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. 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. Claim (s) 1 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mignani et al. (WO 2008/043764, translation attached) . Mignani et al., hereafter “ Mignani ,” show that it is known to have a separation apparatus for a method of separating plastic and silicone in a composite material ( pg 2, para 4), comprising a tank having a reaction space for immersing the composite material in a hydrocarbon solvent to thereby separate the plastic and the silicone in the composite material, the plastic and the silicone being insoluble in the hydrocarbon solvent ( pg 2, para 6; pg 5, para 12). Mignani does not show a storage tank and a reaction tank. However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use two separate tanks in order to avoid contamination of the storage tank and because duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced (MPEP 2144.04 (VI)(B)). Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-10 and 12-19 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT MONICA HUSON whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-1198 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-F 8a-4p . 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, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Christina Johnson can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT 571-272-1176 . 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. FILLIN "Examiner Stamp" \* MERGEFORMAT MONICA ANNE HUSON Primary Examiner Art Unit 1742 /MONICA A HUSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742