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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending:
Claims 1-8 and 10-16 are rejected.
Claim 9 is objected to.
Claims 17-20 have been withdrawn.
Election/Restrictions
Claims 17-20 have been withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected group II there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 04/08/2026.
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I in the reply filed on 04/08/2026 is acknowledged.
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 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512) in view of Liu (CN 116395831) in view of Matheson (USPN 5,954,963) and further in view of Cormier (US 2009/0211954).
Regarding claims 1 and 3, Slajchert teaches a water treatment system (biological and chemical denitrification method and system, see ABS and Fig. 1) for denitrification of groundwater, comprising: an inlet (process water inlet from feed pump 29) coupled to a groundwater source (a source conduit 28, “groundwater source” is interpreted to also mean “a source for groundwater” and because the claimed “groundwater” is an intended use, it does not impart sufficient patentable weight to the claimed “source” structure); an upflow (chemical denitrification reactor 11) configured reaction volume (see Fig. 1) comprising: an upper portion (corresponds to the top of denitrification reactor 11); and a lower portion (corresponds to the bottom of denitrification reactor 11) coupled to the inlet; a population of bacteria (the bed was seeded with native soil bacteria, see C3/L35-41) within the upflow configured reaction volume (in operation due to the upflow of water in the vessel 13, see C3/L10-15); a recirculation loop (recycle line 51) coupled to the upper portion of the upflow configured reaction volume (see Fig. 1) and configured to recirculate at least a portion of water output from the upper portion of the upflow configured reaction volume back into the upflow configured reaction volume (see Fig. 1)…an electronically-controllable additive doser (nutrient feed pump 45) (the operation could be by digital or analog automated control, or by hand, see C4/L60-67) configured to dose water with a carbon source (the nutrient can be methyl alcohol, see C3/L55-65 and Fig. 1); a post filter (polishing continuous backwashing filter 65) coupled to the recirculation loop (see Fig. 1) …configured to arrest any …bacteria of the population of …bacteria that enter the post filter (polishing filter 65 removes solids to achieve an effluent less than 2ppm nitrate, see C4/L35-45; therefore the polishing filter inherently arrests at least some of the bacteria associated with those solids); and
an output port (corresponds to port connected to effluent line connected to the polishing filter 65) coupled to an output of the post filter (see Fig. 1).
Slajchert does not teach (1) that the recirculation loop is a recirculation and dosing loop comprising the electronically-controllable additive doser configured to dose water within the recirculation and dosing loop; (2) the post filter configured for downflow and comprising a filter media; and (3) heterotrophic bacteria are denitrifying bacteria.
In a related field of endeavor, Liu teaches a sewage treatment system and process (see ABS) a recirculation and dosing loop (outer reflux pipe 8) comprising the electronically-controllable additive doser (corresponds to pump supplying methanol solution storage device 7) configured to dose water within the recirculation and dosing loop (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the electronically-controllable additive doser and the recirculation loop of Slajchert by integrating the doser and loop to be a recirculation and dosing loop as disclosed by Liu because it helps to control the water total nitrogen quantity and optimize the adding of methanol to ensure complete denitrification and stabilize the water quality of the water (Liu, see pgs. 8 and 15).
In a related field of endeavor, Matheson teaches process for biologically treating water (see ABS) comprising a post filter (multimedia filter 40) configured for downflow (see Fig. 1), and comprising a filter media (filter bed 42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the post-filter of Slajchert by incorporating a filter media and configuring for downflow as disclosed by Matheson because a downflow configuration allows for gravitational flow which provides a desirable flow rate through the filter (Matheson, see C6/L30-40) and the filter bed provides the benefit of trapping large and small particulates (Matheson, see C6/L20-30) thereby improving the effluent water quality.
In a related field of endeavor, Cormier teaches an apparatus for denitrifying wastewater (see ABS) comprising heterotrophic bacteria are denitrifying bacteria (see ¶31).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the bacteria of Slajchert with the heterotrophic denitrifying bacteria of Cormier because it helps to reduce all nitrate (NO3-) in solution (Cormier, see ¶45).
Regarding claim 2, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1, wherein the post filter is a member of a set of post filters coupled in parallel to the recirculation and dosing loop and coupled in parallel to the output port (Matheson, two or more parallel filters 40 can be provided such that when a given one of the individual filters is taken off-line for backwashing, the other filter(s) can remain in operation, see C6/L20-32).
Regarding claim 4, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1, wherein the population of heterotrophic bacteria (Cormier, i.e. heterotopic denitrifying bacteria) is agitated and fluidized by head pressure of the water source (Slajchert is capable of meeting the claimed limitation). The limitation “…agitated and fluidized by head pressure of the water source” is a process/method step, and the system of Cormier further teaches that some active movement of the granular media 33 in the packed bed 31 when the anoxic packed-bed biological and chemical denitrification reactor 11 is in operation due to the upflow of water in the vessel 13 and movement in the packed bed 31 provides advantages as will be discussed herein below (Slajchert, see C3/L5-15), therefore Slajchert as modified by Cormier is capable of performing the claimed process/method step.
Regarding claim 6, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1.
Cormier further teach that the carbon source is acetic acid (acetic acid, see ¶91).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the carbon source of Slajchert by selecting acetic acid as the carbon source as disclosed by Cormier because it is a very effective denitrifying carbon source (Cormier, see ¶91).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512) in view of Liu (CN 116395831) in view of Matheson (USPN 5,954,963) in view of Cormier (US 2009/0211954) and further in view of Zhang (CN 114014439).
Regarding claim 5, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1.
The combination does not teach that the electronically-controllable additive doser is coupled to a controller configured to adjust dosing of the carbon source based, at least in part, on a nitrate measurement sampled after the post filter.
In a related field of endeavor, Zhang teaches a control method for denitrification (see ABS) comprising an electronically-controllable additive doser is coupled to a controller (PLC control box 2 connected with computer 1) configured to adjust dosing of the carbon source based, at least in part, on a nitrate measurement sampled after the post denitrification (the computer detects the water nitrate concentration X through the NO3-N sensor at each time of water outlet, and automatically calculates the carbon nitrogen ratio r of the next period according to the calculating program set in the inner part; the computer controls the waste water pump to send the waste water to the reactor after the waste water pump is controlled by the computer, controlling the metering pump to accurately add carbon source, see pg. 6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the electronically-controllable additive doser of Slajchert by incorporating a controller configured to adjust dosing of the carbon source based, at least in part, on a nitrate measurement sampled after the post denitrification as disclosed by Zhang because it facilitates easy control of the denitrification reaction as well as aiding in a fast and stable operation while keeping costs low (Zhang, see ABS).
Zhang does not teach the controller configured to adjust dosing of the carbon source based, at least in part, on a nitrate measurement sampled after the post filter.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the sensor of Slajchert (as modified by Zhang) by arranging said sensor after the post filter because it achieves the predictable result of monitoring final effluent nitrate concentration.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512) in view of Liu (CN 116395831) in view of Matheson (USPN 5,954,963) in view of Cormier (US 2009/0211954) and further in view of Jiang (US 2025/0042791).
Regarding claim 7, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1, wherein the recirculation and dosing loop (Slajchert as modified by Liu teaches the claimed limitation) comprises electronically-controllable additive doser (Slajchert, nutrient feed pump 45) is a first electronically-controllable additive doser (Slajchert, see Fig. 1).
The combination does not teach that the recirculation and dosing loop comprises a second electronically-controllable additive doser configured to dose water within the recirculation and dosing loop with an alkaline substance.
In a related field of endeavor, Jiang teaches biological dentification process (see ABS) comprising a recirculation loop comprising an electronically-controllable additive doser (automatic lye dripping device 23) configured to dose water within the recirculation and dosing loop with an alkaline substance (“the pH online monitor 22 and the automatic lye dripping device 23 may also be mounted at the first water delivery pipe 32. A second signal input end of the circulation control part 35 is connected to the pH online monitor 22, and a first signal output end of the circulation control part 35 is connected to the automatic lye dripping device 23. The automatic lye dripping device 23 contains carbonate solution or bicarbonate solution to adjust the alkalinity of the wastewater”, see ¶39 and “the circulation control part 35 starts the automatic lye dripping device 23 to adjust the alkalinity until the pH value of the wastewater detected by the pH online monitor 22 reaches 10.0, and the circulation control part turns off the automatic lye dripping device 23”, see ¶41 and Fig. 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the recirculation and dosing loop (Slajchert as modified by Liu) by incorporating an electronically-controllable additive doser configured to dose water within the recirculation and dosing loop with an alkaline substance disclosed by Jiang because it helps to control the alkalinity of the wastewater which is desirable in denitrification reactions (Jiang, see ¶39).
Regarding claim 8, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson, Cormier and Jiang teach the water treatment system of claim 7, wherein the alkaline substance comprises lye (Jiang, i.e. lye).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512) in view of Liu (CN 116395831) in view of Matheson (USPN 5,954,963) view of Cormier (US 2009/0211954) and further in view of Clough (USPN 5,154,836).
Regarding claim 10, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson and Cormier teach the water treatment system of claim 1.
The combination does not teach that the filter media comprises manganese dioxide ore.
In a related field endeavor, Clough teaches a process for treating contaminants in aqueous-based materials (see ABS) comprising a filter media comprises manganese dioxide ore (a coarse filter containing a uniformly distributed coarse manganese dioxide ore (pyrolucite), see C11/L35-45).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the filter media of Slajchert (as modified by Matheson) by incorporating manganese dioxide ore as disclosed by Matheson because it effectively oxidizes contaminants in wastewater (Matheson, see C2/L15-30).
Claims 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512) in view of Liu (CN 116395831) and further in view of Matheson (USPN 5,954,963).
Regarding claim 11, Slajchert teaches a water treatment system (biological and chemical denitrification method and system, see ABS and Fig. 1) for denitrification of groundwater, comprising: an inlet (process water inlet from feed pump 29) coupled to a pressurized water source (a source conduit 28, “water source” is interpreted to also mean “a source for water” and because the claimed “water” is an intended use, it does not impart sufficient patentable weight to the claimed “source” structure); a reaction volume (chemical denitrification reactor 11) comprising a population of denitrifying bacteria (the bed was seeded with native soil bacteria, see C3/L35-41), the reaction volume coupled to the inlet (see Fig. 1) and configured for upflow operation (in operation due to the upflow of water in the vessel 13, see C3/L10-15); a recirculation loop (recycle line 51) coupled to the reaction volume (see Fig. 1) and configured to recirculate a quantity of water output from the reaction volume back into reaction volume (see Fig. 1), …an additive doser (nutrient feed pump 45) configured to dose water (the nutrient can be methyl alcohol, see C3/L 55-65 and Fig. 1)…a post filter (polishing continuous backwashing filter 65)…is coupled to the recirculation loop (see Fig. 1); …configured to arrest particles that enter the post filter; and an output port coupled to an output of the post filter group (the final effluent has less than 2ppm nitrate, see C4/L35-45; therefore the polishing filter inherently arrests at least some of the bacteria associated with those solids).
Further, Slajchert teaches that “when the anoxic packed-bed biological and chemical denitrification reactor 11 is in operation due to the upflow of water in the vessel 13” see C3/L10-15, “the bed was seeded with native soil bacteria” see C3/L35-41, “removal of nitrates from the up-flowing water” see C3/L40-45, “the nutrients is to facilitate the growth of biological substances on the granular media 33” and “the nutrients feed and encourage the growth of native soil bacteria which has been seeded into the packed bed 31 of granular media 33” see C5/L4-15. Based on the teachings of Slajchert, the biological denitrification occurring in the packed is facilitated by the bacteria seeded into the media. Therefore, the packed bed necessarily comprises a population of denitrifying bacteria.
Slajchert does not teach (1) the recirculation loop comprising an additive doser configured to dose water within the recirculation loop with an additive; and (2) the post filter is a post filter group comprising at least two post filters each of which: is configured for downflow; and comprises a filter media.
In a related field of endeavor, Liu teaches a sewage treatment system and process (see ABS) comprising a recirculation loop (outer reflux pipe 8) having an additive doser (corresponds to pump supplying methanol solution storage device 7) configured to dose water within the recirculation loop with an additive (see Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the additive doser and the recirculation loop of Slajchert by integrating the doser and loop such that the recirculation loop comprising an additive doser configured to dose water within the recirculation loop with an additive as disclosed by Liu because it helps to control the water total nitrogen quantity, optimize the adding of methanol to ensure complete denitrification and stabilize the water quality of the water (Liu, see pgs. 8 and 15).
In a related field of endeavor, Matheson teaches process for biologically treating water (see ABS) comprising a post filter (multimedia filter 40) configured for downflow (see Fig. 1), and comprising a filter media (filter bed 42); and a post filter group comprising at least two post filters (two or more parallel filters 40 can be provided such that when a given one of the individual filters is taken off-line for backwashing, the other filter(s) can remain in operation, see C6/L25-32).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the post-filter of Slajchert by configuring as a post filter group, each post filter comprising: a filter media and configuring for downflow as disclosed by Matheson because a downflow configuration allows for gravitational flow which provides a desirable flow rate through the filter (Matheson, see C6/L30-40) and the filter bed provides the benefit of trapping large and small particulates (Matheson, see C6/L20-30) thereby improving the effluent water quality.
Regarding claim 12, Slajchert, Liu, and Matheson teach the water treatment system of claim 11, comprising a controller configured to instruct the additive doser to dose the additive (Slajchert, the operation could be by digital or analog automated control, or by hand, see C4/L60-67; therefore the system of Slajchert requires a controller or similar circuitry to perform the operation).
Regarding claim 13, Slajchert, Liu, and Matheson teach the water treatment system of claim 12, wherein the controller is configured to instruct the additive doser to adjust a schedule of dosing of the carbon source (the automated control system is capable of performing the claimed function). Slajchert further teaches “various control algorithms can be used, the basic feedback concept is that the recycle quantity is increased, as a percentage of the effluent from media-free volume 37 as the nitrate concentration in that effluent increases beyond desired levels” see C4/L45-55 and “the reactor system includes a nutrient feed source 41 and a nutrient feed pump 45 connected in a conduit 47 to transport nutrients into the lower influent-receiving chamber 23 of the reactor 11. The purpose of the nutrients is to facilitate the growth of biological substances on the granular media 33. More specifically, the nutrients feed and encourage the growth of native soil bacteria which has been seeded into the packed bed 31 of granular media 33”, see C4/L60-65. Therefore, the controller is capable of performing the limitation using the programmed algorithms and the automated control system.
Regarding claim 14, Slajchert, Liu, and Matheson teach the water treatment system of claim 12, wherein the controller is configured to instruct the additive doser to adjust a volume of dosing of the carbon source (the automated control system is capable of performing the claimed function). The limitation “adjust a volume of the carbon source” is interpreted to include any volume and the system of Slajchert is provided with nutrient pump 45 to dose any volume. Slajchert further teaches “various control algorithms can be used, the basic feedback concept is that the recycle quantity is increased, as a percentage of the effluent from media-free volume 37 as the nitrate concentration in that effluent increases beyond desired levels” see C4/L45-55 and “the reactor system includes a nutrient feed source 41 and a nutrient feed pump 45 connected in a conduit 47 to transport nutrients into the lower influent-receiving chamber 23 of the reactor 11. The purpose of the nutrients is to facilitate the growth of biological substances on the granular media 33. More specifically, the nutrients feed and encourage the growth of native soil bacteria which has been seeded into the packed bed 31 of granular media 33”, see C4/L60-65. Therefore, the controller is capable of performing the limitation using the programmed algorithms and the automated control system.
Regarding claim 15, Slajchert, Liu, and Matheson teach the water treatment system of claim 12.
Slajchert and Liu do not teach that the controller is configured to select a post filter from the post filter group for backwashing; and in response, initiating backwashing of the selected post filter by instructing a backwash valve associated with the selected post filter to enter a backwash mode; and diverting at least a portion of water directed from the post filter group to the output port to the selected post filter to backwash the post filter.
Matheson further teaches a controller is configured to select a post filter from the post filter group for backwashing (in order to allow continuous operation of inventive system 2, two or more parallel filters 40 can be provided such that when a given one of the individual filters is taken off-line for backwashing, the other filter(s) can remain in operation, see C6/L20-30; choosing one filter among the multiple parallel filters for backwash reads on “configured to select…”); and in response, initiating backwashing of the selected post filter by instructing a backwash valve associated with the selected post filter to enter a backwash mode (water backwashing step begins with the opening of valve 120 disposed in backwash supply water conduit 122 and the opening of valve 124 disposed in backwash effluent conduit 126, see C7/L15-25 and Fig. 1); and diverting at least a portion of water directed from the post filter group to the output port to the selected post filter to backwash the post filter (water backwashing step begins with the opening of valve 120 disposed in backwash supply water conduit 122 and the opening of valve 124 disposed in backwash effluent conduit 126, see C7/L15-25 and Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the controller of Slajchert by configuring to select a post filter from the post filter group for backwashing; and in response, initiating backwashing of the selected post filter by instructing a backwash valve associated with the selected post filter to enter a backwash mode; and diverting at least a portion of water directed from the post filter group to the output port to the selected post filter to backwash the post filter as disclosed by Matheson because an adequate amount of backwashing water delivered to the filter expends the bed volume sufficiently to allow particulate debris to be carried upward (Matheson, see C7/L20-30).
Regarding claim 16, Slajchert, Liu, and Matheson teach the water treatment system of claim 11, wherein the additive comprises one of: a carbon source (Slajchert, i.e. methyl alcohol)….
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 9 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The closest prior art references to claim 9 are Slajchert (USPN 8,753,512), Liu (CN 116395831), Matheson (USPN 5,954,963), Cormier (US 2009/0211954), Jiang (US 2025/0042791) and Zhang (CN 114014439).
Regarding claim 9, Slajchert, Liu, Matheson, Cormier and Jiang teach the water treatment system of claim 7.
Specifically, Cormier teaches a controller configured to adjust the carbon source based on a nitrate measurement and alkalinity measurement within a denitrification reactor. Jiang teaches a controller configured to adjust the alkalinity in order to control the alkalinity levels within a denitrification reactor. Zhang teaches a controller configured to adjust the carbon source based on a nitrate measurement downstream of a denitrification reactor.
However, none of the cited references teach nor fairly suggests the claimed controller configured with two feedback control loops to control both alkalinity and the carbon source based at least in part on a nitrate concentration sampled after the post filter. Therefore, the closest prior art does not teach or render obvious “a controller configured to adjust dosing of the alkaline substance based, at least in part, on the nitrate measurement sampled after the post treatment ; a controller configured to: adjust dosing of the carbon source based, at least in part, on a nitrate measurement sampled after the post filter” as required by claim 9. Accordingly, claim 9 would be allowable over the cited prior art of record.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EKANDRA S. MILLER-CRUZ whose telephone number is (571)270-7849. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7 am - 6 pm EST.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/EKANDRA S. MILLER-CRUZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights