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
Acknowledgment is made of the applicant's priority to the provisional US application 63/363,414. The priority dates for all of the claims within this application are as follows:
Claims 1-26: 04/22/2022
Acknowledgement is also made that this application is a continuation of the now-abandoned non-provisional US application 18/304,961
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/19/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
To promote clarity and efficiency in the examination process (compact prosecution), the following terms as outlined below are interpreted, but not limited to, the following:
Buffer zone – Equalization or holding tank
Lead-lag – Series flow pattern
Caustic – Alkaline substance (Used in this application to lower the pH of a solution)
For further clarity of the record, it was determined that functional language within device claims were used throughout this application. Functional language within a device claim does not have to be explicitly taught by a prior art reference when the function does not add any structure to the device. (Ex. Claim 2 “the pH sensor adapted to test the wastewater pH”) Although the prior art does not have to explicitly teach the functional language, the examiner must still determine that the prior art device is capable of performing the functional language written within the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 9 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contain new subject matter which was not described in the prior, priority applications in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 9 and 26 mention the inclusion of “propeller assembly adapted to mix wastewater”. While the priority application, mentions a propeller assembly, it specifically mentions created flows and mixing without the need for “mechanical – propeller-based – mixers” {63/363,414}. Since this application is a continuation of a prior non-provisional application, no new matter is eligible; however, new matter will still be considered by the examiner if this new matter rejection is overcome by the applicant in the future.
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, 7, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coyne (US5540836A) in view of Wang (CN201999767U). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
In regards to claim 1, Coyne teaches A system for treating wastewater comprising: {C 2, L 53, "wastewater treatment system"} at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 2, L's 55-56, "first and second tank units"} at least one inflow pipe and valve assembly coupled to the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to direct wastewater into the at least one reactor tank assembly {C 4, L's 45-51, "Raw wastewater 22 … traveling in a drain or pipe is drawn through conduit 26 by pump 12"} through at least one inlet header port assembly disposed on a top portion of the reactor tank assembly; {C 24, L's 43-44, "Inlet opening at the top of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 11, L's 60-62, "conduit 72 is directed to either a municipal sewer, a septic system, storage, or recycled for use in the process"} coupled by at least one outlet port assembly of the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to direct wastewater out from the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 24, L's 45-47, "outlet at the bottom of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} at least one return flow pipe and valve assembly of the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 11, L's 60-62, "conduit 72 is directed to either a municipal sewer, a septic system, storage, or recycled for use in the process"} adapted to direct, as required, at least a portion of the wastewater flowing out from the at least one reactor tank assembly back into the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C11, L's 64-65, "it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment."} at least one circulation pump assembly {R 12 "Main Pump"} disposed on the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C11, L's 64-65, "it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment."} at least one carrier-injector pump assembly, {C 15, L's 41-43, "with the amount of aqueous chemical mixture being added to mixing chamber 114 being controlled by a pump 286"} the at least one carrier-injector pump assembly adapted to pump a portion of wastewater fed to it as a secondary stream of wastewater flowing through the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C 15, L's 48-51, "mixer 118 may have a separate supply line… independently control the amount of chemical agents supplied to mixing chambers 114 and 118."} at least one mixer assembly operationally disposed within the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to mix wastewater in the reactor tank assembly, inclusive, when present, of wastewater drawn from the reactor tank assembly and reintroduced into the reactor tank assembly through the at least one return flow pipe and valve assembly; {C 9, L's 17-19, "clockwise rotation or turbulence of wastewater caused by a voluminous flow of small air bubbles"} and at least one pH sensor assembly disposed at least partially within the wastewater flow {C 4, L's 53-55, "The raw wastewater stream … is checked for … and pH"} and operationally coupled to at least one computer system, {C's 16-17, L's 60-2, "The system is fully automated … a central processing unit which receives input from … wastewater condition sensors"} the at least one computer system adapted to control introducing {C's 16-17, L's 60-2, "central processing unit … provides control signals to … for each pump and motor."} at least one or more of acid from an at least one acid storage reactor tank and valve assembly operationally coupled to the wastewater flow {C's 5-6, L's 67-4; F 3 R (284) "chemical mixture supply tank"} and a caustic from an at least one caustic storage reactor tank and valve assembly operationally coupled to the wastewater flow, {C's 5-6, L's 67-4; F 3 R (284) "chemical mixture supply tank"} the at least one or more acid and caustic used to change the pH of the wastewater, {C's 5-6, L's 67-4} the at least one or more acid and caustic introduced to the wastewater as the wastewater flows through one or more streams of the outflow pipe and valve assembly.{C 15, L's 41-43, "with the amount of aqueous chemical mixture being added to mixing chamber 114 being controlled by a pump 286"}
In regards to claim 2, Coyne teaches The system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein at least one static mixer is disposed on the outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 7, L's 16-17; C 9, L's 16-18; F 1, R (14)} and at least one pH sensor is disposed on the outflow pipe and valve assembly following the static mixer, {F 1 R's (1d) "pH ck" & (14)} the pH sensor adapted to test wastewater pH after the wastewater has passed through the static mixer {C 11, L's 7-10} and, if the pH is inclusively between 5.0 and 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} a selector valve adapted to be open and allow the wastewater to flow out of the system for treating wastewater {C 11, L's 57-62, "if it meets with the desired water quality standards, the wastewater exits … to either a municipal sewer.."
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
and, if the pH is less than 5.0 or greater than 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} the selector valve assembly adapted to be closed and direct wastewater to flow back into a reactor tank assembly. {C 11, L's 62-65, "If the wastewater exiting … is not of the desired clarity … it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment.
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
In regards to claim 7, Coyne teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein a distribution trough of the at least one reactor tank assembly is adapted to receive wastewater and distribute that wastewater substantially evenly over the surface of wastewater already in the at least one reactor tank assembly. {C 8, L's 1-8, "Into compartment 1A … to disperse or spread the wastewater as it exits conduit 34 and enters compartment 1A"}
In regards to claim 19, Coyne teaches a system for treating wastewater comprising: {C 2, L 53, "wastewater treatment system"} at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 2, L's 55-56, "first and second tank units"} a distribution trough of the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to receive wastewater and distribute that wastewater substantially evenly over the surface of wastewater already in the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 8, L's 1-8, "Into compartment 1A … to disperse or spread the wastewater as it exits conduit 34 and enters compartment 1A"} at least one inflow pipe and valve assembly coupled to the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to direct wastewater into the at least one reactor tank assembly {C 4, L's 45-51, "Raw wastewater 22 … traveling in a drain or pipe is drawn through conduit 26 by pump 12"} through at least one inlet header port assembly disposed on a top portion of the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 24, L's 43-44, "Inlet opening at the top of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 11, L's 60-62, "conduit 72 is directed to either a municipal sewer, a septic system, storage, or recycled for use in the process"} coupled by at least one outlet port assembly of the at least one reactor tank assemblies adapted to direct wastewater out from the at least one reactor tank assemblies; {C 24, L's 45-47, "outlet at the bottom of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} at least one return flow pipe and valve assembly of the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly adapted to direct, as required, at least a portion of the wastewater flowing out from the at least one reactor tank assemblies back into at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 11, L's 60-65, "conduit 72 is directed to either a municipal sewer, a septic system, storage, or recycled for use in the process … it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment"} at least one circulation pump assembly {R 12 "Main Pump"} disposed on the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C11, L's 64-65, "it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment."} at least one carrier-injector pump assembly, {C 15, L's 41-43, "with the amount of aqueous chemical mixture being added to mixing chamber 114 being controlled by a pump 286"} the at least one carrier-injector pump assembly adapted to pump a portion of wastewater fed to it as a secondary stream of wastewater flowing through the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C 15, L's 48-51, "mixer 118 may have a separate supply line… independently control the amount of chemical agents supplied to mixing chambers 114 and 118."} at least one mixer assembly operationally disposed within each reactor tank assembly adapted to mix wastewater in the at least one reactor tank assemblies, inclusive, when present, of wastewater drawn from at least one reactor tank assembly and reintroduced into the at least one reactor tank assemblies through the at least one return flow pipe and valve assembly; {C 9, L's 17-19, "clockwise rotation or turbulence of wastewater caused by a voluminous flow of small air bubbles"} at least one pH sensor assembly disposed at least partially within the wastewater flow {C 4, L's 53-55, "The raw wastewater stream … is checked for … and pH"} and operationally coupled to at least one computer system, {C's 16-17, L's 60-2, "The system is fully automated … a central processing unit which receives input from … wastewater condition sensors"} the at least one computer system adapted to control introducing {C's 16-17, L's 60-2, "central processing unit … provides control signals to … for each pump and motor."} at least one or more of acid from an at least one acid storage reactor tank and valve assembly operationally coupled to the wastewater flow {C's 5-6, L's 67-4; F 3 R (284) "chemical mixture supply tank"} and a caustic from an at least one caustic storage reactor tank and valve assembly operationally coupled to the wastewater flow, {C's 5-6, L's 67-4; F 3 R (284) "chemical mixture supply tank"} the at least one or more acid and caustic used to change the pH of the wastewater, {C's 5-6, L's 67-4} the at least one or more acid and caustic introduced to the wastewater as the wastewater flows through one or more streams of the outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C 15, L's 41-43, "with the amount of aqueous chemical mixture being added to mixing chamber 114 being controlled by a pump 286"} and one or more from a group of: temperature sensors disposed within the at least one or more of the reactor tank assemblies and pipe and valve assemblies, pressure sensors disposed within at least one or more of the reactor tank assemblies, and flow sensors disposed within at least one or more of the pipe and valve assemblies. {C 16, L's 65-66, "wastewater condition sensor, flow sensors, …"}
In regards to claim 20, Coyne teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein at least one static mixer is disposed on the outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 7, L's 16-17; C 9, L's 16-18; F 1, R (14)} and at least one pH sensor is disposed on the outflow pipe and valve assembly following the static mixer, {F 1 R's (1d) "pH ck" & (14)} the pH sensor adapted to test wastewater pH after the wastewater has passed through the static mixer {C 11, L's 7-10} and, if the pH is inclusively between 5.0 and 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} a selector valve adapted to be open and allow the wastewater to flow out of the system for treating wastewater {C 11, L's 57-62, "if it meets with the desired water quality standards, the wastewater exits … to either a municipal sewer.."
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
and, if the pH is less than 5.0 or greater than 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} the selector valve assembly adapted to be closed and direct wastewater to flow back into a reactor tank assembly. {C 11, L's 62-65, "If the wastewater exiting … is not of the desired clarity … it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment.
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
Coyne does not teach:
Claim 1: The at least one reactor tank assembly operable at least one or more of singly, as a series of reactor tank assemblies, and parallel with other reactor tank assemblies;
Claim 19: The at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to be operable in lead-lag flows and parallel flows with at least one second reactor tank assembly, changes between lead-lag flow and parallel flow adapted to be enacted at least one or more of manually and automatically;
However, Wang teaches the limitations that Coyne does not teach.
In regards to claim 1, Wang teaches the at least one reactor tank assembly operable at least one or more of singly, as a series of reactor tank assemblies, and parallel with other reactor tank assemblies. {P 4 middle, "The whole system … controlled, parallel or serial mode"}
In regards to claim 19, Wang teaches the at least one reactor tank assembly adapted to be operable in lead-lag flows and parallel flows {P 2 bottom, "series-parallel operation switching device"} with at least one second reactor tank assembly, changes between lead-lag flow and parallel flow adapted to be enacted at least one or more of manually and automatically. {P 4 middle, "the whole system can be automatically controlled, parallel or serial mode, manual selection on the DCS … two-stage exchange can be finished automatically by the program control"}
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 inventions of Wang to the invention of Coyne, because both inventions appear within the same field of water treatment systems and techniques. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Wang to Coyne because the automation of Wang creates conditions that prolongs the resin life, reduces pollution, and saves chemicals during the acid-base dosing portion of treatment. {Wang, P 3 middle, “The beneficial effect … reduces the pollution”}
Claims 3 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Wang (CN201999767U), in view of Tharp (US20160200608A1). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne and Wang teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2, 7, and 19-20 as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 3: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein the at least one reactor tank assembly has a buffer zone suitable for holding variable wastewater levels.
Claim 21: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein the at least one reactor tank assembly has a buffer zone suitable for holding variable wastewater levels.
However, Tharp teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Wang do not teach.
In regards to claim 3, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein the at least one reactor tank assembly has a buffer zone suitable for holding variable wastewater levels. {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"}
In regards to claim 21, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein the at least one reactor tank assembly has a buffer zone suitable for holding variable wastewater levels. {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"}
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 Tharp to the previously combined invention of Coyne and Wang because the invention of Tharp falls within the same field of wastewater treatment as the combined invention of Coyne and Wang. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Tharp to Coyne and Wang because the invention of Tharp introduces methods for operating during colder months that minimize operational issues and reduce costs. {Tharp, P 6, ¶ 5 right side, “minimize operation issues or energy costs during cold months”}
Claims 4 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Wang (CN201999767U), in view of Ghalib (WO2006130850A1). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne and Wang teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2, 7, and 19-20 as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 4: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein flow rate variability ranges inclusively between 2,500 and 10,000 gallons per minute.
Claim 22: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein flow rate variability ranges inclusively between 2,500 and 10,000 gallons per minute.
However, Ghalib teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Wang do not teach.
In regards to claim 4, Ghalib teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein flow rate variability ranges inclusively between 2,500 and 10,000 gallons per minute. {P 7, L's 22-24, "range of 2,000 to 1,500,000 gallons per minute"}
In regards to claim 22, Ghalib teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein flow rate variability ranges inclusively between 2,500 and 10,000 gallons per minute. {P 7, L's 22-24, "range of 2,000 to 1,500,000 gallons per minute"}
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 Ghalib to the combined invention of Coyne and Wang because both inventions appear within the same field of wastewater treatment systems and methods. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Ghalib to Coyne and Wang because the screen arrangement of Ghalib allows for maximum overflow capacity with minimal head loss; reduces the need for large, above-ground buildings; and upwards flow causes relatively low and uniform hydraulic loading rates. {Ghalib, P 11, L’s 3-8}
Claims 5-6 and 23-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A), Wang (CN201999767U), and Ghalib (WO2006130850A1); in view of Tharp (US20160200608A1) *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne, Wang, and Ghalib teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2, 4, 7, 19-20, and 22, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 5: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 4 wherein circulation pump assemblies are adapted to handle varied rates of wastewater flows.
Claim 6: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 4 wherein flow rate variability ranges are controllable by the at least one circulation pump, buffer zone, and parallel reactor tank assembly.
Claim 23: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 22 wherein circulation pump assemblies are adapted to handle varied rates of wastewater flows.
Claim 24: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 22 wherein flow rate variability ranges are controllable by the at least one circulation pump, buffer zone, and parallel reactor tank assembly.
However, Tharp teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne, Wang, and Ghalib do not teach.
In regards to claim 5, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 4 wherein circulation pump assemblies are adapted to handle varied rates of wastewater flows. {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"}
In regards to claim 6, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 4 wherein flow rate variability ranges are controllable by the at least one circulation pump, {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"} buffer zone, {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"} and parallel reactor tank assembly. {¶ 35, "equalization basin 104 may be designed … in parallel with the reactor 106"}
In regards to claim 23, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 22 wherein circulation pump assemblies are adapted to handle varied rates of wastewater flows. {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"}
In regards to claim 24, Tharp teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 22 wherein flow rate variability ranges are controllable by the at least one circulation pump, {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"} buffer zone, {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"} and parallel reactor tank assembly. {¶ 35, "equalization basin 104 may be designed … in parallel with the reactor 106"}
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 Tharp to the combined invention of Coyne, Wang, and Ghalib because Tharp falls within the same field of wastewater treatment systems and methods as the combined invention. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Tharp to the combined invention because Tharp teaches a method of operation that minimizes operational issues and reduces costs during the colder months. {Tharp, P 6, ¶ 5 right side, “minimize operation issues or energy costs during cold months”}
Claims 8 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Wang (CN201999767U), in view of Quintel (US8323493B2). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne and Wang teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2, 7, and 19-20, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 8: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein at least one bag strainer disposed on the outflow stream is adapted to catch particles and debris from the wastewater flow.
Claim 25: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein at least one bag strainer disposed on the outflow stream is adapted to catch particles and debris from the wastewater flow.
However, Quintel teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Wang do not teach.
In regards to claim 8, Quintel teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein at least one bag strainer disposed on the outflow stream is adapted to catch particles and debris from the wastewater flow. {C 1, L's 39-41, 49-51, "strainer for removing large particles … filtering unit has a basket … effluent of the bag filter is discharged through an outlet … to a drain"}
In regards to claim 25, Quintel teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein at least one bag strainer disposed on the outflow stream is adapted to catch particles and debris from the wastewater flow. {C 1, L's 39-41, 49-51, "strainer for removing large particles … filtering unit has a basket … effluent of the bag filter is discharged through an outlet … to a drain"}
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 Quintel with the combined invention of Coyne and Wang, because Quintel falls within the same field of wastewater treatment as the combined invention. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Quintel to Coyne and Wang because the invention of Quintel can be mounted on a wheeled cart, allowing for portability, which increases its ability for connection to many different types of systems, as well as the areas in which is can be used. {Quintel, C 5, L’s 2-5}
Claims 9 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Wang (CN201999767U), in view of Johnson (US6126827A). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne and Wang teach all of the limitations of claims 1-2, 7, and 19-20, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 9: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein the at least one reactor assembly includes at least one propeller assembly adapted to mix wastewater.
Claim 26: The system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein the at least one reactor assembly includes at least one propeller assembly adapted to mix wastewater.
However, Johnson teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Wang do not teach
In regards to claim 9, Johnson teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 1 wherein the at least one reactor assembly includes at least one propeller assembly adapted to mix wastewater. {C 6, L's 22-23, "mixing device 49 which may comprise a propeller type mixer"}
In regards to claim 26, Johnson teaches the system for treating wastewater of Claim 19 wherein the at least one reactor assembly includes at least one propeller assembly adapted to mix wastewater. {C 6, L's 22-23, "mixing device 49 which may comprise a propeller type mixer"}
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 Johnson to the combined invention of Coyne and Wang because John appears within the same field of wastewater treatment systems as Coyne and Wang. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Johnson to Coyne and Wang because using the logic controller of Johnson, allows the user to reduce cycle times so the system can accommodate periods of increased flow. {Johnson, C 8, L’s 64-66}
Claims 10-11, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Coyne (US5540836A), in view of Ghalib (WO2006130850A1).
In regards to claim 10, Coyne teaches a method for treating wastewater comprising: {C 2, L's 48-49, "wastewater treatment system and method"} sending wastewater from at least one inflow pipe and valve assembly coupled to at least one reactor tank assembly into the at least one reactor tank assembly C 4, L's 45-51, "Raw wastewater 22 … traveling in a drain or pipe is drawn through conduit 26 by pump 12"} through at least one inlet header port assembly disposed on a top portion of the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 24, L's 43-44, "Inlet opening at the top of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} further mixing the wastewater by way of at least one mixer assembly, mixing to substantially uniform intermixing of an at least one or more of acid and caustic introduced to the wastewater within the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 6, L's 10-12, "Mixing vessel 14 … to provide a thorough and rapid mixing of … chemicals with the wastewater"} sending wastewater from the at least one reactor tank assembly through at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly {C 11, L's 60-62, "conduit 72 is directed to either a municipal sewer, a septic system, storage, or recycled for use in the process"} coupled by at least one outlet port assembly of the at least one reactor tank assembly; {C 24, L's 45-47, "outlet at the bottom of the downwardly flowing wastewater compartment"} measuring pH by at least one pH sensor disposed within wastewater {C 4, L's 53-55, "The raw wastewater stream … is checked for … and pH"} that has flowed into the outflow pipe; {C 11, L's 7-10} if the pH is in an unacceptable range, treating the wastewater by introducing at least one or more of an acid and a caustic into the wastewater flow {C's 5-6, L's 66-2, "pH of the wastewater … is adjusted … adding a compound of chemical which will raise or lower the pH so that it is within a desired pH range"} by way of at least one secondary stream of the wastewater, {C 15, L's 41-43, "supplies aqueous mixture to line 282 with the amount of aqueous chemical mixture being added to mixer chamber 114"} a carrier-injector pump assembly pumping the secondary stream of wastewater from wastewater flowing through the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C 15, L's 48-51, "mixer 118 may have a separate supply line… independently control the amount of chemical agents supplied to mixing chambers 114 and 118."} if the pH was in an unacceptable range, sending at least a portion of the treated wastewater, back into at least one reactor tank assembly by way of at least one return flow pipe and valve assembly of the at least one outflow pipe and valve assembly; {C 11, L's 62-65, "If the wastewater exiting … is not of the desired clarity … it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment.
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
and if the pH is in an acceptable range, discharging at least a portion of the wastewater from the system for treating wastewater. {C 11, L's 57-62, "if it meets with the desired water quality standards, the wastewater exits … to either a municipal sewer."
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
In regards to claim 11, Coyne teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including testing wastewater pH after the wastewater has passed through at least one static mixer disposed on the outflow pipe and valve assembly, {C 11, L's 7-10} if the pH is inclusively between 5.0 and 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} opening a selector valve assembly and allowing the wastewater to flow out of the system for treating wastewater {C 11, L's 57-62, "if it meets with the desired water quality standards, the wastewater exits … to either a municipal sewer.."
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
and, if the pH is less than 5.0 or greater than 8.0, {C 6 L's 1-2, "desired pH range, for example, 4 to 8"} closing the selector valve assembly and directing wastewater to flow back into at least one reactor tank assembly. {C 11, L's 62-65, "If the wastewater exiting … is not of the desired clarity … it is returned to main pump 12 and sent through the system again for further treatment.
PNG
media_image1.png
381
396
media_image1.png
Greyscale
}
In regards to claim 16, Coyne teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including sending wastewater into a distribution trough and distributing the wastewater substantially evenly over the surface of the wastewater already in the at least one reactor tank assembly. {C 8, L's 1-8, "Into compartment 1A … to disperse or spread the wastewater as it exits conduit 34 and enters compartment 1A"}
Coyne does not teach:
Claim 10: mixing the wastewater by way of waterflow pressure generated by at least one circulation pump assembly.
However, Ghalib teaches all of the limitations that Coyne does not teach.
In regards to claim 10, Ghalib teaches mixing the wastewater by way of waterflow pressure {P 15, L's 16-17, "flushing system 72 … to mix the contents of shaft structure 16"} generated by at least one circulation pump assembly. {P 16, L's 6-7, "flushing system including one more high-pressure nozzles connected to one or more pumps"}
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 Ghalib to the invention of Coyne because both inventions appear within the same field of wastewater treatment systems and methods. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Ghalib to Coyne because the screen arrangement of Ghalib allows for maximum overflow capacity with minimal head loss; reduces the need for large, above-ground buildings; and upwards flow causes relatively low and uniform hydraulic loading rates. {Ghalib, P 11, L’s 3-8}
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Ghalib (WO2006130850A1), in view of Tharp (US20160200608A1).
The combination of Coyne and Ghalib teach all of the limitations of claims 10-11 and 16, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
In regards to claim 14, Ghalib further teaches water flowing between about 2,500 and 10,000 gallons per minute. Note that claim 14 depends on claim 13, hence why this mapping was placed within the combination of Coyne, Ghalib, and Tharp.
The combination of Coyne and Ghalib do not teach:
Claim 12: The method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including holding variable wastewater levels within a buffer zone of the at least one reactor assembly.
Claim 13: The method for treating wastewater of Claim 12 including circulating variable rates of wastewater flows.
Claim 15: The method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including controlling wastewater flow with at least one circulation pump, buffer zone, and parallel reactor tank assembly.
However, Tharp teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Ghalib do not teach.
In regards to claim 12, Tharp teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including holding variable wastewater levels within a buffer zone of the at least one reactor assembly. {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"}
In regards to claim 13, Tharp teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 12 including circulating variable rates of wastewater flows. {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"}
In regards to claim 15, Tharp teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including controlling wastewater flow with at least one circulation pump, {¶ 11, "A valve and/or pump … for controlling the flow of wastewater"} buffer zone, {¶ 37 bottom, "equalization basin 104 is designed to act as a buffer … through the reactor 106"} and parallel reactor tank assembly. {¶ 35, "equalization basin 104 may be designed … in parallel with the reactor 106"}
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 Tharp to the combined invention of Coyne and Ghalib because the invention of Tharp falls within the same field of wastewater treatment as the combined invention of Coyne and Ghalib. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Tharp to Coyne and Ghalib because the invention of Tharp introduces methods for operating during colder months that minimize operational issues and reduce costs. {Tharp, P 6, ¶ 5 right side, “minimize operation issues or energy costs during cold months”}
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Ghalib (WO2006130850A1), in view of Quintel (US8323493B2).
The combination of Coyne and Ghalib teach all of the limitations of claims 10-11 and 16, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 17: The method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including catching with at least one bag strainer larger particles and debris from the wastewater flow.
However, Quintel teaches all of the limitations that the combination of Coyne and Ghalib do not teach.
In regards to claim 17, Quintel teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including catching with at least one bag strainer larger particles and debris from the wastewater flow. {C 1, L's 39-41, 49-51, "strainer for removing large particles … filtering unit has a basket … effluent of the bag filter is discharged through an outlet … to a drain"}
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 Quintel with the combined invention of Coyne and Ghalib, because Quintel falls within the same field of wastewater treatment as the combined invention. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Quintel to Coyne and Ghalib because the invention of Quintel can be mounted on a wheeled cart, allowing for portability, which increases its ability for connection to many different types of systems, as well as the areas in which is can be used. {Quintel, C 5, L’s 2-5}
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Coyne (US5540836A) and Ghalib (WO2006130850A1), in view of Wang (CN201999767U). *Note all teachings and mappings of Wang are based on the attached, machine translated, English version.
The combination of Coyne and Ghalib teach all of the limitations of claims 10-11 and 16, as mentioned in prior 103 rejections.
This combination does not teach:
Claim 18: The method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including changing between lead-lag and parallel wastewater flows at least one or more of manually and automatically.
However, Wang teaches all of the limitations that the combined of Coyne and Ghalib do not teach.
In regards to claim 18, Wang teaches the method for treating wastewater of Claim 10 including changing between lead-lag and parallel wastewater flows {P 2 bottom, "series-parallel operation switching device"} at least one or more of manually and automatically. {P 4 middle, "the whole system can be automatically controlled, parallel or serial mode, manual selection on the DCS"}
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 Wang to the combined invention of Coyne and Ghalib, because both inventions appear within the same field of water treatment systems and techniques. One of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be motivated to combine Wang to Coyne and Ghalib because the automation of Wang creates conditions that prolongs the resin life, reduces pollution, and saves chemicals during the acid-base dosing portion of treatment. {Wang, P 3 middle, “The beneficial effect … reduces the pollution”}
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