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 .
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 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 14-17, 20-21, 23-24 and 39-46 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the rising air bubbles" in line 20. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be considered to recite "the rising [[air]]gas bubbles".
Claims 10 and 24 are considered vague and indefinite as the claims recite subject matter in parenthesis regarding absorption and filtration, respectively. It is unclear if the subject matter within parentheses is part of the claimed subject matter which applicant wishes to protect or is exemplary or optional and not part of the claimed invention. For examination purposes, the subject matter in parentheses is considered to be exemplary. Appropriate action required.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the rising air bubbles" in line 21. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be considered to recite "the rising [[air]]gas bubbles".
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the conically-shaped foam fractionation chamber” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be considered to recite "the conically-shaped
Claim 45 recites the limitation "the surface meniscus region” in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be considered to recite "[[the]]a surface meniscus region".
Claim 46 recites the limitation "the top of the fractionated water column" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes, the claim will be considered to recite "[[the]]a top of [[the]]a fractionated water column".
Claims 2, 4-6, 8-9, 14-16, 20, 23-24 and 39-44 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim.
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.
Claims 45-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Phillips et al. (US 2019/0176101).
Per claim 45, Phillips et al. disclose a method of separating amounts of primary and secondary amphiphilic substances from water which is contaminated initially with a mixture of said substances ([0001] This disclosure relates to an apparatus for separation of a substance from groundwater and to a method for use of the separation apparatus.; [0031] In certain embodiments of the method, the substance is organic. In one form of this, the organic substance is at least one of a perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance (PFAS). In other particular forms of this, the perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance includes one or more of the group comprising: perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS); perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA); perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS); poly fluorinated carboxylic acids, alkyl sulfonates and alkyl sulfonamido compounds; and fluorotelemeric compounds, each having differing carbon chain lengths; and including precursors of these.),
the method comprising the steps of:
introducing a flow of gas into a vessel containing the contaminated water ([0013] In a first aspect, there is provided a method of separating an amount of a substance from groundwater that is present in a body of ground, the method comprising the steps of: introducing a flow of gas into a vertical well containing groundwater,),
aiming to produce a froth layer which rises above an interface with said water
and gas flow, so that the froth layer includes an amount of water and a
concentrated amount of the primary amphiphilic substances when compared
with its initial concentration, which is then removed (Abstract, There is also a gas sparger (26) located near the first end (24) which admits gas into the chamber for inducing groundwater to flow from the first end (24) of the chamber toward a second end upper end, and for producing a froth layer (32) which rises above an interface with the groundwater including a concentrated amount of the substance.); and
continuing to introduce the flow of gas into the vessel containing the
contaminated water, to allow a steady-state enrichment of the amphiphilic
compounds to occur in [[the]]a surface meniscus region of the flotation vessel ([0014] In certain embodiments, the upward flow of gas and the production of the froth layer is continuous.; [0022] In certain embodiments, the step of controlling a physical parameter of the froth layer comprises use of a froth depth regulation device for maintaining the depth of said froth in the well.);
and then
introducing an upward, volumetric displacement of some of the water within
the flotation vessel, to thereby release any remaining primary amphiphilic
substances, and a concentrated amount of the secondary amphiphilic
substances when compared with its initial concentration, which is then
removed from the vessel ([0013] In a first aspect, there is provided a method of separating an amount of a substance from groundwater that is present in a body of ground, the method comprising the steps of: introducing a flow of gas into a vertical well containing groundwater, the well being at least partially located within the ground, and the groundwater in the well in fluid communication with the groundwater located outside of a lower portion of the well; wherein the introduced gas induces an upward flow of groundwater in the well, and produces a froth layer which rises above an interface with the groundwater in an upper portion of the well, the froth layer including a concentrated amount of the substance; [0024] A liquid level sensor can signal whether the in-well groundwater height is too high or too low, and control the flow of the introduced gas to in turn induce more groundwater to be drawn up into the well, as well as displacing an amount of the groundwater to raise the static height of the water level in the well to a desirable dynamic (operating) height and a depth of froth layer which is known to give adequate froth layer drainage characteristics.). Phillips et al. do not explicitly disclose the primary amphiphilic substances being of relatively longer molecular hydrocarbon chain lengths =>C8 compared with the secondary amphiphilic substances =<C6.
It is submitted that it would have been a routine matter of design choice and/or process optimization to incorporate the method of Phillips et al. such that it comprises the primary amphiphilic substances being of relatively longer molecular hydrocarbon chain lengths =>C8 compared with the secondary amphiphilic substances =<C6 in order to, for example, remove a wide range of different compounds in groundwater, depending on the anticipated contaminant loading and the results desired. Further, the examiner notes that applicant has not provided for the record a proper showing (e.g., comparative test data) of any new and unexpected results obtained by treating the recited compounds. It has been held that routine matters of design choice and/or process optimization do not involve and inventive step. See MPEP 2144.
Per claim 46, Phillips et al. disclose wherein the upward volumetric displacement of some of the water in the flotation vessel to remove stratified contaminant amphiphilic compounds within it involves lifting up [[the]]a top of [[the]]a fractionated water column so it spills over a weir ([0025] In certain embodiments, the step of controlling a physical parameter of the froth layer further comprises use of a device for confining the cross-sectional flow path of the froth in the well, resulting in drainage of said froth layer. Apparatus which is shaped to confine or squeeze a rising froth layer can cause additional drainage of the froth layer, and may include changes to the cross-sectional open area of froth flow, for example by the use of froth crowders, narrow necked passages or channels or capillaries, tapered funnels, weir skimmers, for example.), using of one or more of the following water lift devices: an air-filled/water-filled bladder, an aeration pad/disc, air inlet venturis and an air pump ([0021] Another type of bubble generation device can involve inducing air into a flow of groundwater passing through a venturi expander for example, to create fine air bubbles in situ, and then passing this aerated flow into the well.; [0084] The gas supply line 28 is used to charge gas into the chamber 18 via the sparger 26, the gas typically caused to flow by means of a pump or some other source of compressed or pressurised gas which is located above the ground surface level 20 (such as a compressor 56 in FIG. 3, but which is not shown in FIG. 1).).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 34 is allowed.
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-10, 14-17, 20-21, 23-24 and 39-44 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Per claim 1, while it is known in the art to provide a method of separating trace amounts of amphiphilic substances from water which is contaminated with the substances, the method comprising the steps of:
- admitting an amount of the water, which includes an initial concentration of the
substances, into a chamber via an inlet thereinto,
- introducing a flow of gas into the chamber, wherein said introduced gas forms gas bubbles and induces the water in the chamber to flow, to produce a froth layer which is formed at, and which rises above, an interface with the said flow of water and of introduced gas in the chamber, the froth layer including an amount of water and also a concentrated amount of the substances when compared with their initial concentration; and
- removing at least some of the froth layer from an upper portion of the chamber
wherein in use, the method involves operably controlling the location of the
interface at a vertical height in the conically shaped part of the chamber, to result in
conditions where:
the rising [[air]]gas bubbles experience crowding and coalescence in the water below the interface, enhancing formation of the froth layer, to thereby influence recovery of the substances therein; and
the cross-sectional flow path of the froth layer which rises above the interface becomes confined near the upper portion of the chamber, resulting in drainage of water from the froth layer to thereby influence the concentration of the substances therein (see, for example, US 2019/0176101 to Phillips et al.), in the examiner’s opinion the prior art fails to teach or render obvious the method further comprising the chamber being, at least in part, conically shaped by having a progressively smaller internal cross-sectional area when moving in an upward direction over its vertical height.
Per claim 17, while it is known in the art to provide an apparatus for separating trace amounts of amphiphilic substances from water which is contaminated with these substances, the apparatus
comprising:
- a chamber having an inlet which is arranged in use to admit thereinto an
amount of the contaminated water which includes an initial concentration of the
substances,
- a gas introduction device which in use admits gas into the chamber, wherein
the introduced gas inducing forms gas bubbles and induces the water in the chamber to flow to produce a froth layer which is formed at, and which rises above an interface with the said flow of water and introduced gas in the chamber, the froth layer including an amount of water and also a concentrated amount of the substances when compared with its their initial concentration; and
- a removal device in use for removing at least some of the froth layer from an
upper portion of the chamber,
wherein the apparatus is arranged in use to contain with the interface operably
located at a vertical height resulting in
conditions where:
the rising [[air]]gas bubbles experience crowding and coalescence in the water below the interface, enhancing formation of the froth layer thereat; and
the cross-sectional flow path of the froth layer which rises above the interface is
confined near the upper portion of the chamber resulting in drainage of water from the froth layer to thereby influence the concentration of the substances therein (see, US 2019/0176101 to Phillips et al.) in the examiner’s opinion the prior art fails to teach or render obvious the apparatus further comprising the chamber being, at least in part, conically shaped by having a progressively smaller internal cross-sectional area when moving in an upward direction over its vertical height; the interface being in the conically shaped part of the chamber.
Per claim 34, while it is known in the art to provide an apparatus for separating trace amounts of an amphiphilic substance from water which is contaminated with the
substance, the apparatus comprising:
- a chamber; and
- the chamber having an inlet which is arranged in a lowermost region thereof,
and arranged in use to admit thereinto an amount of the contaminated water which
includes an initial concentration of the substance;
- a gas introduction device which in use admits gas into the chamber, the
introduced gas for inducing water to flow within the chamber, and for producing a froth
layer which is formed at, and which rises above an interface with the said flow of water
and introduced gas in the chamber, the froth layer including an amount of water and
also a concentrated amount of the substance when compared with its initial
concentration (see, for example, US 2019/0176101 to Phillips et al.); in the examiner’s opinion the prior art fails to teach or render obvious wherein the chamber is a conical chamber, configured with a progressively smaller, circular internal cross-sectional shape when moving in a vertical direction up a central vertical axis thereof; wherein the apparatus is arranged in use to confine the froth layer near an uppermost narrow width portion of the chamber, and in so doing, to control the water content of the froth layer, which rises above the interface and passes through the narrow width portion, to influence the concentration of the substance therein; and a device for removing at least some of the froth layer from the upper portion of the chamber.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRED PRINCE whose telephone number is (571)272-1165. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 0900-1730.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571)270-3240. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/FRED PRINCE/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1779