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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 10/23/2023 and 11/08/2023 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
Claims 1-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg (US 4007921, hereinafter Zingg) in view of Steckling et al. (US PGPub 2019/0076799, hereinafter Steckling) and Patterson (US 4357953), hereinafter Patterson.
Regarding claim 1, Zingg discloses a mixing system, comprising:
an eductor (figure 1, nozzle 38 within section 32) configured to mix a primary fluid with a flowable secondary substance;
a reservoir (tank 29) for the primary fluid;
a supply connection (conduit section 35) configured to be connected to the reservoir (via conduit section 34);
a discharge connection (conduit section 32 near casing 31) to discharge a mixed fluid;
a storage container (solids hopper 11 and compartment 20) for the secondary substance;
a centrifugal pump (pump 36; column 3, line 47, “a centrifugal pump”) configured to convey the primary fluid through the supply connection (see flow arrows in figure 1);
the eductor comprising a primary inlet (within nozzle 38) for the primary fluid, a secondary inlet (section 32) for the secondary substance, an outlet (near casing 31) for the mixed fluid, and a suction chamber (downstream of nozzle 38 within section 32) to suck the secondary substance, the primary inlet connected to the supply connection so that the primary fluid is capable of flowing from the reservoir into the eductor (see figure 1), the outlet connected to the discharge connection so that the mixed fluid is capable of being discharged from the eductor (see figure 1), the secondary inlet disposed at the suction chamber and connected to the storage container (see figure 1).
Zingg is silent to a controller as recited. Steckling teaches a mixing system including an eductor device (figure 1A) that includes a pump (figure 3, pump 59) and a controller (controller 57) configured to control the pump (via line 58). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the controller of Steckling for the purpose of adjusting the pump to provide a desired primary fluid and secondary fluid mixture concentration (Steckling: paragraph 0034).
Zingg is silent to the closing device and sensor as recited. Patterson teaches a mixing system including an eductor device (figure 1) and a closing device (valve 4) with an open position and a closed position is disposed between the suction chamber (hopper 6) and the storage container (vessel 1), the secondary substance capable of flowing from the storage container into the suction chamber when the closing device is in the open position, and the closing device is configured to prevent a flow of the secondary substance from the storage container into the suction chamber in the closed position (column 2, line 65, “Valve 4 provides ON-OFF control of solids flow”); and a sensor (pressure sensor 13) configured to determine a suction power of the eductor, the sensor signal-connected to the controller (via line 21 to system 16). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
It would have further been obvious to have the controller configured to control the centrifugal pump in dependence on the determined suction power for the purpose of providing provide a desired primary fluid and secondary fluid mixture concentration (Steckling: paragraph 0034). It is noted that the controller of Patterson adjusts the flow of liquid into the eductor via valve 9, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that a similar function could be performed with the controller and pump of Steckling.
Regarding claim 2, Zingg discloses the supply connection is connected to the reservoir for the primary fluid, and the discharge connection is connected to the reservoir so that the mixed fluid is capable of being returned from the outlet of the eductor into the reservoir (see figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Zingg is silent to a first shut-off valve as recited. Patterson teaches a mixing system including an eductor (figure 1) and a first shut-off valve (valve 15) in the discharge connection. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the valve of Patterson for the purpose of shutting the system down if needed in response to a plugging issue (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 4, Zingg is silent to a second shut-off valve as recited. Patterson teaches a mixing system including an eductor (figure 1) and a second shut-off valve (valve 9) positioned at the inlet to the eductor. With the position of the pump in Zingg, the valve of Patterson would be positioned between the pump and the eductor as recited. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the valve of Patterson for the purpose of shutting the system down if needed in response to a plugging issue (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 5, Zingg is silent to the first and second shut-off valves. Patterson is relied upon, as above, to teach first and second shut-off valves, and further to teach the valves being capable of being controlled by the controller (via lines 20 and 24). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the valves of Patterson for the purpose of shutting the system down if needed in response to a plugging issue (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 6, Zingg is silent to a closing device. Patterson is relied upon, as above, to teach the closing device, and to teach the closing device is capable of being controlled by the controller (via line 19), and of the controller is configured to automatically activate the closing device (column 4, lines 16-22). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 7, Zingg is silent to the controller and closing device. Patterson is relied upon, as above, to teach the controller and closing device, and further to teach the controller is configured to close the supply connection or close the discharge connection, or to set the closing device into the closed position when the suction power falls below a threshold value (column 4, lines 16-22). The cited text indicates that the closing device of Patterson is closed in response to pressure changes, and thus the controller would be fully capable of performing the functions described. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 8, Zingg is silent to a sensor. Patterson is relied upon, as above, to teach a sensor, and further to teach a pressure sensor (pressure sensor 13; column 3, line 44). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 9, Zingg discloses an additional reservoir (figure 1, space within upper portion of conduit section 32) for receiving a fluid flowing back from the discharge connection is disposed between the secondary inlet of the eductor and the closing device.
Claims 10, 11, 16, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg (US 4007921, hereinafter Zingg) in view of Steckling et al. (US PGPub 2019/0076799, hereinafter Steckling) and Patterson (US 4357953), hereinafter Patterson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Stockli et al. (US PGPub 2016/0202707, hereinafter Stockli).
Regarding claim 10, Zingg discloses a centrifugal pump (pump 36; column 3, line 47, “a centrifugal pump”), but is silent to the recited specifics. Stockli teaches a centrifugal pump (figure 8B) wherein the centrifugal pump comprises a pump unit having a pump housing (housing 309) in which a rotor (rotor 302) is provided to convey the primary fluid, and a stator (figure 8D, stator 307) forming an electromagnetic rotary drive with the rotor, the rotor is capable of being magnetically driven without contact and magnetically levitated without contact with respect to the stator (paragraph 0110, “centrifugal wheel 302b is held in a levitating manner contactless by the stator 307 and the magnetically acting forces”), and the pump unit is configured to be inserted into the stator (figures 8A-8D). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have substituted the centrifugal pump of Stockli for that of Zingg because such a simple substitution of one known prior art element for another would have provided only the predictable result of moving fluid through the device. See KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007).
Regarding claims 11, 16, and 17, the cited references disclose, teach or otherwise render obvious the structural parts of the device (Zingg, Steckling, Patterson, and Stockli all teach tubes to move fluid between different parts of their relative devices). The phrase “single-use parts” conveys no additional structure to the eductor, storage container, pump unit, closing device, reservoir, or tubes. As they appear in the prior art any or all of these structures would be fully capable of being “single-use,” as a user could choose to discard them after a single use. Because the phrase “single-use” conveys no additional structure to the parts of the device and all the parts recited in claims 11, 16, and 17 are disclosed, taught, or otherwise rendered obvious in the prior art (see rejections above), claims 11, 16, and 17 are met.
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zingg (US 4007921, hereinafter Zingg) in view of Steckling et al. (US PGPub 2019/0076799, hereinafter Steckling) and Patterson (US 4357953), hereinafter Patterson, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Jones et al. (US PGPub 2023/0110920, hereinafter Jones).
Regarding claim 12, the mixing system according to claim 1 is rendered obvious by Zingg, Steckling, and Patterson (see rejections above), but the references are silent to the specifics of the method. Jones teaches a method of operating a mixing system wherein a primary fluid is conveyed through an eductor and a closing device is set in a closed position unless certain pressure thresholds are met (paragraphs 0221 and 0224). This, in combination with Patterson’s teaches of closing valves if pressures are outside of certain ranges, renders obvious the method as recited. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have closed the closing device until a proper suction pressure is reach to ensure that sufficient suction is available to properly move material through the device without clogging.
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Zingg is silent to the suction power as recited. Patterson teaches the controller and closing device, and that the controller closes the supply connection or closes the discharge connection when the suction power falls below a threshold value (column 4, lines 16-22). The cited text indicates that the closing device of Patterson is closed in response to pressure changes, and thus the controller would be fully capable of performing the functions described. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Regarding claim 15, Zingg is silent to a sensor. Patterson is relied upon, as above, to teach a sensor, and further to teach a pressure sensor (pressure sensor 13; column 3, line 44) that would be used to determine suction power. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Zingg with the closing device and sensor of Patterson for the purpose of determining if there is a plugging issue with the system and shutting it down if needed (Patterson: column 4, lines 16-22).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited prior art generally discloses eductor mixers in fluid recirculation systems.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC C HOWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-9834. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5.
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 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.
/MARC C HOWELL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774