DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the amendments and arguments filed on 1/16/2026, and any subsequent filings.
Notations “C_”, “L_” and “Pr_” are used to mean “column_”, “line_” and “paragraph_”.
Claims 6 and 9 are canceled. Claims 1-5, 7-8, and 10-20 are pending.
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
Claim Objections
The Applicant argues that the claim objection of Claim 10 should be withdrawn due to the amendment of Claim 10 (pg. 6). This argument is unpersuasive because the terms used to refer to “the electrolyzer” and “the electrolyzer module” remains inconsistent.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The Applicant argues that reference Watson does not teach each and every element of the amended Claim 1 (pg. 6). This argument is unpersuasive because this is directed towards the amended claim.
The Applicant argues that reference Choi was published after the filing date of the present application (pg. 6-7). This is unpersuasive because Choi was effectively filed on 09/06/2021, which is earlier than the effectively filing date of the instant application. Thus, Choi is considered prior art under 102(a)(2).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The Applicant argues that reference Choi was published after the filing date of the present application (pg. 6-7). This is unpersuasive because Choi was effectively filed on 09/08/2020, which is earlier than the effectively filing date of the instant application. Thus, Choi is considered prior art under 102(a)(2).
The Applicant argues that Choi fails to teach a system that includes a hydrogen load fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module to produce hydrogen (pg. 7). This argument is unpersuasive because this is directed towards the amended claim.
Response to Amendment
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 1 refers to “the electrolyzer” and “the electrolyzer module”. Claim language should remain consistent. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-5, 7-8 and 10-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claim 1 claims “a first diffuser” and “a second diffuser”, which are absent from the originally filed specification. Fig. 2 of the originally filed drawings shows a system where oxygen is introduced into the water supply at more than one location, but paragraph [0034], which describes Fig. 2, does not describe “a first diffuser” and “a second diffuser”.
Dependent claims not recited above require all of the limitations of independent Claim 1, and therefore are rejected for the same reasons set forth above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1-5, 7, 10-11, and 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by U.S. Publication US20170362723A1 (‘Jung’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus (system) (Claims 1-5, 7, 10-11) and a method (Claims 13 and 15-17).
Regarding Claims 1-5 and 7, Jung discloses a system for increasing the oxygen concentration of a water supply (abstract) comprising:
an electrolyzer module (Fig. 1, [0018], electrolytic gas generator) that produces oxygen and hydrogen ([0023] and [0027]);
a water supply (Fig. 1, [0039], water added to first water-gas mixing device 704 and mixing tank 705) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module such that the water supply receives oxygen produced by the electrolyzer module (Fig. 1);
a first diffuser (Fig. 1, [0039], line comprising fourth flow splitting control valve 701 and leading to mixing tank 705) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and located at a first location along a length of the water supply;
a second diffuser (Fig. 1, [0039], line comprising fourth flow splitting control valve 701 and leading to first water-gas mixing device 704) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and located at a second location along the length of the water supply (Fig. 1); and
a hydrogen load (Fig. 1, [0030], hydrogen gas storing tank 502) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module to use the produced hydrogen (Fig. 1, [0043] and [0047]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 2: an oxygen storage system (Fig. 1, [0028], first gas storing unit 40 comprises oxygen/ozone storing tank 401) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and to the water supply (Fig. 1).
Claim 3: a valve (Fig. 1, [0039], fourth flow splitting control valve 701) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and the water supply.
Claim 4: the valve increases or decreases a flow rate of the oxygen to the water supply ([0044]).
Claim 5: the oxygen concentration of the water supply is from about 1 mg/L ([0047]) to about 20 mg/L (Table 1).
Claim 7: the water supply comprises a pipeline ([0018]).
Regarding Claims 10-11, Jung discloses a system for increasing the oxygen concentration of a water supply (abstract) comprising:
an electrolyzer module (Fig. 1, [0018], electrolytic gas generator) that produces oxygen and hydrogen ([0023] and [0027]);
a water supply (Fig. 1, [0039], water added to first water-gas mixing device 704 and mixing tank 705) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module such that the water supply receives oxygen produced by the electrolyzer module (Fig. 1);
a valve (Fig. 1, [0039], fourth flow splitting control valve 701) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and the water supply that increases or decreases a flow rate of the oxygen to the water supply ([0044]); and
a hydrogen load (Fig. 1, [0030], hydrogen gas storing tank 502) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module to use the produced hydrogen (Fig. 1, [0043] and [0047]).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 11: a diffuser (Fig. 1, [0039], line comprising fourth flow splitting control valve 701 and leading to first water-gas mixing device 704) fluidly connected to the electrolyzer module and the water supply, wherein the diffuser diffuses the oxygen produced by the electrolyzer module into the water supply ([0040] and [0042]).
Regarding Claims 13 -17, Jung discloses a method for increasing the oxygen concentration of a water supply (abstract), the method comprising:
producing oxygen and hydrogen ([0023] and [0027]) in an electrolyzer module (Fig. 1, [0018], electrolytic gas generator);
diffusing a first portion of the oxygen into a water supply at a first location (Fig. 1, [0039], line comprising fourth flow splitting control valve 701 and leading to mixing tank 705);
diffusing a second portion of the oxygen into the water supply at a second location (Fig. 1, [0039], line comprising fourth flow splitting control valve 701 and leading to first water-gas mixing device 704); and
transferring the produced hydrogen to a hydrogen load (Fig. 1, [0030], hydrogen gas storing tank 502).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 14: the amount of the first portion of the oxygen diffused into the water supply is varied over time ([0023-0026], adjusting voltage controls concentration of gases produced).
Claim 15: the amount of the first portion of oxygen diffused into the water supply is sufficient to disrupt the growth of bacteria (the range of Jung covers the range of the instant application, see originally filed specification, dated 12/06/2022, [0025-0026]).
Claim 16: storing a third portion of the oxygen in an oxygen storage system (Fig. 1, [0028], first gas storing unit 40 comprises oxygen/ozone storing tank 401).
Claim 17: increasing or decreasing a flow rate of the first portion of the oxygen ([0044]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 8, 12 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication US20170362723A1 (‘Jung’) in view of U.S. Publication US20150274557A1 (‘Watson’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus (system) (Claims 8 and 12) and a method (Claims 18-20).
Regarding Claims 8 and 12, Jung teaches the systems of Claims 1 and 10, except that the water supply comprises a municipal water supply, a wastewater supply, or a water supply for aquaculture.
Watson also relates to a system for increasing the oxygen concentration of a water supply (abstract), including that the water supply comprises a municipal water supply ([0048]), a wastewater supply ([0048]), or a water supply for aquaculture ([0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the water supply of Jung to comprise a municipal water supply, a wastewater supply, or a water supply for aquaculture, as demonstrated by Watson, because the source water will typically be selected depending on the intended use of the produced oxygenated water (Watson, [0048]).
Regarding Claims 18-20, Jung teaches the method of Claim 13, except that water in the water supply is suitable for bathing, exercise or drinking.
Watson also relates to a method for increasing the oxygen concentration of a water supply (abstract), including that water in the water supply is suitable for bathing ([0006]), exercise ([0006]) or drinking ([0006] and [0091-0092]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the water of Jung is suitable for bathing, exercise or drinking, as demonstrated by Watson, because oxygenated water is reportedly beneficial for these applications (Watson, [0006]).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-4613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 am to 6 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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights