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 Objections
Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: “The system according to claim 1, characterized in that the electron trap (200) is positioned in the fluidic circuit (300) in a position near the dispensing device (600), , or the end of the fluidic circuit (300).” Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 12-16 are objected to because of the following informalities: “Method” should read: “A method” in claim 12 and “The method” in claim 13. Claims 14-16 are objected to due to dependency. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-16 are 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 1 contains the limitation “preferably” to which it is unknown if the limitation is optional or required. The following amendment would overcome this rejection: “from 5 to 80%, or
Claim 2 contains the limitation “preferably” to which it is unknown if the limitation is optional or required.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the final fluid" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the initial fluid" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is also unknown if “the initial fluid (IF)” is the same or different than “a fluid (F)”.
Claim 8 contains the limitation “preferably” to which it is unknown if the limitation is optional or required.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the circuit" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As written, it could refer back to “a fluidic circuit (300)” as defined in claim 1. For suggested clarification, “which are switchable and connected to an electrical electrical circuit further comprises a set of diodes (242, 252)”
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the frequency of electrical pulses" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 9 contains the limitation “preferably” to which it is unknown if the limitation is optional or required. The following is suggested: “The system according to claim 8, characterized in that the frequency of electrical pulses is from 60 Hz to 1 x 1015 Hz, or between 60 and 1 kHz.”
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the electrical power sources (240,250)" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 10 contains the limitation “preferably” to which it is unknown if the limitation is optional or required. The following is suggested: “The system according to claim 8, characterized in that the adjustable voltage sources (240, 250) operate with electric potential differences ranging from 110 V to 1 GV, or from 50 to 500 kV.”
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the sources (240,250)" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim 11 recites the limitation "the equipment (500)" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “equipment (100)” in line 2. Claim 12 recites the limitation “the database and/or equipment memory” in line 10. Claim 12 recites the limitation “the electroenergized final fluid (FF)” in line 16. Claim 12 recites the limitation “the passage and distribution piping” in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim. The following is suggested: “the system (100)”; “a system memory”; “an electroenergized final fluid (FF)”; “a passage and distribution piping”.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “the user” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The following is suggested: “the user.”
Claim 16 is drawn to a “use” and does not recite any active, positive steps and is therefore indefinite. See MPEP 2173.05(q).
The balance of the claims are rejected due to dependency.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because a use is not a method. See MPEP 2173.05(q).
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.
Claim(s) 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Sprague (WO 2019200472 A1).
In regards to claim(s) 14, the claim is interpreted as being any fluid that is outputted by the method of claim 12 through a system of claim 1. A product-by-process claim is not limited to the manipulations of the recited steps, only the structure implied by the steps. See MPEP 2113. Therefore, claim 14’s electroenergized fluid is interpreted as a fluid with electron trapping ability. Sprague discloses a fluid that has electrons added or removed (abstract; also disclosed as electron trapping, p. 15, lines 11-15).
In regards to claim(s) 15, Sprague discloses adjusted pH (abstract) and same or reduced surface energy (p. 1, lines 13-23; p. 7, lines 12-16).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Duvoisin (US 11357243 B2) discloses a system for trapping electrons. Duvoisin’474 (US 11608474 B2) discloses a system for trapping electrons for the purpose of separating oil/water emulsions.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICHOLAS A SMITH whose telephone number is (571)272-8760. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-3:30pm.
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, Srilakshmi Kumar can be reached at (571)272-7769. 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.
/NICHOLAS A SMITH/Supervisory Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1752
Prosecution Insights