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 .
This is a response to Applicant's amendment filed on July 06, 2026.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-17 have been amended. No new claim has been added. Claims 1-17 are pending. Claims 1-17 are examined herein.
Response to Amendments
The Amendments to the Claims filed 07/06/2026 have been entered. The minor informalities have been addressed by amendments and objections to claims 1-17 thereto are withdrawn accordingly. The previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph rejections of claims 1-17 are withdrawn in view of the Applicant's amendments and arguments.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's Remarks/Arguments and Amendments to the Claims both filed 07/06/2026 have been fully considered. It is noted that claim 1, an independent claim from which all dependent claims depend, has been amended to recite “wherein the filtration purification path is operated at least partially in parallel to the biological purification path with a partial flow of a biologically treated contaminated water removed downstream of an aeration tank of the biological purification path and upstream of a secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path” in the context of a purification method for purifying contaminated water as claimed.
Applicant argues that the claim 1 as amended and its dependent claims are not anticipated nor prima facie obvious over cited prior art(s), Bott et al. (WO 2019/165389 A1), since the cited reference(s) does not teach the amended features of, in the context of a purification method for purifying contaminated water, “wherein the filtration purification path is operated at least partially in parallel to the biological purification path with a partial flow of a biologically treated contaminated water removed downstream of an aeration tank of the biological purification path and upstream of a secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path”. Bott discloses the post-filtration device (PF) 60, which is mapped to the secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path, can include a post-filtration device that includes a sand filter, granular activated carbon (GAC), powder activated carbon (PAC), biological activated carbon (BAC) or any other mechanism for biological degradation or adsorption of constituents. See Remarks, page 8-10.
In response, the examiner respectfully disagrees.
Per MPEP, during patent examination, the pending claims must be “given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification.” The broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims must also be consistent with the interpretation that those skilled in the art would reach (See MPEP 2111). Consequently, the claim limitation “a clarification tank” in claim 1 is reasonably interpreted as “a tank for clarificaiton, wherein the clarification removes tiny amounts of solid bits from a liquid to make it clear”. It is noted that the detailed structure/mechanism of the clarification tank is not the scopes of limitations recited in claim 1 of claimed invention.
It is known in the art that “filtration” is a specific type of clarification that passes a fluid through a porous barrier to catch solids, where either the liquid or the trapped solid is the main goal.
There is an evidentiary reference, Polyakov et al. (CLARIFICATION OF AQUEOUS SUSPENSIONS WITH A HIGH CONTENT OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN RAPID SAND FILTERS, (2019) EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, Number I), that teaches a clarification is conducted using rapid sand filters in water treatment process. This directs the filtration is an efficient tool for achieving clarification of wastewater.
It is still the examiner’s assessment that the post-filtration device (PF 60, Fig. 12) taught by Bott et al. does meet the recited “a secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path”.
Applicant's amendment necessitated a modified/new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action.
Upon further consideration and search, a modified/new ground of rejections to claims 1-17 are presented, in view of the previously presented prior art(s), Bott et al. (WO 2019/165389 A1) and/or Saeidi et al. (Effects of Powder Activated Carbon Particle Size on Adsorption Capacity and Mechanical Properties of the Semi Activated Carbon Fiber, Fibers and Polymers 2015, Vol.16, No.3, 543-549), and newly found references, Polyakov et al. (CLARIFICATION OF AQUEOUS SUSPENSIONS WITH A HIGH CONTENT OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN RAPID SAND FILTERS, (2019) EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, Number I) and Sakurada (US 5,350,511), as presented in the instant Office action.
MODIFIED REJECTIONS
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 1-5 and 8-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bott et al. (WO 2019/165389 A1, hereinafter “Bott”), and as evidenced by Polyakov et al. (CLARIFICATION OF AQUEOUS SUSPENSIONS WITH A HIGH CONTENT OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN RAPID SAND FILTERS, (2019) EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, Number I, hereinafter “Polyakov”) and Sakurada (US 5,350,511).
In regard to claim 1, Bott discloses a purification method for purifying contaminated water (paragraph [0001]; Fig. 12), comprising (in the embodiment shown in Fig. 12, subcomponents of the embodiment in Fig. 12 share subcomponents of the embodiments shown in Fig. 6 – Fig. 11; paragraphs [00095]-[00098]):
at least one biological purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, a UBZ 42, Fig. 12, a biological processor 40, and a post-filtration device 60, Fig. 12) as well as a filtration purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, and a membrane 47, Fig. 12 that includes a ceramic or polymer membrane),
wherein the filtration purification path is operated at least partially in parallel and in sequential to the biological purification path (note that the wastewater passes through BP 40 and MB 47 in parallel and in sequence) with a partial flow removed from the biological purification path, wherein the partial flow to be supplied to the filtration purification path is removed upstream of a secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path (the partial flow supplied to MB 47, Fig. 12 is removed upstream of the post-filtration device (PF 60, Fig. 12) (a partial flow removed from the bottom of the BP 40 is recycled to a dedicated zone for uncontrolled, thicker biofilms (UBZ 42, Fig. 12)),
wherein the purification in the filtration purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a membrane MB 47, Fig. 12) comprises the following steps:
supplying the partial flow of the biologically treated contaminated water to a purification tank (a tank containing UBZ 42, BP 40, and MB 47, Fig. 12) (a partial flow from BP 40 is recycled to UBZ 42 and BP 40 via preheater 80, selector 90, and an augmentor 95), wherein a membrane module (MB 47, Fig. 12) is located in the purification tank and the membrane module (MB 47, Fig. 12) is aerated by an inflow of air from below (air supplier 45, Fig. 12 add air to the BP 40 and MB 47, Fig. 12 (paragraph [00096]) from below);
filtering the partial flow of the biologically treated contaminated water through the membrane module (MB 47, Fig. 12) to a permeate side of the membrane module (the filtered water is passed through the permeate side of the membrane MB 47, Fig. 12);
adding an adsorption agent to the partial flow of the biologically treated contaminated water in the purification tank at a raw side of the membrane module, wherein the adsorption agent comprises powdered activated carbon (paragraph [00097]) (PAC 30 is broadly interpreted as an extension of the purification tank, wherein the addition of the adsorption agent is realized at the raw side of the membrane module (paragraph [00096]) which directs the activated carbon addition point PAC 30, Fig. 12 is upstream (raw side) of the membrane module 47 MB, Fig. 12); and
wherein the purification method is used as a stage of a purification process of a wastewater treatment plant prior to introducing the purified water into a river, a lake, or an ocean (paragraph [000198]).
But Bott does not explicitly disclose the post-filtration device (PF 60, Fig. 12) is a clarification tank.
However, it is known in the art that “filtration” is a specific type of clarification that passes a fluid through a porous barrier to catch solids, where either the liquid or the trapped solid is the main goal. There is an evidentiary reference, Polyakov et al. (CLARIFICATION OF AQUEOUS SUSPENSIONS WITH A HIGH CONTENT OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS IN RAPID SAND FILTERS, (2019) EUREKA: Physics and Engineering, Number I), that teaches a clarification is conducted using rapid sand filters in water treatment process. This directs the filtration is an efficient tool for achieving clarification of wastewater (Abstract; Fig. 1).
Therefore, the post-filtration device (PF 60, Fig. 12) taught by Bott, and as evidenced by Polyakov, renders the recited limitation “a secondary clarification tank of the biological purification path” prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 2, Bott discloses the purification method is used as a stage of a purification process of a wastewater treatment plant prior to introducing the purified water into a river, a lake, or an ocean (paragraph [000198]). In addition, Bott discloses a biological treatment process can be used to remove constituents from water. The biological treatment process can be used in, for example, wastewater treatment, drinking water treatment, water reuse, distribution systems for drinking water, collection systems for wastewater, residential or institutional plumbing, natural or constructed wetlands, storm water treatment, agricultural buffers, or river bank filtration systems (paragraph [0042]).
As set forth above (see the rejection regrading claim 1), it was designated that (1) at least one biological purification path comprises: a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, a UBZ 42, Fig. 12, a biological processor 40, and a post-filtration device 60, Fig. 12; and (2) a filtration purification path comprises: a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, and a membrane 47, Fig. 12 that includes a ceramic or polymer membrane. The embodiment in Fig. 12 renders the recitation “a volume flow of the purified water leaving a flow outlet of the biological purification path and a volume flow of the purified water leaving a flow outlet of the filtration purification path are introduced respectively into the river, the lake, or the ocean as the purified water” prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 3, Bott discloses there is precisely only one membrane module (there is one membrane in MB 47, Fig. 12) in the purification tank (a tank containing UBZ 42, BP 40, and MB 47, Fig. 12) of the filtration purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, and a membrane 47, Fig. 12 that includes a ceramic or polymer membrane), and wherein the permeate side of this membrane module comprises the purified water.
Bott discloses the purification method is used as a stage of a purification process of a wastewater treatment plant prior to introducing the purified water into a river, a lake, or an ocean (paragraph [000198]). In addition, Bott discloses a biological treatment process can be used to remove constituents from water. The biological treatment process can be used in, for example, wastewater treatment, drinking water treatment, water reuse, distribution systems for drinking water, collection systems for wastewater, residential or institutional plumbing, natural or constructed wetlands, storm water treatment, agricultural buffers, or river bank filtration systems (paragraph [0042]). Bott discloses there is no further membrane module in the embodiment of Fig. 12, therefore, the recitation “the permeate side of this membrane module comprises the purified water that is introduced from the purification tank into the river, the lake or the ocean as the purified water without flowing through a further membrane module” is considered prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 4, Bott discloses the adsorption agent added in the filtration purification path comprises powdered activated carbon (paragraph [00072]).
Regarding the limitation of “powdered activated carbon produced from wood and/or peat”, per MPEP, it is acknowledged that the powdered activated carbon recited in claim 4 is product-by-process claims which are not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, but the structure (i.e., physical and chemical properties) implied by the steps. During the examination of the claimed invention, the powdered activated carbon recited in claim 4 is only limited (characterized) by chemical compositions/properties of powdered activated carbon as recited in claim 4 and is not limited by the source of making the powdered activated carbon. See MPEP 2113.
In regard to claim 8, Bott discloses an absorption agent of activated carbon (PAC 30, Fig. 1) is added to the purification tank, wherein the PAC 30 include a device that includes a coagulation method, including, for example, a device that adds a poly-aluminum chloride-based coagulant or other coagulant that has, for example, low generation of waste sludge in a wide pH range (paragraph [00072]). This directs the adsorption agent that is used in the filtration purification path is suspended or dissolved in water prior to adding as recited.
In regard to claims 9 and 10, Bott discloses filtration purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, and a membrane 47, Fig. 12 that includes a ceramic or polymer membrane). Bott discloses the PAC 30 can include a device that includes a coagulation method, including, for example, a device that adds a poly-aluminum chloride-based coagulant (paragraphs [00072]).
In regard to claims 11 and 12, Bott discloses wastewater comprises a micropollutant, a nano pollutant (page 62, claim 11) which directs a necessity of the membrane module being a microfiltration, preferably an ultrafiltration. Bott discloses membrane can be hollow fiber, flat sheet, flat plate (paragraph [000147]).
In regard to claim 13, Bott discloses the purification tank (a tank containing MB 47, Fig. 12) of the filtration purification path is a standard container. Also, it is known in the art that wastewater treatment facility comprises concrete material as evidenced by Sakurada (US 5,350,511, col. 1, lines 1-20).
In regard to claim 14, Bott discloses a volume flow of purified water returned from a secondary clarification tank (a pre-treater 80, Fig. 12), which is downstream of the aeration tank of the biological purification path, is supplied to the purification tank of the filtration purification path in addition to the partial flow of the biologically treated contaminated water contaminated water from the biological purification path (it is noted that both the recycled water from 80, Fig. 12 and contaminate water 5, Fig. 12 via 20, 30, 43, Fig. 12 is supplied to a purification tank containing MB 47, Fig. 12).
In regard to claim 15, Bott discloses the addition of the adsorption agent at PAC 30, Fig. 12 via UBZ 42, Fig. 12 to the purification tank of the filtration purification path is carried out. Since the recycled purified water from 80, Fig. 12 is also transported to the purification tank adjacent to the UBZ 42, Fig. 12, the recitation of claim 15 is considered an obvious technique that can be practiced by one skilled in the art, thereby the teachings of Bott render the recitation of claim 15 prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 16, in other embodiment shown in Fig. 6, Bott discloses the addition of the adsorption agent at PAC 30, Fig. 6 to the purification tank of the filtration purification path is realized right next to the BP 40, Fig. 6 which comprises an air supplier 45, Fig. 6. Since the recycled purified water from 80, Fig. 12 is also transported to the purification tank adjacent to the PAC 30, Fig. 12, the recitation of claim 16 is considered an obvious technique that can be practiced by one skilled in the art, thereby the teachings of Bott render the recitation of claim 16 prima facie obvious. In addition, Bott discloses the partial flow of the biologically treated contaminated water supplied to the purification tank is removed downstream of the aeration tank (a tank supplying air 45, Fig. 12).
In regard to claim 17, in other embodiment shown in Fig. 6, Bott discloses a return volume flow is returned from the purification tank of the filtration purification path (a water from a solid-liquid separator SLS 50, Fig. 6) into the biological purification path (BP 40, Fig. 6). Since adsorption agent (powered activated carbon particles) is used in a coagulation process (paragraph [00072]), it is reasonably expected that the adsorption agent is concentrated in the contaminated water, thereby a certain amount of the adsorption agent retained by the membrane module is returned from the purification tank of the filtration purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, and a membrane 47, Fig. 12 that includes a ceramic or polymer membrane) into the biological purification path (a fluid purification path comprising a coagulator C/P 20, Fig. 12, a secondary coagulator PAC 30, Fig. 12, a UBZ 42, Fig. 12, a biological processor 40, and a post-filtration device 60, Fig. 12) as recited in claimed invention.
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bott, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Saeidi et al. (Effects of Powder Activated Carbon Particle Size on Adsorption Capacity and Mechanical Properties of the Semi Activated Carbon Fiber, Fibers and Polymers 2015, Vol.16, No.3, 543-549, hereinafter “Saeidi”).
In regard to claims 5-7, Bott does not explicitly disclose a nominal grain size, an iodine number and a surface area of the powdered activated carbon as recited.
However, Saeidi discloses effects of activated carbon particle size on adsorption and mechanical properties of the semi activated carbon fiber (SACF) (page 543, Abstract). Saeidi discloses embodiment of activated carbon particles having a particle size of 50-150 microns, a surface area of greater than 1,000 m2/g, and an iodine number greater than 1350 mg/g (page 544, Table 1) which renders the recited ranges of nominal grain size, iodine number and surface area of the powdered activated carbon prima facie obvious.
It is noted that both the Bott and Saeidi references direct a powdered activated carbon used as an adsorbent.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Bott, to provide the powdered activated carbon having a nominal grain size, an iodine number and a surface area of the powdered activated carbon as recited, because the powdered activated carbon used as an adsorbent having a particle size of 50-150 microns, a surface area of greater than 1,000 m2/g, and an iodine number greater than 1350 mg/g is known in the art as taught by Saeidi (page 544, Table 1).
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 YOUNGSUL JEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1494. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YOUNGSUL JEONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
