DETAILED ACTION
For this Office action, Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 4-17 are new.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 09 March 2026, with respect to the grounds of rejection of Claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The grounds of rejection have been withdrawn. Applicant has amended the claims in a manner that addresses and overcomes the issues of indefiniteness that required the grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b); therefore, said grounds of rejection are withdrawn upon further consideration.
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 09 March 2026, with respect to the grounds of rejection of Claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The grounds of rejection have bee
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed 09 March 2026, with respect to the rejections of claims 1-3 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made in view of 35 U.S.C. 103 using Liu as a secondary reference. Applicant has amended the claims in a manner that overcomes the teachings of the cited prior art, in particular by requiring the biosorption column to comprise biological material including biomass configured to selectively adsorb at least one metal from the water stream. The cited prior art does not disclose this limitation, and the grounds of rejection from the prior Office action are withdrawn. However, after further search and consideration, new grounds of rejection are made and detailed below. Since the arguments do not address these new grounds of rejection, they are considered moot and will not be further addressed at this time.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-8, 10, 13-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heiss (US Pat Pub. 2005/0139530) in view of Liu et al. (herein referred to as “Liu”, CN 113731371 ) and Santoro et al. (herein referred to as “Santoro”, US Pat Pub. 2022/0267183).
Regarding instant Claim 1, Heiss discloses a device for extracting at least one metal from a water stream (Abstract; Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; coagulant 16 and downstream UF modules in water purifier remove at least one metal) comprising:
at least one pretreatment system, wherein the at least one pretreatment system removes at least one contaminant from the water stream (Figure 1; Paragraph [0027]; Y-type strainer that removes particulate of a certain size); and
at least one chemical precipitation system configured to precipitate the at least one metal from the treated (Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; coagulant 16, wherein coagulant combined with downstream UF modules would remove metal; see also that accumulated precipitate is removed from reservoir 14).
However, the reference is silent on a biosorption column and at least one concentration system. Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media). Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media).
Liu discloses a preparation method of lithium ion adsorption material in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of adsorbing metal using biomass (Abstract; see biomass sol). Liu further discloses the use of a biosorption column comprising biological material including microbial biomass configured to selectively adsorb at least one metal from a water stream that aids in adsorbing and removing lithium from a water source (Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the adsorptive column of Heiss by further including the biosorption column as taught by Liu because Liu discloses the biomass in the column adsorbs and removes lithium from the water source (Liu, Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
However, the combined references are silent on at least one concentration system. Note that Heiss purges solids from the pretreatment system (Paragraph [0027]; see purge ports).
Santoro discloses methods and systems for treating fluid using a biochemical process under vacuum pressure in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating a fluid comprising a particulate fraction and a soluble fraction (Abstract). Santoro further discloses the use of a concentration system in the form of a thermal dewatering system to remove water from solids in order to enhance captured solids concentration and further recover water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the pretreatment system of Heiss to further comprise the concentration system of Santoro because Santoro discloses such a concentration system enhances captured solids concentration and further recovers water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
Regarding instant Claim 2, Heiss discloses a system for extracting at least one metal from a water stream (Abstract; Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; coagulant 16 and downstream UF modules in water purifier remove at least one metal) comprising:
at least one pretreatment system, wherein the at least one pretreatment system removes at least one contaminant from the water stream (Figure 1; Paragraph [0027]; Y-type strainer that removes particulate of a certain size);
at least one chemical precipitation system configured to precipitate the at least one metal from the treated water system (Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; coagulant 16, wherein coagulant combined with downstream UF modules would remove metal); and
at least one control system that runs the at least one chemical precipitation and at least one sensor system (Figure 1; Paragraph [0027]; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; Paragraph [0042]; see ACS/automated control system and bank of sensors).
However, the reference is silent on a biosorption column and at least one concentration system. Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media). Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media).
Liu discloses a preparation method of lithium ion adsorption material in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of adsorbing metal using biomass (Abstract; see biomass sol). Liu further discloses the use of a biosorption column comprising biological material including microbial biomass configured to selectively adsorb at least one metal from a water stream that aids in adsorbing and removing lithium from a water source (Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the adsorptive column of Heiss by further including the biosorption column as taught by Liu because Liu discloses the biomass in the column adsorbs and removes lithium from the water source (Liu, Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
However, the combined references are silent on at least one concentration system. Note that Heiss purges solids from the pretreatment system (Paragraph [0027]; see purge ports).
Santoro discloses methods and systems for treating fluid using a biochemical process under vacuum pressure in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating a fluid comprising a particulate fraction and a soluble fraction (Abstract). Santoro further discloses the use of a concentration system in the form of a thermal dewatering system to remove water from solids in order to enhance captured solids concentration and further recover water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the pretreatment system of Heiss to further comprise the concentration system of Santoro because Santoro discloses such a concentration system enhances captured solids concentration and further recovers water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
Regarding instant Claim 3, Heiss discloses a method of extracting at least one critical metal from a water stream (Abstract; Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; method using water purifier; coagulant and downstream UF modules would remove at least one metal) comprising:
introducing a water stream into a device comprising a pretreatment system;
removing at least one contaminant from the water stream using the pretreatment system (Figure 1; Paragraph [0027]; water source pumping into water purifier; Y-type strainer that removes particulate of a certain size);
precipitating out at least one metal removed from a treated water stream using a chemical precipitation method (Figure 1; Paragraph [0032]; Paragraph [0033]; coagulant 16, wherein coagulant combined with downstream UF modules would remove metal).
However, the reference is silent on a biosorption column and at least one concentration system. Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media). Heiss does disclose a column of adsorptive media (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; hydrocarbon adsorptive media).
Liu discloses a preparation method of lithium ion adsorption material in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of adsorbing metal using biomass (Abstract; see biomass sol). Liu further discloses the use of a biosorption column comprising biological material including microbial biomass configured to selectively adsorb at least one metal from a water stream that aids in adsorbing and removing lithium from a water source (Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the adsorptive column of Heiss by further including the biosorption column as taught by Liu because Liu discloses the biomass in the column adsorbs and removes lithium from the water source (Liu, Paragraph [0002]; Paragraph [0010]).
However, the combined references are silent on at least one concentration system. Note that Heiss purges solids from the pretreatment system (Paragraph [0027]; see purge ports).
Santoro discloses methods and systems for treating fluid using a biochemical process under vacuum pressure in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating a fluid comprising a particulate fraction and a soluble fraction (Abstract). Santoro further discloses the use of a concentration system in the form of a thermal dewatering system to remove water from solids in order to enhance captured solids concentration and further recover water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the pretreatment system of Heiss to further comprise the concentration system of Santoro because Santoro discloses such a concentration system enhances captured solids concentration and further recovers water (Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]).
Regarding instant Claim 4, Claim 1, upon which Claim 4 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss, part of the combined references, discloses wherein the microbial biomass is immobilized in the biosorption column (Figure 1; Paragraph [0029]; media column is located in one location).
Regarding instant Claim 5, Claim 1, upon which Claim 5 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the microbial biomass comprises non-living microbial biomass (Liu, Paragraph [0037]; biomass such as cellulose, gelatin, or sodium alginate may be used).
Regarding instant Claim 6, Claim 1, upon which Claim 6 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the at least one metal comprises lithium (Liu, Abstract; lithium).
Regarding instant Claim 7, Claim 4, upon which Claim 7 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the biosorption column is configured such that the metal is reversibly adsorbed to the immobilized microbial biomass (Abstract; Paragraphs [0002]-[0004]; lithium that is extracted is used for other purposes, implying reversible extraction).
Regarding instant Claim 8, Claim 1, upon which Claim 8 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose comprising a regeneration fluid supply configured to introduce acid and regenerants into the biosorption column (Heiss, Figure 1; Paragraph [0033]; acid and other regenerant materials are introduced to clean the system).
Regarding instant Claim 10, Claim 1, upon which Claim 10 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss further discloses wherein the biosorption column is one of a plurality of adsorption columns and further comprises control valves configured to direct flow among the plurality of adsorption columns and a waste port (Heiss, Figure 1; Paragraphs [0027]-[0029]; see automated valves, cartridges/columns can be accessed upon ACS determination).
Regarding instant Claim 13, Claim 1, upon which Claim 13 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the concentration system comprises a thermal distillation system (Santoro, Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]; see thermal distillation/dewatering system).
Regarding instant Claim 14, Claim 3, upon which Claim 14 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein removing at least a portion of the water from the treated stream using the concentration system increases the concentration of the at least one metal prior to participation (Santoro, Paragraph [0086]; Paragraph [0096]; see thermal distillation/dewatering system concentrates the at least one metal and other contaminants by removing liquid).
Regarding instant Claim 15, Claim 2, upon which Claim 15 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss further discloses wherein the control system monitors at least salinity and turbidity before and after discharge (Figure 1; Paragraph [0034]; see conductivity/salinity sensor and turbidity sensor after UF modules).
Regarding instant Claim 16, Claim 1, upon which Claim 18 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss further discloses wherein the at least one sensor includes a sensor positioned after the biosorption column (Figure 1; Paragraph [0042]; see sensors 46-48 at last location before discharge).
Regarding instant Claim 17, Claim 2, upon which Claim 17 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss discloses wherein the control system is configured to operate system with reduced operator intervention by collecting sensor data and issuing control actions (Heiss, Figure 1; Paragraph [0033]; Paragraph [0042]; other paragraphs; see ACS uses data input from sensors such as ORP, conductivity, etc. to impose control and reduce operator intervention).
Regarding instant Claim 20, Claim 3, upon which Claim 20 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose separating enriched microbial biomass from wastewater after microbial biosorption using biomass harvesting or bioreactor regeneration (Heiss, Figure 1; Paragraph [0030]; Paragraph [0033]; downstream UF modules and storage tank 24, along with further downstream reverse osmosis modules, would separate/harvest biomass from water).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heiss (US Pat Pub. 2005/0139530) in view of Liu et al. (herein referred to as “Liu”, CN 113731371 ) and Santoro et al. (herein referred to as “Santoro”, US Pat Pub. 2022/0267183) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bell (WO 2010/045686).
Regarding instant Claim 9, Claim 1, upon which Claim 9 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, the combined references are silent on the at least one metal being recovered by a pH swing that causes at least one metal to desorb from the microbial biomass.
Bell discloses a cleaning method in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of removing metal ions from an aqueous solution (Abstract). Bell further discloses wherein the method uses a pH swing from acid to base in order to destabilize metal ions in solution and have them precipitate from said solution (Abstract; Page 4 [Page “A”], Lines 1-7).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recovery of the at least one metal of Heiss by further doing so with a pH swing that causes the at least one metal to desorb from the microbial biomass as taught by Bell because Bell discloses such a pH swing destabilizes metal ions in solution and have them precipitate from said solution (Bell, Abstract; Page 4 [Page “A”], Lines 1-7).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heiss (US Pat Pub. 2005/0139530) in view of Liu et al. (herein referred to as “Liu”, CN 113731371 ) and Santoro et al. (herein referred to as “Santoro”, US Pat Pub. 2022/0267183) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Bisson et al. (herein referred to as “Bisson”, US Pat Pub. 2012/0315209).
Regarding instant Claim 11, Claim 3, upon which Claim 11 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, the combined references are silent on removing at least one contaminant from the water stream using the pretreatment system comprises dissolved air flotation (DAF) to remove oil by air bubbling and skimming.
Bisson discloses methods and systems for treating water streams in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating water that may include metals (Abstract; Paragraph [0179]). Bisson further discloses removing at least one contaminant from the water stream using the pretreatment system comprises dissolved air flotation (DAF) to remove oil by air bubbling and skimming as an effective way to remove suspended matter such as oils or solids (Paragraph [0123]).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the pretreatment system of Heiss to further comprise removing at least one contaminant from the water stream using the pretreatment system comprises dissolved air flotation (DAF) to remove oil by air bubbling and skimming as taught by Bisson because Bisson discloses such treatment is an effective way to remove suspended matter such as oils or solids (Bisson, Paragraph [0123]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heiss (US Pat Pub. 2005/0139530) in view of Liu et al. (herein referred to as “Liu”, CN 113731371 ) and Santoro et al. (herein referred to as “Santoro”, US Pat Pub. 2022/0267183) as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kawawa et al. (herein referred to as “Kawawa”, US Pat Pub. 2007/0248512).
Regarding instant Claim 12, Claim 3, upon which Claim 12 is dependent, has been rejected above. Heiss discloses the use of a coagulant to remove dispersed solids (Figure 1; Paragraph [0019]; see coagulant).
However, the references are silent on comprising adding polymer and coagulant to remove dispersed solids.
Kawawa discloses a polymeric chelant and coagulant to treat metal-containing water in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating water to remove metals (Abstract). Kawawa further discloses polymers, including organic polymeric coagulants, may be used in addition to a coagulant as an effective means to remove the metal from the wastewater (Abstract; Paragraphs [0006]-[0007]; see polymeric coagulants and coagulants for the removal of metals).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the pretreatment system and coagulant of Heiss to further comprise the coagulant and polymer to remove dispersed solids as taught by Kawawa because Kawawa discloses such combination is effective in removing a plurality of metals out of the water to be treated (Abstract; Paragraph [0006]).
Claims 18 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Heiss (US Pat Pub. 2005/0139530) in view of Liu et al. (herein referred to as “Liu”, CN 113731371 ) and Santoro et al. (herein referred to as “Santoro”, US Pat Pub. 2022/0267183) as applied to claims 18 and 19 above, and further in view of Peeters et al. (herein referred to as “Peeters”, WO 2007/012181).
Regarding instant Claim 18, Claim 3, upon which Claim 18 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, the combined references are silent on the biosorption column comprising a series of two or more continuously-stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) containing microbes configured to adsorb the at least one metal from the water stream.
Peeters discloses an apparatus and method for treating PGD blowdown or similar liquids in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of removing metals from wastewater (Abstract; Paragraph [0039]). Peeters further discloses a biosorption column comprising a series of two or more continuously stirred tank reactors containing microbes configured to adsorb the at least one metal from the water stream in order to remove primary target contaminants of different types (Figure 2; Paragraph [0039]; see zones/reactors/CSTRs 22, 24, 26 and 28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the biosorption column of Heiss to further comprise a series of two or more continuously-stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) containing microbes configured to adsorb the at least one metal from the water stream as taught by Peeters because Peeters discloses such a series of reactors removes primary target contaminants of different types (Peeters, Figure 2; Paragraph [0039]; see zones/reactors/CSTRs 22, 24, 26 and 28).
Regarding instant Claim 19, Claim 18, upon which Claim 19 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the microbes are selected such that they selectively adsorb only one metal of interest (Peeters, Figure 2; Paragraph [0039]; Liu, Abstract; see zones/reactors/CSTRs 22, 24, 26 and 28 remove soluble metals; Liu discloses lithium).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD C GURTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-3189. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-5:30pm MT.
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 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.
/RICHARD C GURTOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773 06/24/2026
Prosecution Insights