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 .
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.
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, 3, 5-8, 13-15, 17, 19, and 21-22 and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Johnston et al (US 20160360745; hereinafter Johnston).
As regarding claim 1, Johnston discloses the claimed invention for a method of filtration in a process vessel (claim 10) comprising: providing a filtration zone in the process vessel (claim 10), wherein the filtration zone comprises a plurality of treated filter media (claim 10); passing a fluid stream through the filtration zone; and removing one or more contaminants from the fluid stream with the treated filter media ([0132]), wherein each of the treated filter media has an internal void space formed therein, and wherein a conditioner ([0144]) is embedded within the internal void space prior to installing the treated filter media into the vessel such that the internal void space is filled with the conditioner in the range from 1% - 90% by volume ([0132] – 25-50%), and wherein the conditioner comprises one or more of iron sulfide, coke, bio-char, charcoal, carbon black, and phosphate salts ([0144]).
As regarding claim 3, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention for wherein the conditioner consists of one or more of iron sulfide, coke, bio-char, charcoal, carbon black, and phosphate salts ([0144]).
As regarding claims 5-8, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention for wherein the internal void space is filled with the conditioner in the range of 5% - 80%, 5% - 30%, 40% - 60%, or 50% - 90% by volume ([0132] - 25-50%).
As regarding claim 13, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention for wherein the conditioner comprises pre-existing particles previously entrained in a filter media prior to use (abstract and claim 10).
As regarding claim 14, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention for wherein the conditioner comprises particles added to a filter media prior to use that then become entrained prior to loading in the process vessel (abstract and claim 10).
Claims 15, 17, 19, and 21-22 and 27-28 are likewise rejected for reasons analogous to those set forth for claims 1, 3, 5, 7 and 13-14.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 2, 4, 8-12, 20, 23-26, and 29-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Johnston et al (US 20160360745; hereinafter Johnston).
As regarding claims 2 and 4, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the contaminants comprise (or consist of) one or more of iron sulfide, coke, bio-char, charcoal, carbon black, and phosphate salts. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the contaminants comprise (or consist of) one or more of iron sulfide, coke, bio-char, charcoal, carbon black, and phosphate salts in order to protect equipment, improve product quality, prevent catalyst fouling, avoid clogging, enhance safety, and keep the process efficiency, since it was known in the art as shown in Glover et al (US 20050255014; hereinafter Glover; [0008]).
As regarding claim 8, alternatively, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the internal void space is filled with the conditioner in the range of 50% - 90% by volume in order to enhance the performance of the treated filter media, since it has been held that where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, discovering the optimum or workable ranges involves only routine skill in the art. In re Aller, 105 USPQ 233.
As regarding claims 9-12, Johnston discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Johnston discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the process vessel is a reactor, a guard vessel, a sorbent bed, or a feed filter. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the process vessel is a reactor, a guard vessel, a sorbent bed, or a feed filter in order to enhance contaminant removal, protect downstream equipment, improve process consistency and extend media life, since it was known in the art as shown in Glover et al (US 11052363; hereinafter Glover; col 8 ln 53-55).
Claims 20, 23-26, and 29-30 are likewise rejected for reasons analogous to those set forth for claims 1-2, and 8-12 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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 L. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights