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
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I, claims 1-6 and 11, in the reply filed on 6 January 2026 is acknowledged.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “diffuse” should be –diffuses— (line 6) and “evaporate” should be –evaporates— (line 7). 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 1-6 and 11 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.
The term “gradually” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “gradually” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It is unclear from the context of the claim and corresponding specification what rate of diffusion of wastewater down the micropore channels would be within the scope of “gradually”.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3, 5, 6 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chardon et al (US 2019/0344193).
Regarding claims 1, 5 and 11, Chardon discloses a capillary distillation method comprising (see [0018]):
heating wastewater (see [0002]; [0065]);
subsequently contacting the heated wastewater to one end of a water-diversion fiber material (wicking layer) such that, by means of capillary action, the heated wastewater enters an inside of the water-diversion fiber material from the one end and diffuses downward and toward a surface of the water-diversion fiber material and evaporates after diffusing to the surface (see [0013];[0014]; [0017]-[0019]; [0066]) and
contacting water vapor to a condensation module (condensation wall) such that the water vapor is condensed and collected, thereby obtaining distilled water (see [0001]; [0010]; [0025]).
Chardon discloses that the wicking layer is fibrous and porous (see [0019]). i.e., has porous channels. While Chardon does not explicitly disclose the size of the pore channels, i.e., microporous as claimed, a person of ordinary skill in the art would readily optimize the size of the pores which facilitates adequate transport of the water through the porous medium and achieves the desired evaporation rate thereof. Absent a showing of criticality or unexpected results, the microporous size ranges claimed are not considered to patentably distinguish the instant claims over the cited prior art.
Regarding claim 3, Chardon discloses wherein the water-diversion fiber material is in the form of a sheet (see [0017]).
Regarding claim 6, Chardon discloses wherein the wastewater is heated by a heating module to a temperature of 70°C, within the claimed range (see [0065]; [0106]).
Claims 2 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chardon, as applied to claim 1, in view of Yousef-Martinek et al (WO 2022/192383, “Yousef”).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, Chardon discloses typical examples of fiber materials including cellulose-based paper or synthetic based wicking materials made with viscose fibers and polyester fibers (see [0019]). However, the reference does not explicitly disclose the specifically claimed fiber materials nor the water contact angle of the fiber material.
Yousef is directed to evaporative separation of water utilizing a hydrophilic evaporative layer and a wicking layer (see Abstract). The wicking material may be selected from cellulose fiber and cotton (see [0052]; [0054]; [00185]-[00186]).
In other words, Yousef establishes that cotton is a suitable substitute for cellulose fibers, or can be used in combination with cellulose fibers, for the purpose of providing a wicking material in processes entailing separation of water by evaporation (see [0052]). Furthermore, cotton has a water contact angle as claimed (inherent property thereof). Modifying Chardon to utilize a cotton wicking material would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, required nothing more than routine experimentation, and associated with a reasonable expectation of success.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RENEE ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-7371. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:00a-5:00p and Friday 8:00a-2:00p.
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.
/Renee Robinson/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772