et al., because the pipes would not require welding, and the pipes would provide good heat transfer, an even distribution of the cooling fluid whilst maintaining small hold up volumes of the cooling fluid, a fast temperature control response, and an increased heat transfer capacity (see, e.g., paragraphs [0010], [0031], [0244]-[0245]).
Regarding claim 6, Ashe et al. further discloses that pipes can be wound in a coil shape (i.e., as an external coil, see paragraph [0208]; as an internal coil, see paragraph [0231]).
Regarding claim 7, Ashe et al. further discloses that the pipes can have a quadrangular cross-section for increasing the heat transfer area (see FIG. 12; paragraph [0209]).
Regarding claim 8, Takizawa et al. (see FIG. 3-4) discloses that the inner refrigerant jacket has a partition wall (i.e., a wall of guide cylinder 4) so that two flow paths are formed, including a first flow path on the inside of the inner refrigerant jacket (i.e., inside of the cylinder 4) and a second flow path on the outside of the inner refrigerant jacket (i.e., outside of the cylinder 4), wherein the outside of the inner refrigerant jacket faces the walls of the tank 1.
Regarding claim 9, Takizawa et al. (see FIG. 3) discloses an impeller disposed in the accommodation space (i.e., a stirring device with paddle blades 8 and helical ribbon blades 5).
Regarding claim 10, Takizawa et al. (see FIG. 3) discloses that the impeller is positioned inside and outside the inner refrigerant jacket (i.e., paddle blades 8 are inside of the guide cylinder 4 and helical ribbon blades 5 are outside of the guide cylinder 4), wherein the impeller induces an ascent of the fluid inside the inner refrigerant jacket (see upward flow arrows inside of the guide cylinder 4, as shown in FIG. 1) and descent of the fluid outside the inner refrigerant jacket (see downward flow arrows outside of the guide cylinder 4, as shown in FIG. 1).
Regarding claim 11, Takizawa et al. (see FIG. 3-4) further discloses one or more guide vanes disposed inside the tank (i.e., reading on a plurality of plates 6a,6b,6c that extend vertically in the accommodation space), wherein the one or more guide vanes inherently guide a flow of the fluid in the same direction as the impeller.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 JENNIFER A LEUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-1449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, CLAIRE X WANG can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/JENNIFER A LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774