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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/18/2023 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 1-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao (US PGPub 2019/0374912, hereinafter Nakao) in view of Kobayashi et al. (US PGPub 2022/0072486, hereinafter Kobayashi).
Regarding claim 1, Nakao discloses a manufacturing apparatus for an ultra fine bubble containing liquid, the manufacturing apparatus comprising:
a bubble generating unit (figure 1, generator 131) configured to generate bubbles in a liquid;
a circulation path (path r1) for the liquid where the circulation path includes the bubble generating unit (see figure 1);
a circulating unit (pump 132) disposed in the circulation path on a downstream side of the bubble generating unit and configured to circulate the liquid through the circulation path;
a blocking unit (valve seen connected to control unit 199) disposed in the circulation path on an upstream side of the bubble generating unit and configured to switch between closing and opening of the circulation path; and
a control unit (control unit 199) configured to control the bubble generating unit, the circulating unit, and the blocking unit (paragraph 0063),
Although Nakao discloses a bubble generator and a bubble collapsing unit for producing ultrafine bubbles, the reference is silent to these being a single device that generates ultrafine bubbles. Kobayashi teaches a manufacturing apparatus for an ultrafine bubble containing liquid (figure 1) including a circulation path (path 7) having a circulating unit (pump 6) downstream of an ultrafine bubble generating unit (unit 2A) and a blocking unit (valve 9) upstream of the ultrafine bubble generating unit, wherein all the devices are controlled by a control unit (device 13). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Nakao with the ultrafine bubble generator positioned as in Kobayashi for the purpose of simplifying the device without including additional equipment.
With regard to the actions of the control unit, both references recite a control unit that controls all of the parts of their respective devices. This would render the control unit capable of alternately executing a first mode in which, with the blocking unit open, the bubble generating unit is driven while the circulating unit is being driven, and a second mode in which, with the blocking unit closed and the bubble generating unit stopped, the circulating unit is driven as recited. It is noted that this claim limitation does not place a structural requirement on the control unit because it does not recite that that control unit is “configured to” perform the recited functions, only that the control unit performs the recited functions. Thus, this is considered to be a functional requirement of the controller, and the controllers of the prior art are deemed to be fully capable of performing this function, meeting the claim.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites further actions of the control unit, and both references recite a control unit that controls all of the parts of their respective devices. This would render the control unit capable of executing a third mode in which, with the blocking unit open and the ultra fine bubble generating unit stopped, the circulating unit is driven to achieve a flow velocity higher than that in the first mode. It is noted that this claim limitation does not place a structural requirement on the control unit because it does not recite that that control unit is “configured to” perform the recited functions, only that the control unit performs the recited functions. Thus, this is considered to be a functional requirement of the controller, and the controllers of the prior art are deemed to be fully capable of performing this function, meeting the claim.
Regarding claim 3, Nakao is silent to a temperature detecting unit as recited. Kobayashi teaches a temperature detecting unit for detecting a temperature of the ultra fine bubble generating unit (paragraph 0122). The cited paragraph indicates that the controller of Kobayashi detects the temperature of water emitted from the ultra fine bubble generating unit, which is considered to be the temperature of the unit as recited. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Nakao with the temperature detecting unit of Kobayashi for the purpose of ensuring a desired temperature to produce a desired gas and bubble concentration.
The claim recites further actions of the control unit, and both references recite a control unit that controls all of the parts of their respective devices. This would render the control unit capable of switching from the first mode to the third mode in a case that the detected temperature from the temperature detecting unit reaches a predetermined temperature upper limit. It is noted that this claim limitation does not place a structural requirement on the control unit because it does not recite that that control unit is “configured to” perform the recited functions, only that the control unit performs the recited functions. Thus, this is considered to be a functional requirement of the controller, and the controllers of the prior art are deemed to be fully capable of performing this function, meeting the claim.
Regarding claim 4, claim recites further actions of the control unit, and both references recite a control unit that controls all of the parts of their respective devices. This would render the control unit capable of switching from the first mode to the third mode in a case that the detected temperature from the temperature detecting unit reaches a predetermined temperature upper limit. It is noted that this claim limitation does not place a structural requirement on the control unit because it does not recite that that control unit is “configured to” perform the recited functions, only that the control unit performs the recited functions. Thus, this is considered to be a functional requirement of the controller, and the controllers of the prior art are deemed to be fully capable of performing this function, meeting the claim.
Regarding claims 5-9, the ending and starting of modes merely represents actions of the control unit. Both references recite a control unit that controls all of the parts of their respective devices. This would render the control unit capable of performing the functions recited in claims 5-9. It is noted that this claim limitation does not place a structural requirement on the control unit because it does not recite that that control unit is “configured to” perform the recited functions, only that the control unit performs the recited functions. Thus, this is considered to be a functional requirement of the controller, and the controllers of the prior art are deemed to be fully capable of performing this function, meeting the claims.
With respect to the limitation of a plurality of temperature detecting units, this would merely represent a duplication of parts. It is well-settled that mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960). In this case, the additional temperature detecting units would produce only the predictable result of providing additional temperature data relating to the ultrafine bubble generating unit, and thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included additional units for that purpose.
Regarding claim 10, Nakao discloses an accommodating unit (figure 1, storage unit 150) disposed in a middle of the circulation path and configured to accommodate the liquid (paragraph 0072).
Regarding claim 11, Nakao discloses a temperature control unit (figure 1, cooling unit 104) for controlling a temperature of the liquid accommodated in the accommodating unit (storage unit 150).
Regarding claim 13, Nakao is silent to a concentration detecting unit as recited. Kobayashi teaches a concentration detecting unit (meter 10) that detects the concentration of bubbles included in the water after the ultrafine bubble generating device, which would be equivalent to detecting the concentration in the storage unit of Nakao. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the device of Nakao with the concentration detection unit of Kobayashi for the purpose of ensuring the product produces by the device has the desired concentration of bubbles.
Claims 12 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao (US PGPub 2019/0374912, hereinafter Nakao) in view of Kobayashi et al. (US PGPub 2022/0072486, hereinafter Kobayashi), as applied to claims 1 and 10 above, and further in view of Yamada et al. (US PGPub 2021/0129090, hereinafter Yamada).
Regarding claim 12, Nakao is silent to a stirring unit as recited. Yamada teaches a manufacturing apparatus for ultrafine bubble containing liquid that includes an accommodating unit (figure 3A, container 201) to store liquid with a stirring unit (rotation plate 202) contained therein. To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have provided the apparatus of Nakao with the stirring unit of Yamada for the purpose of maintaining the distribution of gas and bubbles within the liquid during production.
Regarding claim 14, Nakao is silent to a heating element as recited. Yamada teaches a manufacturing apparatus for ultrafine bubble containing liquid that generates ultra fine bubbles by causing a heating element to generate heat to cause film boiling at an interface between the liquid and the heating element (paragraph 0031). To one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to have used the heating element of Yamada to produce ultrafine bubbles because the use of a known method of producing ultrafine bubbles would provide only the expected result of producing ultrafine bubbles.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is allowed.
Claim 15 recites specific method steps, including switching between the two modes as recited, that are not reasonably disclosed, taught, or suggested in the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The cited prior art generally discloses devices for producing ultrafine bubbles in a liquid.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARC C HOWELL whose telephone number is (571)272-9834. 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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/MARC C HOWELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights