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 § 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 15, 16, 19, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854).
With respect to claims 1 and 15, Jeong teaches a flow through capacitor and method of regenerating electrodes (abstract, 0006-0032), channels b, b’ and c, current collectors a, anion exchange membrane d and cation exchange membrane e. (Fig. 1B, 0065-0068), the method including applying an electric potential difference across the electrodes and controlling the potential difference in a charging potential such that dissolved solids are adsorbed to the porous electrodes (0068-0079, during a deionization operation, apply a negative voltage to the second current collector to move cations contained in water in the third channel to the second channel), a regeneration step of flowing acidic solution through and reversing the potential across the electrodes (0073, during a regeneration/descaling operation, apply a first positive voltage to the second current collector to move cations in the second channel to the third channel).
Jeong teaches does not explicitly teach a processor, at least one processor or applying a second positive voltage greater than the first positive voltage to the second current collector to electrolyze water in the second channel.
Andelman teaches foul-resistant flow-through capacitor comprising electrodes (abstract), a controller automatically activates a regeneration cycle (C8/L314-26), the capacitor should be backwashed by reversing the flow, for example, to avoid buildup of solids and that it may also be desirable to occasionally operate the capacitor at slight overvoltage which keeps the electrodes clean of microbes and foulants (C6/L41-60), and as evidenced by Schneider, Schneider teaches and electrochemical reduction reactor comprising electrodes (abstract, 0054), and fouling or scaling of the electrodes by agglomeration of organic matter, or by precipitation of metals, can advantageously be reversed by reversing the polarity of the electrodes, backwashing with water, increasing voltage, or by cleaning with an acid or base.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Jeong’s taught method and apparatus to include a processor as the use of a processor would have been an obvious design choice to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in order to automate the process and to include a step of overvoltage to clear keep the electrodes clear as described by Andelman and Schneider as the use of overvoltage/increasing voltage is known in the art as shown by Andelman and Schneider and the courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date, see MPEP §2143.
With respect to claims 2 and 16, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches the second current collector comprises at least one of a transition metal, a transition metal oxide, a transition metal alloy, aluminum, an aluminum oxide, graphene, a dimensionally stable anode (DSA), and a boron doped diamond (BDD) electrode (0061).
With respect to claims 5 and 19, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches porous electrodes connected to current collectors, a flow path that defined the electrodes, the width of the flow path is not limited and may range from about 50 micron to about 500 microns, and the apparatus can have any geometric structure (0061-0066, Fig. 2), a porous electrode electrically connected to the second current collector, wherein a thickness of a gap between the cation exchange membrane and the porous electrode ranges from 10μm to 500μm.
With respect to claims 6 and 20, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches applying a potential difference as discussed above.
With respect to claim 7, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Joeng teaches the current collector selected from Cu, Al, Ni, Fe, Co, and Ti, or a metal mixture or alloy thereof, absent clarification structural differences over the prior art and of what it required to allow an aqueous solution of 1000 ppm of NaCl to reach less than or equal to pH 4 at a current density of 25 mA/cm2 within less than or equal to 7 minutes, the art reads on the claim language, examiner notes intended use of the apparatus is not accorded patentable weight where the statement of intended use does not distinguish over the prior art apparatus (see MPEP 2114) .
With respect to claim 8, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches an inlet and supply unit, the housing may have any shape, the supply unit for the fluid to be treated may be selectively communicated using a valve (0087-0093, a first flow path configured to allow external water to flow), Figs. 2 and 3 illustrate flow paths to channels, a second flow path configured to allow water to flow from the first flow path to the second channel; a third flow path configured to allow water to flow from the first flow path to the third channel; and at least one valve configured to allow water to flow from the first flow path to one of the second flow path and the third flow path.
Claim(s) 3, 4, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854) in view of Takahashi (US PG Pub 2006/0091013).
With respect to claims 3 and 17, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches porous electrodes (0009, 0065, a porous electrode electrically connected to the second current collector); and a spacer (0062). The taught combination does not teach a spacer between the porous electrode and the cation exchange membrane. However, the use of spacers between electrodes and ion exchange membranes is known in the art as shown by Takahashi.
Takahashi teaches an electrical deionization apparatus with compartments partitioned from one another by ion exchange membranes between a cathode and an anode, and fibrous material layers intersecting flow (abstract, 0005-0024), it is preferable for a cation exchange fibrous material or ion conductive spacer to be disposed running along the surface of the cation exchange membrane so that the removal of the ions to be removed from the water to be treated by ion exchange can be carried out more completely (0050-0051), in examples a spacer between the electrode and the cation exchange membrane (Fig. 6, 11, examples). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the taught combination to provide a spacer between the electrode and the cation exchange membrane as described by Takahashi as according to Takahashi, the spacers allow for more complete removal of ions, improve efficiency and allow for a smaller apparatus (0069).
With respect to claims 4 and 18, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. Jeong teaches porous electrodes connected to current collectors, a flow path that defined the electrodes, the spacer and width of the flow path is not limited and may range from about 50 micron to about 500 microns, and the apparatus can have any geometric structure (0061-0066), as discussed above with respect to claims 3 and 17, Takahashi teaches spacers, and that the spacers may be disposed in only in some of the compartments (0077). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to select the gap or spacer, depending on the application such that a gap between the anion exchange membrane and the first porous electrode is smaller than a gap between the cation exchange membrane and the second porous electrode, would be a matter of design choice absent evidence of unexpected results.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854) in view Katz (US 5,026,465).
With respect to claim 9, the water treatment apparatus of claim 8, is taught above. Jeong teaches reversing direction potential difference across electrodes in a regeneration step (0070-0074), Andelman teaches a processor as discussed; above Schneider teaches fouling or scaling of the electrodes can be reversed by reversing the polarity of the electrodes, backwashing with water, increasing voltage, or cleaning (0054). While the taught combination does not teach the processor configured to: during the deionization operation, control the at least one valve to allow water to flow from the first flow path to the third flow path; and during the descaling operation, control the at least one valve to allow water to flow from the first flow path to the second flow path. Katz teaches electrodeionization polarity reversal apparatus is employed for the removal of dissolved salts (abstract), reduction in scaling and fouling by periodically and symmetrically reversing the electrical polarity and when the polarity is reversed, the ion-depleting compartments become ion-enriching compartments and vice versa, therefore it is necessary to simultaneously interchange the flows of the ion-depleting and enriching compartments by suitable manual or automatic manipulation of flow combining and diversion valves, and valves divert the stream from one set of chambers to alternate chambers (C1/L65-C4/L42).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the taught combination to include controlling valves to change the flow to alternate compartments using the controller as according to Katz it is necessary to remove scaling.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854) in view of Kirman (US 9,493,368).
With respect to claim 10, the water treatment apparatus of claim 8, is taught above. Jeong teaches a flow through capacitor, while Jeong does not teach a pump, the use of a pump would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide flow through the apparatus. The taught combination does not teach the processor configured to during the regeneration operation, control a maximum operating revolution per minute (RPM) of the pump to a first RPM, and during the descaling operation, control the maximum operating RPM of the pump to a second RPM greater than the first RPM. Kirman teaches a method of precipitating scale from water includes providing an electrochemical cell comprising electrode chambers and ion exchange membranes (abstract), and a controller (C7/L27-41), one of ordinary skill in the art is capable of adjusting the amperage and flow rate (C12), and in example 2 the processor configured to during the regeneration operation, control a maximum operating revolution per minute (RPM) of the pump to a first RPM, and during the descaling operation, control the maximum operating RPM of the pump to a second RPM greater than the first RPM. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control the pump to a greater rpm or flow rate in order to flush scale and sediment during the descaling operation.
Claim(s) 11-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854) in view of Wilkins (US PG Pub 2005/0103724).
With respect to claims 11, 12, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. The taught combination teaches a processor, deionization, and regeneration, Jeong teaches a valve; however, the taught combination does not explicitly teach a circulation flow path configured to allow water discharged from the second channel to flow into the third channel; and a circulation valve configured to open and close the circulation flow path. Wilkens teaches an continuous electrodeionization with (0008) comprising compartments comprising electrodes, and ion exchange material where water passes through loops by controlling valves, the loops may include ion-depleting compartments and one or more electrode compartments, and may pass through these compartments in any order (0040-0049), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control flow through loops using valves as described by Wilkens as a according to Wilkens if polarity reversal is desired, the function of the loops can be switched to accommodate the polarity change.
With respect to claim 13, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. The taught combination does not teach a first discharge flow path configured to allow water discharged from the third channel to flow; a second discharge flow path configured to allow the water discharged from the third channel to flow; and at least one valve configured to allow the water discharged from the third channel to one of the first discharge flow path or the second discharge flow path, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to: during the deionization operation, control the at least one valve to allow water to flow from the third channel to the first discharge flow path, and during the regeneration operation and the descaling operation, control the at least one valve to allow water to flow from the third channel to the second discharge flow path. However as discussed above with respect to claims 11 and 12, Wilkens teaches an continuous electrodeionization with (0008) comprising compartments comprising electrodes, and ion exchange material where water passes through loops by controlling valves, the loops may include ion-depleting compartments and one or more electrode compartments, and may pass through these compartments in any order (0040-0049), and specifically valves the recited limitations (Figs 1-3), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to control flow through loops using valves as described by Wilkens as a according to Wilkens if polarity reversal is desired, the function of the loops can be switched to accommodate the polarity change.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jeong (US PG Pub 2016/0289097), in view of Andelman (US 5,779,891), and Schneider (US PG Pub 2024/0051854) in view of Freydina (US PG Pub 2006/0231495).
With respect to claim 14, the water treatment apparatus of claim 1, is taught above. The taught combination teaches a processor and regeneration steps as discussed above, and further teaches desorption conducted for a time (0098-0103), but is silent as to a sensor, Freydina teaches an electrodeionization device where the electric field can be reversed and those of ordinary skill in the art will be able to select or optimize the operating conditions of a particular electrical purification apparatus to suit a particular application using routine experimentation, and a device that can be used essentially continuously while providing regeneration (0073-0077), and a sensor in the exiting stream, a controller may determine an appropriate response, for example, signaling when regeneration of the media contained within electrodeionization device 610 is required (0085). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a sensor to signal when regeneration of the device is required.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEANNIE MCDERMOTT whose telephone number is (571)272-4479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571 270-7872. 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.
/JEANNIE MCDERMOTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
/BRADLEY R SPIES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights