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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 27 JANUARY 2026 has been entered.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Claim Status
Rejected Claims: 1-12 and 15-20
Withdrawn Claims: 13-14
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 27 JANUARY 2026 has been entered.
In view of the amendment to the claims, the amendment of claims 1-4, 8-9, 12, 15, and 17-19 has been acknowledged.
In view of the amendment to independent claims 1, 12, and 19, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 have had their basis for rejection changed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 27 JANUARY 2026 have been fully considered.
Applicant argues, regarding the rejection of claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sato in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel, that Sato teaches against the newly amended limitation of directly connecting the rear of the electrodeionization device to a boron removal tower and have no other direct connection of a boron removal tower to the electrodeionization device because Sato teaches the use of a plurality of boron removal towers to improve boron adsorption, with three towers connected to the electrodeionization device and thus claim 1 is patentable over Sato in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel (Arguments filed 27 JANUARY 2026, Page 11 to Page 15, Paragraph 2).
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 and Sato have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant argues, regarding the rejection of claim 1, that the Sato fails to teach the newly amended limitations “wherein the depth of the leakage region of the boron adsorption resin is the difference between a height of a lowest leakage sample resin layer among the plurality of sample resin layers and a total height of the boron adsorption resin, and wherein the determining the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin comprises determining, based on the depth of the lowest leakage sample resin layer, a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin including the leakage sample resin layer” wherein the calculation will pertain to the real-time lifespan of a bed of resin and so claim 1 is allowable (Arguments filed 27 JANUARY 2026, Page 15, Paragraph 3 to Page 18, Paragraph 2).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, Chuuman teaches calculation of resin lifespan between columns in series such that the columns/resin can be rotated/regenerated/replaced as they are consumed. Gensbittel teaches that multiple anion exchange beds may be configured as single anion exchange units. Tanabe et al (US Patent No. 5833846 A) hereinafter Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel make obvious a layered single bed with multiple sample ports to determine breakthrough of each resin layer. Furthermore, despite not explicitly teaching the use of height for determining breakthrough, Chuuman utilizes the volume of resin, which can be the volume of one or multiple columns, and the boron adsorption capacity of the resin to calculate breakthrough. Height is a derived factor of volume and must be related back to the overall volume and adsorption capacity otherwise the calculation cannot be accomplished, and as such, the equation used in the instant application simply utilizes the ratio of total height of resin divided by the height of remaining resin as a unitless percentage to calculate a remaining lifespan. Chuuman explicitly teaches that increased space velocity of water through the column decreases the total amount of boron that the resin can adsorb because the reaction is slow and describes a method of keeping the space velocity and incoming boron concentration within a certain range so that the column will last a particular amount of time. Therefore, the calculations are equivalents, because they are used for the same purpose of determining lifespan of the resin and claim 1 is not allowable. See MPEP 2144.06 for more details on art recognized equivalence.
Applicant argues that claims 12 and 19 are allowable for the same reasons as claim 1 and the dependent claims are allowable because claims 1, 12, and 19 are also allowable (Arguments filed 27 JANUARY 2026, Page 18, Paragraph 3 to Page 19).
Regarding Applicant’s argument, claim 1 is not allowable and so independent claims 12 and 19 and the dependent claims are also not allowable.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 12, “one boron removal tower” was added in line 2 of the claim which should read “one boron removal device” for clarity as the rest of the claim already used this terminology and towers are used as a subset of each device later in the claim.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 8 adds the limitations “a first block” and “a second block” without defining the terms further. In the instant specification, a first block is suggested to be a preprocessing unit including selections of a sand filtration device, microfiltration device, heat exchanger, activated carbon device, ultrafiltration device, reverse osmosis device (Paragraph 0019). The first block will be interpreted to be one of these devices. In the instant specification, a second block is suggested to be a first pure water production unit including a reverse osmosis device, a degassing device, and an ultraviolet oxidation device (Paragraph 0020). The second block will be interpreted to be one of these devices.
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 1-3 and 7-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe et al US Patent No. 5833846 A (hereinafter Tanabe) in view of Chuuman et al International Patent Application No. WO 2019163174 A1 (hereinafter Chuuman) in view of Gensbittel US Patent Application No. 20140138318 A1 (hereinafter Gensbittel).
Regarding Claim 1, Tanabe teaches a high-purity water producing apparatus that is capable of effectively removing boron (i.e., a management method of a system for producing an ultrapure water; Abstract) that includes a double pass reverse osmosis unit and an electrodeionization unit and additionally a boron removing unit downstream of the deionization unit that contains a boron-selective ion exchange resin (i.e., the system comprising one boron removal tower, an electrodeionization device directly connected to the one boron removal tower only at a rear of the electrodeionization device and not directly connected to any other boron removal tower, the one boron removal tower comprising an accommodation space through which water to be processed is configured to pass, and a boron adsorption resin in the accommodation space; supplying the water to be processed to the boron removal tower to pass through the boron adsorption resin; Col. 4, Line 39 to Col. 5, Line 25)
wherein the boron concentration is sampled at various points (Col. 9, Lines 15-20) for determining if the boron is at sufficiently low enough levels or if there is too much boron leakage (i.e., measuring an amount of residual boron from sample processing water obtained; determining a leakage sample resin layer reaching a break-through point based on the amount of the residual boron; deriving a depth of a leakage region of the boron adsorption resin based on a location of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; determining a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin based on the derived depth of the leakage region and an operating period corresponding to a period of operating the system until the determination of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; Col. 1, line 59 to Col. 2, Line 22)
wherein the ion exchange resin is known to be either replaced or regenerated when it starts leaking too much boron from the column (i.e., and replacing the boron adsorption resin based on the lifespan; Col. 5, Lines 3-25).
Tanabe does not explicitly teach the boron adsorption resin comprising a plurality of sample resin layers disposed in a direction in which the water to be processed in the accommodation space flows.
However, Chuuman teaches boron adsorption towers provided in series for the purpose of a merry-go-round type of utilization and regeneration system such that there are always multiple ion exchange beds in use while at least one ion exchange bed is being regenerated (i.e., the boron adsorption resin comprising a plurality of sample resin layers disposed in a direction in which the water to be processed in the accommodation space flows; Paragraph 0041, Machine Translation). Multiple boron adsorption towers in series is a functional equivalent to multiple stages of resin beds within the same boron adsorption tower and including multiple beds in a single tower is an obvious variant to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Chuuman further teaches that the resin adsorption capacity is dependent upon the space velocity of the boron containing water, the volume of resin, adsorption capacity of the resin, the breakthrough boron concentration setpoint, and the feedwater boron concentration because the adsorption reaction of boron is slow and so it is known to optimize the space velocity to increase the amount of boron a given volume of resin can capture (Paragraphs 0033-0037, Machine Translation). Chuuman also teaches a method of controlling the breakthrough point of boron in the resin by controlling the space velocity in regards to the inlet boron concentration of the water and then setting an operating time for the conditions such that the resin lifespan will be known at any given time because the operating time is a set factor (Paragraphs 0046-0047, Machine Translation).
Chuuman is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a method for removing boron by passing boron containing water through a boron adsorption tower for producing pure or ultrapure water (Paragraph 0001, Machine Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the high-purity water producing apparatus as taught by Tanabe with the series columns as taught by Chuuman because the series columns would maintain continuous operation of the towers while replacement and/or regeneration of the ion exchange resin takes place.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman does not explicitly teach the boron removal tower comprising a plurality of sample ports through which sample processing water obtained from the plurality of sample resin layers is discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers.
However, Gensbittel teaches a technical solution for the optimized control of boron breakthrough and reduced boron leakage (Paragraph 0011) which involves a boron analyzer monitoring boron concentration downstream of a strong base anion exchange bed (Paragraphs 0043-0047) and acknowledges that individual features of the invention can be implemented as a plurality (i.e., teach the boron removal tower comprising a plurality of sample ports through which sample processing water obtained from the plurality of sample resin layers is discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers; Paragraph 0073).
Gensbittel is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a process for obtaining ultrapure water (Abstract). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the high-purity water producing apparatuses as made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman with the boron analyzer as taught by Gensbittel because the boron analyzer would control boron breakthrough and reduce boron leakage.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel do not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the leakage region of the boron adsorption resin is the difference between a height of a lowest leakage sample resin layer among the plurality of sample resin layers and a total height of the boron adsorption resin, and wherein the determining the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin comprises determining, based on the depth of the lowest leakage sample resin layer, a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin including the leakage sample resin layer.
However, Chuuman teaches that space velocity, which is a volume based flow rate, inlet boron concentration, and resin volume are important for overall resin break-through determination. Depth and height are simply derived values of volume and height must eventually be related to volume for an accurate calculation of boron adsorption, which is done by creating a percentage of depletion in the instant application. A layer of the instant application is the equivalent of a column as taught by Chuuman and the height of breakthrough that is determined by Chuuman would simply be the height of the entire column. Volume of resin can also be determined for a single column or for many columns combined. Chuuman explicitly describes the use of volume and space velocity to determine break-through of a given type of resin for a feedwater source with examples of how increasing space velocity decreases total boron adsorption for resin given a particular breakthrough point, with operating time (i.e. lifespan) values for various combinations of inlet boron concentration and space velocity. While not explicitly describing that this is an alternative for a height derived version of breakthrough, both calculations are determining the breakthrough point and estimating lifespan of a given amount of resin. As such these two are art recognized equivalents for the same purpose of determining the lifespan of resin and an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 2, Gensbittel further teaches that multiple anion exchange beds may be configured as single anion exchange units (Paragraph 0029) shown to be operated in series in Fig. 1a below (i.e., wherein the plurality of sample resin layers are provided at predetermined intervals from a bottom of the one boron removal tower).
PNG
media_image1.png
349
326
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 3, Chuuman further teaches that boron adsorption towers can be connected in parallel for the purpose of stopping supply water to some towers while continuously supplying water through some of the towers (i.e., further comprising, at a rear of the one boron removal tower, a plurality of boron removal towers connected in parallel; Paragraph 0026, Machine Translation).
Regarding Claim 7, Tanabe further teaches that AMBERLITE IRA-743 resin can be used which contains an N-methylglucamine group and is a chelating resin (i.e., wherein the boron adsorption resin comprises an ion exchange resin including a methylglucamine group; Col. 5, lines 3-25).
Regarding Claim 8, Tanabe further teaches that it is known to conventionally include an activated carbon device (i.e., a first block), and a reverse osmosis device (i.e., a second block) in an ultrapure water production system in addition to electrodeionization and boron removal downstream of reverse osmosis (i.e., a third block; wherein the third block comprises the electrodeionization device and a boron removal device and wherein the boron removal device comprises the one boron removal tower and the boron adsorption resin; Col. 5, Lines 26-58).
Regarding Claim 10, Tanabe further teaches that pretreatment includes an activated carbon device (i.e., wherein the first block comprises at least one of an activated carbon device; Col. 5, Lines 43-58).
Regarding Claim 11, Tanabe further teaches that a reverse osmosis unit can be combined with electrodeionization (i.e., wherein the second block comprises at least one of a reverse osmosis device; Col. 5, Lines 43-58).
Claims 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Amaya et al International Patent Application No. WO 2018198723 A1 (hereinafter Amaya).
Regarding Claim 4, Chuuman further teaches a series of boron adsorption towers (i.e., wherein the plurality of boron removal towers comprises a first boron removal tower and a second boron removal tower; Paragraph 0041, Machine Translation).
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel does not teach wherein, in an operation of supplying the water to be processed to the boron removal tower, the water to be processed passes through the first boron removal tower at a first space velocity and passes through the second boron removal tower at a second space velocity that is greater than the first space velocity.
However, Amaya teaches the use of a boron-adsorbing cation exchange/anion exchange mixed resin bed with a space velocity of 3.2 (l/h) followed by a non-regenerative mixed ion bed ion exchange resin device with a space velocity of 50 (l/h) (i.e., wherein, in an operation of supplying the water to be processed to the boron removal tower, the water to be processed passes through the first boron removal tower at a first space velocity and passes through the second boron removal tower at a second space velocity that is greater than the first space velocity; Paragraph 0084, Machine Translation).
Furthermore, Amaya teaches that space velocity is known to be optimized for the improvement of boron removal rate and reduction in the elution of organic matter (Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation).
Amaya is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to an ultrapure water producing system and method (Paragraph 0001, Machine Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the method for producing pure water made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel with the space velocity as taught by Amaya because the space velocity would improve the boron removal rate and reduce the elution of organic matter.
Regarding Claim 5, Amaya further teaches that space velocity is known to be optimized for the improvement of boron removal rate and reduction in the elution of organic matter (Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation). Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya does not explicitly teach wherein the determining the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin comprises calculating the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin according to: lifespan (days) = (a total height of the boron adsorption resin/a depth of the leakage region) x the operating period (days) x SV conversion, and wherein the SV conversion is a ratio of the first space velocity to the second space velocity. However, the equation is simply calculating a depth of consumed boron adsorptive resin over time. With the knowledge that space velocity changes the boron adsorption rate of the bed, taught by Amaya, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to determine that space velocities of columns in series would also impact overall resin lifespan. Furthermore, Chuuman teaches that space velocity, which is a volume based flow rate, and resin volume are important for overall resin break-through determination. Depth and height are simply derived values of volume and height must eventually be related to volume for an accurate calculation of boron adsorption, even if that is a hard-coded value for a specific column dimension, because resin is not 1-dimensional. A layer of the instant application is the equivalent of a column as taught by Chuuman and the height of breakthrough that is determined by Chuuman would simply be the height of the entire column. Volume of resin can also be determined for a single column or for many columns combined. Chuuman explicitly describes the use of volume and space velocity to determine break-through of a given type of resin for a feedwater source. While not explicitly describing that this is an alternative for a height derived version of breakthrough, both calculations are determining the breakthrough point and estimating lifespan of a given amount of resin. As such these two are art recognized equivalents for the same purpose of determining the lifespan of resin and an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 6, Amaya further teaches that the space velocity of the boron adsorption resin mixed ion exchange device is preferably 1 to 100 (l/h) (i.e., wherein the first space velocity is about 60(1/h), and wherein the second space velocity is about 90(1/h); Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation). Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya does not explicitly teach the first space velocity is about 60 (l/h) and the second space velocity is about 90 (l/h). However, a prima facie case of obviousness exists for claimed ranges that overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by prior art (In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976))(See MPEP 2144.05(I)). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to have selected space velocity that corresponds to the claimed range while experimenting with the range made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of Sato Japanese Patent No. JP 2016150275 A (hereinafter Sato).
Regarding Claim 9, Tanabe further teaches that a membrane degasifier is known to use with reverse osmosis and electrodeionization (i.e., wherein the third block further comprises: a membrane degassing device; Fig. 3, #122),
a UV oxidizer (Fig. 3, #108) downstream of the boron removing unit (i.e., an ultraviolet oxidation device connected to a rear end of the boron removal device; Fig. 3, #3; Col. 8, Lines 35-56),
and a cartridge polisher (Fig. 3, #109) downstream of the UV oxidizer to remove organic acids and other impurities present (Col. 3, Lines 7-31) that is a mixed bed of resins (i.e., and an ion exchange device connected to a rear end of the ultraviolet oxidation device; Col. 9, Lines 39-42). Tanabe further teaches that the purpose of the degasifier is to expel gases such as nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide from water after passing through the reverse osmosis unit so that 18 MΩ water may be produced (Col. 2, Line 66 to Col. 3, Line 6).
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel does not teach a membrane degassing device connected to the front end of the electrodeionization device.
However, Sato teaches that a degassing membrane device may conventionally be located between the RO membrane separation device and the electrodeionization device (i.e., a membrane degassing device connected to the front end of the electrodeionization device; Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation).
Sato is analogous to the claimed invention because it pertains to a method and apparatus for producing pure water that can efficiently remove boron from said water (Paragraph 0001, Machine Translation). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the high-purity water producing apparatus made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel with the degassing membrane device between the reverse osmosis and electrodeionization as taught by Sato because the configuration is conventional and the degassing device is necessary for producing 18 MΩ water.
Claims 12 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya.
Regarding Claim 12, Tanabe teaches a high-purity water producing apparatus that is capable of effectively removing boron (i.e., a management method of a system for producing an ultrapure water; Abstract) that includes a double pass reverse osmosis unit and an electrodeionization unit and additionally a boron removing unit downstream of the deionization unit that contains a boron-selective ion exchange resin (i.e., comprising one boron removal device, an electrodeionization device directly connected to the one boron removal device only at a rear of the electrodeionization device and not directly connected to any other boron removal device, the electrodeionization device configured to discharge water to be processed directly into the one boron removal device, each of the boron removal towers comprising an accommodation space through which water to be processed is configured to pass, and a boron adsorption resin in the accommodation space; supplying the water to be processed to the boron removal tower to pass through the boron adsorption resin; Col. 4, Line 39 to Col. 5, Line 25)
wherein the boron concentration is sampled at various points (Col. 9, Lines 15-20) for determining if the boron is at sufficiently low enough levels or if there is too much boron leakage (i.e., measuring an amount of residual boron from sample processing water obtained; determining a leakage sample resin layer reaching a break-through point based on the amount of the residual boron; deriving a depth of a leakage region of the boron adsorption resin based on a location of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; determining a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin based on the derived depth of the leakage region and an operating period corresponding to a period of operating the system until the determination of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; Col. 1, line 59 to Col. 2, Line 22)
wherein the ion exchange resin is known to be either replaced or regenerated when it starts leaking too much boron from the column (i.e., and replacing the boron adsorption resin based on the lifespan; Col. 5, Lines 3-25).
Tanabe does not explicitly teach a plurality of boron removal towers and the boron adsorption resin comprising a plurality of sample resin layers disposed in a direction in which the water to be processed in the accommodation space flows.
However, Chuuman teaches boron adsorption towers provided in series for the purpose of a merry-go-round type of utilization and regeneration system such that there are always multiple ion exchange beds in use while at least one ion exchange bed is being regenerated (i.e., the boron removal device comprises a plurality of boron removal towers; the boron adsorption resin comprising a plurality of sample resin layers disposed in a direction in which the water to be processed in the accommodation space flows; Paragraph 0041, Machine Translation). Multiple boron adsorption towers in series is a functional equivalent to multiple stages of resin beds within the same boron adsorption tower and including multiple beds in a single tower is an obvious variant to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Chuuman further teaches that the resin adsorption capacity is dependent upon the space velocity of the boron containing water, the volume of resin, adsorption capacity of the resin, the breakthrough boron concentration setpoint, and the feedwater boron concentration because the adsorption reaction of boron is slow and so it is known to optimize the space velocity to increase the amount of boron a given volume of resin can capture (Paragraphs 0033-0037, Machine Translation). Chuuman also teaches a method of controlling the breakthrough point of boron in the resin by controlling the space velocity in regards to the inlet boron concentration of the water and then setting an operating time for the conditions such that the resin lifespan will be known at any given time because the operating time is a set factor (Paragraphs 0046-0047, Machine Translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the high-purity water producing apparatus as taught by Tanabe with the series columns as taught by Chuuman because the series columns would maintain continuous operation of the towers while replacement and/or regeneration of the ion exchange resin takes place.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman does not explicitly teach the boron removal tower comprising a plurality of sample ports through which sample processing water obtained from the plurality of sample resin layers is discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers.
However, Gensbittel teaches a technical solution for the optimized control of boron breakthrough and reduced boron leakage (Paragraph 0011) which involves a boron analyzer monitoring boron concentration downstream of a strong base anion exchange bed (Paragraphs 0043-0047) and acknowledges that individual features of the invention can be implemented as a plurality (i.e., the boron removal tower comprising a plurality of sample ports through which sample processing water obtained from the plurality of sample resin layers is discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers; Paragraph 0073).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the boron adsorption devices as made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman with the boron analyzer as taught by Gensbittel because the boron analyzer would control boron breakthrough and reduce boron leakage.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel does not teach determining a replacement cycle of the boron adsorption resin by increasing a passing flow rate of the water to be processed in at least one of the plurality of boron removal towers.
However, Amaya teaches that space velocity is known to be optimized for the improvement of boron removal rate and reduction in the elution of organic matter (i.e., determining a replacement cycle of the boron adsorption resin by increasing a passing flow rate of the water to be processed in at least one of the plurality of boron removal towers; Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the method for producing pure water made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel with the space velocity optimization as taught by Amaya because the space velocity would improve the boron removal rate and reduce the elution of organic matter.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya do not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the leakage region of the boron adsorption resin is the difference between a height of a lowest leakage sample resin layer among the plurality of sample resin layers and a total height of the boron adsorption resin, and wherein the determining the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin comprises determining, based on the depth of the lowest leakage sample resin layer, a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin including the leakage sample resin layer.
However, Chuuman teaches that space velocity, which is a volume based flow rate, inlet boron concentration, and resin volume are important for overall resin break-through determination. Depth and height are simply derived values of volume and height must eventually be related to volume for an accurate calculation of boron adsorption, which is done by creating a percentage of depletion in the instant application. A layer of the instant application is the equivalent of a column as taught by Chuuman and the height of breakthrough that is determined by Chuuman would simply be the height of the entire column. Volume of resin can also be determined for a single column or for many columns combined. Chuuman explicitly describes the use of volume and space velocity to determine break-through of a given type of resin for a feedwater source with examples of how increasing space velocity decreases total boron adsorption for resin given a particular breakthrough point, with operating time (i.e. lifespan) values for various combinations of inlet boron concentration and space velocity. While not explicitly describing that this is an alternative for a height derived version of breakthrough, both calculations are determining the breakthrough point and estimating lifespan of a given amount of resin. As such these two are art recognized equivalents for the same purpose of determining the lifespan of resin and an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 15, Gensbittel further teaches an operation modus termed “downflow exhaustion/up flow regeneration” in which the inlet stream comes into the top of the anion exchange beds and the outlet flows out of the bottom of the anion exchange beds (i.e., wherein the one boron removal device further comprises an inlet portion connected to an upper side of each of the plurality of boron removal towers, and an outlet portion connected to a lower side of each of the plurality of boron removal towers; Fig. 2a; Paragraph 0052).
Regarding Claim 16, Amaya further teaches that it is preferable that the boron concentration in the treated water from the non-regenerative mixed bed ion exchange resin is less than 0.5 ng/L, or ppt (i.e., wherein a concentration of residual boron of processing water, discharged to the outlet portion, is managed to be 1 ppt or less; Paragraph 0017, Machine Translation).
Furthermore, the limitation “wherein a concentration of residual boron of processing water, discharged to the outlet portion, is managed to be 1 ppt or less” is directed toward an expected result from the practice or use of the claimed invention and is therefore not subject to patentability. Where the prior art product structure is capable of performing the intended use as recited, a prima facie case of either anticipation or obviousness has been established because the devices meets the limitations of the claim (In re Schreiber, 128 F.3d 1473, 1477, 44 USPQ2d 1429, 1431 (Fed. Cir. 1997); MPEP §2111.02 II).
Regarding Claim 17, Tanabe further teaches a UV oxidizer (Fig. 3, #108) operated downstream of the deionized water (which includes the boron-selective ion exchange resin) that forms a closed loop with a deionized water tank (Fig. 3, #107), cartridge polisher (Fig. 3, #109), and a membrane separation unit (Fig. 3, #110) for the purpose of protecting against bacterial contamination if the water becomes stagnant (i.e., wherein the system further comprises an ultraviolet oxidation layer connected to a rear end of the one boron removal device to remove organic materials eluted from the one boron removal device; Col. 3, Lines 7-32).
Regarding Claim 18, Tanabe further teaches a cartridge polisher (Fig. 3, #109) downstream of the UV oxidizer to remove organic acids and other impurities present (Col. 3, Lines 7-31) that is a mixed bed of resins (i.e., wherein the system further comprises an ion exchange device configured to remove total organic carbon (TOC) decomposition byproducts or organic ions generated in a process in which the ultraviolet oxidation layer removes the organic materials eluted from the one boron removal device; Col. 9, Lines 39-42).
Amaya further teaches a non-regenerative mixed bed ion exchange resin device (i.e., wherein the system further comprises an ion exchange device; Fig. 2, #15) connected in the order of electrodeionization, boron removal device, ultraviolet oxidation, and ion exchange (Fig. 2; Paragraph 0021, Machine Translation) with the purpose of the non-regenerative mixed bed ion exchange resin device being to reduce TOC concentration in the water (i.e., configured to remove total organic carbon (TOC) decomposition byproducts or organic ions generated in a process in which the ultraviolet oxidation layer removes the organic materials eluted from the boron removal device; Paragraph 0051, Machine Translation).
Regarding Claim 19, Tanabe teaches a high-purity water producing apparatus that is capable of effectively removing boron (i.e., a management method of a system for producing an ultrapure water; Abstract) that includes a double pass reverse osmosis unit and an electrodeionization unit and additionally a boron removing unit downstream of the deionization unit that contains a boron-selective ion exchange resin (i.e., the system comprising one boron removal tower, an electrodeionization device directly connected to the one boron removal tower only at a rear of the electrodeionization device and not directly connected to any other boron removal tower, the one boron removal tower comprising an accommodation space through which water to be processed is configured to pass, and a boron adsorption resin in the accommodation space; supplying the water to be processed to the boron removal tower to pass through the boron adsorption resin; Col. 4, Line 39 to Col. 5, Line 25)
wherein the boron concentration is sampled at various points (Col. 9, Lines 15-20) for determining if the boron is at sufficiently low enough levels or if there is too much boron leakage (i.e., measuring an amount of residual boron from sample processing water obtained; determining a leakage sample resin layer reaching a break-through point based on the amount of the residual boron; deriving a depth of a leakage region of the boron adsorption resin based on a location of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; determining a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin based on the derived depth of the leakage region and an operating period corresponding to a period of operating the system until the determination of the leakage sample resin layer reaching the break-through point; Col. 1, line 59 to Col. 2, Line 22)
wherein the ion exchange resin is known to be either replaced or regenerated when it starts leaking too much boron from the column (i.e., and replacing the boron adsorption resin based on the lifespan; Col. 5, Lines 3-25).
Tanabe does not explicitly teach the boron adsorption resin comprising a plurality of sample resin layers disposed in a direction in which the water to be processed in the accommodation space flows.
However, Chuuman teaches boron adsorption towers provided in series for the purpose of a merry-go-round type of utilization and regeneration system such that there are always multiple ion exchange beds in use while at least one ion exchange bed is being regenerated (i.e., passing through portions having different heights of the boron adsorption resin; Paragraph 0041, Machine Translation). Multiple boron adsorption towers in series is a functional equivalent to multiple stages or different heights of resin beds within the same boron adsorption tower and including multiple beds in a single tower is an obvious variant to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Chuuman further teaches that the resin adsorption capacity is dependent upon the space velocity of the boron containing water, the volume of resin, adsorption capacity of the resin, the breakthrough boron concentration setpoint, and the feedwater boron concentration because the adsorption reaction of boron is slow and so it is known to optimize the space velocity to increase the amount of boron a given volume of resin can capture (Paragraphs 0033-0037, Machine Translation). Chuuman also teaches a method of controlling the breakthrough point of boron in the resin by controlling the space velocity in regards to the inlet boron concentration of the water and then setting an operating time for the conditions such that the resin lifespan will be known at any given time because the operating time is a set factor (Paragraphs 0046-0047, Machine Translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the high-purity water producing apparatus as taught by Tanabe with the series columns as taught by Chuuman because the series columns would maintain continuous operation of the towers while replacement and/or regeneration of the ion exchange resin takes place.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman does not explicitly teach the boron removal tower comprising a plurality of sample ports through which sample processing water obtained from the plurality of sample resin layers is discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers.
However, Gensbittel teaches a technical solution for the optimized control of boron breakthrough and reduced boron leakage (Paragraph 0011) which involves a boron analyzer monitoring boron concentration downstream of a strong base anion exchange bed (Paragraphs 0043-0047) and acknowledges that individual features of the invention can be implemented as a plurality (i.e., a plurality of sample ports through which a plurality of sample waters to be processed passing through portions having different heights of the boron adsorption resin, are respectively discharged, the management method comprising; determining a leakage sample resin layer from each of the plurality of sample ports; determining a leakage sample resin layer, among the plurality of sample resin layers; Paragraph 0073).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the boron adsorption devices as made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman with the boron analyzer as taught by Gensbittel because the boron analyzer would control boron breakthrough and reduce boron leakage.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel does not teach determining a replacement cycle of the boron adsorption resin by increasing a passing flow rate of the boron removal tower.
However, Amaya teaches that space velocity is known to be optimized for the improvement of boron removal rate and reduction in the elution of organic matter (i.e., determining a replacement cycle of the boron adsorption resin by increasing a passing flow rate of the boron removal tower; Paragraph 0046, Machine Translation).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing the instant claimed invention to modify the method for producing pure water made obvious by Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel with the space velocity optimization as taught by Amaya because the space velocity would improve the boron removal rate and reduce the elution of organic matter.
Tanabe in view of Chuuman in view of Gensbittel in view of Amaya do not explicitly teach wherein the depth of the leakage region of the boron adsorption resin is the difference between a height of a lowest leakage sample resin layer among the plurality of sample resin layers and a total height of the boron adsorption resin, and wherein the determining the lifespan of the boron adsorption resin comprises determining, based on the depth of the lowest leakage sample resin layer, a lifespan of the boron adsorption resin including the leakage sample resin layer.
However, Chuuman teaches that space velocity, which is a volume based flow rate, inlet boron concentration, and resin volume are important for overall resin break-through determination. Depth and height are simply derived values of volume and height must eventually be related to volume for an accurate calculation of boron adsorption, which is done by creating a percentage of depletion in the instant application. A layer of the instant application is the equivalent of a column as taught by Chuuman and the height of breakthrough that is determined by Chuuman would simply be the height of the entire column. Volume of resin can also be determined for a single column or for many columns combined. Chuuman explicitly describes the use of volume and space velocity to determine break-through of a given type of resin for a feedwater source with examples of how increasing space velocity decreases total boron adsorption for resin given a particular breakthrough point, with operating time (i.e. lifespan) values for various combinations of inlet boron concentration and space velocity. While not explicitly describing that this is an alternative for a height derived version of breakthrough, both calculations are determining the breakthrough point and estimating lifespan of a given amount of resin. As such these two are art recognized equivalents for the same purpose of determining the lifespan of resin and an express suggestion to substitute one equivalent component or process for another is not necessary to render such substitution obvious (In re Fout, 675 F.2d 297, 213 USPQ 532 (CCPA 1982); MPEP 2144.06).
Regarding Claim 20, Chuuman further teaches boron adsorption towers provided in series for the purpose of a merry-go-round type of utilization and regeneration system such that there are always multiple ion exchange beds in use while at least one ion exchange bed is being regenerated (i.e., wherein the boron adsorption resin comprises boron adsorption capacity on a level lower than a portion reaching the break-through point of the boron adsorption resin; Paragraph 0041, Machine Translation).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ADAM ADRIEN GERMAIN whose telephone number is (703)756-5499. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 7:30-4:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571)272-5954. 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.
/A.A.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/IN SUK C BULLOCK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights