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 .
Priority
This application is not claiming priority to any earlier patent documentation. The application as examined with the following priority date: 01/11/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/11/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 17-19 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Beylich (WO2005110930A1).
In regards to claim 17, Beylich teaches a method comprising: applying a fatty acid salt comprising a fatty acid and a metal cation to a surface slick located on an aqueous fluid, {P 2 , L's 29-32, "method for treatment of oil … on a liquid surface … involving the addition of a fat-soluble metal containing substance comprising … an organic fat-soluble anion and a metal cation … organic anion may be a remainder from a fatty acid"} the surface slick comprising an oleaginous substance; {P 6, L 33, "added to raw oil on a water surface"} and interacting the fatty acid salt with a surface of the surface slick {P Cover, Abstract, "A fat-soluble metal … is added to the oil. The metal containing substance may be prepared by allowing a metal salt to react with an acidic organic compound"} to reduce a surface area of the surface slick. {P 1, L's 25-29, "stiffening the oil, … the oil does not become dispersed" and F's 1-2 [oil before and after addition of metal complex]}
In regards to claim 18, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising: skimming at least a portion of the surface slick off the aqueous fluid after the surface area has been reduced. {P 2, L's 23-24, "oil may be removed from the surface with mechanical means"}
In regards to claim 19, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the fatty acid salt is applied to the surface slick in a second aqueous fluid. {P Cover, Abstract, "A fat-soluble metal … is added to the oil. The metal containing substance may be prepared by allowing a metal salt to react with an acidic organic compound" & P 4, L's 2-4, "fat-soluble metal containing substance is present as a liquid"}
In regards to claim 21, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the metal cation comprises a transition metal cation or a rare earth metal cation. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide}
In regards to claim 22, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the metal cation comprises a copper (II) cation, a neodymium (III) cation, a cerium (III) cation, a zinc (II) cation, or any combination thereof. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide and P 3 F and P 3, L 9, " and n … are integers chosen from 0, 1, 2, 3, 4"}
In regards to claim 23, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the metal cation comprises a zinc (II) cation. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide and P 3 F and P 3, L 9, " and n … are integers chosen from 0, 1, 2, 3, 4"}
In regards to claim 24, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the fatty acid comprises a C8 to C26 fatty acid. {P 3 F and P3, L's 10-12, "R1 - R7 are chosen among … C1-C24-alkyl"}
In regards to claim 25, Beylich teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the aqueous fluid comprises freshwater, seawater, or brine. {P 6, L's 1-2, "using this method … it does not matter whether water is salt water or fresh water"}
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.
Claims 1-2 and 6-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beylich (WO2005110930A1) in view of Ceaser (US4780518A).
In regards to claim 1, Beylich teaches a method comprising: applying a fatty acid to a surface slick located on an aqueous fluid, {P 2, L's 29-32, "method for treatment of oil on a solid or liquid surface … involving … an organic fat-soluble anion … the organic anion may be a remainder from a fatty acid"} the surface slick comprising an oleaginous substance; {P 6, L 33, "added to raw oil on a water surface"} applying a metal cation to the surface slick; {P 2, L's 29-32, "method … involving … a metal complex comprised by … and a metal cation."} the reaction of the fatty acid and metal cation upon the surface slick [not taught by Beylich] to form a fatty acid salt {P 9, L's 5-7, "the fat-soluble metal containing substance"} to reduce a surface area of the surface slick. {P 1, L's 25-29, "stiffening the oil, … the oil does not become dispersed" and F's 1-2 [oil before and after addition of metal complex]}
In regards to claim 2, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: skimming at least a portion of the surface slick off the aqueous fluid after the surface area has been reduced. {P 2, L's 23-24, "oil may be removed from the surface with mechanical means"}
In regards to claim 6, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metal cation comprises a transition metal cation or a rare earth metal cation. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide}
In regards to claim 7, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metal cation comprises a copper (II) cation, a neodymium (III) cation, a cerium (III) cation, a zinc (II) cation, or any combination thereof. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide and P 3 F and P 3, L 9, " and n … are integers chosen from 0, 1, 2, 3, 4"}
In regards to claim 8, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metal cation comprises a zinc (II) cation. {P's 2-3, L's 34-2, "The metallic cation can be a cation chosen from the transition metals in the periodic table of the elements or a cation chosen among the lanthanide and P 3 F and P 3, L 9, " and n … are integers chosen from 0, 1, 2, 3, 4"}
In regards to claim 9, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the metal cation is applied to the surface slick as a metal chloride salt. {P 6, L's 26-31, "[Experiment 1] addition of aqueous ferric chloride solution … the fat-soluble iron product" & P 7, L's 1-2, "The resulting oil spill shown in Figure 1. Then the product of Experiment 1 was added"}
In regards to claim 10, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the fatty acid comprises a C8 to C26 fatty acid. {P 3 F and P3, L's 10-12, "R1 - R7 are chosen among … C1-C24-alkyl"} While the claimed range of C8-C26 is not fully encompassed within the range of the prior art, the prior art range appears substantially identical to the claimed range, and a person of reasonable skill in the art would find it obvious that the missing carbons of the prior art has no functional difference to the claimed range as a whole.
In regards to claim 11, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the fatty acid comprises dodecanoic acid. {P 3 F, R (circled in red) and P 3, L's 12-15, "carbon chains of said compounds may optionally include … oxygen … and groups which are chosen among consideration products … of one or more types of chemical compounds such as acids"}
PNG
media_image1.png
257
335
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In regards to claim 12, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the aqueous fluid comprises freshwater, seawater, or brine. {P 6, L's 1-2, "using this method … it does not matter whether water is salt water or fresh water"}
In regards to claim 13, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the surface area of the surface slick is reduced by about 50% or greater. {P 7, L's 9-10, "Typically 95% of the total oil spill … was removed as shown in Figure 5" & F 5}
In regards to claim 14, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the surface area of the surface slick is reduced by about 80% or greater. {P 7, L's 9-10, "Typically 95% of the total oil spill … was removed as shown in F 5" & F 5}
Regarding claims 13-14 rejections, it is noted the prior art teaches a percentage of the total oil spill removed, not the surface area, however, the experimental parameters of the prior art explain how 19.5g of water was placed in a round dish with a height of 11mm, and 460mg of raw oil was placed on top of that water. {P’s 6-7, L’s 34-1} Given the experimental setup of the prior art, it is obvious the applicant’s “surface area”, and the prior art’s “total” oil removed are the measurements of the same parameter.
In regards to claim 15, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein interacting the fatty acid salt with the surface of the surface slick promotes formation of a plurality of clusters {P 7, L's 7-8, "The oil spill quickly attracts to the PET fibers as shown in Figure 3." & F 3} comprising the oleaginous substance, crystallization of the oleaginous substance upon the surface slick, or any combination thereof. {P 4, L's 16-19, "By an optional, additional feature … a polymeric material and oil to further simplify … recovery of the oil spill. A polymeric material … is well suited for stiffening (confinement)"}
In regards to claim 16, Beylich teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the oleaginous substance comprises petroleum or crude oil. {P 6, L 33, "added to raw oil on a water surface"}
Beylich does not teach wherein the metal cation is applied to the surface slick after applying the fatty acid, nor do they teach that the reaction of the fatty acid and the metal cation is upon the surface slick.
However, all the limitations that Beylich does not teach, are taught by Ceaser.
In regards to claim 1, Ceaser teaches applying the metal cation after applying the fatty acid; {C 5, L's 27-39, "The first two ingredients [fatty acid] are added… Ingredients 3, 4, and 5 [metal cation] are added … as a spray to the circulating liquid"} reacting the fatty acid and the metal cation upon the surface slick. {C 1, L's 48-50, "contacting the surface layers of the water-insoluble organic fluid, such as oil, with a composition of the present invention"}
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Beylich with some of the limitations of Ceaser because both inventions appear to be methods and products for removing oil from the surface of another liquid. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Ceaser to Beylich because the invention of Ceaser allows the absorbent material to stay afloat on top of the water, being hydrophobic, even after the absorption of the oil has occurred, something that the prior art hadn’t been able to accomplish in an effective manner. {Ceaser, C 1, L’s 22-26 and 45-53}
Claims 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Beylich (WO2005110930A1) and Ceaser (US4780518A), in view of Laux (US6316398B1).
The combination of Beylich and Ceaser teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2 and 6-16, as mentioned in the prior 103 rejection.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 3: The method of claim 1, wherein the fatty acid is applied to the surface slick in a first fluid and the metal cation is applied to the surface slick in a second fluid.
Claim 4: The method of claim 3, wherein the fatty acid has a concentration in the first fluid of about 0.5 wt% to about 2.0 wt%, based on a total weight of the first fluid.
Claim 5: The method of claim 3, wherein the metal cation has a concentration in the second fluid of about 2,500 ppm to about 10,000 ppm, based on a total weight of the second fluid.
However, Laux teaches all of the limitations of claims 3-5 that the combination of Beylich and Ceaser do not teach.
In regards to claim 3, Laux teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the fatty acid is applied to the surface slick in a first fluid {C 1, L's 58-65, "the second surfactant being a … anionic … with … a solvent" & C 2, L's 20-25, "Among the quaternary ammonium-containing surfactants [anionic] … the alkyl groups have … and are derived from long-chain fatty acids"} and the metal cation is applied to the surface slick in a second fluid. {C 1, L's 58-65, "the first surfactant being a cationic surfactant with a salt … with … a solvent"}
In regards to claim 4, Laux teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the fatty acid has a concentration in the first fluid of about 0.5 wt% to about 2.0 wt%, based on a total weight of the first fluid. {C 4, L's 53-56, "the anionic surfactants … make up about 0.1% to about 25.0% of the total weight"}
In regards to claim 5, Laux teaches the method of claim 3, wherein the metal cation has a concentration in the second fluid of about 2,500 ppm to about 10,000 ppm, based on a total weight of the second fluid. {C 3, L's 3-4, "cationic surfactant makes up about 0.2 to about 3.5% … by weight of the total weight"}
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Laux with the combined invention of Beylich and Ceaser because both inventions appear to have been created for the goal of removing or cleaning oil that is on top of, or within anther substance. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Laux to the combination of Beylich and Ceaser because the invention of Laux provides a superior cleaning composition that forms emulsions with oil … wherein the waste drops out of the emulsion in the absence of waste treatment chemicals. {Laux, C 1, L’s 35-41}
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beylich (WO2005110930A1) in view of Laux (US6316398B1).
Beylich teaches all of the limitations of claims 17-19 and 21-25, as mentioned in a prior 102 rejection.
Beylich does not teach:
Claim 20: The method of claim 19, wherein the fatty acid salt has a concentration in the second aqueous fluid ranging from about 0.75 wt% to about 3 wt%.
However, Laux teaches all of the limitations that Beylich does not teach.
In regards to claim 20, Laux teaches the method of claim 19, wherein the fatty acid salt has a concentration in the second aqueous fluid ranging from about 0.75 wt% to about 3 wt%. {C 5, L's 27-29, "composition is diluted with about 90-99.5% by weight water"}
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the concentration parameters of Laux with the invention of Beylich because both inventions appear to have been created with the goal of oil removal on top or within another surface. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Laux to the combination of Beylich and Ceaser because the invention of Laux provides a superior cleaning composition that forms emulsions with oil … wherein the waste drops out of the emulsion in the absence of waste treatment chemicals. {Laux, C 1, L’s 35-41}
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CONNOR J ROTONDI whose telephone number is (571)272-2058. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00am-4:30pm.
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. 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.
/CONNOR J ROTONDI/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779