DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claims 1 are pending in the application.
Examiner’s Note: The examiner has cited particular passages including column and line numbers, paragraphs as designated numerically and/or figures as designated numerically in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claims, other passages, paragraphs and figures of any and all cited prior art references may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing an eventual response, to fully consider the context of the passages, paragraphs and figures as taught by the prior art and/or cited by the examiner while including in such consideration the cited prior art references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention. MPEP 2141.02 VI: “PRIOR ART MUST BE CONSIDERED IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDING DISCLOSURES THAT TEACH AWAY FROM THE CLAIMS."
Response to Amendment and Arguments
Applicant amended independent claim 1 to further specify:
(Currently Amended) A fluid reclamation apparatus comprising:
an intake drain located substantially under an area of land, the intake drain comprising one or more inclined surfaces located under substantially the entire area of land;
a fluid tank;
a fluid mover; and
a fluid distribution apparatus;
wherein:
the one or more inclined surfaces of the intake drain are connected to an input opening of the fluid tank so as to guide fluid into the fluid tank;
Regarding 102 rejection:
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claims have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant contends that Takai does not disclose an “intake drain comprising one or more inclined surfaces located under substantially the entire area of land” and that neither the perforated pipe (42) nor the water-impermeable sheet (19) satisfies this limitation. Applicant further argues that the sheet is connected to sidewalls of the tank rather than to an input opening of the tank, and therefore fails to guide water directly into the tank as required by claim 1.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees for the reasons provides below.
Takai discloses an underground water collect system comprising an impermeable sheet 10 and associated perforated pipe 42 positioned beneath the land surface (SEE fig. 1). The impermeable sheet 19 is shown and described as being upwardly and outwardly inclined from the buried tank 11 to the surrounding soil. Rainwater infiltrating through the soil above the sheet is guided by the inclined sheet toward the tank and into the intake pipe 21.
a water impermeable sheet 19 buried underground and being upwardly and outwardly inclined from the side or bottom of the water tank 11; wherein the other end of the intake pipe 21 is arranged near and above the water impermeable sheet 19.
According to the invention of claim 1, rainwater having fallen onto the ground surface infiltrates into the underground. The rainwater infiltrated into the underground is purified by the natural filtering effect by the ground, and the buried water impermeable sheet 19 guides the infiltrated rainwater down to the water tank 11 by the inclination of the water impermeable sheet 19. The thus guided water flows from the other end of the intake pipe 21 arranged near and above the water impermeable sheet 19, toward the one end side of the intake pipe 21 to thereby flow into the water tank 11… In this way, rainwater having fallen over a relatively wide area is filtered by the ground, and then collected by the water impermeable sheet 19 and reserved in the water tank 11. [col. 2 lines 19-42]
The Examiner maintains that the combination of the impermeable sheet 19 and the connected perforated pipes 42 collectively constitute the claimed “intake drain.” Specifically, the sheet 19 provides the required inclined surface(s) configured to channel the infiltrated fluid into the tank via intake pipe 21. As depicted in Takai’s figured 1, the inclined surfaces of the sheet extend under the area of the land above the tank and are functionally located “substantially under” that area. Therefore, the structural and functional aspects of the claimed intake drain are taught by Takai.
Applicant further argues that the inclined surfaces of Takai’s sheet terminate at the tank and are not “connected to an input opening” of the tank as required by claim 1. However, Takai expressly discloses intake pipe 21 connecting the space adjacent the sheet 19 to the interior of the tank (SEE fig. 1). The sheet 19 guides infiltrated water toward the region where the intake piles 21 are located, and these pipes open directly into the tank. Consequently, the sheet 19 and intake pipes 21 together from a continuously pathway guiding water into the tank (SEE col. 9 lines 25-42). The claimed requirement that the inclined surface be “connected to an input opening of the fluid tank so as to guide fluid into the fluid tank” is therefore met by the combination structure of the sheet 19 and the intake pipes 21 in Takai.
Applicant’s argument that water would “pool around the sidewalls” is not supported by the disclosure of Takai, which explicitly states that the water guided by the sheet 19 flows through the intake pipes into the tank. Therefore, Takai teaches the same functional relationship recited in the claim.
Accordingly, Takai anticipates claim 1 including the newly amended limitation.
Regarding Double Patenting
Applicant has not amended the claims to be patentably distinct from the conflicting claims of U.S. Patent 9,832,939, 10,798,886, and 11,800,839, nor has applicant filed the appropriate terminal disclaimer. Applicant has therefore failed to overcome the rejection.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 9,832,939, claim 1 of the Patent No. 10,798,886. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claim 1 of the Patent 9,832,939, 10,798,886, and 11,800,839, individually, anticipate claim 1 of the current application. Specifically, claim 1 of the Patent 9,832,939, 10,798,886, and 11,800,839 disclose all claimed subject matter of claim 1 of the current application and additionally disclose additional subject matter. Since the subject matter of the claim 1 of the claimed invention is subset of the subject matter of claim 1 of the Patent 9,832,939, 10,798,886, and 11,800,839 claim 1 of the current application are anticipated by claim 1 of the Patent 9,832,939, 10,798,886, and 11,800,839.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Takai.
Regarding claim 1, Takai discloses a fluid reclamation apparatus [SEE fig. 1 and 12] comprising:
an intake drain [impermeable sheet 19 - Fig. 1 and 12] located substantially under an area of land, the intake drain comprising one or more inclined surfaces located under substantially the entire are of land;
a water impermeable sheet 19 buried underground and being upwardly and outwardly inclined from the side or bottom of the water tank 11; wherein the other end of the intake pipe 21 is arranged near and above the water impermeable sheet 19.
According to the invention of claim 1, rainwater having fallen onto the ground surface infiltrates into the underground. The rainwater infiltrated into the underground is purified by the natural filtering effect by the ground, and the buried water impermeable sheet 19 guides the infiltrated rainwater down to the water tank 11 by the inclination of the water impermeable sheet 19. The thus guided water flows from the other end of the intake pipe 21 arranged near and above the water impermeable sheet 19, toward the one end side of the intake pipe 21 to thereby flow into the water tank 11… In this way, rainwater having fallen over a relatively wide area is filtered by the ground, and then collected by the water impermeable sheet 19 and reserved in the water tank 11. [col. 2 lines 19-42]
The water, which has infiltrated into the underground around the water tank 11 but has not been guided to each perforated pipe 42, reaches the water impermeable sheet 19 and flows toward the water tank 11 by the inclination of the water impermeable sheet 19. Since each intake pipe 21 is arranged above and near the water impermeable sheet 19, the water having flown toward the water tank 11 along the water impermeable sheet 19 is guided into the perforated pipe 42 via suitable water through-holes 42a and then flows into the water tank 11 via intake pipe 21 so as to be stored in the water tank 11. In this way, the water tank 11 reserves rainwater having fallen onto a relatively wide area and collected by the perforated pipes 42 and water impermeable sheet 19 spread over such an area. [col. 8 lines 25-38]
a fluid tank [Water tank 11];
a fluid mover [drain pump 17; Col. 5 lines 23-39]; and
a fluid distribution apparatus [outlet pipe 18 Col. 5 lines 23-39];
wherein:
the one or more inclined surfaces of the intake drain [impermeable sheet 19] are connected to an input opening of the fluid tank [pipe 21] so as to guide fluid into the fluid tank col. [8 lines 25-38];
Meanwhile, in burying the water tank 11 in a ground having a higher ratio of sands into which rainwater is particularly apt to infiltrate, it is preferable to provide a plurality of layers of intake pipes 21 as shown in FIG. 12 and to bury the water impermeable sheet 19 which is upwardly and outwardly inclined from the bottom of the water tank 11. In such a ground into which rainwater is particularly apt to infiltrate, the ratio of water to be guided into the perforated pipe 42 is reduced due to the relatively fast infiltration speed. However, by burying the water impermeable sheet 19 down to the bottom portion of the water tank 11, it becomes possible to bring the water infiltrated down to the vicinity of the water tank 11 and the water collected by the water impermeable sheet 19 into the water tank 11 via intake pipes 21 provided at the lower pipe layer, to thereby allow the water tank 11 to effectively collect and store rainwater having fallen over a relatively wide area. [col. 9 lines 25-41]
the fluid mover is configured to move a volume of fluid from the fluid tank and through the fluid distribution apparatus [Col. 5 lines 23-39, drain pump 17 distributes water aboveground]; and
the fluid distribution apparatus is configured to provide the volume of fluid to the area of land above the intake drain [Col. 5 lines 23-39; outlet pipe 18 discharge water out of the system and, if desired, on to the land above tank 11].
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 VINCENT HUY TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7210. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 7:00-4:00.
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, Thomas C Lee can be reached on 571-272-3667. 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.
/VINCENT H TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2115