DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the application filed on September 28, 2023, and any subsequent filings.
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 1, 8, 10, and 17 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, lines 3 and 5, “containing fluoride” should appear after each recitation of “wastewater” to be consistent with the preamble;
In line 8, line 2, “containing fluoride” should appear after each recitation of “wastewater”;
In Claim 10, lines 3, 5, and 8, “containing fluoride” should appear after each recitation of “wastewater” to be consistent with the preamble; and,
In Claim 17, lines 3, 5, and 8, “containing fluoride” should appear after each recitation of “wastewater” to be consistent with the preamble.
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.
Claims 7-9, 15, and 18 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.
In Claim 7, the percentage purity lacks units such that a person or ordinary skill in the art would not understand if purity is based on mass, volume, moles, or some other unknown quantity.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "water storage tank" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: the relation between the water storage tank and other structure recited in Claim 1 from which the claim depends.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "water storage tank" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being incomplete for omitting essential elements, such omission amounting to a gap between the elements. See MPEP § 2172.01. The omitted elements are: the relation between the water storage tank and other structure recited in Claim 1 from which the claim depends.
In Claim 15, the percentage purity lacks units such that a person or ordinary skill in the art would not understand if purity is based on mass, volume, moles, or some other unknown quantity.
Claim 19 recites metal hydroxide pellets in the scrubbing chamber yet Claim 17 from which the claim depends recites either metal oxide or metal hydroxide such that if the option is metal oxide, then no metal hydroxide pellets would be present.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: independent Claims 1, 10, and 17 distinguish over the closet prior art in that: (1) Prince, International Publication No. WO 2019/083459A1 (page 9, paragraph 3) discloses liquid water contacting an surface inside of the membrane not the claimed outside surface of the membrane; (2) Nakano, et al., Japanese Patent No. 6797632B2 discloses water passes through the membrane (see accompanying machine translation, page 8, paragraph 2) which does not pass through in the claims; and, (3) Ruckenstein, et al., “Composite membranes prepared by concentrated emulsion polymerization and their use for pervaporation separation of water-acetic acid mixtures,” J. of Membrane Sci., 66:205-210, 1992, discloses acetic acid separation not the claimed hydrofluoric acid separation.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICK ORME whose telephone number is (408)918-7585. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 7:30 am - 6:00 pm Pacific Time.
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.
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.
/PATRICK ORME/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779