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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. EP19189871.7, filed on 8/2/2019.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because lines 4-5 are directed to the purported merits of the invention. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,”, “The invention relates to” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: The limitation “absorbance peaks” should be peak to maintain proper grammar. 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 4-6,7,11,13,15-18 and 22 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 4 has the limitation “a plurality of emitter pairs” which is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear if this element is the same/different from the previously introduced “one or more capacitive emitter pairs”, as recited in claim 1.
Claim 4 has the limitation “the emitters” which is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear if this element is the same/different from the previously introduced “one or more capacitive emitter pairs”, as recited in claim 1 or “a plurality of emitter pairs” in claim 4.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the device generator" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 6 has the limitation “the plurality of emitter pairs” which is unclear. Specifically, it is unclear if this element is the same/different from the previously introduced “one or more capacitive emitter pairs”, as recited in claim 1. The limitation of “one or more capacitive emitter pairs” can be interpreted as having one pair, so it is unclear what the limitation in claim 6 is referring to.
Claim 7 has the phrase “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 7 recites the broad recitation “distance of less than 10mm”, and the claim also recites “distance of less than 6 mm” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 11 has the phrase “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 13 has the phrase “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 13 recites the broad recitation “frequency between about 100 Hz and 1,000,00 Hz”, and the claim also recites “between 500 to 10,000 Hz” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 13 recites the broad recitation “frequency between about 1 Hz and 1,000 Hz”, and the claim also recites “between 10 and 100 Hz” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the step of measuring conductivity…" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 has no step of measuring conductivity, therefore there is no basis for it in the claim.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the step of determining…" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 has no step of determining, therefore there is no basis for it in the claim.
Claim 16 has the phrase “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the determination step…" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 has no determination step, therefore there is no basis for it in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the step of real-time monitoring…" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 14 has no step of real-time monitoring, therefore there is no basis for it in the claim.
Claim 18 is also rejected as being dependent from claim 17.
Claim 22 has the phrase “preferably” which renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitation(s) following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 22 recites the broad recitation “distance less than 1 0mm”, and the claim also recites “less than 6 mm” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5,14,19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zongyi (CN101473951A) in view of Chew et al (US 10,858,268).
With regards to claim 1, Zongyi discloses a system for treating a liquid beverage using an electromagnetic field comprising alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC) components (apparatus for making a negative potential antioxidant health-care tea beverage having a power supply that rectifies an AC 220V to 150 DC, Title, Fig. 1), a power supply for supplying power to the device (source of the AC 220V, Fig. 1), a treatment chamber containing a treatment liquid beverage in a static state (electrolytic cell body 1 made of ABS plastic that holds a liquid, Fig. 1), one or more capacitive emitter pairs arranged in a predetermined pattern and placed to be in direct contact with the treatment liquid beverage (an anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 in direct contact with the liquid inside of electrolytic cell body 1 for treatment , Fig. 1), wherein each two adjacent capacitive emitters are spaced at a predefined distance and respectively electrically coupled with first and second output terminals of the device (anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 are each connected by wiring to power supply 5, Fig. 1), wherein current is provided in the treatment liquid beverage to produce a negative oxidation reduction potential (ORP) shift in the treatment liquid beverage (rectified 150 V DC signal is applied to anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 in order to produce water that has a negative ORP of -800mv, page 1, lines 36-38) whose pH substantially remains constant (slightly alkaline PH of 8.5 is produced by the rectified 150 V DC signal to the anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4, page 1, lines 43-46).
Zongyi does not disclose a device for generating a DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component, wherein the device is configured to apply the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave to the treatment liquid beverage to generate a pulsating capacitive field having a field strength between the capacitive emitters.
Chew et al teaches a device for generating a DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component (a device 110 for generating a superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave. The device 110 comprises an alternating current (AC) wave generator 112 and a direct current (DC) biasing unit 116 which are electrically coupled with the AC wave generator 112 in series, col 5, lines 15-21), wherein the device is configured to apply the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave to the treatment liquid beverage to generate a pulsating capacitive field having a field strength between the capacitive (device 110 generates a superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave to actuators 120 for treatment of liquid 130 inside container 140, Fig. 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi and Chew et al before him or her, to modify the power supply of Zongyi to include the AC wave generator and DC biasing unit of Chew et al because the combination allows for an economical and convenient power supply for a treating a liquid.
With regards to claim 2, Zongyi discloses wherein the currents are provided to energize the treatment beverage such that one or more treatment effects are induced in the treatment liquid beverage (rectified 150V DC signal produced by power supply 5 are supplied to anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 to treat the liquid to provide a negative potential and anti-oxidation to the liquid, page 2, lines 15-17).
With regards to claim 3, Zongyi discloses wherein the treatment effects comprise reducing throat burning sensation of the treatment liquid beverage (the cathode effluent produced by the electrolytic method has small molecular clusters (5-6), high activity, slightly alkaline pH 8.5,page 1, lines 44-46).
With regards to claim 4, Zongyi discloses wherein a plurality of emitter pairs are included and placed in the treatment chamber in a predetermined pattern and come in direct contact with the treatment liquid beverage (anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 are included and placed in electrolytic body 1 in a pattern and come in direct contact with the liquid in body 1, Fig. 1), or the plurality of emitter pairs are mounted inline at a position where the emitters are in direct contact with the treatment liquid beverage (anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 are included and placed in electrolytic body 1 in a pattern and come in direct contact with the liquid in body 1, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 5, Zongyi discloses wherein the emitters are provided in the form of plates or rods arranged in parallel coupling electrically with the first and second output terminals of the device generator, respectively, and wherein the emitters substantially extend over an entire length of the treatment chamber (anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 are provided in the form of plates in parallel coupling electrically with the wires of power supply 5, wherein the anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 extend the entire length of body 1, Fig. 1).
With regards to claim 8, Chew et al teaches wherein the device comprises an AC wave generator for generating an AC electromagnetic wave having a time-varying frequency (device 110 comprises an alternating current (AC) wave generator 112,Fig. 1) at a desired sweeping time (the AC wave generator comprises a control unit configured to generate a signal having the time-varying frequency AC electromagnetic wave at the desired sweeping time, col 5, lines 49-52), and a DC biasing unit electrically coupled in series with the AC wave generator (the direct current (DC) biasing unit 116 is electrically coupled in series with the AC wave generator 112 and configured for producing a DC output with a predefined DC bias voltage which may be varied or fixed, col 6, lines 37-40), wherein the DC biasing unit is configured to produce a DC output transmitted to the AC wave generator for generating the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component (the AC driving signal corresponds to the time-varying frequency AC electromagnetic wave having the desired sweeping time and would be delivered to the DC biasing unit 116 for the superimposition with the DC output, col 5, line 67 and col 6, lines 1-4).
With regards to claim 9, Chew et al teaches wherein the device comprises an AC wave generator for generating an AC electromagnetic wave having a time-varying frequency (device 110 comprises an alternating current (AC) wave generator 112, Fig. 1) at a desired sweeping time (the AC wave generator comprises a control unit configured to generate a signal having the time-varying frequency AC electromagnetic wave at the desired sweeping time, col 5, lines 49-52), the AC wave generator being programmed to create imbalance time varying frequency wave form to generate the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a net DC component (the time-varying AC electromagnetic wave is riding on the DC preset level to produce the superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave (hereinafter called “DAC wave”) wherein the DAC wave can be imbalanced wherein the DC component is more of the wave, col 6, lines 40-45, Fig. 5A).
With regards to claim 13, Chew et al teaches wherein the device is configured to generate the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component, having a frequency between about 100 Hz and 1,000,000 Hz preferably between 500 to 10,000 Hz and a sweeping frequency between 1 Hz and 1000 Hz, preferably 10 Hz and 100Hz (the frequency of the superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave is between about 100 Hz and about 1 MHz, and preferably between about 100 Hz and about 200 kHz. The sweeping frequency of the superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave is between about 1 Hz and about 1 KHz, and preferably between about 10 Hz and about 100 Hz, col 6, lines 25-30).
With regards to claim 14, Zongyi discloses a method for treating a liquid beverage using an electromagnetic field comprising alternating current (AC) and direct current (DC) components (method for operating an apparatus for making a negative potential antioxidant health-care tea beverage having a power supply that rectifies an AC 220V to 150 DC, Title, Fig. 1), to produce a negative oxidation reduction potential (ORP) shift in the treatment liquid beverage (rectified 150 V DC signal is applied to anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 in order to produce water that has a negative ORP of -800mv, page 1, lines 36-38) whose pH substantially remain constant (slightly alkaline PH of 8.5 is produced by the rectified 150 V DC signal to the anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4, page 1, lines 43-46) and one or more capacitive emitter pairs arranged in a predetermined pattern and placed to be in direct contact with the liquid beverage so as to generate a pulsating capacitive field having a field strength between the capacitive emitters (power supply 5 is configured to apply a rectified 150 V DC to generate a field between anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4, Fig. 5)
Zongyi does not disclose generating a DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component and applying the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave to a treatment liquid beverage in a static state to provide a time-varying frequency and pulsating AC wave current comprising the biased DC component.
Chew et al teaches a device for generating a DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave comprising a biased DC component (a device 110 for generating a superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave. The device 110 comprises an alternating current (AC) wave generator 112 and a direct current (DC) biasing unit 116 which are electrically coupled with the AC wave generator 112 in series, col 5, lines 15-21), wherein the device is configured to apply the DC biased time-varying frequency pulsating electromagnetic wave to the treatment liquid beverage to generate a pulsating capacitive field having a field strength between the capacitive (device 110 generates a superimposed time-varying frequency electromagnetic wave to actuators 120 for treatment of liquid 130 inside container 140, Fig. 1).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi and Chew et al before him or her, to modify the power supply of Zongyi to include the AC wave generator and DC biasing unit of Chew et al because the combination allows for an economical and convenient power supply for a treating a liquid
With regards to claim 19, Zongyi discloses wherein the currents are provided to energize the treatment beverage such that one or more treatment effects are induced in the treatment liquid beverage (rectified 150V DC signal produced by power supply 5 are supplied to anode plate 2 and cathode plate 4 to treat the liquid to provide a negative potential and anti-oxidation to the liquid, page 2, lines 15-17).
With regards to claim 20, Zongyi discloses wherein the treatment effects comprise reducing throat burning sensation of the treatment liquid beverage (the cathode effluent produced by the electrolytic method has small molecular clusters (5-6), high activity, slightly alkaline pH 8.5,page 1, lines 44-46).
Claim(s) 7 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zongyi and Chew et al as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Satoh et al (US 6,251,259).
With regards to claims 7 and 22, Zongyi and Chew et al does not teach wherein the two adjacent capacitive emitters are spaced at a distance of less than 10 mm, preferably less than 6 mm.
Satoh et al teaches wherein the two adjacent capacitive emitters are spaced at a distance of less than 10 mm, preferably less than 6 mm (a distance between a pair of mutually facing electrode plates 116 and 117 is 0 mm to 5.0 mm, more preferably, 1.5 mm, col 7, lines 5-7).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi, Chew et al and Satoh et al before him or her, to modify the anode and cathode plate of Zongyi and Chew et al to include the distance part as taught by Satoh et al because the combination allows for producing liquid capable of controlling pH and ORP.
Claim(s) 10 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zongyi and Chew et al as applied to claims 1 and 14 above, and further in view of Fujimura et al (US 2020/0017384).
With regards to claim 10, Zongyi and Chew et al does not teach an ORP meter for real-time monitoring and measuring the ORP of the treatment liquid beverage.
Fujimura et al teaches an ORP meter for real-time monitoring and measuring the ORP of the treatment liquid beverage (ORP meter 10B is used for monitoring and measuring liquid W2 in real time, paragraph 0048, lines 1-3, Fig. 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi, Chew et al and Fujimura et al before him or her, to modify the cell body of Zongy and Chew et al to include the ORP meter of Fujimura et al because the combination allows for a monitoring of ORP in an apparatus for making a safe liquid.
With regards to claim 21, Zongyi and Chew et al does not teach a step of real-time monitoring and measuring the ORP of the treatment liquid beverage.
Fujimura et al teaches a step of real-time monitoring and measuring the ORP of the treatment liquid beverage (ORP meter 10B is used for monitoring and measuring liquid W2 in real time, paragraph 0048, lines 1-3, Fig. 2).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi and Chew et al and Fujimura et al before him or her, to modify the cell body of Zongyi and Chew et al to include the ORP meter of Fujimura et al because the combination allows for an monitoring of ORP in an apparatus for making a safe liquid.
Claim(s) 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zongyi and Chew et al as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Suh et al (KR20060100589A).
With regards to claim 12, Zongyi and Chew et al does not teach a cooler used to cool down the treatment liquid beverage and/or a stirrer for homogenization of the treatment liquid beverage.
Suh et al teaches a cooler used to cool down the treatment liquid beverage (method for making green tea drink with a cooling step by the plate shaped heat exchanger, page 6, lines 6-8) and/or a stirrer for homogenization of the treatment liquid beverage (method for making green tea drink having a mixing step using a stirrer, page 6, lines 9-12).
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Zongyi, Chew et al and Suh et al before him or her, to modify the cell body of Zongyi to include the heat exchanger and stirrer of Suh et al because the combination allows for improved quality of a tea making apparatus.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6,11,15,16,17 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 6 is objected to because the prior art does not disclose or teach wherein each of the emitters has a part of emitter surface covered by a conductive coating, and the coated emitter surfaces being oriented in one direction and arranged between non-coated emitter surfaces.
Claims 11 is objected to because the prior art does not disclose or teach to obtain a plurality of FTIR spectra which are mapped and analyzed to acquire a maximum vertical variation of peak height of a same absorbance peak so as to determine a degree of energization.
Claim 15 is objected to because the prior art does not disclose or teach measuring a conductivity of the liquid beverage for selecting the emitters adapted for the treatment of the liquid beverage.
Claim 16 is objected to because the prior art does not disclose or teach determining a degree of non-thermal energization, of the treatment liquid beverage, as a feedback control for the beverage treatment.
Claim 17 is objected to because the prior art does not disclose or teach obtaining a plurality of FTIR spectra which represent respectively the plurality of consecutive samples, mapping and analysis of the plurality of FTIR spectra for a same absorbance peak to collect information on peak height of the same absorbance peak, and determining a maximum vertical variation of the peak height based on the lowest and highest peak heights of the same absorbance peak, wherein the maximum vertical variation of the peak height reflects the degree of energization of the treatment liquid beverage.
Claim 18 would be objected to because of its dependency on claim 17.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS JOHN WARD whose telephone number is (571)270-1786. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 7am - 4pm.
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, EDWARD LANDRUM can be reached at 5712725567. 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.
/THOMAS J WARD/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/JOHN J NORTON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights