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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the flow path must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show a sectional area of a filler as described in the specification. The specification describes both a sectional area of a filler and a sectional area of a flow path, but only the sectional area of a flow path, “S” is shown. Furthermore, it is unclear from the figures and description what is encompassed by a sectional area of the flow path. For example, figures 9-13 point to a single opening or hole as being “S” with a different hole in for example 13A and 13B being labeled as “S”, but a flow path could encompass all the openings and area in the container devoid of the physical structure of the filler; and as such the flow path being labeled as well as the specific area assigned the sectional area of the flow path is essential to a proper understanding of the disclosed invention. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 7, 8, 10 and 12 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.
Regarding claim 1, it is unclear what is meant by a sectional area of the flow path. A flow path is the way material flows through a structure, and the flow path itself is not a structure, but rather a material that is moving. The material moves differently based on the type of material and conditions that are constantly changing, such as flow speed, temperature and pressure. Therefore, there is no sectional area of a flow path that can be defined in set terms or structure. Claims 7 and 8 are also rejected under 35 USC 112(b) by virtue of their dependency on claim 1.
Regarding claim 10, it is unclear what is meant by a sectional area of the flow path. A flow path is the way material flows through a structure, and the flow path itself is not a structure, but rather a material that is moving. The material moves differently based on the type of material and conditions that are constantly changing, such as flow speed, temperature and pressure. Therefore, there is no sectional area of a flow path that can be defined in set terms or structure.
Regarding claim 12, it is unclear what is meant by a sectional area of the flow path. A flow path is the way material flows through a structure, and the flow path itself is not a structure, but rather a material that is moving. The material moves differently based on the type of material and conditions that are constantly changing, such as flow speed, temperature and pressure. Therefore, there is no sectional area of a flow path that can be defined in set terms or structure.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 7, 8, 10 and 12-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Jasper (U.S. Patent No. 12,066,137).
Regarding claim 1, Jasper discloses a fine bubble generation unit (abstract; figures), comprising:
a container into which fluid is injected and discharged (figures 1 and 2, reference #14),
a plurality of fillers filled or stacked inside the container, comprising a flow path through which the fluid flows, the flow path being formed therein or between the plurality of fillers and an inside wall of the container (figures 1, 2 and 4, reference #18 and 20; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
a stopper provided inside the container or ends at opposite sides of the container to prevent the plurality of fillers from moving and being removed (figures 1 and 2, first and last reference #20; or alternatively, figure 2, reference #30; or alternatively, figures 2, reference #49 tapered portion/reducer is smaller than the fillers to prevent them from being removed; column 7, lines 15-17),
wherein fine bubbles are configured to be generated in a process in which the fluid passes through an inside portion of the container (abstract; figure 4, reference #22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (this recitation is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
each of the plurality of fillers is installed such that an arrangement of the flow path thereof or a sectional area of the flow path thereof is different from a neighboring filler (abstract; figures 1 and 4, reference #18, 20, 22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”).
Regarding claim 2, Jasper discloses a fine bubble generation unit (abstract; figures), comprising:
a container into which fluid is injected and discharged (figures 1 and 2, reference #14),
a plurality of fillers filled or stacked inside the container, comprising a flow path through which the fluid flows, the flow path being formed therein or between the plurality of fillers and an inside wall of the container (figures 1, 2 and 4, reference #18 and 20; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
a stopper provided inside the container or ends at opposite sides of the container to prevent the plurality of fillers from moving and being removed (figures 1 and 2, first and last reference #20; or alternatively, figure 2, reference #30; or alternatively, figures 2, reference #49 tapered portion/reducer is smaller than the fillers to prevent them from being removed; column 7, lines 15-17),
wherein fine bubbles are configured to be generated in a process in which the fluid passes through an inside portion of the container (abstract; figure 4, reference #22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (this recitation is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
the plurality of fillers is formed in a coupling module of a block structure in which the plurality of fillers is connected to each other in series or parallel, and one or more coupling modules are filled or stacked inside the container (figures 1 and 2, reference #18 and 20 is one coupling module connected by reference #30 and multiple reference #18/20 stacked inside container 14).
Regarding claim 7, Jasper discloses wherein each of the plurality of fillers is formed of a flexible material, and is formed in a sheet shape or a shape in which two or more sheets are coupled to each other so that the plurality of fillers vibrates by pressure of the fluid flowing inside the container (column 3, lines 28-35 (all materials have some degree of flexibility, and a thin metal plate as described by Jasper in column 3, lines 28-35 will be flexible and able to vibrate/pulsate/oscillate/move back and forth as the pressure and flow of material pushes into it). This limitation is directed to a process of making and does not appear to distinctly claim any additional structural elements. The recitation of the manner in which a structure is formed does not structurally distinguish the physical structure of the fillers as a patentable structural limitation.
Regarding claim 8, Jasper discloses wherein each of the plurality of fillers is installed in a direction crossing a flowing direction of the fluid (figures 1 and 2, reference #18 and 20), comprises a through hole to form the flow path (figures 1 and 4, reference #22 and 24), and has a plate shape (figures 1, 2 and 4, reference #18 and 20; column 3, lines 28-35) on which a gap maintaining part is formed to protrude, on one side portion or opposite side portions to maintain a gap from a neighboring filler (figure 1, reference #30; column 7, lines 15-35).
Regarding claim 10, Jasper discloses wherein the coupling module is installed such that an arrangement of the flow path thereof or a sectional area of the flow path thereof is different from a neighboring coupling module (abstract; figures 1 and 4, reference #18, 20, 22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”).
Regarding claim 12, Jasper discloses a fine bubble generation unit (abstract; figures), comprising:
a container into which fluid is injected and discharged (figures 1 and 2, reference #14),
a plurality of fillers filled or stacked inside the container and comprising a flow path, through which a fluid flows, formed inside (figures 1, 2 and 4, reference #18 and 20; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
a stopper provided inside the container or ends at opposite sides of the container to prevent the plurality of fillers from moving and being removed (figures 1 and 2, first and last reference #20; or alternatively, figure 2, reference #30; or alternatively, figures 2, reference #49 tapered portion/reducer is smaller than the fillers to prevent them from being removed; column 7, lines 15-17),
wherein fine bubbles are configured to be generated in a process in which the fluid passes through an inside portion of the container (abstract; figure 4, reference #22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (this recitation is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”), and
a sectional area of a flow path formed in a filler installed at an inlet of the container, through which the fluid is injected, is formed larger than a flow path formed in a filler installed at an outlet of the container, through which the fluid is discharged, to reduce a size of a fine bubble generated in a process in which the fluid passes through the fillers, thereby minimizing a size of a finally generated fine bubble (abstract; figures 1 and 4, reference #18, 20, 22 and 24; column 8, lines 38-47; column 9, lines 5-25) (it is noted that no structural elements or features of the fillers have been recited, beyond the nomenclature of call the limitation a “filler” and the recitation of the flow path and fluid flow is directed to a manner of operating disclosed unit and the material or article worked upon which do not further limit an apparatus claim. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, it has been held that process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”).
Regarding claim 13, Jasper discloses wherein each of the plurality of fillers is formed of a flexible material, and is formed in a sheet shape or a shape in which two or more sheets are coupled to each other so that the plurality of fillers vibrates by pressure of the fluid flowing inside the container (column 3, lines 28-35 (all materials have some degree of flexibility, and a thin metal plate as described by Jasper in column 3, lines 28-35 will be flexible and able to vibrate/pulsate/oscillate/move back and forth as the pressure and flow of material pushes into it). This limitation is directed to a process of making and does not appear to distinctly claim any additional structural elements. The recitation of the manner in which a structure is formed does not structurally distinguish the physical structure of the fillers as a patentable structural limitation.
Regarding claim 14, Jasper discloses wherein each of the plurality of fillers is installed in a direction crossing a flowing direction of the fluid (figures 1 and 2, reference #18 and 20), comprises a through hole to form the flow path (figures 1 and 4, reference #22 and 24), and has a plate shape (figures 1, 2 and 4, reference #18 and 20; column 3, lines 28-35) on which a gap maintaining part is formed to protrude, on one side portion or opposite side portions to maintain a gap from a neighboring filler (figure 1, reference #30; column 7, lines 15-35).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. JPH0857278A discloses the container (figure 6, reference #3), fillers with flow path according to the functional limitations (figure 6, reference #6C, 6C’, 6C’’) and stopper (figure 6, peripheral ends of reference #6) as recited in the claims. SU1111802A discloses the container (reference #1), fillers with flow path according to the functional limitations (reference #2 and 5) and stopper (reference #6, 7, 8 and 9) as recited in the claims.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELIZABETH INSLER whose telephone number is (571)270-0492. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ELIZABETH INSLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774