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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments (see Remarks, pages 1-3) in the Response to Election/Restriction filed October 30th, 2025 are persuasive. Therefore, the restriction requirement is withdrawn.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 5 recites “first columns” (plural) in lines 1-2 and “second columns” (plural) in line 2 which per claim 1 are understood to mean “one or more first columns” and “ one or more second columns” respectively.
Claim 6 recites “wherein at least one of said first and said second concentrate stock tanks further comprises a pump configured for closed loop circulation of a concentrate contained therein.”, but the specification does not state any specifics about the pump and the pump does not appear to be shown in drawings. As best understood, the claim is interpreted to mean the tank is connected to a pump for circulation (from the tank back to the tank).
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Page 10, para. [0050], line 5 recites “and my further include” which should be changed to “and may further include”.
Page 11, para. [0055], line 1 recites “Method 30 includes step 40 of method 30 includes” and it appears this should be changed to “Method 30 includes step 40 of
Page 13, para. [0067], line 7 recites “that is the in the column” and it appears this should be changed to “
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “A system for mineralizing distilled water comprises” in line 1. It is recommended to change this to “A system for mineralizing distilled water comprising” for consistency with wording used in other claims.
Claim 1 recites “wherein said water input with substantially reduced mineral content” in lines 2-3 which should be changed to “wherein said water input has substantially reduced mineral content” for clarity.
Claim 1 recites “distilled water input” in line 2 and then “said water input” also in line 2 and then “said input” in line 4 while subsequent recitations refer to “said distilled water input” or “said input of distilled water” (Claim 8).
It is recommended to change “said water input” in line 2 to “said distilled water input” and it is recommended to change “said input” in line 4 to “said distilled water input” for consistency.
Claim 1 recites “said mineral matrix” in line 18. It is recommended to amend this to “said first mineral matrix”.
Claim 1 recites “said mineral matrix” in line 22. It is recommended to amend this to “said second mineral matrix”.
Claim 8 recites “splitting said input of distilled water into: a primary portion, a secondary portion, configured for generating a mineralizing concentrate solution;” in lines 4-5 and this should be changed to “splitting said input of distilled water into[[:]] a primary portion[[,]] and a secondary portion[[,]]; wherein said secondary portion is s;” or similar for clarity.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-13 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "said first conduit" in line 35 (and again in line 39). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Both of these (instances in line 35 and line 39) should be changed to “said at least one primary conduit”.
Claims 2-7 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Claim 4 recites “said at least one column” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “said at least one first column or said at least one second column”.
Claim 8 recites “collecting said a stock” in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “collecting a stock”.
Claim 8 recites “collecting said a stock” in line 19. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “collecting a stock”.
Claims 8-13 are rejected by virtue of their dependency on claim 8.
Claim 10 recites “said pressure” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites “said columns” in line 1 (and again in lines 1-2). There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. These could be changed to “said first and second columns”.
Claim 13 recites “The process” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This could be changed to “The method”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberman et al. (Applicant disclosed WO 2009047764) in view of Scheu (US 20190144311), Nelson (US 20180002205), Wang et al. (attached translation of CN 210915618U), Ghanbari (attached non-patent literature titled “Pilot study and modeling of remineralization of low-temperature desalinated water by calcite filtration”), Kabula (US 20180009678) and Skovby et al. (US 20160167000).
Regarding claim 1, Liberman et al. discloses a system for mineralizing water (re-hardened water, Abstract). Liberman et al. does not appear to explicitly state that the water is distilled water (such as from a distillation process or reverse osmosis, see Applicant’s disclosure, para. [0022]). However, “it is well-settled that the material worked upon by an apparatus does not limit apparatus claims”. See MPEP 2115. The device of Liberman et al. would be fully capable of mineralizing distilled water.
Liberman et al. discloses the system shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
649
1096
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Liberman et al. discloses the system comprises: (a) an inlet for distilled water input (shown above), wherein said water input with substantially reduced mineral content (to be re-hardened, Abstract); (b) a splitter (shown above) operationally connected to said inlet, configured for splitting said input into a primary portion and secondary portion (shown above); (c) at least one primary conduit (line P1a) operationally connected to said splitter, configured for conveying said primary portion of said distilled water input; (d) at least one secondary conduit (shown above) configured for conveying said secondary portion of said distilled water input; (e) a carbonator (absorber 10 and CO2 line, Fig. 5) comprising a carbon dioxide supply module (CO2 line feeding absorber 10, Fig. 5, must have a source meeting the limitation of “supply module”), said carbonator being operationally connected to said at least one secondary conduit (via absorber 10) and being configured for dissolving carbon dioxide in said secondary portion of said distilled water input (page 7, lines 5-6); (f) at least one first column (columns 20, page 13, lines 17-26), comprising an interior volume, said at least one first column being operationally connected to said carbonator (via absorber 10); (h) a first mineral matrix filling said interior volume of said at least one first column (col. 7, lines 8-10), said mineral matrix being configured for being infiltrated by water of said secondary portion of said distilled water input (col. 7, lines 8-13) and thereby generating a first mineralizing concentrate solution.
Liberman et al. does not disclose a second column having a second mineral matrix different from the first.
However, Scheu discloses a system for mineralizing distilled water (water which has passed through reverse osmosis step 6 and ion exchange step 8, Fig. 3 ) having a carbonator (CO2 gas feed unit, para. [0042]) and Scheu discloses a first column (component 10) and a second column (component 12) wherein the second column comprises an interior volume, said second column being operationally connected to said carbonator (Fig. 3) wherein a second mineral matrix fills the interior volume of the at least one second column (MgO, Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system includes: (g) at least one second column, comprising an interior volume, said at least one second column being operationally connected to said carbonator; (i) a second mineral matrix filling said interior volume of said at least one second column, said mineral matrix being configured for being infiltrated by water of said secondary portion of said distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a second column for a second mineral matrix in order to add both calcium (Liberman et al., Fig. 5, CaCO3, Scheu, Fig. 3, CaCO3, component 10, Fig. 3) and magnesium (Scheu, MgO, component 12, Fig. 3) to the stream of water.
The above cited references do not expressly disclose wherein said first and second mineral matrices of said first and second columns are different to form different mineral concentrate solutions.
However, Nelson also discloses a mineralization process (Abstract) where a stream is split into a primary (main process flow 1) and secondary portions (side process flow 2 and 3, Fig. 1) where separate components (vessel 9 for alkali carbonate addition and vessel 11 for alkali hydroxide addition, para. [0186]) are added to the secondary portion to form different mineral concentrate solutions (delivered back to the primary stream via flow 2 and flow 3 respectively) as shown below:
PNG
media_image2.png
679
920
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system is configured such that said first and second mineral matrices of said first and second columns being different to form different mineral concentrate solutions and thereby generating a first and a second mineralizing concentrate solution.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to rearrange the columns such that components are added in parallel (as taught by Nelson above) rather than in series (as taught by Scheu, discussed above) and thereby achieve the predictable result of adding different mineral components to a (primary) stream of distilled water for remineralization. See In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) and In re Kuhle, 526 F.2d 553, 188 USPQ 7 (CCPA 1975).
The above cited references do not disclose a first concentrate stock tank, operationally connected to said at least one first column and a second concentrate stock tank operationally connected to said at least one second column.
However, Wang et al. discloses a system for mineralization (Abstract) of distilled water (produced at reverse osmosis 100) as shown below:
PNG
media_image3.png
663
814
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Wang et al. further teaches a concentrate stock tank (storage tank 710) configured for collecting a stock of mineralizing concentrate solution.
Likewise, Ghanbari discloses a mineralization process (Abstract on page 5) and Ghanbari teaches providing concentrate stock tanks for columns (“A storage tank was used as an intermediate buffer in front of the calcite filters”, 3.2.1. Pilot Setup section, page 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system includes (j) a first concentrate stock tank, operationally connected to said at least one first column, said first concentrate stock tank being configured for collecting a stock of said first mineralizing concentrate solution; (k) a second concentrate stock tank, operationally connected to said at least one second column, said second concentrate stock tank being configured for collecting a stock of said second mineralizing concentrate solution.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a tank to store the concentrate so that water may be immediately provided upon demand (rather than having to wait for the water to pass through the process).
The combined teaching of the above-cited references disclose (l) a first mixing module (Liberman et al., Fig. 5, the mixing module comprising the T-junction annotated above, likewise, Nelson teaches two mixing T-junctions, shown annotated above) operationally connected to said first concentrate stock tank (Wang et al., tank 710) and (m) a second mixing module operationally connected to said second concentrate stock tank (as shown annotated above, Nelson teaches first and second T-junctions where the streams combine with the primary conduit to mix).
The above-cited references do not explicitly disclose the mixing module includes a dosimeter.
However, Kabula teaches a water treatment system (Abstract) which is analogous art at least because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of maintaining a desired concentration of components in water and Kabula further teaches a mixing module with a dosimeter (chaos mixer with dosing pump, para. [0056]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system includes (l) a first mixing module (Liberman et al., Fig. 5, T-junction annotated above) operationally connected to said first concentrate stock tank (Wang et al., tank 710, Fig. 2, Ghanbari, storage/buffer tanks, page 33) said first mixing module including a dosimeter (Kabula, para. [0056]) configured for combining a predefined amount of said first mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input in said first conduit; (m) a second mixing module (Nelson, second T-junction shown above) operationally connected to said second concentrate stock tank (Wang et al., tank 710, Fig. 2, Ghanbari, storage/buffer tanks, page 33), said second mixing module including a dosimeter (Kabula, para. [0056]) configured for combining a predefined amount of said second mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input in said first conduit, thereby controllably combining a predefined amount of said first and said second mineralizing concentrate solutions with said primary portion of said distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to control the concentration of minerals at a desired level by using a dosimeter.
Insomuch as Liberman et al. does not explicitly disclose a dispensing module; Wang et al. further teaches a dispensing module (water outlet 920, Fig. 2) operationally connected to a mixing module (Wang et al. also discloses a T-junction, Fig. 2, shown above and meeting the limitation of “mixing module”) said dispensing module being configured for dispensing a homogenous mineralized water mixture to a consumer (Fig. 2, appearing to have a section which could be grasped and a downward outlet to facilitate use by a consumer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein: the system includes (n) a dispensing module operationally connected to said first and said second mixing modules, said dispensing module being configured for dispensing a homogenous mineralized water mixture to a consumer.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to include a dispensing module so that the water may be utilized.
Assuming, arguendo, that the T-junction disclosed by Liberman et al. and Nelson do not constitute mixing modules; Skovby et al. discloses a mineralization system (para. [0001]) and further teaches the use of mixing modules (mixing unit, pars. [0127] and [0131] and it is also noted that Skovby et al. teaches a flowmeter/dosimeter for the slave batch line comprising the mixing unit, para. [0099]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein mixing modules such as dynamic mixers (Skovby et al., para. [0131]) are utilized (instead of T-junctions discussed above).
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use a dynamic mixer in order to improve mixing.
Regarding claim 2, Liberman et al. discloses wherein said distilled water input is pressurized in that Liberman et al. shows the inlet stream traveling to the splitter (Fig. 5, shown above) and thus the inlet stream must have water pressure.
Regarding claim 4, Liberman et al. discloses wherein said at least one column is fillable with at least one member selected form the group consisting of: minerals, and ion exchange resin (minerals: calcium carbonate, CaCO3, Fig. 5).
Regarding claim 5, Liberman et al. discloses wherein limestone, dolomite and others (“etc.”) may be used (col. 7, line 10), but does not expressly disclose calcite.
However, Ghanbari further discloses the use of calcite (Abstract on page 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein calcite is used such that at least one of said first columns contains dolomite and at least one of said second columns contains calcite.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use calcite and dolomite in order to supply calcium and magnesium ions (Scheu. Pars. [0003] and [0034]).
Regarding claim 8, Liberman et al. discloses a method of mineralizing water (re-hardened water, Abstract). Liberman et al. does not appear to explicitly disclose the source of the water. However, Scheu discloses a similar system for mineralizing distilled water (water which has passed through reverse osmosis step 6 and ion exchange step 8, Fig. 3, meeting Applicant’s definition of distilled water, see Applicant’s disclosure, para. [0022]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the source of water being mineralized is a distilled water source.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the method of Liberman et al. with a reverse osmosis process in order to mineralize water for drinking (Scheu, Abstract).
Liberman et al. discloses the method outlined below:
PNG
media_image4.png
570
1156
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Liberman et al. discloses the method of mineralizing distilled water comprises providing an input (shown above) of distilled water with substantially reduced mineral content (and thus needing re-hardening, Abstract); splitting (shown above) said input of distilled water into: a primary portion, a secondary portion, configured for generating a mineralizing concentrate solution; dissolving carbon dioxide in said secondary portion (page 7, lines 5-6) of said distilled water input; providing at least one first column (column 20, Fig. 5) comprising an interior volume; filling said interior volume of said first column with a first mineral matrix (col. 7, lines 8-10) infiltrating said secondary portion of said distilled water input through said first mineral matrix in said first column, thereby generating a first mineralizing concentrate solution (col. 7, lines 8-13).
Liberman et al. does not disclose a second column having a second mineral matrix different from the first.
However, Scheu discloses a system for mineralizing distilled water (water which has passed through reverse osmosis step 6 and ion exchange step 8, Fig. 3 ) having a carbonator (CO2 gas feed unit, para. [0042]) and Scheu discloses a first column (component 10) and a second column (component 12) wherein the second column comprises an interior volume, said second column being operationally connected to said carbonator (Fig. 3) wherein a second mineral matrix fills the interior volume of the at least one second column (MgO, Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method includes providing at least one second column comprising an interior volume; filling said interior volume of said second column with a second mineral matrix; infiltrating said secondary portion of said distilled water input through said second mineral matrix in said second column, thereby generating a second mineralizing concentrate solution.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use a second column for a second mineral matrix in order to add both calcium (Liberman et al., Fig. 5, CaCO3, Scheu, Fig. 3, CaCO3, component 10, Fig. 3) and magnesium (Scheu, MgO, component 12, Fig. 3) to the stream of water.
Insomuch as the above cited references do not expressly disclose wherein said first and said second mineral matrices of said first and said second columns are different in order to form different mineral concentrate solutions; Nelson also discloses a mineralization process (Abstract) where a stream is split into a primary (main process flow 1) and secondary portions (side process flow 2 and 3, Fig. 1) where separate components (vessel 9 for alkali carbonate addition and vessel 11 for alkali hydroxide addition, para. [0186]) are added to the secondary portion to form different mineral concentrate solutions (delivered back to the primary stream via flow 2 and flow 3 respectively) as shown above for claim 1.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein said first and said second mineral matrices of said first and said second columns being different to form different mineral concentrate solutions.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to rearrange the columns such that components are added in parallel (as taught by Nelson above) rather than in series (as taught by Scheu, discussed above) and thereby achieve the predictable result of adding different mineral components to a (primary) stream of distilled water for remineralization. See In re Japikse, supra and In re Kuhle, supra.
The above cited references do not expressly disclose collecting a stock of said first mineralizing concentrate solution and collecting a stock of said second mineralizing concentrate solution.
However, Wang et al. discloses a system for mineralization (Abstract) of distilled water (produced at reverse osmosis 100) as shown above for claim 1.
Wang et al. further teaches collecting a concentrate stock in a tank (storage tank 710).
Likewise, Ghanbari discloses a mineralization process (Abstract on page 5) and Ghanbari teaches collecting in tanks (“A storage tank was used as an intermediate buffer in front of the calcite filters”, 3.2.1. Pilot Setup section, page 33).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method includes collecting a stock of said first mineralizing concentrate solution and collecting a stock of said second mineralizing concentrate solution.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use tanks to collect the concentrate solutions so that water may be immediately mixed and provided upon demand (rather than having to wait for the water to pass through the process).
Insomuch as the above-cited references do not expressly disclose controllably combining a predefined amount of said first mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input and controllably combining a predefined amount of said second mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input; Kabula teaches a water treatment system (Abstract) which is analogous art at least because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of maintaining a desired concentration of components in water and Kabula further teaches a mixing module with a dosimeter (chaos mixer with dosing pump, para. [0056]) for controllably combining streams.
Further, Skovby et al. discloses a mineralization system (para. [0001]) and further teaches controlling flow with a flowmeter (for the slave batch line which contains a mixing unit 6, Fig. 1, para. [0099]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method includes controllably combining a predefined amount of said first mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input and controllably combining a predefined amount of said second mineralizing concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input, thereby controllably combining a predefined amount of said first and said second mineralizing concentrate solutions with said primary portion of said distilled water input (controllably combining, such as by using a dosimeter, Kabula, para. [0056] or using a flowmeter, Skovby et al., para. [0099]);
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to control the concentration of minerals at a desired level (Skovby et al., para. [0029]) by using a dosimeter (Kabula, dosimeter, para. [0056] or Skovby et al., flowmeter, para. [0099]).
Insomuch as Liberman et al. does not explicitly disclose dispensing to a consumer; Wang et al. further teaches a dispensing module (water outlet 920, Fig. 2, appearing to have a section which could be grasped and a downward outlet to facilitate use by a consumer).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method includes dispensing a mineralized water mixture to a consumer.
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to dispense the water for use, such as for drinking (Wang et al., Abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Liberman et al. discloses the method further comprises pressurization of said distilled water input in that Liberman et al. shows the inlet stream traveling to the splitter (Fig. 5, shown above for claim 1) and thus the inlet stream must have water pressure.
Regarding claim 11, Liberman et al. discloses wherein limestone, dolomite and others (“etc.”) may be used (col. 7, line 10), but does not expressly disclose calcite.
However, Ghanbari further discloses the use of calcite (Abstract on page 5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method includes filling at least one of said columns with dolomite and filling at least one of said columns with calcite.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use calcite and dolomite in order to supply calcium and magnesium ions (Scheu. Pars. [0003] and [0034]).
Regarding claim 13, Liberman et al. does not discloses the method comprises combining a predefined or dosed amount of a salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input.
However, Scheu further teaches combining a predefined or dosed amount of a salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input (para. [0037]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method further includes combining a predefined or dosed amount of a salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to combine a predefined or dosed amount of a salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of said distilled water input in order to adjust the concentration of anions (Scheu, para. [0037]).
Claims 3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberman et al. (Applicant disclosed WO 2009047764) in view of Scheu (US 20190144311), Nelson (US 20180002205), Wang et al. (attached translation of CN 210915618U), Ghanbari (attached non-patent literature titled “Pilot study and modeling of remineralization of low-temperature desalinated water by calcite filtration”), Kabula (US 20180009678) and Skovby et al. (US 20160167000) as applied to claim 1 or claim 8 above and in further view of Gaudinot et al. (US 20040104180) and Wagemanns et al. (attached WO 2020127612).
Regarding claim 3, Liberman et al. does not expressly disclose wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input.
However, Wang et al. further teaches wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator (switching valve 910, or separate control valves are provided, para. [0010]) configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input (operating the valve will control the pressure in the branches 310 and 320, Fig. 2).
Likewise, Gaudinot et al. discloses a system for mineralizing water (Abstract) and further teaches wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator (valves, Fig. 2, shown below) configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input (operating the valves will control pressure):
PNG
media_image5.png
416
635
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Further, Wagemanns et al. discloses a system for producing potable mineralized water (Abstract) and further teaches wherein a splitter (downstream of pump 76 splits into a line with precursor volume 31 and a precursor bypass 37) which is connected to a flow regulator configured to control a pressure (pump 76 and/or valves 85 and 86, page 16, line 28 – page 17, line 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use a valve and/or pump as a flow regulator in order to control the flow of water in the system.
Regarding claim 10, Liberman et al. does not expressly disclose the method further comprises controlling said pressure of said distilled water input.
However, Wang et al. further teaches wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator (switching valve 910, or separate control valves are provided, para. [0010]) configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input (operating the valve will control the pressure in the branches 310 and 320, Fig. 2).
Likewise, Gaudinot et al. discloses a system for mineralizing water (Abstract) and further teaches wherein said splitter is connected to a flow regulator (valves, Fig. 2, shown above for claim 3) configured to control a pressure of said distilled water input (operating the valves will control pressure).
Further, Wagemanns et al. discloses a system for producing potable mineralized water (Abstract) and further teaches wherein a splitter (downstream of pump 76 splits into a line with precursor volume 31 and a precursor bypass 37) which is connected to a flow regulator configured to control a pressure (pump 76 and/or valves 85 and 86, page 16, line 28 – page 17, line 4).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the method further comprises controlling said pressure of said distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to use a valve and/or pump as a flow regulator in order to control the flow of water in the system and which would also control the pressure in order to deliver the desired amount of water for the primary and secondary portions.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberman et al. (Applicant disclosed WO 2009047764) in view of Scheu (US 20190144311), Nelson (US 20180002205), Wang et al. (attached translation of CN 210915618U), Ghanbari (attached non-patent literature titled “Pilot study and modeling of remineralization of low-temperature desalinated water by calcite filtration”), Kabula (US 20180009678) and Skovby et al. (US 20160167000) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Ekambaram et al. (US 6071005), Forsberg et al. (US 6058718) and Nilsson (US 5858071).
Regarding claim 6, Liberman et al. does not disclose at least one of said first and said second concentrate stock tanks further comprises a pump configured for closed loop circulation.
However, Ekambaram et al. discloses a device which is analogous art at least because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of preventing settling when storing solutions with components which may settle (col. 2, line 2, container 1) and Ekambaram et al. teaches a tank further comprises a pump (pump 32) configured for closed loop circulation of a concentrate contained therein (col. 4, lines 18-24 and lines 37-42, col. 5, lines 15-20).
Further, Forsberg et al. discloses a potable water system (Abstract) and Forsberg et al. teaches a tank (tank 303b, Fig. 17c) comprises a pump (pump 300) configured for closed loop circulation (claim 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein at least one of said first and said second concentrate stock tanks further comprises a pump configured for closed loop circulation of a concentrate contained therein.
The person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include a closed loop circulation pump in order to ensure that the concentrated solution remains well mixed and components do not settle (Ekambaram et al., col. 2, line 2) or to provide for a bacteriostat loop (e.g. UV treatment lamp 29, Forsberg et al., claim 1) to prevent growth of microorganisms in the storage tanks (Forsberg et al., claim 1).
Assuming, arguendo, that the limitation “tanks further comprises a pump” requires the pump to be within the tank; Nilsson discloses a water purifying apparatus having a recirculation loop (pump 10, col. 3, lines 64-65) wherein the pump is located within the tank (pump 10 within tank 1, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the combined teaching of the above-cited references by rearranging the pump from external to the tank (Ekambaram et al., pump 32, Forsberg et al., pump 300) to internal to the tank (Nilsson, pump 10) and thereby achieve the predictable/equivalent result of providing for recirculation. See In re Japikse, supra and In re Kuhle supra.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberman et al. (Applicant disclosed WO 2009047764) in view of Scheu (US 20190144311), Nelson (US 20180002205), Wang et al. (attached translation of CN 210915618U), Ghanbari (attached non-patent literature titled “Pilot study and modeling of remineralization of low-temperature desalinated water by calcite filtration”), Kabula (US 20180009678) and Skovby et al. (US 20160167000) as applied to claim 1 above and in further view of Sumita (attached WO 2015087536A1).
Regarding claim 7, Liberman et al. does not disclose a salt concentrate tank and an additional mixing module configured for combining a predefined or dosed amount of salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of distilled water input.
However, Scheu further discloses an additional mixing module (mixing component 16) configured for combining a predefined or dosed amount of salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of distilled water input (pars. [0037], [0042], [0047]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system includes an additional mixing module configured for combining a predefined or dosed amount of salt concentrate solution with said primary portion of distilled water input.
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to add an additional mixing module to adjust the concentration of anions (Scheu, para. [0037]).
The above-cited references do not expressly disclose a salt concentration tank.
However, Sumita discloses a water treatment system (para. [0001]) and teaches a salt concentration tank (tank 13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein the system further comprises a salt concentration tank.
The person of ordinary skill would have found it obvious to use a salt concentration tank in order to provide a source for the salt concentrate solution (Sumita, para. [0053], Scheu para. [0037]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liberman et al. (Applicant disclosed WO 2009047764) in view of Scheu (US 20190144311), Nelson (US 20180002205), Wang et al. (attached translation of CN 210915618U), Ghanbari (attached non-patent literature titled “Pilot study and modeling of remineralization of low-temperature desalinated water by calcite filtration”), Kabula (US 20180009678) and Skovby et al. (US 20160167000) as applied to claim 8 above and in further view of Wagemanns et al. (attached WO 2020127612).
Regarding claim 12, Liberman et al. does not disclose said dispensing further comprising at least one member selected from the group consisting of: cooling said mineralized water mixture, heating said mineralized water mixture, and carbonating said mineralized water mixture.
However, Wagemanns et al. discloses a method for producing potable mineralized water (Abstract) and further teaches dispensing comprises cooling said mineralized water mixture (water is dispensed into storage tank 68 which is cooled, page 19, lines 9-12, such that water passing through dispensing pump 78 has been cooled, Fig. 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the teachings of Liberman et al. wherein said dispensing further comprising at least one member selected from the group consisting of: …….cooling said mineralized water mixture.
The person of ordinary skill would have been motivated to cool the water in order to provide a source of cool potable water.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK M MCCARTY whose telephone number is (571)272-4398. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM.
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 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.
/P.M.M./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774