DETAILED ACTION
For this Office action, Claims 1-20 are pending.
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 § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-12, 17, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirama, US 4935133.
Regarding instant Claim 1, Hirama discloses a system for magnetizing water (Abstract; Col. 1, Lines 7-10; magnetic treater for water), comprising:
a non-magnetic conduit configured to allow a stream of water to flow therethrough (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 6, Lines 5-23; channel 18); and
a magnetic fields generation mechanism comprising a plurality of magnets arranged around the non-magnetic conduit, the magnetic fields generation mechanism configured to subject the stream of water to magnetic fields (Figures 1-4; Col. 5, Lines 5-52; permanent magnet train 13 with permanent magnets 11).
Regarding instant Claim 2, Claim 1, upon which Claim 2 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein the magnetic field generation mechanism comprises a plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings, each permanent magnet ring fitted coaxially around the non-magnetic conduit, the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings mounted along a length of the non-magnetic conduit with a predetermined longitudinal distance between each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 5, Line 5-Col. 6, Line 23; see stack of ring magnets 11 axially stacked along conduit 18).
Regarding instant Claim 3, Claim 2, upon which Claim 3 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are mounted on the non-magnetic conduit with an axis of symmetry of each axially magnetized permanent magnet ring of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet ring parallel with a longitudinal axis of the non-magnetic conduit, a central hole of each axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings encompassing the non-magnetic conduit (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4; Col. 5, Line 5-Col. 6, Line 23; see stack of ring magnets 11 axially stacked along conduit 18, with axis of symmetry of magnets along conduit 18).
Regarding instant Claim 4, Claim 3, upon which Claim 4 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein each axially magnetized permanent magnet of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings comprises a first face with a first polarity and a second face with a second polarity, the first face and the second face perpendicular to the axis of symmetry of the permanent magnet ring (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4).
Regarding instant Claim 5, Claim 4, upon which Claim 5 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are facing each other with faces having opposite polarities (Figure 4; see polarities of the magnets in the figure).
Regarding instant Claim 7, Claim 4, upon which Claim 7 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein the plurality of axially magnetized permanent rings comprises:
a first axially magnetized permanent magnet ring (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4; Col. 5, Lines 5-52; see far left magnet 11); and
a second axially magnetized permanent magnet ring positioned at the predetermined longitudinal distance away from the first axially magnetized permanent magnet ring (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4; Col. 5, Lines 5-52; adjacent magnet 11 in the train 13),
wherein, a first face of the first axially magnetized permanent ring with a first polarity is positioned facing a second face of the second axially magnetized permanent magnet ring with a second polarity, the first polarity and the second polarity are opposite polarities (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4; see polarities in Figure 4).
Regarding instant Claim 8, Claim 7, upon which Claim 8 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein an inner diameter of each axially magnetized permanent magnet ring of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings is equal to an outer diameter of the non-magnetic conduit (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 6, Lines 5-23; Channel 18 is formed via through holes 17 in magnets 11).
Regarding instant Claim 9, Claim 7, upon which Claim 9 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses comprising an elongated housing coaxially disposed around the non-magnetic conduit, the elongated housing extended along the longitudinal axis of the non-magnetic conduit, the elongated housing coaxial with and encompassing the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings such that the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are disposed between the elongated housing and the non-magnetic conduit (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 5, Lines 5-13; casing 15).
Regarding instant Claim 10, Claim 1, upon which Claim 10 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein the magnetic field generation mechanism comprises a plurality of slab magnets arranged around the non-magnetic conduit, the plurality of slab magnets mounted along a length of the non-magnetic conduit with a predetermined longitudinal distance between each pair of adjacent slab magnets of the plurality of the slab magnets (Figures 1-4; Col. 5, Lines 5-52; permanent magnet train 13 with permanent magnets 11 that can be regarded as slabs).
Regarding instant Claim 11, Claim 10, upon which Claim 11 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein each slab magnet of the plurality of slab magnets is mounted between an outer surface of the non-magnetic conduit and an inner surface of an iron shield (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 5, Line 14-Col. 6, Line 35; casing 15, cover pipe 25 and conduit 18).
Regarding instant Claim 12, Claim 11, upon which Claim 12 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein the plurality of slab magnets comprise mounted on opposite sides of the outer surface of the non-magnetic conduit with each pair of oppositely mounted slab magnets facing each other with opposite poles (Figure 4; see polarities of the magnets in the figure).
Regarding instant Claim 17, Hirama discloses a method for magnetizing water (Abstract; Col. 1, Lines 7-10; method of operating a magnetic treater for water), the method comprising:
generating a magnetic field in a stream of water by arranging a plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings around a conduit through which the stream of water passes, each permanent magnet ring of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings fitted coaxially around the conduit, the plurality of axially magnetized magnet rings mounted along a length of the conduit with a predetermined longitudinal distance between each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 5, Line 5-Col. 6, Line 23; see stack of ring magnets 11 axially stacked along conduit 18).
Regarding instant Claim 18, Claim 17, upon which Claim 18 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings around the conduit comprises arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings such that each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are positioned at a predetermined longitudinal distance from each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are positioned at a predetermined longitudinal distance from each other and facing each other with faces having opposite polarities (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4; see polarities disclosed in Figure 4).
Regarding instant Claim 20, Claim 17, upon which Claim 20 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings around the conduit comprises arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnetized permanent magnet rings such that each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent magnet rings of the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings are positioned at a predetermined longitudinal distance between 2 mm and 10 mm from each other (Figures 1-4; Col. 5, Lines 40-50; distance can be 2 to 5 mm).
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.
Claims 6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirama, US 4935133, in view of Takizawa et al. (herein referred to as “Takizawa”, US Pat Pub. 2013/0234555).
Regarding instant Claim 6, Claim 4, upon which Claim 6 is rejected, has been rejected above. Hirama, however, is silent on the magnet rings facing each with similar polarities.
Takizawa discloses a rotary electric machine in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of providing magnet poles facing each other (Paragraph [0034]). Takizawa further discloses that facing magnet poles towards each other can adjust the magnetic flux flowing through the magnets (Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarities of the magnet rings facing each other of Hirama to be of similarity polarities as taught by Takizawa because Takizawa discloses such positioning will adjust the magnetic flux through the stack of magnets (Takizawa, Paragraph [0034]).
Regarding instant Claim 19, Claim 17, upon which Claim 19 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama further discloses wherein arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings around the conduit comprises arranging the plurality of axially magnetized permanent magnet rings such that each pair of adjacent axially magnetized permanent rings of the plurality of axially magnetized rings are positioned longitudinal distances from each other (Figure 1; Figure 2; Figure 4).
Hirama, however, is silent on the magnet rings facing each with similar polarities.
Takizawa discloses a rotary electric machine in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of providing magnet poles facing each other (Paragraph [0034]). Takizawa further discloses that facing magnet poles towards each other can adjust the magnetic flux flowing through the magnets (Paragraph [0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the polarities of the magnet rings facing each other of Hirama to be of similarity polarities as taught by Takizawa because Takizawa discloses such positioning will adjust the magnetic flux through the stack of magnets (Takizawa, Paragraph [0034]).
Claims 13 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirama, US 4935133, in view of Kampf, US 5766461.
Regarding instant Claim 13, Claim 1, upon which Claim 13 is dependent, has been rejected above. Hirama discloses a plurality of magnets arranged around the non-magnetic conduit, the plurality of magnets mounted along a length of the non-magnetic conduit with a predetermined longitudinal distance between each pair of adjacent magnets of the plurality of magnets (Figure 1; Figure 2; Col. 5, Line 5-Col. 6, Line 23; see stack of magnets 11 axially stacked along conduit 18).
However, Hirama is silent on the magnets being bar magnets.
Kampf discloses a device for magnetically treating a fluid in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of magnetically treating a fluid (Abstract). Kampf further discloses that the configuration of the magnet used to treat the water may be in a bar shape along with others in order to guarantee the correct matching of the device with the fluid (Col. 3, Lines 39-47; see bar configuration).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the shape of the magnets of Hirama to further be bar magnets as taught by Kampf because Kampf discloses such a shape is common and can be used to guarantee the correct matching of the magnet with the fluid (Kampf, Col. 3, Lines 39-47).
Regarding instant Claim 14, Claim 13, upon which Claim 14 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the magnetic field generation mechanism further comprises a plurality of magnet bars mounted within the non-magnetic conduit along the length of the non-magnetic conduit (Kampf, Abstract; Figure 4; see configuration of permanent magnet 36 in Figure 4).
Claims 15 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirama, US 4935133, in view of Jefferson, US 5738766.
Regarding instant Claim 15, Claim 1, upon which Claim 15 is dependent, has been rejected above. However, Hirama is silent on the magnetic field generation mechanism comprising a plurality of electromagnet coils.
Jefferson discloses a device for neutralizing and preventing formation of scale in the same field of endeavor as the instant application, as it solves the mutual problem of treating water with an electromagnetic field (Abstract). Jefferson further discloses wherein a magnetic field generation mechanism comprises a plurality of electromagnet coils arranged around the non-magnetic conduit, the plurality of electromagnet coils mounted along a length of non-magnetic conduit with a predetermined longitudinal distance between each pair or electromagnetic coils of the plurality of electromagnet coils as a method to provide a controlled electromagnetic field to the water (Abstract; Figure 1; Col. 2, Line 65-Col. 3, Line 8; see plurality of helical loops/coils 26).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the invention to modify the magnetic field generation mechanism of Hirama to further comprise the plurality of electromagnet coils as described in Jefferson because Jefferson discloses such a plurality of electromagnet coils is another known method to provide a controlled electromagnetic field to the water being treated (Jefferson, Abstract; Figure 1; Col. 2, Line 65-Col. 3, Line 8).
Regarding instant Claim 16, Claim 15, upon which Claim 16 is dependent, has been rejected above. The combined references further disclose wherein the magnetic field generation mechanism further comprises a plurality of electromagnet coils mounted on a magnet support within the non-magnetic conduit along the length of the non-magnetic conduit (Jefferson, Figure 1; Col. 2, Line 65-Col. 3, Line 8; see support of helical coils around pipe).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RICHARD C GURTOWSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-3189. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 am-5:30pm MT.
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 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.
/RICHARD C GURTOWSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773 03/21/2026