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 .
Election/Restrictions
Claims 52-53 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7/14/2026.
Claims 36 and 51 are withdrawn in response to the election made over the phone with Dennis Majewski on 7/30/2026.
In the Remarks filed 7/14/2026, Applicant states, “The Office Action neglects to mention common operations recited in Claims 34, 52, and 53.”
Applicant’s attention is drawn to Page 4/8 of the Restriction/Election requirement where the Examiner provides a literal quotation of the common subject matter between the groups of claims. If Applicant is using the term “operations” to mean method or process steps, Applicant is reminded that Claims 34 and 52 are apparatus claims; they are not limited by method or process steps as recited in Claim 53. As such, process/method steps are not common subject matter in the claims.
The Restriction/Election requirement clearly articulates the reason why the common technical subject matter is not novel in view of ‘936. A further detailed explanation can be found 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.
Claims 39 and 40 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.
Claims 39, 40, 41, 45: “the valve arrangement” lacks antecedent basis in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 34, 35, 37-40, and 42-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by CN12875936 (Herein, ‘936).
Claims 34, 37, 39, 42, and 43: ‘936 teaches water purification module (abstract) comprising: a fluid path including: a cationic resin cartridge (Fig. 1, 2nd or middle filter bed pictured; Claim 1 wherein K6 is the “cation bed bypass valve” which means that the bed prior – i.e. the middle bed – is the cationic cartridge), an anionic resin cartridge (Fig. 1, 3rd filter bed pictured; Claim 1 wherein K7 is the “anion bed bypass valve” which means that the bed prior – i.e. the 3rd bed – is the anion cartridge), wherein the anionic resin cartridge is fluidly connected in series with the cationic resin cartridge (Fig. 1, via K5 and K8), at least one bypass fluid path including a first bypass fluid path arranged to bypass the anionic resin cartridge while allowing water to flow to the cationic resin cartridge (Fig. 1, lines that passes through K6), and a valve arrangement comprising one or more valves configured to selectively direct water to the at least one bypass fluid path (Fig. 1, see valves K1-K14); and a control unit configured to control the valve arrangement to direct water through the at least one bypass fluid path based on a production mode of the water purification module (Fig. 1, PLC), wherein the production mode is one of (i) a water production mode wherein the water purification module is configured to generate purified water (abstract), wherein the control unit is configured to control the valve arrangement to direct water to both the cationic resin cartridge and the anionic resin cartridge in the water production mode (Fig. 1, wherein water can flow through both the 2nd/middle cationic bed and 3rd anionic bed).
Claim 35: there is a second bypass fluid path that allows for bypassing the cationic resin cartridge while allowing water to flow to the anionic cartridge (Fig. 1, K6 allows bypassing cationic bed and through K8 to anionic bed).
Claim 38: the first bypass fluid path connects two points, the first being downstream of the cationic resin bed and upstream of the anionic bed (K5) to a second point downstream of the anionic bed (Fig. 1, where the arrow from K7 meets the line from K9).
Claim 40: wherein the valve arrangement is configured to selectively direct water to the second bypass fluid path instead of the first bypass fluid path (Fig. 1, valves K5-K9 allow for controlling fluid routes an bypassing).
Claims 44 and 45: there is a third fluid line including valves connecting the output of the cationic bed to an input of the anionic bed (Fig. 1 line passing from K5 to K8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 46-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over CN12875936 (Herein, ‘936) as applied to claim 34 above, and further in view of Hicks (US Pub. No. 2008/0105620).
Claims 46, 47, and 50: ‘936 does not teach a mixed bed resin cartridge in addition to the cationic and anion cartridges.
Hicks teaches a water purification system comprising a primary (Fig. 1, 20) and a secondary (Fig. 1, 22) ion exchange unit. Each unit may either be a mixed bed resin or the combination of anion and cation exchange resin beds [0011]. They teach that these are interchangeable [0026]. Hicks teaches that the use of multiple units/beds ensures that when one unit is exhausted, the water is still treated [0011-0013, 0024] and that when used in parallel, valves and devices change the flow path of the water through the system in response to the status of the ion exchange beds [0024]. The locations of the first and second unit are interchangeable and, therefore, the mixed bed resin can be upstream or downstream of the anion/cation exchange beds.
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have found it obvious to provide an additional mixed bed resin column for the benefit of providing an additional column for separation when the cation and anion exchange resin beds of ‘936 are exhausted.
Claims 48 and 49: Hicks teaches that when parallel configurations are used, the system is controlled to trigger valves and other devices to change the flow path of the water in the system [0024].
One of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have found it obvious at the time of the invention to provide a bypass fluid path to bypass the mixed bed resin cartridge in the combination of ‘936 and Hicks for the benefit of controlling the fluid flow to avoid flowing fluid through spent beds. The bypass points would include fluid flow lines – as shown in ‘936 – in combinations to bypass each of the beds in the system and send the bypassed fluid to the input or output of any of the other beds in order to allow for any desired fluid flow path based on which beds are still in service. This allows for the maximum in-service time of the system.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Jangharwala et al. (USP 5951874) teaches an ion exchange system comprising a cation and anion exchange bed.
Varner et al. (USP 7387722) teaches an automatic water treatment system comprising ion exchange resin and bypass paths.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLISON FITZSIMMONS whose telephone number is (571)270-1767. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30 am - 2:00 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, 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.
ALLISON FITZSIMMONS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1773
/ALLISON G FITZSIMMONS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773 /ALLISON G FITZSIMMONS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights