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
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 1 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 1 recites the limitation "the waste liquids" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The earlier recitation of “wastewater” does not agree with this recitation, alternately applicant may recite “an inlet for a waste liquid formed on the top..” earlier in the claim to provide antecedent basis.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the water liquids" in line 10. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. The earlier recitation of “wastewater” does not agree with this recitation, applicant should amend this accordingly with other amendments above.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al (KR 101046211 with para reference to Espacenet Machine Translation of KR 101046211 Obtained 21 November 2025) taken in combination with Murphy et al (GB 2353732).
Regarding claim 1, Lee teaches a wastewater storage bucket 400 (see title, abstract, Figs 2-4) comprising a body 400 (Fig 3, [0026]), and the body including: an inlet (from line 310) formed on the top of the outer wall of the body 400 (Fig 3, [0025-0026]) and outlet (exhaust port 420) opposite to inlet (form line 310) (Fig 2-4, [0026]); and a motor 460 fixed on a center of the top of the outer wall of the body and configured to drive a stirrer 450 to rotate (Fig 2-4, [0026]), wherein the stirrer 450 is vertically inserted into a bottom of an inner wall of the body and is configured to rotatably stir the waste liquids evenly (Fig 3, [0026,0031]); wherein the body also includes a tube 330 formed as a grid fixed on a top of the inner wall thereof (top of 400), multiple spray heads 330 defined on the tube 330 formed as a grid and configured to molecularize the waste liquids (Fig 2-4, [0026]), multiple heaters 410 arranged on an inner wall of the body 400 configured to heat the water liquids in the body (Fig 2-4, [0026]).
However Lee does not teach the multiple heaters are arranged on an outer wall of the body away from the motor and a discharge orifice defined on a center of a bottom of the inner wall of the body and configured to discharge the waste liquids.
Murphy teaches a system for separating mixed liquids in an evaporator 12 (title, abstract, Fig 2), Murphy teaches evaporator 12 is jacketed pressure vessel 20 with heat source 21 flowing through jacket 22 on outer wall of vessel 20, for causing liquid evaporation inside the vessel, wherein liquid is sprayed through sprayer nozzle 27 into vessel on inside wall 20a, and unevaporated liquid is removed through drain valve 28 on bottom wall 20b as required (Fig 2, P9:L1-P10:L11), this provide superheat to vapors to help separation (P10, L6-11).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the system of Lee in view of Murphy to include external heater on outer wall rather than internal heater of Lee, motivated to provide superheat to vapor as needed to improve evaporation/separation in Lee, and to further include a drain outlet to remove liquids as required as taught by Murphy.
However Lee teaches the multiple spray heads 330 defined on the tube 330 formed as a grid rather than as a circular tube.
However the skilled artisan in view of Lee would understand that the spray would need to be evenly distributed across the cross section of the wastewater storage bucket and would find obvious, due to changes of size, and routine constructional design choice to modify the header from a grid to circular tube with expected result of still covering the cross sectional area of the bucket without unexpected results, see MPEP 2144.04.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Martel (US 4,406,745) teaches stirred evaporator. Obata et al (US 4,812,203) teaches an evaporator. Struewing (US 5,156,742) teaches stirred separator. Perry (US 5,352,357) teaches stirred separator. Berberi (US 5,472,576) teaches stirred separator. Cogat (US 5,478,443) teaches stirred separator. Hata (US 2004/0084156) teaches stirred desalination evaporator. Nomura (US 2005/0069820) teaches film evaporator. Young (US 8,109,488) teaches wastewater treatment system. Tamura et al (US 12,053,716) teaches wastewater treatment.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1603. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 - 5.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571) 272-5954. 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.
/JONATHAN MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772