Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Objections
The claims are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 7 appears to be worded awkwardly, and should perhaps read, “… wherein within the water outlet, between the upper wall of the separating chamber and an outer wall of the separator is a plurality of guiding vanes that are aligned to an opposite direction of a pitch angle related to a pitch angle of the spiral vanes.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Regarding claim 1. The claim recites, “wherein a top end of the wall of the separating chamber includes an annular upper edge with a rounded top contour having a minimum radius of 8 mm and the annular upper edge defines a surface of the water outlet.”
Examiner is interpreting the rounded top contour of the annular upper edge as referencing the cross sectional contour of the edge, e.g. see R in fig. 2. This is opposed to interpreting a top down view of a cylindrical wall as having a rounded top contour.
PNG
media_image1.png
194
174
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 4. The claim recites, “wherein the rounded top contour of the top end is concave.”
Examiner is interpreting this limitation to correspond to the inclination of the top end of the wall, see Applicant’s PGPUB abstract and paras. 13 and 27, in addition to fig. 2 which shows the portion leading to the rounded top contour as being concave. In other words, it does not make sense for the rounded top contour, per se, to be concave. Please see 112(b) rejection below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 4. Consistent with the claim interpretation section above, the claim is being interpreted as requiring a concave inclination. However, no inclination has been introduced in claim 1. Instead, the inclination is introduced in claim 2.
For the purpose of substantive examination, Examiner will consider claim 4 as if dependent upon claim 2.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5, 7-13, 15, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 3329130 A to Cochran in view of GB 750198 A to Silver.
Regarding claim 1. Cochran teaches a separator of a boiler drum for separating steam and water, wherein the separator includes:
a separating chamber (fig. 2a, inner steam vortex 48) having a fluid inlet at a bottom of the separating chamber (fig. 2b, vortex tube inlet opening 44),
a steam outlet at a top of the separating chamber (fig. 2a, steam vortex outlet tube 67),
a water outlet around the steam outlet (fig. 2a, first annular water removal channel 53), and
a wall from the bottom to the water outlet and extending around an interior of the separating chamber (fig. 2a, vertical vortex tube 42), and
spiral vanes in the interior of the separating chamber and attached to the wall of the separating chamber (fig. 2b, vanes 45),
wherein the spiral vanes are between the fluid inlet and the steam outlet (figs. 2a-2b) and are configured to impart a circular motion to fluids entering the separating chamber through the fluid inlet (col. 4 ll. 41-45),
wherein the water outlet leads first upwards and then turns downwards (fig. 2a, the water flows upwards to the first annular water removal channel 53 and then turns downwards to the first annular liquid flow reversing outlet passage 56), and
PNG
media_image2.png
169
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein a top end of the wall of the separating chamber includes an annular upper edge with a rounded top contour (see close up of fig. 2a to the right, the upper or outlet end 52 of the vortex tube 42 has a rounded top contour) and the annular upper edge defines a surface of the water outlet (col. 4 ll. 60-63).
PNG
media_image3.png
1371
508
media_image3.png
Greyscale
But fails to explicitly teach a rounded top contour having a minimum radius of 8 mm.
Silver teaches a rounded contour (fig. 1, rolled end 13) having a radius over 8 mm (p. 2 ll. 27-36, where the rolled end 13 having a radius of one inch is equal to a radius of 25.4 mm).
PNG
media_image4.png
460
391
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Cochran to implement a structure having smooth, rolled edges, as taught by Silver. This would provide the predictable result and benefit of providing a smooth flow of fluid with low pressure drop, as suggested by Silver on p. 1 ll. 11-18 and 39-55.
Regarding claim 3. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein the minimum radius of the rounded top contour is at least 12 mm (as noted in the rejection to claim 1, Silver teaches a radius of 25.4 mm).
Regarding claim 5. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 1, further comprising an opposite wall which is opposite to the water outlet and is around the top end of the wall of the separating chamber (This corresponds to the inner tube 51, first annular top plate 53a, and skirt 54 of Cochran, fig. 2a),
wherein the opposite wall is curved and is without edges (when modified by Silver to have smooth edges, these components would be curved and without edges, similar to Silver’s casting 14).
Regarding claim 11. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 5, wherein the opposite wall of the top end of the wall of the separating chamber the water outlet is curved (see claim 5) and a width of the water outlet is substantially constant or narrows in an outflow direction (as seen in Cochran fig. 2a, the water outlet 53 narrows in an outflow direction, at least initially, before increasing in width).
Regarding claim 7. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein within the water outlet, between the upper wall of the separating chamber and an outer wall of the separator is a plurality of guiding vanes (fig. 2a, inverted teardrop-shaped diffuser blades 57) that are aligned to an opposite direction of a pitch angle related to a pitch angle of the spiral vanes (Cochran col. 5 ll. 5-8, additionally, figs. 5 and col. 4 ll. 55-58 describe the same configuration as claimed).
Regarding claim 8. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 7, wherein the guiding vanes number in a range of 6 to 16 (Cochran col. 5 ll. 10-13, 12 blades are present).
Regarding claim 9. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 7, wherein a cumulative circumferential coverage of the guiding vanes is at least 300 degrees (Cochran col. 5 ll. 10-13, 360 degrees are covered).
Regarding claim 10. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of any of claim 7, wherein the pitch angle of the guiding vanes is in a range of 45 to 75 degrees (Cochran fig. 5, it appears that the angle of the vanes 57 are within this range, at least in the uppermost portions).
PNG
media_image5.png
612
598
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 12. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein the steam outlet has a bottom which has an upwards decreasing diameter (optional limitation, see mapping to alternative) and/or a top shape having an upwards increasing diameter (Cochran fig. 2a, inner surface 98 of ring 69).
Regarding claim 13. Cochran teaches a separator of a boiler drum comprising:
a separating chamber (fig. 2a, inner steam vortex 48) including an annular first wall having a lower fluid inlet (fig. 2b, vortex tube inlet opening 44) configured to receive fluid from the boiler drum (col. 4 ll. 39-41),
wherein a flow passage extends up through the annular first wall from the lower fluid inlet towards a steam outlet (figs. 2a-2b, a flow passage can be seen between the opening 44 and the steam vortex outlet tube 67) and an inlet to an annular water outlet (fig. 2a, first annular water removal channel 53) which extends around the steam outlet, an annular top region of the annular first wall (fig. 2a, top region of vertical vortex tube 42),
PNG
media_image2.png
169
184
media_image2.png
Greyscale
wherein the annular top region includes an upper edge having a cross section with a radius of curvature (see close up of fig. 2a to the right, the upper edge can be seen to have a radius of curvature) and the annular top region is an inner wall of the annular water outlet (col. 4 ll. 60-63);
an annular outer wall of the annular water outlet positioned over and at least partially enclosing the annular top region (This corresponds to the inner tube 51, first annular top plate 53a, and skirt 54 of Cochran, fig. 2a),
wherein the annular outer wall extends around the steam outlet (fig. 2a, the previously mentioned features extend around the steam outlet), and
vanes within the separating chamber (fig. 2b, vanes 45) and below the annular top region (fig. 2a, inverted teardrop-shaped diffuser blades 57),
wherein the vanes are configured to impart a rotational flow to the fluid flowing from the boiler up through the separating chamber (col. 4 ll. 55-58),
wherein a water flow passage through the annular water outlet extends from the inlet, upwards towards the upper edge between an annular inner surface of the annular top region and the surface of the outer wall, and downward from the upper edge past an outer surface of the annular top region (col. 5 ll. 1-4, as seen in fig. 2a).
But fails to explicitly teach a radius of curvature of at least 8 mm, and fails to teach wherein the annular outer wall includes a concave surface opposite to the annular top region.
Silver teaches a rounded contour (fig. 1, rolled end 13 and casting 14) having a radius over 8 mm (p. 2 ll. 27-36, where the rolled end 13 having a radius of one inch is equal to a radius of 25.4 mm).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the device of Cochran to implement a structure having smooth, rolled edges, as taught by Silver. This would provide the predictable result and benefit of providing a smooth flow of fluid with low pressure drop, as suggested by Silver on p. 1 ll. 11-18 and 39-55.
Regarding claim 15. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 13, wherein the annular water outlet includes an outer wall defining a radially outward surface of the water outlet and extending around the first wall (this corresponds to the skirt 54, Cochran fig. 2a).
Regarding claim 17. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 13, wherein the annular top region has a shape in cross section which is bulbous with a narrow tapered lower end and a rounded upper surface, and the rounded upper shape includes the upper edge (when modified by Silver, this shape would be present, see Silver fig. 1).
PNG
media_image6.png
188
276
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 18. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 13, wherein the annular water outlet includes guide vanes having a pitch angle opposite to a pitch angle of the vanes (Cochran col. 5 ll. 5-8, additionally, figs. 5 and col. 4 ll. 55-58 describe the same configuration as claimed).
Claim(s) 6 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cochran in view of Silver as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 5320652 A to Akel.
Regarding claim 6. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 1, wherein the separating chamber has a top section (portion of the vertical vortex tube 42 in Cochran fig. 2a)
But fails to teach the top section increases in diameter in an upward direction.
Akel teaches a top section increasing in diameter in an upward direction (fig. 2, conical diffuser section 34, described in col. 3 ll. 20-30).
PNG
media_image7.png
722
482
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the device of Cochran to implement a suitable conical diffuser section in the vertical vortex tube 42, as taught by Akel. This would provide the predictable result and benefit of enhancing separation by reducing momentum, as suggested by Akel in the portion cited above.
Regarding claim 16. Modified Cochran teaches the separator of claim 13,
But fails to teach wherein the annular first wall includes a frustoconical section above the vanes and below the annular top region, wherein the frustoconical section increases in diameter in an upward direction.
Akel teaches an annular wall including a frustoconical section above vanes and below a top region which increases in diameter in an upward direction (fig. 2, conical diffuser section 34, described in col. 3 ll. 20-30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to further modify the device of Cochran to implement a suitable conical diffuser section in the vertical vortex tube 42, as taught by Akel. This would provide the predictable result and benefit of enhancing separation by reducing momentum, as suggested by Akel in the portion cited above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 14 are 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.
Claim 4 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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:
Regarding claim 2. The combination of Cochran in view of Silver, applied to claim 1, represents the closest prior art of record to the claimed invention. The prior art fails to teach, “wherein the top end of the wall of the separating chamber is inclined radially inward by an inclination angle relative to vertical of at least 15 degrees from a start of an inclination line to a point where the top end of the wall curves outwards from the inclination line, and the top end of the wall and the length of the inclination is at least 25 mm.”, in addition to the rest of the claim.
Instead, Cochran teaches a substantially straight wall of the separating chamber, and Silver would at best suggest an outwardly inclined angle. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to arrive at the invention, as claimed.
Regarding claim 4. The claim is being interpreted as dependent upon claim 2, see rejection under 112(b), and is allowable for the same reasons.
Regarding claim 14. The claim is allowable for substantially the same reason as claim 2.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Kurt J Wolford whose telephone number is (571)272-9945. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 4:00 PM.
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, Michael G Hoang can be reached at (571)272-6460. 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.
/KURT J WOLFORD/Examiner, Art Unit 3762 /MICHAEL G HOANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3762