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 with traverse of Group I (claims 1-6) in the reply filed on August 26, 2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that there is no serious additional burden on the examiner to examine the non-elected claim. This is not found persuasive because the non-elected claim is drawn to production method steps and parameters that are not recited in the elected claims. A search of the elected claims will not include searching for the method of making and will not overlap significantly.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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, 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by WO 2014/156294 A1.
WO ‘294 teaches a separation membrane comprising a cylindrical porous support (14), a dense part (18) covering the support from a boundary position (18a) to one side (18b), and a separation membrane (16) covering the support from the boundary portion to the other side and covering the dense part in a vicinity of the boundary position, wherein an angle between the support and lines connecting the dense part and the membrane is less than 45° in an area of 0.1 mm. This angle will be the same at four measurement positions around the perimeter of the membrane. The thickness of the membrane is about 0.1 micron to tens of microns and the seal extends to cover an end surface of the support on one side (see figures 1-2, pages 2-5 of the machine-generated English translation).
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.
Claim(s) 3 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO ‘294.
WO ‘294 discloses all of the limitations of the claims except that the dense part has a specified surface roughness. Absent a proper showing of criticality or unexpected results, the surface roughness of the dense part is considered to be a parameter that would have been routinely optimized by one having ordinary skill in the art in order to provide a sufficiently smooth surface for sealing and flow characteristics of the membrane.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO ‘294 in view of JP 2016043294.
WO ‘294 discloses all of the limitations of the claim except that the dense part has a closed porosity not higher than 10%. JP ‘294 discloses a ceramic filter comprising a porous substrate, a membrane filter formed on the substrate, and a seal layer formed on an end of the substrate, in which the strength of the seal location is improved by the seal layer being a dense ceramic having a porosity of 10% of less (paragraph 0028 of the machine-generated English translation). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify the filter of WO ‘294 by using the seal porosity of JP ‘294 to improve corrosion resistance and strength.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. The additional references listed on the attached PTO-892 form disclose filter seal arrangements.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANK LAWRENCE whose telephone number is (571)272-1161. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30am-7pm.
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.
/FRANK M LAWRENCE JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
fl