DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 1-18 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (CN 211570217U, please refer to the attached English translation document, hereinafter “Cheng”).
In regard to claim 1, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater, in particular to a non-thermal plasma technology (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document).
Cheng discloses a flow-through fluid treatment system (1, Fig. 1, a plasma reactor) for generating a plasma discharge in a fluid, the system comprising (description about the purification device in pages 2-4 in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document):
(i) a high-voltage electrode (11, Fig. 1, an inner cylinder connected with a high-voltage power supply) forming a fluid inlet into a cylindrical flow-through reactor (1, Fig. 1) (a liquid is transported through a liquid inlet 15 and the inner cylinder 11 which meets the recited “a high-voltage electrode forming a fluid inlet”), the fluid inlet having an inlet inner diameter (the diameter of the inner cylinder 11);
(ii) a ground electrode (an outer cylinder 12, Fig. 1 provided with a ground electrode) forming a fluid outlet out of the cylindrical flow-through reactor (the outer cylinder 12, Fig. 1 in conjunction with a fluid outlet pipe meets the recited “a ground electrode forming a fluid outlet”), the ground electrode and the high-voltage electrode disposed coaxially (the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12 disposed coaxially (i.e., share a common, central axis in circular geometric configuration) across a gap (an annular gap (13, Fig. 1) between the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12) between the electrodes in a cylindrical flow-through reactor space;
(iii) a gas inlet (14, Fig. 1) into the cylindrical flow-through reactor, disposed vertically with respect to an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor, and a polytetrafluoroethylene joint is adopted for a gas inlet and a liquid inlet of the plasma reactor; and
(iv) a high-voltage power supply electrically connected to the inner cylinder (a high-voltage electrode) for generating a plasma discharge across the gap, thereby producing plasma treated fluid.
But Cheng does not explicitly disclose the feature of a gas inlet disposed tangentially in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor to generate a vortex gas flow within the cylindrical flow-through reactor space.
However, as set forth above, Cheng discloses a gas inlet (14, Fig. 1) is disposed vertically with respect to an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor, and a polytetrafluoroethylene joint is adopted for a gas inlet and a liquid inlet of the plasma reactor. Since the gas (air) is eventually transported to the interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor along with the input liquid, and the gas is dispersed inside the cylindrical flow-through reactor, which would expected to result in a turbulent flow therein that causes a pressure drop therein, one skilled in the art would have reasonably expected that the teachings of Cheng renders the recitation “a gas inlet disposed tangentially in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor to generate a vortex gas flow within the cylindrical flow-through reactor space” prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 2, Cheng discloses the fluid outlet comprising the outer cylinder 12 has an outlet inner diameter that is larger than the inlet inner diameter of the inner cylinder 11 (Fig. 1).
In regard to claim 3, set forth above, Cheng discloses a gap (an annular gap 13, Fig. 1 between the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12) between the electrodes in a cylindrical flow-through reactor space which is considered an optimal length of a gap is installed therein. In light of teachings from Cheng, in its entirety, the claimed range of the gap would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation in an effort to optimize fluid treatment system activity and utility taking into consideration the operational parameters of the fluid treatment operation (fluid residence time, temperature, pressure, gas/fluid throughput), the geometry of the fluid treatment system, the physical and chemical make-up of the fluid inlet feedstock as well as the nature of the fluid outlet end-products.
In regard to claim 8, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater (i.e., a liquid) (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document).
Claims 4-7 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ganjigunte Ramaswamy et al. (US 2022/0212959 A1, hereinafter “Ganjigunte Ramaswamy”).
In regard to claims 4, 6 and 7, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater, in particular to a non-thermal plasma technology (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction).
But Cheng does not explicitly disclose the fluid is a foam, and the foam comprises amphophilic compounds such as perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
However, Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses a method of forming an aerosol of an aqueous liquid, and directing the aerosol into a plasma, wherein the method can be used to degrade a polyfluoroalkyl substance (Abstract). Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses a method comprising: forming an aerosol of an aqueous liquid; and directing the aerosol into a plasma, wherein the aqueous liquid is suspected of comprising a contaminant that is degraded by the plasma, wherein the contaminant is a polyfluoroalkyl substance (page 4, claims 1-12).
It is noted that both the Cheng and Ganjigunte Ramaswamy references direct a method of degrade a contaminant(s) using plasma discharge.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the apparatus of Cheng, to provide the features of the fluid is a foam, and the foam comprises amphophilic compounds such as perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as taught by Ganjigunte Ramaswamy, because the recited features of “a contaminant degraded by the plasma wherein the contaminant is a polyfluoroalkyl substance” is a known, effective method of degrading contaminants using plasma discharge as taught by Ganjigunte Ramaswamy (page 4, claims 1-12).
In regard to claims 5 and 9, Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses polyfluoroalkyl substance resulted from foam material (aqueous film forming foam (AFFF)) (paragraph [0013]) which implicitly directs a presence of a foam fractionation system (i.e., a foam collection system), also discloses a presence of a surfactant in the aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) (paragraph [0023]).
Claims 10-12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng et al. (CN 211570217U, please refer to the attached English translation document, hereinafter “Cheng”).
In regard to claim 10, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater, in particular to a non-thermal plasma technology (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document).
Cheng discloses a method of flow-through fluid treatment (1, Fig. 1, a plasma reactor) for generating a plasma discharge in a fluid, the method comprising (description about the purification device in pages 2-4 in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document):
(i) flowing a fluid through a fluid inlet (a liquid is transported through a liquid inlet 15 and the inner cylinder 11 which meets the recited “the fluid inlet forming a high-voltage electrode”) having an inlet inner diameter (the diameter of the inner cylinder 11, Fig. 1) into a cylindrical flow-through reactor (1, Fig. 1), the fluid inlet forming a high-voltage electrode (11, Fig. 1, an inner cylinder connected with a high-voltage power supply);
(ii) flowing the fluid out of a fluid outlet the fluid outlet forming a ground electrode (an outer cylinder 12, Fig. 1 provided with a ground electrode) disposed coaxially (the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12 disposed coaxially, i.e., share a common, central axis in circular geometric configuration) across a gap (an annular gap 13, Fig. 1 between the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12) between the electrodes in a cylindrical flowthrough reactor space (a space inside the plasma reactor (1, Fig. 1);
(iii) flowing a gas through a gas inlet (14, Fig. 1) into the cylindrical flow-through reactor, wherein the gas inlet disposed vertically in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor, and a polytetrafluoroethylene joint is adopted for a gas inlet and a liquid inlet of the plasma reactor; and
(iv) operating a high-voltage power supply electrically connected to the inner cylinder (a high-voltage electrode) for generating a plasma discharge across the gap, thereby producing plasma treated fluid.
But Cheng does not explicitly disclose the feature of a gas inlet disposed tangentially in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor to generate a vortex gas flow within the cylindrical flow-through reactor space.
However, as set forth above, Cheng discloses a gas inlet (14, Fig. 1) is disposed vertically in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor, and a polytetrafluoroethylene joint is adopted for a gas inlet and a liquid inlet of the plasma reactor. Since the gas (air) is eventually transported to the interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor along with the input liquid, and the gas is dispersed inside the cylindrical flow-through reactor, which would expected to result in a turbulent flow therein that causes a pressure drop therein, one skilled in the art would have reasonably expected that the teachings of Cheng renders the recitation “a gas inlet disposed tangentially in an interior wall of the cylindrical flow-through reactor to generate a vortex gas flow within the cylindrical flow-through reactor space” prima facie obvious.
In regard to claim 11, Cheng discloses the fluid outlet comprising the outer cylinder 12 has an outlet inner diameter that is larger than the inlet inner diameter of the inner cylinder 11 (Fig. 1).
In regard to claim 12, set forth above, Cheng discloses a gap (an annular gap 13, Fig. 1 between the inner cylinder 11 and the outer cylinder 12) between the electrodes in a cylindrical flow-through reactor space which is considered an optimal length of a gap is installed therein. In light of teachings from Cheng, in its entirety, the claimed range of the gap would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art through routine experimentation in an effort to optimize fluid treatment system activity and utility taking into consideration the operational parameters of the fluid treatment operation (residence time, temperature, pressure, gas throughput), the geometry of the fluid treatment system, the physical and chemical make-up of the fluid inlet feedstock as well as the nature of the fluid outlet end-products.
In regard to claim 17, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater (i.e., a liquid) (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction with Fig. 1 of the original Chinese document).
Claims 13-16 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ganjigunte Ramaswamy et al. (US 2022/0212959 A1, hereinafter “Ganjigunte Ramaswamy”).
In regard to claims 13, 15 and 16, Cheng discloses a purification device and a purification method for treating antibiotic wastewater, in particular to a non-thermal plasma technology (page 2, Technical Field in conjunction).
But Cheng does not explicitly disclose the fluid is a foam, and the foam comprises amphophilic compounds such as perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
However, Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses a method of forming an aerosol of an aqueous liquid, and directing the aerosol into a plasma, wherein the method can be used to degrade a polyfluoroalkyl substance (Abstract). Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses a method comprising: forming an aerosol of an aqueous liquid; and directing the aerosol into a plasma, wherein the aqueous liquid is suspected of comprising a contaminant that is degraded by the plasma, wherein the contaminant is a polyfluoroalkyl substance (page 4, claims 1-12).
It is noted that both the Cheng and Ganjigunte Ramaswamy references direct a method of degrade a contaminant(s) using plasma discharge.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the process of Cheng, to provide the features of the fluid is a foam, and the foam comprises amphophilic compounds such as perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as taught by Ganjigunte Ramaswamy, because the recited features of “a contaminant degraded by the plasma wherein the contaminant is a polyfluoroalkyl substance” is a known, effective method of degrading contaminants using plasma discharge as taught by Ganjigunte Ramaswamy (page 4, claims 1-12).
In regard to claims 14 and 18, Ganjigunte Ramaswamy discloses polyfluoroalkyl substance resulted from foam material (aqueous film forming foam (AFFF)) (paragraph [0013]) which implicitly directs a presence of a foam fractionation system (i.e., a foam collection system), also discloses a presence of a surfactant in the aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) (paragraph [0023]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YOUNGSUL JEONG whose telephone number is (571)270-1494. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, In Suk Bullock can be reached on 571-272-5954. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/YOUNGSUL JEONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772