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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) for being indefinite. It is not clear how the third thermometer can function as the second thermometer. Both thermometers are in different locations of the ultra-fine bubble production apparatus. Additionally, it is not clear how the feeder also functions as the controller since they are separate elements. Correction/clarification is required.
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)(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 1, 5, 6, 11, 12, 14, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by Yanai (U.S. Publication 2021/0245117).
Regarding claim 1, Yanai teaches an ultra-fine bubble production apparatus (figure 19) comprising: an ultra-fine bubble generator configured to generate ultra-fine bubbles (item 1960); a collector configured to collect a liquid containing the ultra-fine bubbles generated in the ultra-fine bubble generator (item 1940); a first cooler capable of cooling a liquid in the collector (item 1944 cooling unit); and a controller configured to control the first cooler (paragraph 147 teaches the liquid is controlled to maintain a lower temperature which is inherently considered requiring a controller), wherein the controller controls the first cooler so that a temperature of the liquid in the collector is lower than a temperature of the liquid containing the ultra-fine bubbles generated in the ultra-fine bubble generator (paragraph 143 teaches liquid to be low enough in temperature so gas is likely to dissolve, and item 1944 along with the controller is considered capable of cooling the temperature to a lower temperature than item 1960).
Regarding claim 5, Yanai teaches wherein the first cooler cools the liquid by cooling the collector (item 1945 surrounds and cools item 1940).
Regarding claim 6, Yanai teaches wherein the first cooler comes into contact with the liquid collected by the collector, thereby cooling the liquid (item 1944 surrounds and cools item 1940 which then cools item 1941).
Regarding claim 11, Yanai teaches further comprising a solubility detector configured to detect a gas solubility of the liquid collected by the collector (paragraph 140 solubility sensor), wherein based on each gas solubility which depends on a gas type and is detected by the solubility detector, the controller controls the first cooler so that a change in the gas solubility of the liquid collected by the collector is kept within 50 mg/L (the amount of gas dissolved in the liquid is considered intended use of the apparatus, paragraph 147 teaches the liquid is controlled to maintain a lower temperature which is inherently considered requiring a controller, the temperature is used to control the solubility of gas in liquid).
Regarding claim 12, Yanai teaches further comprising a circulation channel configured to circulate the liquid in a manner capable of feeding the liquid collected by the collector to the ultra-fine bubble generator (items 182, 183, 1981 are considered reading on a circulation channel that is considered capable of feeding liquid from item 1940 to item 1960 via item 1934, the materials being worked upon are considered intended use).
Regarding claim 14, Yanai teaches wherein the ultra-fine bubble generator generates the ultra-fine bubbles by heating a heating element and thereby causing film boiling at an interface between the heating element and the liquid (paragraph 147 teaches film boiling is caused to take place by causing the heater to generate heat).
Regarding claim 15, Yanai teaches an ultra-fine bubble production method (figure 19, paragraph 147 teaches a method of generating ultra-fine bubbles) comprising: an ultra-fine bubble generation step of generating ultra-fine bubbles (item 1960 generates ultra-fine bubbles); a collection step of collecting a liquid containing the ultra-fine bubbles generated in the ultra-fine bubble generation step (item 1940 collects the ultra-fine bubbles generated by item 1960); a first cooling step of cooling the liquid collected in the collection step with a first cooler (item 1944 cools the liquid item 1941); and a control step of controlling the first cooler (paragraph 147 teaches the liquid is controlled to maintain a lower temperature which is inherently considered requiring a controller,), wherein the control step includes controlling the first cooler so that a temperature of the liquid collected in the collection step is lower than a temperature of the liquid containing the ultra-fine bubbles generated in the ultra-fine bubble generation step (paragraph 143 teaches liquid to be low enough in temperature so gas is likely to dissolve, paragraph 147 teaches film boiling which is higher than the liquid 1941).
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 2, 3, 4, and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yanai (U.S. Publication 2021/0245117).
Regarding claim 2, Yanai teaches monitoring and cooling the temperature of the liquid in the ultra-fine bubble generator to prevent the temperature from getting too high (paragraph 147); a thermometer capable of obtaining the temperature of the liquid in the collector (paragraph 141 temperature sensor) the controller controls the first cooler based on the temperature obtained by the first thermometer and the temperature obtained by the second thermometer (paragraph 147 teaches controlling the temperature of the liquid which would inherently require a controller). Regarding claim 2, Yanai is silent to the second thermometer. Regarding claim 2, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to duplicate the number of thermometers in order to obtain the desired bubble mixture since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 3, Yanai teaches a feeder configured to feed a liquid to the ultra-fine bubble generator (the material is considered intended use, see item 1934) and the controller controls the first cooler based on the temperature obtained by the first thermometer, the temperature obtained by the second thermometer (paragraph 147 teaches controlling the temperature of the liquid which would inherently require a controller). Regarding claim 3, Yanai is silent to the third thermometer. Regarding claim 3, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to duplicate the number of thermometers in order to obtain the desired bubble mixture since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 4, Yanai teaches a feeder that is considered capable of functioning as a collector (item 1934 is considered collecting a volume of fluid). Regarding claim 4, Yanai is silent to the multiple thermometers. Regarding claim 4, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to duplicate the number of thermometers in order to obtain the desired bubble mixture since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Regarding claim 10, Yanai teaches controlling the temperature of the first cooler (paragraph 147 teaches the liquid is controlled to maintain a lower temperature which is inherently considered requiring a controller), and the specific temperatures are considered intended use of the apparatus. Regarding claim 10, Yanai is silent to the additional thermometers. Regarding claim 10, absent any unexpected results, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filling date of the claimed invention to duplicate the number of thermometers in order to obtain the desired bubble mixture since it has been held that mere duplication of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. St. Regis Paper Co. v. Bemis Co., 193 USPQ 8.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7, 8, 9, and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 7, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the ultra-fine bubble production apparatus with the combination of the three thermometers, and the second cooler capable of cooling liquid in the feeder.
Regarding claim 13, the prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the ultra-fine bubble production apparatus with the combination of the two circulation channels, and the cooler cools the liquid in the collector by cooling the liquid in the feeder.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANSHU BHATIA whose telephone number is (571)270-7628. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11 a.m. to 7:30 p.m..
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, Claire Wang can be reached at (571)270-1051. 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.
/ANSHU BHATIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights