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 I (claims 1-13) and Species B (figure 2) in the reply filed on 4/8/2026 is acknowledged.
Applicant alleges claims 1-4 and 8-13 read on the elected species B of figure 2. However, claim 4 is further identified as reading on a non-elected species, in particular, wherein the multiplicity of openings, grids and/or rod-shaped elements of the orifice plate device are arranged offset one behind another in the direction of the secondary fluid flow, in particular transversely with respect to the direction of flow as shown in figure 1C and not shown in the elected species of figure 2. Accordingly claim 4 is withdrawn to a non-elected species embodiment.
Claims 1-3 and 8-13 are taken up for examination upon the elected invention and species. Claims 4-7 and 14-16 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention and species embodiment, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 4/8/2026.
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 2, 10, 11 and 13 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 2, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 2 recites the broad recitation “by up to 85%”, and the claim also recites “in particular by up to 40%” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Regarding claim 10, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 10 recites the broad recitation “less than 180°”, and the claim also recites “in particular in the range between 150 and 90° or in particular in the range between 30 and 85°” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Regarding claim 11, a broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 11 recites the broad recitation “less than three times”, and the claim also recites “in particular less than double” which is the narrower statement of the range/limitation. The claim(s) are considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claims.
Regarding claim 13, it is unclear what structure “it” is referring to in line 1. As such the claim is indefinite for failing to distinctly claim the invention.
Regarding claim 13, it is unclear what distance the mixed flow is being measured from. As such the claim is indefinite for failing to distinctly claim the invention.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Maus et al. (U.S. Patent No. 8,528,884).
Regarding claim 1, Maus et al. discloses a mixing device (figure 2, device 14) for a primary fluid flow in a first pipe (figure 2, flow 18; column 7, lines 1-12) with at least one secondary fluid flow for obtaining a mixed flow (figure 2, droplets 6, 7 and regions 16, 17), wherein
a mixing point of the fluid flows is arranged in each case at the connection of the first pipe to at least one second pipe for the at least one secondary fluid flow (figure 2, region 17 at connection of guide 27; column 7, lines 13-48), and an orifice plate device for a targeted reduction in the flow cross section is arranged upstream of the mixing point in at least one second pipe (figure 1, nozzle 1 with openings 4 and 5, in second pipe 27 as shown in figure 2; see also figure 4, plage 10 with openings 4 and 5)
or
the first pipe has a wall section with an orifice plate device for the targeted reduction in the flow cross section, through which orifice plate device the at least one secondary fluid flow flows into the first pipe during operation (directed to non-elected species embodiment not being examined).
Regarding claim 2, Maus et al. discloses wherein the orifice plate device reduces the free flow cross section for the at least one secondary fluid flow in each case by up to 85%, in particular by up to 40% (figures 1 and 4, openings 4 and 5 with cross sections 8 and 9).
Regarding claim 3, Maus et al. discloses wherein the orifice plate device in each case has a multiplicity of openings, grids and/or rod-shaped elements through which the at least one secondary fluid flow can flow (figures 1 and 4, openings 4 and 5).
Regarding claim 8, Maus et al. discloses wherein the primary fluid flow is unchoked at least in the region of the mixing with the at least one secondary fluid flow (figure 2, region 19).
Regarding claim 9, Maus et al. discloses wherein the primary fluid flow and/or the at least one secondary fluid flow have a portion of air or consist of air (column 1, lines 20-58).
Regarding claim 10, Maus et al. discloses wherein the first pipe is connected to the at least one second pipe at an angle, as seen in the direction of flow, of less than 180°, in particular in the range between 150 and 90°, or in particular in the range between 30 and 85° (see figure 2, angle between 15 and 27 not labeled).
Regarding claim 11, Maus et al. discloses wherein the distance between the orifice plate device and the mixing point in the direction of flow is less than three times, in particular less than double, the characteristic diameter of the second pipe (see figure 2, with distances not labeled).
Regarding claim 12, Maus et al. discloses wherein the at least one secondary fluid flow flows through the wall section of the orifice plate device at an angle of 10 to 175° (figure 1, see dotted lines; figure 2, see angles of 6 and 7).
Regarding claim 13, Maus et al. discloses wherein it is configured and designed in such a manner that the mean temperature of the mixed fluid flow at a distance of 10 to 20 times the characteristic diameter of the first pipe deviates by less than 10% from the ideal mixing temperature of the fluid flows (figure 2; columns 2-3, lines 28-56). This limitation is directed to an intended operation of the device dependent on any number of various materials being used without providing any further structural limitations; and it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. 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.”
Claim(s) 1-3, 8-9, and 11-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kim et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,376,850).
Regarding claim 1, Kim et al. discloses a mixing device (title) for a primary fluid flow in a first pipe (figure 2, pipe 110) with at least one secondary fluid flow for obtaining a mixed flow (column 5, lines 48-52), wherein
a mixing point of the fluid flows is arranged in each case at the connection of the first pipe to at least one second pipe for the at least one secondary fluid flow (see figures 2 and 3, arrows and dotted line indicating fluid flows having a mixing point at connection between 110 and 150; column 2, lines 51-56), and an orifice plate device for a targeted reduction in the flow cross section is arranged upstream of the mixing point in at least one second pipe (figure 1, mixer 140 in second pipe 150 with apertures 142c in plate 142as shown in figures 4-7)
or
the first pipe has a wall section with an orifice plate device for the targeted reduction in the flow cross section, through which orifice plate device the at least one secondary fluid flow flows into the first pipe during operation (directed to non-elected species embodiment not being examined).
Regarding claim 2, Kim et al. discloses wherein the orifice plate device reduces the free flow cross section for the at least one secondary fluid flow in each case by up to 85%, in particular by up to 40% (figures 4-7, apertures 42c).
Regarding claim 3, Kim et al. discloses wherein the orifice plate device in each case has a multiplicity of openings, grids and/or rod-shaped elements through which the at least one secondary fluid flow can flow (figures 4-7, 142b and 142c).
Regarding claim 8, Kim et al. discloses wherein the primary fluid flow is unchoked at least in the region of the mixing with the at least one secondary fluid flow (figure 2, pipe 110).
Regarding claim 9, Kim et al. discloses wherein the primary fluid flow and/or the at least one secondary fluid flow have a portion of air or consist of air (abstract; column 1, lines 13-17).
Regarding claim 11, Kim et al. discloses wherein the distance between the orifice plate device and the mixing point in the direction of flow is less than three times, in particular less than double, the characteristic diameter of the second pipe (see figure 2, with distances not labeled).
Regarding claim 12, Kim et al. discloses wherein the at least one secondary fluid flow flows through the wall section of the orifice plate device at an angle of 10 to 175° (figure 1, see dotted lines; figure 2, see angles of dotted lines from 140).
Regarding claim 13, Kim et al. discloses wherein it is configured and designed in such a manner that the mean temperature of the mixed fluid flow at a distance of 10 to 20 times the characteristic diameter of the first pipe deviates by less than 10% from the ideal mixing temperature of the fluid flows (figure 2; columns 2-3, lines 28-51). This limitation is directed to an intended operation of the device dependent on any number of various materials being used without providing any further structural limitations; and it is noted that neither the manner of operating a disclosed device nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. 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.”
Conclusion
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
Prosecution Insights