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 Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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 10 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.
Claim 10 is indefinite because the limitation of “about” lacks a standard defined in the instant disclosure.
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.
Claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 1–7, 9–10, 12, 14, 19–20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Finger et al., US 2019/0263699 A1 (“Finger”) in view of Grainger et al., US 2018/0100108 A1 (“Grainger”).
Regarding claim 1:
Finger discloses that a cold trap (Finger’s cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0062]) comprising:
an inlet (where contaminated water 202 enters cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0063]) for receiving a gas mixture (Finger discloses its contaminated water enters as vapor phase, Id.) comprising a first chemical species (Finger discloses as water, Finger Fig. 2, [0063]) and second chemical species (Finger discloses as contaminants, such as water soluable acids, ions, Finger [0022]),
wherein the first chemical species (water) and second chemical species (contaminants) have different phase equilibria (water and contaminants have different phase equilibrium because they are made of distinct atomic and molecular properties that dictates its behavior at different temperatures and pressure);
a body (casing of cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0062]) in fluid communication with the inlet (as shown in Finger Fig. 2, [0063]) and through which the gas mixture flows (see Finger Fig. 2),
wherein the body includes internal walls (Finger discloses its cold trap serves as a vessel or container, and the internal walls forming the vessel or containers would be the claimed “internal walls”, Finger Fig. 2, [0023]) and one or more internal structural components (Finger discloses its cold trap may include a plurality of cooled plates, fins, baffles, Finger Fig. 4, [0023]);
an outlet (Finger discloses its cold trap is a housing with inlet and outlet and an outlet is shown in Finger Fig. 2, [0023]) for exhausting at least the undesired chemical species (contained in Finger’s gas stream 206, Finger Fig. 2, [0068]) from the cold trap (220 of Finger),
wherein the body is in fluid communication with the outlet (as shown in Finger Fig. 2);
a shell thermally exposed to an environment outside of the cold trap (Finger discloses its cold trap as a cylinder in Fig. 2, which includes a shell, and was exposed to a heat source 222, Finger Fig. 2, [0068]);
and a thermal control system configured to control a temperature of the internal walls and one or more internal structural components, wherein the thermal control system maintains a deposition temperature at a pressure that selectively deposits the first chemical species to a solid phase on the internal walls and the one or more internal structural components without condensing or depositing the second chemical species (Finger discloses the temperature and pressure of the cold trap is controlled to cause water vapor to selectively form a deposit, and cause at least one or more volatiles to remain vapor phase and therefore separating the volatiles, the device controlling the temperature and pressure would read on the claimed “thermal control system”, Finger Fig. 1, [0024]).
Finger does not disclose that limitation of that wherein the thermal control system includes a plurality of tubes that carry a working fluid, wherein the plurality of tubes are thermally connected to the shell so that the working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the cold trap, wherein the plurality of tubes extend axially through the body and also run directly adjacent to the shell.
In the analogous art of thermal control systems, Grainger discloses that a heat exchanger 60 includes a plurality of tubes (Grainger’s heat exchanger tubes 61, Fig. 3, [0048]) that carry a working fluid (Grainger’s hot gas is the “working fluid”, Grainger Fig. 3, [0048]), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) are thermally connected to the shell (Grainger’s tubes 61 touches its shell 62 and therefore, it reads on “thermally connected”) so that the working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the cold trap (Grainger discloses its hot gas is cooled down, which means it rejects heat to the environment), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) extend axially through the body (as shown in Grainger Fig. 3a) and also run directly adjacent to the shell (as shown in Fig. 3b of Grainger). Grainger discloses is invention allows staged condensation at different temperatures and it further include mechanical scraping at each condensing surface to prevent build up and improve heat transfer, Grainger [0016]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use Grainger’s design in Finger for the benefits disclosed.
Regarding claim 2:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the Modified first chemical species includes water (as mapped in claim 1, Finger Fig. 2, [0024]) and the second chemical species includes volatiles (Finger Fig. 2, [0024]).
Regarding claim 3:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 2, wherein the volatiles include hydrogen, hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, ammonia, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, ethylene, or mercury (Finger discloses hydrogen sulfide and ammonia, Finger [0027]).
Regarding claim 4:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the outlet modulates a backpressure to control the pressure in the body (Finger discloses a compressor 230 connected to Finger’s outlet of cold trap 220, and Finger disclsoes its compressor 230 is configured to reduce a water vapor partial pressure in the cold trap, which means it control the pressure in the body, Finger Fig. 2, [0008], [0067]).
Regarding claim 5:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the thermal control system cools the internal walls and one or more internal structural components to the deposition temperature and rejects heat absorbed by phase change to the environment outside the cold trap at the shell (Finger discloses its cold trap includes cooled plates, fins or other surfaces in the housing for condensing and collect water vapor and/or volatiles into a liquid or solid phase, Finger Fig. 2, [0023]–[0025], Finger’s cold trap is capable of rejects the heat generated during phase transfer to the environment because Finger discloses its cold trap may take advantage of ambient environment for “free” cooling capacity, Finger [0051]), which means Finger’s device is capable of exchange het directly with the environment).
Regarding claim 6:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the one or more internal structural components includes a plurality of baffles (Finger Fig. 4, [0024]) to increase a path length of the gas mixture flowing through the body, and a plurality of fins (Finger Fig. 4, [0024]) disposed on the tubes to increase mixing of the gas mixture flowing through the body.
Regarding claim 7:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 6, the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) are thermally coupled to the internal walls, the one or more internal structural components, and the shell (Grainger’s touches its internal wall of the shell 62 and Grainger’s device is a heat exchanger, which would necessarily be thermally couples to all the internal structural components within that device, Grainger Fig. 3b, [0048]).
Regarding claim 9:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the environment outside the cold trap has a sink temperature equal to or less than about 110 K (Finger discloses its cold trap could operate at an ambient environment of 2.7 K, which is less than about 110K, Finger [0064]).
Regarding claim 10:
Modified Finger discloses that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the deposition temperature is between 175 K and 273 K (Finger discloses its cold trap temperature is between about 170 K to about 220K, Finger [0027], overlapping with the claimed range and support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05(I)) at a pressure between 2.6 Pa and 611 Pa (Finger discloses a pressure of generally less than 611 Pa, Finger [0027], overlapping the claimed range and support a prima facie case of obviousness. MPEP 2144.05(I)).
Regarding claim 12:
Modified Finger does not explicitly disclose that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the thermal control system includes one or more thermosiphons connected to a heat sink or radiator element, wherein the one or more thermosiphons draw heat generated in the body from selective deposition to the heat sink or radiator element.
However, Finger discloses its cold trap may be passively cooled to achieve selective freezing distillations. Finger discloses that its cold trap may take advantage of ambient environment, for example when the environment temperatures is as low as 40 K, Finger [0064]. Such cold environment would read on the claimed “radiator element” and the passive heat conduction process reads on a thermosiphons process.
Regarding claim 14:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the thermal control system includes one or more thermoelectric coolers thermally coupled to the body.
However, Grainger discloses its cooling means could be a Peltier cooler, Grainger [0027]. Peltier cooler is a thermoelectric cooler.
Regarding claim 19:
Finger discloses that a method of selective deposition of one or more species in a cold trap (Finger’s method of producing purified water, Finger entire document), the method comprising:
receiving a gas mixture (Finger’s contaminated water 202 received in vapor form, Finger Fig. 2, [0022]) in a body of a cold trap (Finger’s cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0062]) via an inlet (where Finger’s contaminated water 202 enters cold trap, Finger Fig. 2),
wherein the gas mixture includes at least a first chemical species and undesired chemical species having different phase equilibria (Finger discloses as water and other volatiles such as ammonia, Finger Fig. 2, [0022], water and ammonia has different phase equilibria due to different atomic composition),
the gas mixture (202 of Finger) being received at a first temperature (less than 273K, Finger [0010]) and first pressure (less than 611 Pa, Finger [0010]);
flowing the gas mixture through the body of the cold trap (as shown in Fig. 2 of Finger);
selectively depositing the first chemical species to a solid phase on internal surfaces of the body by maintaining the body at a deposition temperature and pressure without condensing or depositing the second chemical species (Finger discloses the temperature and pressure of the cold trap are controlled to cause the water vapor to selectively deposit, and cause at least one or more volatiles to remain in a vapor phase, Finger Fig. 2, [0024]),
wherein the body is maintained at the deposition temperature using a thermal control system (Finger discloses that pressure and temperature are controlled in its cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0064], the structure responsible for the T and P control is the claimed ‘thermal control system”),
and exhausting at least the second chemical species of the gas mixture from the cold trap via an outlet (where gas stream 206 exits cold trap 220, Finger Fig. 2, [0068]) at a second temperature and second pressure (Finger discloses a heat source 222 increase the temperature of the cold trap 220 to convert the frozen contaminated water 24 into gas stream, the temperature and pressure after heating would read on the claimed “second temperature and second pressure”).
Finger does not disclose wherein the thermal control system includes a plurality of tubes that carries a working fluid, wherein the plurality of tubes are thermally coupled to the shell so that the working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the cold trap, wherein the plurality of tubes extend axially through the body and also run directly adjacent to the shell.
In the analogous art of thermal control systems, Grainger discloses that a heat exchanger 60 includes a plurality of tubes (Grainger’s heat exchanger tubes 61, Fig. 3, [0048]) that carry a working fluid (Grainger’s hot gas is the “working fluid”, Grainger Fig. 3, [0048]), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) are thermally connected to the shell (Grainger’s tubes 61 touches its shell 62 and therefore, it reads on “thermally connected”) so that the working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the cold trap (Grainger discloses its hot gas is cooled down, which means it rejects heat to the environment), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) extend axially through the body (as shown in Grainger Fig. 3a) and also run directly adjacent to the shell (as shown in Fig. 3b of Grainger). Grainger discloses is invention allows staged condensation at different temperatures and it further include mechanical scraping at each condensing surface to prevent build up and improve heat transfer, Grainger [0016]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use Grainger’s design in Finger for the benefits disclosed.
Regarding claim 20:
Modified Finger discloses that the method of claim 19, wherein the first chemical species includes water and the second chemical species includes a volatile (Finger Fig. 2, [0069]).
Claims 8 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Finger in view of Grainger and in further view of Campbell et al., US 2013/0091871 A1 (“Campbell”).
Regarding claim 8:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the cold trap of claim 7, wherein the thermal control system includes a pump to circulate the working fluid through the plurality of tubes to isothermalize the internal walls and the one or more internal structural components to within +/-5K of the deposition temperature while absorbing heat generated in the body from selective deposition and rejecting the heat to the environment outside the cold trap.
In the analogous art of thermal control systems, Campbell discloses a thermal control system includes a pump circulate the working fluid through the plurality of tubes (Campbell discloses its refrigerant is pumped, and it would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to also include Campbell’s pump for the modified system to work properly, Campbell Fig. 3, [0025) to isothermalize the internal walls and the one or more internal structural components to within +/- 5K of the deposition temperature while absorbing heat generated in the body from selective deposition and rejecting the heat to the environment outside the cold trap (Campbell discloses its refrigerant unit could maintain temperature at a steady temperature value, Campbell [0025] and Finger discloses a need of controlling the temperature in the cold trap to deposit the contaminated water at a solid phase, and Fingers gives an example of a temperature of -270 degree C, Finger [0064]; it would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for modified Finger’s cold trap to operate at isotherms because Campbell discloses its system is capable being operated as isotherms, and Finger discloses a scenario where its system is operated at isotherms).
Regarding claim 21:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the method of claim 19, wherein maintaining the body at the deposition temperature includes controlling a flow rate of the working fluid.
In the analogous art of thermal control systems, Campbell discloses control a temperature within a desired ban being achieved by manipulating the refrigerant flow rate, Campbell [0028]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use the method disclosed by Campbell to maintain the body at the deposition temperature because such controlling method is known and Campbell discloses its design facilitates cooling, Campbell [0003].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Finger in view of Grainger, and in further view of Onuki et al., US 4,432,208 A (“Onuki”).
Regarding claim 11:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the cold trap of claim 1, further comprising: an insulation layer disposed between the body and the shell, wherein the insulation layer thermally isolates the body from the shell.
In the analogous art of cold traps, Onuki discloses a heat insulation layer 3 between a cold trap body 2 and an outer shell 1, Onuki Fig. 3, col. 4, ll. 8–35. Onuki discloses its design ensures the temperature in the trapping section 2 is uniform, Id. Additionally, Finger discloses that in some of its embodiment, the cold trap may be isolated and sealed off from other components, Finger [0033]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Onuki’s cold trap heat insulation design in Finger, such that there is an insulation layer 3 similar to that shown in Onuki between Fingers body and shell for the benefits of uniform temperature distribution and good insulation.
Claim 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Finger in view of Grainger and in further view of Ghoshal et al., US 2011/0016886 A1 (“Ghoshal”).
Regarding claim 13:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the cold trap of claim 1,wherein the thermal control system includes one or more actuating radiators thermally coupled to the body and configured to operate in an open position and closed position, wherein the closed position is insulated from the environment outside the cold trap and the open position is exposed to the environment outside the cold trap, wherein the one or more actuating radiators are actuated to the open position in response to the internal walls of the cold trap exceeding a threshold temperature.
In the analogous art of cold traps, Ghoshal discloses a louvered heat sink 4300 used mainly with a thermoelectric cooling system 1500, Ghoshal Fig. 43, [0274]. Ghoshal discloses one or more actuating radiators (Ghoshal’s louvers 4306, Id.) thermally coupled to the body (1500 of Ghoshal, Fig. 15, [0089]) and configured to operate in an open and closed position (see Ghoshal Figs. 43a and 43b, [0273]), wherein the closed position is insulated from the environment outside the cold trap and the open position is exposed to the environment outside the cold trap (Ghoshal discloses its louvers opens to allow conduction of heat and thermal resistance is low and that when louver is closed, thermal resistance is high, which means the closed position insulates the environment outside the cold trap, Ghoshal [0273] and [0274]). Ghoshal discloses that its design increases energy efficiency, Ghoshal [0076]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Ghoshal’s design in Finger for improved energy efficiency. With such modification, modified Finger would open Ghoshal’s louvers 4306 in response to the internal walls of the cold trap exceeding a threading temperature to allow the device to cool.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Finger in view of Grainger, and in further view of Yatsu, US 2016/0177935 A1 (“Yatsu”).
Regarding claim 15:
Modified Finger does not disclose that the cold trap of claim 1, wherein the thermal control system includes one or more cryocoolers thermally coupled to the body.
In the analogous art of cold traps, Yatsu discloses cold trap 14 using a cryocooler 24 to cool, Yatsu Fig. 5, [0024]. Yatsu discloses a cryocooler is capable of appropriately cooling a cold panel in a cold trap, Yatsu [0017]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use cryocooler to cool Finger’s cold trap because Yatsu discloses a cryocooler is capable of performing such function and a person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Finger in view of Yatsu, because Yatusu’s cryocooler avoid undesirable situations where a temperature of the end of the cold panel which is far from a connection point between the cold panel and the cryocooler is significantly higher than a temperature of the connection point, Yatsu [0014].
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nguyen, US 2006/0131363 A1 (“Nguyen”) in view of Grainger.
Regarding claim 16:
Nguyen discloses that a system (Nguyen’s system as shown in Fig. 4) comprising:
a first cold trap (Nguyen’s first cold trap 240, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0031]) for receiving a gas mixture comprising multiple gas species having different phase equilibria (Nguyen discloses as a vapor exhaust from an exhausted chemical vapor, which contains different types of waste, Nguyen [0010], different types of waste have different phase equilibria because they are different materials with different atomic composition and structure),
wherein the first cold trap (240 of Nguyen) includes a first body having first internal walls (pointed by label 275 in Nguyen Fig. 4) and first internal structural components (Nguyen’s collection plates 260, Fig. 4, [0031]), wherein the first cold trap further includes a first shell (pointed by label 240 in Nguyen Fig. 4) thermally exposed to an environment outside the first cold trap (as shown in Fig. 4 of Nguyen),
wherein the first cold trap (240 of Nguyen) further includes a first thermal control system (Nguyen’s cooler 275, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0029]) and a first pressure-regulating system (Nguyen discloses the gaseous exhaust at the gas output port is substantially the same as the input, Nguyen [0014], the structure keep the pressure the same is the claimed “first pressure-regulation system) to maintain a first temperature (Nguyen discloses as a temperature in the range from 25 degree to minus 200 degree Celsius, Nguyen [0014]) and first pressure (Nguyen discloses as a high pressure, Nguyen [0014]) to selectively deposit a first species to a solid phase in the first cold trap without condensing or depositing other species of the multiple gas species (Nguyen discloses by-product that deposit as solid waste in the temperature range of 25 degree to minus 200 degree Celsius, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0029]),
and a second cold trap (Nguyen’s second cold trap 242, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0031]) in fluid communication with the first cold trap (241 of Nguyen),
wherein the second cold trap (242 of Nguyen) includes a second thermal control system (Nguyen’s cooler 277, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0031]) and a second pressure-regulating system (Nguyen discloses its inlet pressure and outlet pressure of the cold trap are substantially the same, Nguyen [0014] and the system responsible to keep the pressure the same would be the claimed “second pressure-regulation system”) to maintain a second temperature (Nguyen discloses as about -40 °C, Nguyen [0016]) and second pressure (Nguyen discloses as a high pressure) to selectively deposit a second species (Nguyen discloses as other by-product tmvs, Nguyen [0016]) to a solid phase in the second cold trap without condensing or depositing other species of the multiple gas species (Nguyen shows other species that are not condensing or depositing exits via output port 285, Nguyen Fig. 4, [0031]),
wherein the second cold trap includes a second body (as shown in Nguyen Fig. 4) having second internal walls (pointed by label 277 in Fig. 4 of Nguyen) and second internal structural components (Nguyen’s collection plates 260, Fig. 4, [0031]), wherein the second cold trap further includes a second shell (pointed by label 242 in Nguyen Fig. 4) thermally exposed to an environment outside the second cold trap (as shown in Nguyen Fig. 4).
Nguyen does not disclose that the first thermal control system includes a plurality of first tubes that carry a first working fluid, wherein the plurality of first tubes are thermally coupled to the first shell so that the first working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the first cold trap, wherein the plurality of first tubes extend axially through the first body and also run directly adjacent to the first shell.
Nguyen also does not disclose that wherein the second thermal control system includes a plurality of second tubes that carry a second working fluid, wherein the plurality of second tubes are thermally coupled to the second shell so that the second working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the second cold trap and first cold trap, wherein the plurality of second tubes extend axially through the second body and also run directly adjacent to the second shell.
In the analogous art of thermal control systems, Grainger discloses that a heat exchanger 60 includes a plurality of tubes (Grainger’s heat exchanger tubes 61, Fig. 3, [0048]) that carry a working fluid (Grainger’s hot gas is the “working fluid”, Grainger Fig. 3, [0048]), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) are thermally connected to the shell (Grainger’s tubes 61 touches its shell 62 and therefore, it reads on “thermally connected”) so that the working fluid rejects heat to the environment outside the cold trap (Grainger discloses its hot gas is cooled down, which means it rejects heat to the environment), wherein the plurality of tubes (61 of Grainger) extend axially through the body (as shown in Grainger Fig. 3a) and also run directly adjacent to the shell (as shown in Fig. 3b of Grainger). Grainger discloses is invention allows staged condensation at different temperatures and it further include mechanical scraping at each condensing surface to prevent build up and improve heat transfer, Grainger [0016]. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to use Grainger’s design in Nguyen’s first and second thermal systems for the benefits disclosed.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Nguyen in view of Grainger, and in further view of Finger.
Regarding claim 17:
Modified Nguyen does not disclose that the system of claim 16, wherein the first species includes water, and wherein the second species includes a volatile.
In the analogous art of cold traps, Finger discloses a cold trap system for depositing water and removing other volatiles, Finger Fig. 2, [0009]. It would have been obvious to use Nguyen’s cold trap system in Finger because Nguyen discloses cold trap system is very efficient, Nguyen [0011]. With such modification, Nguyen’s trap system in Finger could be used to deposit first species as water and second species as a volatile because Finger’s system deals with contaminated water comprising other volatiles, Finger [0009]).
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The examiner withdraws the current 35 USC § 112(b) rejection except for claim 10 because the applicant has tendered an amendment to overcome the current rejection except for claim 10.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
The examiner withdraws the current 35 USC § 102(a)(1) rejection because the applicant has tendered an amendment to overcome the current rejection. However, amended claims are rejected in further view of Grainger, details are provided above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Applicant’s arguments regarding the obviousness rejection depends on the allowability of independent claims, and since independent claims are not allowable, application’s arguments are moot.
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 QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached on (571) 270-7872. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights