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 Objections
Claims 16, 18, 23, and 25-27 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 16 line 8, "them." Replace the pronoun "them" with the proper antecedent to recite the language used in the claim precisely.
Claim 18 line 2, “[[(2)]]” for consistency.
Claim 18 line 2, cubic meters per hour (m3/h).
Claim 23 line 1, “inlet[[)]]”
Claims 25-27, said at least one grounded droplet collector for consistency.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 16-28 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 16 recites the phrase "configured to charge aerosols contained in a stream of supplied air and to obtain aerosols having negative air ions" in lines 4-5. The phrase makes claim 16 unclear and is confusing, and the claim does not define how said at least one emitter electrode of corona discharge is configured to obtain aerosols having negative air ions [emphasis added]. The specification teaches "[i]n the first stage, aerosols in process air flow are negatively charged with emitter electrode of corona discharge" at page 19 paragraph 1. Consider amending as follows: “to obtain the charged aerosols having negative
Accordingly, limitations 17-28 that depend from claim 16 are also rejected.
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 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.
Claim(s) 16-22, 24-26, and 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘690 (DE 2533690 A) in view of Pilat (GB 1523142 A)
Regarding claim 16, as interpreted, DE ‘690 discloses an apparatus (Fig. 3; “Figure 3 shows an electrostatic scrubber similar to Figure 2…with the contaminated gases flowing in the opposite direction to that of the cleansing liquid sprays”) for electrostatic deactivation and removal of hazardous aerosols from air, said apparatus comprising
an ionization zone (see Fig. 3) comprising
at least one emitter electrode of corona discharge (corona discharge aerosol particle charger 36), configured to charge aerosols contained in a stream of supplied air and to obtain aerosols having negative air ions,
a spraying zone (see Fig. 3) arranged above the ionization zone, comprising
at least one electro-spraying electrode (Fig. 3; “The cleansing liquid enters through pipes 44 and continues on to the spray nozzles 46…inserted into the pipes 44 are insulated high voltage leads 48, from a power supply 38”), configured to generate positively charged droplets (“The cleaning liquid is directed downwardly via pipes 44, then charged at the uncovered ends of high voltage leads 48, and thereafter emitted through the spray nozzles 46 as electrostatically positively charged droplets”) and to absorb said charged aerosols by contacting [the charged aerosols] with said generated positively charged droplets (“The charged aerosol particles are collected upon the surfaces charged to the opposite polarity, which are the surfaces on either or both of the liquid droplets or the bubble. Aerosol particle collection will occur upon both the inside and outside surfaces of the respective bubbles.”),
a high-voltage circuit configured to provide directly charged liquid (Fig. 3; “…gases pass through an aerosol particle charger 36 which utilizes a high voltage power supply 38 creating direct current used in a selected electrostatic charger configuration…aerosol particles, are negatively charged…”) and comprising
a high-voltage direct current source having positive polarity (38 at right side of Fig. 3) and
a high-voltage direct current source having negative polarity (38 at left side of Fig. 3),
wherein the high-voltage direct current source having positive polarity is connected to the at least one electro-spraying electrode (Fig. 3; “The cleansing liquid enters through pipes 44 and continues on to the spray nozzles 46…inserted into the pipes 44 are insulated high voltage leads 48, from a power supply 38”), and the high-voltage direct current source having negative polarity is connected to the at least one emitter electrode of corona discharge (corona discharge aerosol particle charger 36 in Fig. 3).
The primary reference DE ‘690 does not appear to disclose a grounded circuit comprising a collection device. Pilat is analogous art (p. 1, ll. 57-65) and does teach a grounded circuit comprising a collection device; whereas, the collection device is interpreted as non-discharge electrode, and therefore is connected to ground (p. 5, ll. 60-62).
a grounded circuit (p. 5, ll. 60-62) configured to provide electrically grounded liquid (Figs. 6-9) and comprising
a collection device (Fig. 3) for collecting said negative air ions and said absorbed aerosols from said spraying zone, wherein the apparatus is characterized in that
the collection device further comprises
at least one grounded droplet collector (a non-discharge electrode, p. 5, ll. 60-62), wherein the at least one grounded droplet collector (Fig. 3) is configured to accommodate the ionization zone and the spraying zone (whereas Fig. 3 is similar to Fig. 2 but with the contaminated gases flowing in the opposite direction), so that the high-voltage circuit comprising the directly charged liquid is separated from the grounded circuit comprising the electrically grounded liquid during an operational sequence of the apparatus (Figs. 6-9; p. 2, ll. 15-32; illustrates a non-discharging electrode that is grounded).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to combine the teachings of the primary reference DE ‘690 and the teaching of Pilat to improve collection efficiency with a reasonable expectation of success.
The teaching of the prior art is relied upon as set forth above for claims 17-22, 24-26, and 28 that follow:
Regarding claim 17, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses wherein said ionization zone further comprises at least one air inlet for guiding said stream of supplied air past said emitter electrode of corona discharge (Figs. 2, 3).
Regarding claim 18, the teaching of the prior art is relied upon as set forth above and teaches said aerosols are charged in said ionization zone. The prior are does not appear to teach a time period of less than 1 second in air flow volumes starting from 50 cubic meters per hour (m3/h). However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention select the material to optimize air flow volumes starting from 50 cubic meters per hour (m3/h) to control the delivery rate designed for the efficacy of the apparatus since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable like the volumetric flow rate involves only routine skill in the art.
Regarding claim 19, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses the at least one electro-spraying electrode is configured to eject droplets in at least one direction across said stream of supplied air (Figs. 3, 6-9).
Regarding claim 20, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses said spraying zone further comprises at least one air outlet (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 21, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses the at least one grounded droplet collector is configured to be in the form of two opposed walls or a surrounding cylinder (Fig. 3 illustrates two opposed chamber walls).
Regarding claim 22, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses said collection device further comprises an ion collector electrode which is disposed between said ionization zone and said spraying zone (Fig. 2, whereas Fig. 3 is similar to Fig. 2 but with the contaminated gases flowing in the opposite direction).
Regarding claim 24, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses said air outlet includes at least one exhaust fan (p. 3, l. 95).
Regarding claim 25, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses said at least one grounded droplet collector but do not explicitly disclose a hydrophilic surface. Nonetheless, if the charge liquid for the apparatus were water, It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to have a hydrophilic surface for collection efficiency of the at least one grounded droplet collector with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 26, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat discloses said at least one grounded droplet collector extends over spraying zone and ionization zone (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 28, each of DE ‘690 and Pilat does not appear to disclose at least one liquid regenerative system. However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to include a regenerative system for the apparatus in order to recycle liquid to reduce operational expenses. Regarding the series of pumps and valves, at least one collection, sedimentation, and storage tanks for the at least one liquid regenerative system, these are known unit operational devices used to maintain fluid flow and direction of flow of fluid (or liquid) for unit operational systems, like the apparatus of the current invention, that would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to utilize these known unit operation devices to recycle the liquid of a regenerative system with these devices. See evidentiary reference US 4204844 A (col. 5. ll. 15-33).
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘690 (DE 2533690 A) and Pilat (GB 1523142 A) taken with DE ‘233 (DE 2632233).
For claim 23, the teaching of the prior art is relied upon as set forth above but does not appear to teach said air inlet includes at least one suction fan. Prior art DE ‘233 discloses an air inlet includes at least one suction fan (Fig. 10). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to include the suction fan of DE ‘233 to control the inlet flow rate of the air stream.
Claim(s) 27 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE ‘690 (DE 2533690 A) and Pilat (GB 1523142 A) taken Bodo (US 3690043 A).
For claim 27, the teaching of the prior art is relied upon as set forth above but does not appear to teach said electro-spraying electrode has a shape of a perforated pipe. Bodo discloses said electro-spraying electrode that has a shape of a perforated pipe (col. 1, 9-15). It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to substitute the teaching of Bodo for the electro-spraying electrode of the prior art as art-recognized equivalents (see MPEP § 2144.06). Regarding said electro-spraying electrode arranged parallel to said grounded droplet collector, this arrangement is considered location of parts. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the current invention to locate said electro-spraying electrode arranged parallel to said grounded droplet collector, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art and relocating would not have changed the function of said electro-spraying electrode arranged parallel to said grounded droplet collector. See MPEP § 2144.04(VI-C).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure follow:
US 2788081 A: ESP a gas stream having particles comprising a particle-charging means which imparts electrical charges of one sign to the gas particles and a surface which supports a liquid film with an extended edge for atomizing finely divided liquid particles.
US 20090263293 A1: electric discharge device, includes a discharge electrode, a counter electrode, and an electric power supply for providing an electric potential difference between both the electrodes, wherein there is provided a granular particulate ejector configured to eject granular particulates.
US 4193774 A: electrostatic aerosol scrubber and method of operation.
US 6110256 A: apparatus and method for removing particulates and corrosive gases from a gas stream.
US 3690043 A: perforated electrode for an electrofilter for gases.
US 6632267 B1: a method and device for separating materials in the form of particles and/or drops from a gas flow, in which method the gas flow is directed through a collection chamber the outer walls of which are grounded.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SONJI TURNER whose telephone number is (571)272-1203. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 10:00 am - 2:00 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, 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.
/SONJI TURNER/Examiner, Art Unit 1776 October 18, 2025
/Jennifer Dieterle/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights