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
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 1-31 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 recites the limitation "said packing" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the packing" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "wherein each preform" in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "said packing" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 17 recites the limitation "the packing" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation 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.
Claim(s) 1, 4-10, and 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by PARMENTIER (2018/0318794).
Regarding claims 1, 15, and 16, PARMENTIER discloses a method for producing
a multi-capillary packing comprising a plurality of channels suitable for convection of a fluid between an inlet face and an outlet face of said packing, said method comprising:
providing a plurality of preforms (precursor fibres, [0200]-[0204]) suitable for forming, after ablation, a respective capillary channel of the packing;
assembling said plurality of preforms into a bundle [0205];
coating each preform with a plurality of porous layers by depositing alternating layers of a polyelectrolyte and nanoparticles [0216]-[0222]; [0292];
bonding the plurality of coated preforms to form a porous monolith [0232]-[0233], [0258];
ablating the plurality of preforms to form the channels in said porous monolith [0261].
Regarding claim 4, PARMENTIER discloses the nanoparticles comprise silica [0208].
Regarding claim 5, PARMENTIER discloses bonding is carried out by sintering [0234].
Regarding claims 6-7, and 9, PARMENTIER discloses a binder [0218] obtained
by sol gel method and is a silica [0224], [0230].
Regarding claim 8, PARMENTIER discloses the binder is obtained by drying a sol
[0242].
Regarding claim 10, PARMENTIER discloses the ablating comprises dissolution,
oxidation, chemical reaction [0204].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a) Parmentier (US 2014/0349839) discloses multi-capillary monolith
b) D’urso et al. (US 7,638,182) discloses method for producing microchannels in drawn material.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STELLA KIM YI whose telephone number is (571)270-5123. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 EST.
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, Christina Johnson can be reached at 571-272-1176. 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.
STELLA YI
Examiner
Art Unit 1742
/STELLA K YI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1742
Prosecution Insights