DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to an application filed with the US on 04/11/2023 and having an Effective Filing Date of 04/11/2023, in which claims 1-19 are pending and ready for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement(s) (IDS) submitted on 11 APRIL 2023 is/are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and has/have been considered. An initialed copy of Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) 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 “a DCMD condenser” and “a condenser”, it is not clear if these are the same or different condensers; this further leads to confusion with all subsequent recitations of “the condenser”, i.e. found in claims 1, 4, and 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is suggested that “a condenser” be amended to “an AD compressor”, and subsequent “the condenser”’s be amended to reflect which condenser they are intended to refer to.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the condenser is … configured to pass a heated condensed seawater stream to the adsorber” and “the condenser is … configured to pass heated desorbed seawater stream to the desorber”. However, it is the Examiner’s understanding of the AD cycle that the seawater is heated to desorb it from the beds and passed to the condenser to be condensed to purified water (i.e. one way), where no water is passed from the condenser to the adsorber/desorber beds. It is thus not clear if the claimed invention works in a different way or if it is incorrectly claimed.
Similarly, Claim 1 recites the limitation “a hot water tank … configured to heat the desorbed sweater stream leaving a desorber outlet and return the heated desorbed seawater stream leaving the desorber outlet to the desorber through a desorber inlet”; where it is the Examiner’s understanding of the AD cycle that the hot water tank uses a closed loop of separate heating fluid to heat the desorber bed, i.e. not using the desorbed seawater to cycle to the hot want tank and be heated directly; this also appears to be what is shown in Applicants’ Figures 1 and 2. It is thus not clear if the claimed invention works in a different way or if it is incorrectly claimed.
Similarly, Claim 1 recites the limitation “the adsorber is … configured to pass a cooled evaporated seawater stream to the evaporator via a first valve”, and “the desorber is … configured to pass a cooled evaporated seawater stream to the evaporator via a third valve”; where it is the Examiner’s understanding of the AD cycle that the seawater is heated in the evaporator and passed to the adsorber to be adsorbed by the adsorber bed, where no water is passed from the adsorber or desorber to the evaporator. It is thus not clear if the claimed invention works in a different way or if it is incorrectly claimed.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the coolant tank is configured to return a separated saltwater stream to the cold compartment”. It is not clear how saltwater could be on the cold side of the membrane distillation unit, as the membrane separates freshwater to the cold side. Correction is required.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “wherein the first DCMD module outlet and the second DCMD module are disposed at the same height relative to a first membrane in the first DCMD module and a second membrane in the second DCMD module, respectively.” It is not clear how the first DCMD module outlet can be at the same height as the second DCMD module, relative to their respective membranes. Correction is required.
Claims 2-19 are rejected for depending form an indefinite claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Adsorption desalination generally is known from the prior art (RIAZ, A review of recent advances in adsorption desalination technologies) and direct contact membrane distillation is generally known from the prior art (ASHOOR, "Principles and applications of direct contact membrane distillation (DCMD): A comprehensive review."). However, the use of the two together as claimed is not disclosed by the prior art.
The closest prior art to Applicants’ invention is US2020/0148558 (GHAFFOUR). GHAFFOUR discloses a combination of membrane distillation, which may be direct contact membrane distillation, and adsorption desalination, which comprises most of the same main components as the system as claimed (i.e. a membrane distillation module, a seawater tank, an AD condenser, an AD evaporator, a hot water tank, an adsorber and a desorber), but they are not fluidly connected in the manner as claimed. Specifically, while similar systems disclose seawater being sent first through a condenser and/or adsorber, i.e. to cool the condenser and desorber/dehumidifier while heating the seawater (see ETTOUNEY, Design and analysis of humidification dehumidification desalination process), to modify GHAFFOUR to do so would not have been obvious because GHAFFOUR uses a separate fluid circuit of cooling liquid (see cooling water tank 17 and cooling tower 16) for the adsorber, a feed preheater 2 that uses a closed loop heating fluid 21, and a closed loop heat exchange 14 between the AD evaporator and AD condenser; so to make the modification to cool the condenser and desorber/dehumidifier while heating the seawater would involve a substantial redesign of multiple parts of the process which would be neither simple or predictable. Thus claim 1 is seen to contain allowable subject matter.
Claim 1 (as thus also its dependent claims 2-19) 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Eric J. McCullough whose telephone number is (571)272-8885. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00-6:00.
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, Benjamin Lebron can be reached at 571-272-0475. 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.
/ERIC J MCCULLOUGH/ Examiner, Art Unit 1773
/BENJAMIN L LEBRON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1773