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 without traverse of Group II, claims 8-15, in the reply filed on July 30, 2026 is acknowledged. Claims 1-7 and 16-30 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
Drawings
FIG. 3 (Comparative Example 1-1), FIG. 4 (comparative Example 1-2), FIG. 11 (Comparative Example 2), FIG. 15 (Comparative Example 3), and FIG. 19 (Comparative Example 4) should be designated by a legend such as --Prior Art-- because only that which is old is illustrated. See MPEP § 608.02(g).
Corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The replacement sheet(s) should be labeled “Replacement Sheet” in the page header (as per 37 CFR 1.84(c)) so as not to obstruct any portion of the drawing figures. If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, 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 for the following informalities:
In FIG. 8, reference character 2231 points to a pipe. However, reference character 231 is described as a pipe in the specification (see, e.g., page 27, line 4).
In FIG. 8, reference character 2232 points to a bubble formation portion. However, the reference character 232 is described as the bubble formation portion in the specification (see, e.g., page 27, line 4).
In FIG. 9, reference character 2231 points to a pipe. However, reference character 231 is described as a pipe in the specification (see, e.g., page 30, line 11).
In FIG. 9, reference character 2232 points to a bubble formation portion. However, the reference character 232 is described as the bubble formation portion in the specification (see, e.g., page 30, line 11).
In FIG. 9, FIG. 10, and FIG. 11, reference character 2222 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 28, lines 3-4). However, the illustrated impeller differs from axial-type impeller 2222 shown in FIG. 8. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft 221.
In FIG. 13, reference character 321 points to a shaft. However, reference character 331 is described as a shaft in the specification (see, e.g., page 37, lines 10-11).
In FIG. 13, reference character 320 points to a stirrer. However, reference character 330 is described as a stirrer in the specification (see, e.g., page 37, line 10).
In FIG. 13, reference character 330 points to a sparger. However, reference character 320 is described as a sparger in the specification (see, e.g., page 36, lines 9-12).
In FIG. 13, reference character 3231 points to pipe. However, reference character 321 is described as a pipe in the specification (see, e.g., page 36, line 22, to page 37, line 4).
In FIG. 13, reference character 3232 points to a bubble formation portion. However, reference character 322 is described as a bubble formation portion in the specification (see, e.g., page 36, line 22, to page 37, line 9).
In FIG. 13, reference character 322 points to an impeller. However, reference character 332 is described as an impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 37, lines 10-12).
In FIG. 13, reference character 3222 points to an axial-type impeller. However, reference character 3322 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 37, lines 17-19).
In FIG. 13, reference character 3221 points to a radial-type impeller. However, reference character 3321 is described as a radial-type impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 37, lines 17-19).
In FIG. 14, reference character 322 points to an impeller. However, reference character 332 is described as an impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 41, lines 1-2).
In FIG. 14, reference character 3222 appears to point to an axial-type impeller. However, reference character 3322 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 41, lines 2-5). Furthermore, the illustrated upper impeller differs from the axial-type impeller shown in FIG. 13. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft 321.
In FIG. 14, reference character 3221 points to a radial-type impeller. However, reference character 3321 is described as a radial-type impeller in the specification (see, e.g., page 41, lines 2-5).
In FIG. 14, reference character 3230 points to a sparger. However, reference character 320 is described as a sparger in the specification (see, e.g., page 41, lines 12-15).
In FIG. 14, reference character 3232 points to spray ports. However, reference character 321 is described as spray ports in the specification (see, e.g., page 41, lines 12-15).
In FIG. 14, reference character 3231 points to a pipe of the sparger. However, the reference character is not found in the specification.
In FIG. 15, what is described in the specification (see page 42, lines 8-20; page 43, line 15, to page 44, line 3) is not what is shown. For instance, the specification states that the batch reactor according to FIG. 15 (Comparative Ex. 3) should have only one stage of the radial-type impeller mounted on the rotational shaft. Furthermore, the reference characters used in the specification do not correspond to the reference characters used in FIG. 15.
In FIG. 17, reference character 4222 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see page 49, line 21). However, the illustrated impeller differs from the axial-type impeller as previously shown. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller 4222 should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft.
In FIG. 17, reference character 4221 is described as a radial-type impeller in the specification (see page 49, lines 20-21). However, the illustrated impeller differs from the radial-type impeller as previously shown. As best understood, the front blade of the radial-type impeller 4221 should be oriented parallel to the longitudinal axis of the shaft.
In FIG. 18, reference character 4222 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see page 49, line 21). However, the illustrated impeller differs from the axial-type impeller as previously shown. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller 4222 should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft.
In FIG. 19, reference character 4222 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see page 49, line 21). However, the illustrated impeller differs from the axial-type impeller as previously shown. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller 4222 should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft.
In FIG. 19, reference character 430 points to a sparger. However, reference character 4430 is described as a sparger in the specification (see page 52, line 8).
In FIG. 20, reference character 4222 is described as an axial-type impeller in the specification (see page 49, line 21). However, the illustrated impeller differs from the axial-type impeller as previously shown. As best understood, the front blade of the axial-type impeller 4222 should be oriented at an angle to the longitudinal axis of the shaft.
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 have not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the drawings.
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 8-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 8, the limitation “A batch reactor comprising: a reactor” (at line 1) is unclear. The limitation essentially states that “a reactor comprises a reactor”.
Furthermore, the limitation “a stirrer… rotating” (at lines 2-3) is unclear because the term “rotating” refers to a state of operation. It is suggested that the limitation be changed to recite that the stirrer is, for example, “rotatable” or “configured to rotate”.
Furthermore, the recitation of “an axial direction of the stirrer” (at line 8) is unclear. A “direction” is defined as a position towards which something moves or faces. While a stirrer may have an axis, it is unclear as to what would constitute an “axial direction” of the stirrer.
Furthermore, the recitation of a “height direction” (at line 2) is unclear.
Furthermore, the recitation of “a circumferential direction of the reactor” (at line 9) is unclear. While a reactor vessel may have a circumference, it is unclear as to what would constitute a “circumferential direction” of the reactor vessel.
Regarding claim 9, the limitation “a circumferential direction of the stirrer” is unclear. While a stirrer may define a circumference, it is unclear as to what would constitute an “circumferential direction” of the stirrer. Also, the relationship between “a circumferential direction of the stirrer” and “a circumferential direction of the reactor” set forth in claim 8 (at line 9) is unclear.
Regarding claim 10, the recitation of “a length direction of the sparger” is unclear. While a sparger may have a length, it is unclear as to what is meant by a “length direction” of the sparger. It is unclear as to whether Applicant means a “longitudinal axis” of the sparger.
Furthermore, the relationship between “a length direction of the sparger” and a length direction of the “pipe” is unclear.
Furthermore, the relationship between “an axial direction of the stirrer” (at line 4) and “an axial direction of the stirrer” previously set forth in claim 8 (at lines 8-9).
Regarding claim 12, the recitation of “a length direction thereof” (at line 3) is unclear. While a pipe may have a length, it is unclear as to what is meant by a “length direction” of the pipe. It is unclear as to whether Applicant means a “longitudinal axis” of the pipe.
Furthermore, it is unclear as to which side of the impeller comprises a “downstream side” of the impeller. It is also noted that a downstream side of the impeller will ultimately depend on the direction, e.g., clockwise versus counter-clockwise, in which the shaft is rotated.
Regarding claim 13, it is unclear as to which side of the impeller comprises a “downstream side” of the impeller (at line 5). It is also noted that a downstream side of the impeller will ultimately depend on the direction in which the shaft is rotated.
Regarding claim 14, the recitation of “a sintered porous type” (at line 2) renders the claim indefinite. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite. See MPEP §2173.05(b), III, E.
Regarding claim 15, the recitations of “a radial-type impeller” and “an axial-type impeller” (at line 3) render the claim indefinite. The addition of the word "type" to an otherwise definite expression extends the scope of the expression so as to render it indefinite.
Furthermore, the recitation of “the same or different type” (at line 4) is unclear. For instance, it is unclear as to whether the “type” of impeller should be selected only from the radial-type impeller and the axial-type impeller previously set forth in the claim (at line 3), or whether the impeller “type” can also be selected from impellers not specified n the claim.
The remaining claims are also rejected because they depend from a rejected base claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 8, 10-12, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Piras et al. (US 2011/0144384).
Regarding claim 8, Piras et al. discloses a batch reactor (i.e., a liquid-gas phase reactor system 10; see FIG. 1) comprising:
a reactor (i.e., a reactor vessel 11) configured to receive a liquid phase raw material (i.e., via a fresh liquid reaction medium inlet 38);
a stirrer having an impeller on a rotational shaft (i.e., an agitation device including impeller(s) secured to a drive shaft 20; while two impellers 24 and 26 are shown, “one, two or more impellers are commonly used and are applicable to the invention”, see paragraph [0016]) installed in the reactor 11 in a height direction (i.e., vertically) and configured to be rotatable (i.e., the shaft 20 can be rotated by a motor 22 located outside the vessel 11); and
a sparger (i.e., a gas sparger 40, see paragraph [0019]) allowing a gas phase raw material to be distributed to the liquid phase raw material in the reactor 11 by an operation of the stirrer 20, 24, 26 so that the gas phase raw material is supplied to the liquid phase raw material to produce a reaction product, wherein the sparger 40 is configured to supply the gas phase raw material in at least one direction of an axial direction of the stirrer and a circumferential direction of the reactor.
The further recitations with respect to reactor receiving a solvent in a liquid phase, distributing hydrogen chloride in a gas phase, and producing xylene diisocynate are directed to an intended manner of operating the batch reactor, and the limitations do not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The batch reactor of Piras et al. would have been operable in the manner as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, Piras et al. discloses that the sparger comprises: a pipe 40 installed in the reactor 11 in a direction in which a length direction of the sparger 40 intersects an axial direction of the stirrer (see FIG. 1); and a bubble formation portion (i.e., discharge nozzles or “spargers” (not shown); see paragraph [0019]) provided at an end of the pipe to supply the gas phase raw material in a bubble state toward the impeller 26.
Regarding claim 11, Piras et al. discloses that the sparger 40 is provided as one sparger (see FIG. 1) at a lower end of the reactor (i.e., at a lower section 14 of the vessel 11) and installed on a sidewall portion of the reactor 11.
Regarding claim 12, Piras et al. discloses that sparger comprises: a pipe 40 installed in the reactor 11 with a length direction thereof being oriented in a direction of a diameter of the reactor (see FIG. 1); and a bubble formation portion (i.e., discharge nozzles or “spargers” (not shown); see paragraph [0019]) provided at an end of the pipe 40 to supply the gas phase raw material in a bubble state toward a downstream side of the impeller 26 (i.e., the lower impeller 26 comprises a radial impeller, and the agitation device is configured to operate in a “downward pumping mode”, see paragraph [0016]; therefore, the gas is supplied by the sparger 40 in a bubble state towards a downstream side of the impeller 26).
Regarding claim 15, Piras et al. discloses that the impeller (i.e., configured as a combination of an asymmetrical radial impeller and axial impeller; see paragraph [0016]) comprises: a radial-type impeller or an axial-type impeller installed at a lower end (i.e., a lower impeller 26 comprising a radial impeller); and one or a plurality of impellers of the same or different type installed on a top of the impeller installed on the lower end (i.e., an upper impeller 24 comprising a different, pitched blade (axial) impeller).
Claims 8, 10-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Weetman (US 6,250,797).
Regarding claim 8, Weetman discloses a batch reactor (i.e., a stirred reactor for gas-to-liquid dispersion and mass transfer; see FIG. 1) comprising:
a reactor (i.e., a tank 12) configured to receive a liquid phase raw material;
a stirrer having an impeller on a rotational shaft (i.e., a stirrer comprising impellers 18, 20, 22 attached to a shaft 34) installed in the reactor 12 in a height direction (i.e., vertically) and configured to rotate (i.e., the shaft 34 is rotatable by a motor provided at 36); and
a sparger (i.e., a pipe 40 connected to a sparge ring 38) allowing a gas phase raw material to be distributed to the liquid phase raw material in the reactor 12 by an operation of the stirrer so that the gas phase raw material is supplied to the liquid phase raw material to produce a reaction product, wherein the sparger 38 is configured to supply the gas phase raw material in at least one direction of an axial direction of the stirrer and a circumferential direction of the reactor (i.e., a gas is released in an axial direction of the stirrer 18, 20, 22, 34 via holes located on an upper surface of the sparge ring 38).
The further recitations with respect to reactor receiving a solvent in a liquid phase, distributing hydrogen chloride in a gas phase, and producing xylene diisocynate are directed to an intended manner of operating the batch reactor, and the limitations do not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The batch reactor of Weetman would have been operable in the manner as claimed.
Regarding claim 10, Weetman (see FIG. 1) discloses that the sparger comprises: a pipe 40 installed in the reactor 12 in a direction in which a length direction of the sparger intersects an axial direction of the stirrer (i.e., the longitudinal axis of the pipe 40 intersects the vertical axis of the shaft 34); and a bubble formation portion (i.e., the sparge ring 38 portion with holes on an upper surface thereof) provided at an end of the pipe 40 to supply the gas phase raw material in a bubble state toward the impeller 22.
Regarding claim 11, Weetman (see FIG. 1) discloses that the sparger 40,38 is provided as one sparger at a lower end of the reactor 12 (see figure) and installed on a sidewall portion of the reactor (i.e., the pipe 40 of the sparger is installed on a sidewall portion of the tank 12).
Regarding claim 12, Weetman et al. (see FIG. 1) discloses that the sparger comprises: a pipe 40 installed in the reactor 12 with a length direction thereof being oriented in a direction of a diameter of the reactor; and a bubble formation portion (i.e., the sparge ring 38 with holes on an upper surface thereof) provided at an end of the pipe 40 to supply the gas phase raw material in a bubble state toward a downstream side of the impeller (i.e., a gas is released via holes on an upper surface of the sparge ring 38, and the gas flows upward and toward a downstream side of the impellers 22,20,18, along a flow direction indicated by arrows 44).
Regarding claim 13, Weetman (see FIG. 1) discloses that the sparger 40,38 comprises: a ring (i.e., the sparge ring 38 portion) provided in a circular shape on the lower side of the stirrer (see figure); and a bubble formation portion provided on an upper side of the ring (i.e., holes on the upper surface of the sparge ring 38) and configured to supply the gas phase raw material in a bubble state toward a downstream side of the impeller (i.e., a gas is released via the holes on an upper surface of the sparge ring 38, and the gas flows upward and towards a downstream side of the impellers 22,20,18, along an axial flow direction as indicated by the arrows 44).
Regarding claim 15, Weetman (see FIG. 1) discloses that the impeller comprises: a radial-type impeller or an axial-type impeller (i.e., an axial type impeller 22) installed at a lower end; and one or a plurality of impellers of the same or different type (i.e., axial type impellers 20 and 18, which are of the same type as the axial type impeller 22) installed on a top of the impeller installed on the lower end.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claims 8, 9, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee (US 5,102,630) in view of Da Silva (US 5,030,362).
Regarding claim 8, Lee discloses a batch reactor (see FIG. 1-2) comprising:
a reactor 10 receiving a liquid phase raw material (i.e., via conduit 25);
a stirrer having an impeller on a rotational shaft (i.e., an agitator comprising an upper impeller element 13 and a lower impeller element 14 mounted on a rotatable shaft 15) installed in the reactor in a height direction (i.e., vertically) and being rotatable; and
a gas inlet line 18 with a gas nozzle for allowing a gas phase raw material to be distributed to the liquid phase raw material in the reactor 10 by an operation of the stirrer 13,14,15 so that the gas phase raw material is supplied to the liquid phase raw material to produce a reaction product, wherein the gas inlet line 18 is configured to supply the gas phase raw material in at least one direction of an axial direction of the stirrer and a circumferential direction of the reactor (see figure).
Lee, however, fails to disclose that the gas inlet line 18 comprises a sparger.
Da Silva discloses a reactor (i.e., a tank 20, such as a reactor; see FIG. 2 column 3, lines 40-43) comprising a stirrer having an impeller 13 and a sparger (i.e., a sparger element 23, in the form of a tubular sintered porous element 27) for allowing a gas phase material to be distributed to a liquid phase material in the reactor by operation of the stirrer.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to substitute a sparger for the gas nozzle of the gas inlet line 18 in the batch reactor of Lee because the sparger would have delivered the gas phase raw material into the liquid phase raw material in the form of very small bubbles (as micro-bubbles) and thereby enhanced the gas-liquid contact between the gas and the liquid phase raw materials in the reactor, as taught by Da Silva.
The further recitations with respect to reactor receiving a solvent in a liquid phase, distributing hydrogen chloride in a gas phase, and producing xylene diisocynate are directed to an intended manner of operating the batch reactor, and the limitations do not structurally differentiate the claimed apparatus from the prior art apparatus. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The modified batch reactor of Lee would have been operable in the manner as claimed.
Regarding claim 9, Lee discloses that the gas inlet line 18 is provided in plural along a circumferential direction of the stirrer and installed on a sidewall portion of the reactor 10 at a predetermined interval (i.e., in a preferred embodiment, there are four similar gas inlet lines 18, with one in each quadrant of the reactor; see column 4, lines 42-47). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to likewise substitute a sparger, as taught by Da Silva, for each of the gas nozzles of the plural gas inlet lines 18 in the modified batch reactor of Lee because the spargers would have delivered the gas phase raw material into the liquid phase raw material in the form of very small bubbles (as micro-bubbles) and thereby enhanced the gas-liquid contact between the gas and the liquid phase raw materials in the reactor, as taught by Da Silva.
Regarding claim 14, De Silva further discloses that the sparger is formed as a sintered porous type (i.e., the sparger element 23 comprises a sintered porous element 27 prepared by sintering particles of metal or the like to form a solid porous structure; see FIG. 3-5; column 4, lines 1-18) to supply the gas phase material in a bubble state (i.e., as very small gas bubbles, or micro bubbles) in the liquid phase material.
Regarding claim 15, Lee (see FIG. 1-2; column 4, lines 27-41) discloses that the impeller comprises: a radial-type impeller or an axial-type impeller installed at a lower end (i.e., the lower impeller 14 is an axial-type impeller, wherein the lower impeller 14 comprises a plurality of blades 29 pitched at an angle, so that the liquid is moved axially upon the rotation of the shaft 15); and one or a plurality of impellers of the same or different type installed on a top of the impeller installed on the lower end (i.e., the upper impeller 13 is a radial-type impeller, wherein the upper impeller 13 comprises a plurality of blades 27 oriented in a plane which is radial to the shaft 15, so that the liquid will be moved radially upon rotation of the shaft 15).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Piras et al. (US 2011/0144384) in view of Da Silva (US 5,030,362).
Piras et al. (see paragraph [0019]) discloses that the sparger 40 supplies the gas phase raw material in a bubble state towards the impeller 26. Piras et al., however, fails to disclose that the sparger 40 is formed as a sintered porous type.
Da Silva discloses a reactor (i.e., a tank 20, such as a reactor; see FIG. 2 column 3, lines 40-43) comprising a stirrer having an impeller 13 and a sparger (i.e., a sparger element 23) for allowing a gas phase material to be distributed to a liquid phase material in the reactor by operation of the stirrer; wherein, specifically, the sparger is formed as a sintered porous type (i.e., the sparger element 23 comprises a sintered porous element 27 prepared by sintering particles of metal or the like to form a solid porous structure; see FIG. 3-5; column 4, lines 1-18) to supply the gas phase material in a bubble state (i.e., as very small gas bubbles, referred to as micro bubbles) into the liquid phase material.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the sparger as a sintered porous type sparger in the batch reactor of Piras et al. because the sintered porous type sparger would have delivered the gas phase raw material into the liquid phase raw material in the form of very small bubbles (as micro-bubbles) and thereby enhance the gas-liquid contact between the gas and the liquid phase raw materials in the reactor, as taught by Da Silva.
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Weetman (US 6,250,797) in view of Da Silva (US 5,030,362).
Weetman (see FIG. 1) discloses that the sparger 40,38 supplies the gas phase raw material in a bubble state towards the impeller 22. Weetman, however, fails to disclose that the sparger 40,38 is “formed as a sintered porous type”.
Da Silva discloses a reactor (i.e., a tank 20, such as a reactor; see FIG. 2 column 3, lines 40-43) comprising a stirrer having an impeller 13 and a sparger (i.e., a sparger element 23) for allowing a gas phase material to be distributed to a liquid phase material in the reactor by operation of the stirrer; wherein, specifically, the sparger is formed as a sintered porous type (i.e., the sparger element 23 comprises a sintered porous element 27 prepared by sintering particles of metal or the like to form a solid porous structure; see FIG. 3-5; column 4, lines 1-18) to supply the gas phase material in a bubble state (i.e., as very small gas bubbles, referred to as micro bubbles) into the liquid phase material. While not shown, Da Silva further discloses that the sparger can comprise “… a sintered porous material (for instance, metal, ceramic, glass or plastic) in the form of a ring…” (see column 2, lines 53-56).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to form the sparger as a sintered porous type sparger in the batch reactor of Weetman because the sintered porous type sparger would have delivered the gas phase raw material into the liquid phase raw material in the form of very small bubbles (as micro-bubbles) and thereby enhance the gas-liquid contact between the gas and the liquid phase raw materials in the reactor, as taught by Da Silva.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: Gnagnetti et al. (US 6,984,753) discloses the “agitation device including a combination of an asymmetrical radial impeller and axis impeller” as described by Piras et al., above. Saeki (JP 2004/035490 A), Denton et al. (US 3,287,387), and Slocombe et al. (US 2,680,127) are cited to further illustrate the state of the art.
* * *
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A LEUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-1449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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.
/JENNIFER A LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights