DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the application filed on November 7, 2023 and any subsequent filings.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 8-13, 15, 21, 26, 30, 34, 35, and 70 are pending. Claims 1, 2, 4, 8-13, 15, 21, 26, 30, 34, 35, and 70 are rejected. Claim 8 is objected to.
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 Objections
Claim 8 objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error of "psia" is used in the claim. The pressure value of 22 MPaA is in the claim is sufficient and the pressure value in psia is not presented in the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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, 4, 8-13, 15, 21, 26, 30, 34, 35, and 70 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan").
Regarding claim 1, Strout discloses a system comprising (supercritical water oxidation system, Stroud, Pr 41, Figure 1): a supercritical reactor ( supercritical reactor 208, Stroud, Pr 54, Figure 1 and 2) configured to generate supercritical reactor effluent from an aqueous waste feed stream ( waste feed, Stroud, Pr 54, Figure 1 and 2) and a compressed oxidant stream ( oxidant, Stroud, Pr 54, Figure 1 and 2), the supercritical reactor effluent has waste solids material (Stroud, Pr 55, Figure 1 and 2 and can separate (outlet of gas / liquid separator 214, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2) the supercritical reactor effluent (separate the two phases, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2).
Strout does not disclose a batch receiver that has a first valve configured to receive an output of the separator, the output comprising the at least some of the waste solids material; a collection region configured to collect the output therein; and a second valve configured to discharge the output from the collection region, the collection region being fluidically interposed between the first and second valves, where the batch receiver is configured to: receive and collect the output in the collection region in response to the first valve being in an open state and the second valve being in a closed state; and toggle the first and second valves between open and closed states according to a defined duty cycle in a manner that the at least some of the waste solids material is caused, at least in part, to be discharged from the collection region via the second valve in response to the first valve being in a closed state and the second valve being in an open state.
Fan teaches a separator (gas-solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 37) fluidically connected to the supercritical reactor (reactor assembly 132, Fan, Pr 40), the separator being configured to separate at least some of the waste solids material (gas-solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 37) and a batch receiver (pressure transition assembly 108, Fan, Pr 41, Figure 1) comprising: a first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) configured to receive an output of the separator ( gas - solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1), the output that has at least some of the waste solids material (gas - solids separation unit 110 includes a separation unit solids inlet configured to receive the third solid particles at either the pressure P2 130 or the pressure P3 14, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1); a collection region configured to collect the output therein (gas - solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1); and a second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) configured to discharge the output from the collection region, the collection region being fluidically interposed between the first and second valves, wherein the batch receiver (pressure transition assembly 108, Fan, Pr 41, Figure 1) is configured to: receive and collect the output in the collection region in response to the first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in an open state and the second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in a closed state (Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2); and toggle the first (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) and second valves (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) between open and closed states according to a defined duty cycle in a manner that the at least some of the waste solids material is caused, at least in part (valve 206 and 210 is operable in an open and a closed position, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2), to be discharged from the collection region via the second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) in response to the first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in a closed state and the second valve being in an open state (Fan, Pr 60, Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud with the invention of Fan because both the unified invention of Stroud, and the invention of Fan falls within the same field of innovation of supercritical water oxidation systems that include a separation device for supercritical reactor effluent from an aqueous waste feed stream. In addition, adding invention of Fan will improve the prevention of solid particles at the pressure from coming into direct contact with the first valve (Fan, Pr 9), improve thermodynamic equilibrium, reaction kinetics, net system heat balance, and choice of operating pressure affects the compression cost (Fan, Pr 4).
Regarding claim 2, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a separator (gas / liquid separator 214, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2) is further configured to output modified supercritical reactor effluent (liquid phase effluent, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2) , the modified supercritical reactor effluent comprising H2O (liquid phase effluent comprising H2O, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2) and an amount of the waste solids material (Solid effluent may be transported with the liquid phase effluent, Stroud, Pr 55) at or below one or more regulated threshold levels. Through using the gas / liquid separator 214 (Stroud, Pr 55) of Stroud or gas-solids separation unit 110 (Fan, Pr 37) of Fan the waste solid material will reach below regulated threshold levels.
Regarding claim 4, paragraph 13 in the office action to discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 2. The combination of references does teach a modified supercritical reactor effluent is output (third solid particles at the pressure P2 130, which are discharged from the reactor assembly 106, Fan, Pr 40, Figure 1) via a second end of the separator (separation unit 144, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1) opposing the first end (gas - solids separation unit 144, and a separation unit solids outlet configured to discharge the third particle, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 8, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a modified supercritical reactor effluent has a temperature between 400° C. and 650° C (Fan, Pr 115) and a pressure between 22 MPaA and 25 MPaA (Stroud, Pr 51).
Regarding claim 9, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a supercritical reactor effluent comprises fluid and the waste solids material (Solid effluent may be transported with the liquid phase effluent or removed from the reactor discretely or continuously, Stroud, Pr 55); the fluid comprises H2O and one or more gases (liquid phase effluent comprising H2O and CO2, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2); and CO2 (liquid phase effluent comprising H2O and CO2, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 10, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a fluid comprises about 70% by mass of the H2O and about 30% by mass of the one or more gases (Biogas, Fan, Pr 110).
Regarding claim 11, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a waste solids material (Treatment of wastewater that includes treatment of any type of inorganic or organic waste that can be oxidized Stroud, Pr 37) comprises inorganic precipitate (Inorganic salts and other polar species which are less soluble in supercritical water. This leads to corrosion and plugging from accumulated precipitated salts, Stroud, Pr 46).
Regarding claim 12, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a waste solids material comprises one or more inorganic suspended solids (Inorganic salts and other polar species which are less soluble in supercritical water. This leads to corrosion and plugging from accumulated precipitated salts, Stroud, Pr 46).
Regarding claim 13, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a supercritical reactor effluent has a temperature between 400° C and 650° C (Stroud, Pr 52) and a pressure between about 22 MPaA and about 25 MPaA (Stroud, Pr 51).
Regarding claim 15, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach an output of the separator further comprises a carrier fluid (The liquid phase effluent includes H20 and, in some embodiments, CO2 the mixed phase effluent is then introduced to a gas / liquid separator 214 to separate the two phases. The pressurized liquid phase effluent is then introduced to the pressure exchanger 20, Stroud, Pr 56).
Regarding claim 21, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a storage (gas-solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 37) having an internal cavity fluidically connected to the second valve (valve 210 from pressure transition assembly 108, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) and being configured to receive the at least some of the waste solids material discharged from the second valve (Fan, Pr 37).
Regarding claim 26, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a batch receiver is uninsulated (pressure transition assembly 108, Fan, Pr 41, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 30, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a storage (gas - solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1) comprises a pressure regulator configured to bleed off or vent pressure greater than or equal to a determined threshold (discharge gas surrounding the third particles from the gas - solids separation unit 14, Fan, Pr 42, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 34, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a supercritical reactor (supercritical reactor 208, Stroud, Pr 54, Figure 1 and 2) comprises the separator (gas / liquid separator 214, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2).
Regarding claim 35, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach an inlet configured to receive supercritical reactor effluent (heat exchanger system 204, Stroud, Pr 52, Figure 1 and 2); a first region configured to separate waste solids material from the supercritical reactor effluent (First gas-solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 37, Figure 1); a second region configured to collect the separated waste solids material (an assembly that includes a solids inlet for receiving solid particles , a solids outlet for discharging solid, Fan, Pr 53, Figure 2); a first valve fluidically interposed between the first and second regions(valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2); a first outlet (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) comprising a second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2), the second region being fluidically interposed between the first and second valves (Fan, Pr 53, Figure 2); and a third region comprising a second outlet (outlet of gas / liquid separator 214, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2) configured to output modified supercritical reactor effluent (liquid phase effluent, Stroud, Pr 56, Figure 1 and 2), wherein the first (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) and second valves (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) are configured to toggle between open and closed states according to a defined duty cycle in a manner that the waste solids material is caused, at least in part, to be discharged from the second region via the second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) in response to the first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in a closed state and the second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in an open state (Fan, Pr 15, Figure 2).
Regarding claim 70, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a separator (gas-solids separation unit 110, Fan, Pr 37, Figure 1) to separate waste solids material from supercritical reactor effluent ( effluent from the supercritical reactor 208, Stroud, Pr 54, Figure 1 and 2) in a first region such that the waste solids material collects (an assembly that includes a solids inlet for receiving solid particles , a solids outlet for discharging solid, Fan, Pr 53, Figure 2) in a second region fluidically interposed between a first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) in an open state and a second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) in a closed state, the first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being fluidically interposed between the first region and the second region; and causing, at least in part, the first (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2)and second valves (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) to toggle between open and closed states according to a defined duty cycle such that the waste solids material is caused, at least in part, to be discharged from the second region via the second valve (valve 210, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) in response to the first valve (valve 206, Fan, Pr 49, Figure 2) being in a closed state and the second valve being in an open state (Fan, Pr 15, Figure 2).
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of Wang, et al., U.S. Patent No. 9,328,008 B2 ("Wang").
Regarding claim 3, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a separator however, the combination of references does not teach the separator is a hydro-cyclone.
Wang teaches a separator is a hydro-cyclone (hydrocyclone 4, Wang, Column 8, line 34-36).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Wang because adding invention of Wang will improve separation of most precipitated solid salts in the wastewater which improves resistance to plugging in pipes (wang, Abstract).
Regarding claim 5, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. In paragraphs 29-31 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud, Fan, and Wang and the motivation of combining the references. The combination of references does teach a separator that is vertically oriented along a reference axis (hydrocyclone 4, Wang, Column 8, line 34-36).
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of “An Empirical Model of Hydro-cyclones, Incorporating Angle of Cyclone.” Asomah, et al ("Asomah").
Regarding claim 6, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a separator; however, the combination of references does not teach a separator that is oriented along a reference axis forming an angle relative to a plane upon which the separator is supported.
Asomah discloses a separator (hydrocyclones, Asomah) is oriented along a reference axis forming an angle relative to a plane upon which the separator is supported (Cyclone inclination degree, Asomah, pg 340, Experimental details, Table 1). Table 1 discloses various angles of the cyclone from vertical to horizontal applications.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Asomah because adding invention of Asomah will improve efficiency of separation when operating hydrocyclones especially in a horizontal. The invention of Asomah can be used in variable application to be adaptable to plant design and installation (Asomah, Introduction).
Regarding claim 7, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. In paragraphs 33-36 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud, Fan, and Asomah and the motivation of combining the references. The combination of references does teach a separator (hydrocyclone, Asomah) is horizontally oriented along a reference axis (Cyclone inclination degree, Asomah, pg 340, Experimental details, Table 1).
Claims 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of Surovtsev, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2015/0321038 A1 ("Surovtsev").
Regarding claim 17, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a collection region; however, combination of references does not teach housing of the collection region is maintained between 50° C. and 450° C.
Surovtsev discloses a temperature of a housing of the collection region (solids collector unit 28, Surovtsev, Pr 144) is maintained between about 50° C. and about 450° C (solids collector unit 28 recieves the solids from the reactor that is maintained at 374.2 C, Surovtsev, Pr 144 - 145).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Surovtsev because adding invention of Surovtsev will improve a hydrothermal oxidation process producing environmentally compatible material, power efficient processing of a wide range of highly toxic substances, waste and metal powders, and decreases flue gases discharged into the atmosphere (Surovtsev, Pr 19).
Claims 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of Mandel, et al., U.S. Patent No. 5698163 A ("Mandel").
Regarding claim 20, paragraphs 8-12 in the office action discuss the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 1. The combination of references does teach a first and second valves that are toggles between open and closed. The combination of references does not teach a processor that has a memory comprising one or more sequences of one or more instructions that cause the first and second valves to toggle between the open and closed states.
Mandel discloses a processor (central processor 152, Mandel, Column 3, line 60-63) that has a memory (on-chip memory arrangement 154, Mandel, Column 3, line 63-65) comprising a sequence that is executed by a processor (central processor 152, Mandel, Column 3, line 60-63), causing the first and second valves to toggle between the open and closed states (Mandel, Figure 2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Mandel because adding invention of Mandel will improve the ability to provide a system that can readily accommodate a number of different processes, each of which may have its own operational requirements allowing for a number of different phases or regimes that necessitate real time process control and adjustment, particularly at high temperatures and pressures (Mandel, Column 1, line 25-31).
Claims 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of Krishnamurthy, et al., U.S. Patent No. 20190099766 A1 ("Krishnamurthy").
Regarding claim 22, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a batch receiver, separator, and storage. The combination of references does not disclose a batch receiver and a first portion of the separator are supported within the internal cavity of the storage.
Krishnamurthy teaches a batch receiver (flue gas chamber 24, Krishnamurthy, Pr 12, Figure 1) and a first portion of the separator (cyclonic separators 30, Krishnamurthy, Pr 13, Figure 1) are supported within the internal cavity of the storage (vessel 12, Krishnamurthy, Pr 13, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Krishnamurthy because adding invention of Krishnamurthy will improve the cyclonic separator to protect the blades from erosion by fast traveling solids (Krishnamurthy, Abstract) having increased resistance to erosion and reduced maintenance requirements (Krishnamurthy, Pr 5).
Claims 23 and 25 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), Krishnamurthy, et al., U.S. Patent No. 20190099766 A1 ("Krishnamurthy"), Gomiciaga-Pereda, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2009/0313958 A1 ("Gomiciaga-Pereda"), in further view of “Effect of baffle and shroud designs on discharge of a thermal storage tank using an immersed heat exchanger.” Nicodemus, et al ("Nicodemus")
Regarding claim 23, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a separator however the combination of references does not disclose an insulating shroud.
Gomiciaga-Pereda teaches a separator comprises a first insulating shroud (shroud 121 comprises a cylindrical wall 122, Gomiciaga-Pereda, Pr 22, Figure 3); and a separator that is insulated more than the first portion of the separator (shroud 121 comprises a cylindrical wall 122, Gomiciaga-Pereda, Pr 22, Figure 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Gomiciaga-Pereda because adding invention Gomiciaga-Pereda will improve thermal stratification of the separator (Nicodemus, Abstract).
Regarding claim 25, paragraph 50-53 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 23. The combination of references does teach a separator (shroud 121 comprises a cylindrical wall 122, Gomiciaga-Pereda, Pr 22, Figure 3) that is insulated more than the batch receiver (pressure transition assembly 108, Fan, Pr 41, Figure 1).
Claims 27, 28, and 31 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), “Effect of baffle and shroud designs on discharge of a thermal storage tank using an immersed heat exchanger.” Nicodemus, et al ("Nicodemus"), in further view of Penner, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2018/0127295 A1 ("Penner").
Regarding claim 27, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a storage that stores solid waste; however, the combination of references does not teach a storage comprises a second insulated shroud.
Penner discloses a storage (cylindrical vessel 4, Penner, Pr 32, Figure 1) that has an insulated shroud (shroud 7, Penner, Pr 32, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Penner because adding invention Penner will improve sludge treatment that is composed of solids which can typically have a moisture content (Penner, Pr 3) and the shroud will improve in thermal stratification (Nicodemus, Abstract).
Regarding claim 28, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach a storage (cylindrical vessel 4, Penner, Pr 32, Figure 1) is configured to remove moisture from the at least some of the waste solids material received therein (for dewatering sewage sludge, Penner, Pr 32, Figure 1).
Regarding claim 31, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach an internal cavity of the storage is maintained at about atmospheric pressure (Penner, Pr 12).
Claims 32 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Strout, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0010349 A1 ("Strout"), in view of Fan, et al., U.S. Patent No. 2020/0156032 A1 ("Fan"), in further view of Iversen, et al., U.S. Patent No. 11434933 B2 ("Iversen").
Regarding claim 32, paragraph 22 in the office action discusses the unified invention of Stroud and Fan, and the motivation of combining the references to achieve invention of claim 21. The combination of references does teach about valves; however, the combination of references does not teach a duty cycle that is between 0.1% and 25%.
Iversen teaches a duty cycle is between 0.1% and 25% (Iversen, Column 2, line 61-67).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was effectively filed to combine the invention of Stroud and Fan with the invention of Iversen because adding invention Iversen improves the pressure reduction system in which the system is capable of operating in a manner where the outlet valve is closed for a period before the inlet valve is opened, thus allowing pressure to be generated in the pressure reduction device (Iversen, Column 2, line 61-63).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DeMarkus J Hodge whose telephone number is (571)272-3593. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8-5.
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.
/DeMarkus Jerrell Hodge/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779