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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Species II in the reply filed on 04/15/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is overlapping subject matter. This is not found persuasive because the species appear to be directed to different embodiments of the apparatus and have different combinations of the parts and pieces.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 1-6 and 14-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 04/15/2026.
Claim Objections
Claim 11 is objected to because of the following informalities: it appears to contain reference numbers without parenthesis and none of the other claims have reference numbers. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 7, 8, and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Chin (Savvy Separator: Scrubber Debottlenecking, attached document will be referenced).
PNG
media_image1.png
1224
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Figure 2 of Chin
Claim 7: Chin teaches an apparatus for separating liquids from a gas stream (Chin teaches the use of scrubbers. Figures 1 and 2 show scrubbers removing liquid from a gas) comprising: an elongate hollow main body having an upper portion including a top end and having a lower portion including a bottom end located opposite said top end (Figures 1 and 2 show this body shape. The top and bottom ends can read upon the straight lines before the curved end caps.); a top cover attached to said top end of said main body (This is the top curved portion); a bottom cover attached to said bottom end of said main body (See bottom curved portion); an inlet attached to said main body (See inlet); an outlet attached to said top cover (The outlet is attached to the top cover portion.); a drain attached to said bottom cover (There is a drain at the very bottom of the curved section); and a baffle interposed between said inlet and said outlet which divides an interior of said main body into at least a first chamber in fluid communication with said inlet and a second chamber in fluid communication with said outlet (The inlet and outlet have a baffle that separates them from each other. The first chamber can be read upon by the lower portion inside the inlet duct while the second chamber can be read upon by the area leading up to and including the outlet.), said baffle forcing the gas stream from said upper portion of said main body downwardly along said first chamber to said lower portion and thence upwardly along said second chamber to said upper portion (See arrows in figure 2. The gas enters through the inlet then is forced down by the duct, after that it flows upward through the second chamber to the top of the device.).
Claim 8: Chin teaches the inlet is attached to a side of said main body along said upper portion thereof proximate said top end (See inlet on the side near the top in figure 2).
Claim 10: Chin teaches the baffle is constructed of a top diverter plate, an intermediate diverter plate, and a bottom diverter plate generally forming a Z-shape (This shape can be read upon by the top of the inlet duct extending down to and including the vane distributor. The top is the top of the inlet duct, the intermediate is the vertical straight portion connected to that, and the bottom is part of the vane distributor connected to the vertical section.); said top diverter plate is located proximate said top cover; said intermediate diverter plate spans from said upper portion of said main body to said lower portion of said main body; said bottom diverter plate is located along said lower portion of said main body (See figure 2 for the locations.); said inlet enters said main body below said top diverter plate (Inlet is below the top duct wall.); and a side edge of said top diverter plate is affixed to a top edge of said intermediate diverter plate, a bottom edge of said intermediate diverter plate is affixed to a side edge of said bottom diverter plate (This entire duct is connected to each other and the vane distributor. Figures 3a-c show the inlet pipe in more detail.), and said bottom diverter plate has a plurality of holes therein, such that said baffle forms a complete seal between said first chamber and said second chamber except for said holes (Figure 3a shows the vane distributor having holes along the side. Figures 2 and 3a-c shows that this separates the inlet from the other parts of the scrubber except for where the vane distributor lets the gas out.).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chin.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chin in view of Brister (US2434637).
Rejection in view of Chin
Claim 11: Chin does not explicitly state said top diverter plate is located at a seam between said top end of said main body and said top cover; and said bottom diverter plate is located approximately two-thirds down a length of said main body. It would have been obvious to have the plates at an optimal location since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Claim 12: Chin teaches said main body is generally cylindrical (See scrubbers in the figures); said top diverter plate is a minor disk segment; and said bottom diverter plate is a major disk segment (These do not appear to impart any structure onto the apparatus and therefore the prior art reads upon this.). If the prior art does not read upon this, it would have been obvious to use a known material since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416.
Claim 13: Chin teaches said bottom diverter plate has a periphery and a central area; and said holes are formed along said periphery but not in said central area (Figure 3a shows that the holes are all along the periphery around the distributor but not the central area at the top or bottom plates.).
Examiner note: Examiner suggests providing structure as to the major and minor disks as it is not readily apparent if major and minor are structurally different. For the purposes of examination, these are interpreted as plates and the major and minor just connotate there need to be two plates. Examiner also suggests if the plates are structurally defined to be disks with the holes as seen in figure 3 and 5, it would better emphasize the structure of the device.
Rejection in view of Chin and Brister
Claim 9: Chin does not explicitly teach said outlet includes a pipe section extending through said top cover, said pipe section being perforated. Brister teaches a separator with a perforated member at the exit. Brister teaches in column 2 lines 39-49 that this perforated section acts as a barrio to help prevent any entrained liquids from exiting through with the gas. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill before the effective filing date of the invention to use a perforated pipe as taught by Brister in the device of Chin as Brister teaches the benefit of having a barrier to prevent any entrained liquids from leaving with the gas. Regarding the location of the pipe, it would have been obvious to have the pipe at an optimal location, such as extending through the top cover since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US11639656, 20190046899, 9597622, 20130247764, 20130047510, 20120006762, 20090196806, 20050011170, 20030192433, 4737168.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHILLIP Y SHAO whose telephone number is (571)272-8171. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri; 9-5:30.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571) 270-7872. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/P.Y.S/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 04/28/2026
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights