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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/17/2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 12 objected to because of the following informalities: the limitation “or a combination thereof” is redundant because preceding limitation recites “biochar alone or in combination with”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by article “Using an Ancient Technology in a New Way: Removing Nutrients in a Lake with Biochar” by Princeton Hydro, published on July 17, 2020, https://princetonhydro.com/biochar/ (hereinafter referred as “Princeton Hydro”).
Regarding claim 12, Princeton Hydro teaches a device consisting of biochar in a porous housing (Refer photograph on page 2; page 3 disclosing “Biochar can be placed in floatation balls, cages, or sacks”).
Regarding claim 18, Princeton Hydro further teaches that the porous housing comprises a sock, sleeve, casing, or blood (refer photograph on page 2).
Claim(s) 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Campos et al. (Environmental Pollution 290 (2021) 118025).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, Campos teaches a device consisting of biochar in a porous housing (refer abstract disclosing “samples of each biochar were buried in permeable bags”).
Claim(s) 12 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beierwaltes et al. (US 2018/0105437).
Regarding claims 12 and 18, Beierwaltes teaches a device consisting of biochar in a porous housing (refer abstract disclosing “loading biochar into a porous container”, “providing the porous container with the biochar”; [0014] disclosing “ biochar 12 is loaded into porous “bags” or container(s) 20a-g, such as but not limited to, mesh bags or otherwise porous containers”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Campos et al. (Environmental Pollution 290 (2021) 118025), in view of Alhooshani et al. (US 2022/0118420A1).
Regarding claim 15, Campos teaches limitations of claim 12 as set forth above. Campos teaches that the porous housing is made of nylon (refer paragraph 2.4 on page 3). Campos does not teach that the porous housing comprises a porous material comprising polypropylene or polyethylene.
lhooshani teaches a device comprising ionic binding material present in a porous casing, wherein the porous housing comprises polypropylene (refer abstract). 310
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988). It would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a known material, polypropylene, for porous housing in the device of campos because Alhooshani establishes that polypropylene is a known material in making of a porous housing to hold ion binding material.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over article “Using an Ancient Technology in a New Way: Removing Nutrients in a Lake with Biochar” by Princeton Hydro, published on July 17, 2020, https://princetonhydro.com/biochar/ (hereinafter referred as “Princeton Hydro”), in view of Alhooshani et al. (US 2022/0118420A1).
Regarding claim 15, Princeton Hydro teaches limitations of claim 12 as set forth above. Princeton Hydro does not teach that the porous housing comprises a porous material comprising polypropylene or polyethylene.
Alhooshani teaches a device comprising ionic binding material present in a porous casing, wherein the porous housing comprises polypropylene (refer abstract). 310
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988). It would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a known material, polypropylene, for porous housing in the device of Princeton Hydro because Alhooshani establishes that polypropylene is a known material in making of a porous housing to hold ion binding material.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beierwaltes et al. (US 2018/0105437), in view of Alhooshani et al. (US 2022/0118420A1).
Regarding claim 15, Beierwaltes teaches limitations of claim 12 as set forth above. Beierwaltes does not teach that the porous housing comprises a porous material comprising polypropylene or polyethylene.
Alhooshani teaches a device comprising ionic binding material present in a porous casing, wherein the porous housing comprises polypropylene (refer abstract). 310
The selection of a known material based on its suitability for its intended use supported a prima facie obviousness determination in Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp., 325 U.S. 327, 65 USPQ 297 (1945). See also In re Leshin, 277 F.2d 197, 125 USPQ 416 (CCPA 1960) (selection of a known plastic to make a container of a type made of plastics prior to the invention was held to be obvious); Ryco, Inc. v. Ag-Bag Corp., 857 F.2d 1418, 8 USPQ2d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 1988). It would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art to select a known material, polypropylene, for porous housing in the device of Beierwaltes because Alhooshani establishes that polypropylene is a known material in making of a porous housing to hold ion binding material.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 12 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Popovic et al. (US 11667546) teaches a water treatment apparatus comprising a porous housing with a sorbent, wherein sorbent is biochar (Refer C9/L39-44).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANAV PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM.
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.
/PRANAV N PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights