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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the amended claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
A new reference has been provided to show the obviousness of the orientation of the mixer.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 23-35 and 37-39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lieberherr, DE 2550131 (already of record) in view of Zou et al, US Patent Publication 2015/0197439 in further view of Colman et al, USP 5,439,991.
Regarding claim 23, Lieberherr teaches a green liquor treatment arrangement (the apparatus of the reference is capable of working on green liquor) comprising: a mixing assembly for controlling mixing of green liquor and a flocculation agent (see figures), the mixing assembly comprising:
a mixing vessel having a first end and a second end (see figure 4),
a mixing vessel inlet configured to supply green liquor and flocculating agent to the mixing vessel in the vicinity of the first end (see page 7 of translation, claim 8 and figure 4),
a mixing vessel outlet configured to remove flocculated green liquor from the mixing vessel in the vicinity of the second end (see figure 4),
a stirring device that is rotatably arranged in a vicinity of the first end (see figure 4)and configured to mix the green liquor and flocculation agent by stirring (described in pages 6 and 7 of the provided translation), wherein
the mixing vessel has a length from a center of the mixing vessel inlet to a center of the mixing vessel outlet (see figure 4), the mixing vessel has a maximum width that is perpendicular to a center axis that extends from the first end to the second end (see figure 4), and said length is at least 1.5 times the maximum width (page 6 of the translation includes an example of a width of 400 mm and a length of 800 mm making a ratio of 2).
Lieberherr further teaches a vertical alignment is possible (page three of translation). Additionally a mere rearrangement of position would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as the same end result would occur in a closed mixing vessel.
In order to address that the first end at a bottom side and the second end is at a top side of the vertical mixing vessel, the Colman reference is presented.
In the same field of endeavor of mixing vessel used in a continuous phase with a liquid additive, Colman teaches that the continuous phase mixing apparatus is preferably an elongated vessel that can be either horizontal or vertical (just like the teachings of Lieberherr) and that it is preferable to introduce the reactants at an inlet port at the bottom of the vessel to thoroughly mix through the vessel and to be removed at an outlet at the top of the vessel (column 2 lines 3-26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize the conventional knowledge of Colman that the inlet of a mixing vessel can be placed at the bottom and the outlet at the top to encourage throughout mixing of the additive with the continuous material.
Lieberherr teaches that the liquid is removed from the outlet for further processing but is silent on that further processing being removal of flocculated matter through sedimentation.
In the same field of endeavor of flocculating materials, Zou teaches that once the flocculated particles are suspended into large particles, they can be removed through a sedimentation process [0043].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to utilize Zou's additional treatment of the flocculated materials after mixing to separate by a conventional means as sedimentation in the Lieberherr setup, as this additional step would not provide any undo modifications to add an additional processing step that is both conventional and has a high level of succusses it is commonly utilizing in the industry.
Regarding claims 24 and 34, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches the length width ratio is 2 (page 6) and cylindrical.
Regarding claims 25-27, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches that conically positioned components are welded to the walls of the device (see pages 6-7 and claim 11) with a propeller on an agitator motor is in the middle of the devices axis (page 6 items 9 and 11).
Regarding claims 28-31, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches the inner to outer connection pieces have a size ratio of around 1:10 with an example of 80 mm and 25 mm (see page 6 of translation).
Regarding claims 32 and 33, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches that the motor can be adjustable to operate the desired speed (page 7) and gives an example of the water flow inlet operating at 3200 m/hr (which is 0.889 m/s, which is greater than the claimed 0.3 m/s).
Regarding claim 35, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches an embodiment (figure 5) were the inlet to the vessel is narrower than the outlet as shown by the inlet at A3 enters the vessel in section 5 which is a smaller width than the exit at A4.
Regarding claim 37, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches a volume of less than 10 meters cubed (400 mm and 800 mm length and width is less than 10 meters cubed).
Regarding claims 38-39, Lieberherr remains as applied above and further teaches that the inlet and outlet are near the ends of the vessel (as shown in figure 4). While a numerical calculation for less than 20% cannot be explicitly provided the discloser of entering and exiting at opposite ends of the vessel paired with the figures would provide an implicit teaching readily understood by one of ordinary skill in the art.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACOB T MINSKEY whose telephone number is (571)270-7003. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-6 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, Abbas Rashid can be reached at 5712707475. 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.
JACOB T. MINSKEY
Examiner
Art Unit 1741
/JACOB T MINSKEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1748
Prosecution Insights