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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-6 are currently pending
Claims 7-20 are withdrawn from consideration
Claims 1-6 are currently rejected
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements filed on 08/29/2024, 09/06/2024, 12/05/2024, 09/23/2025 and 07/08/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and have been considered. An initialed copy of the Form 1449 is enclosed herewith.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election of Group I claims 1-6 in the reply filed on 07/08/2026 is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the restriction requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP § 818.01(a)).
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 7 states “of ammonia” and instead should state “of the ammonia” for further clarity. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 6 is objected to because of the following informalities: Line 2 states “a stormwater treatment pond, or a stormwater collection” and instead should remove the ‘or’ to further recite “a stormwater treatment pond, a stormwater collection” for further clarity. 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 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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "includes anammox bacteria,” on lines 8-9. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is trying to refer to the same ‘anammox bacteria’ as recited on line 1 of claim 1, or a different anammox bacteria? FURTHERMORE, claim 1 recites the limitation “maintains anammox bacteria growth when not in contact” on lines 10-11. It is unclear and confusing what Applicant is trying to claim, when what is not in contact? Claims 2-6 are also rejected since these claims depend on claim 1.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "anammox bacteria.” on line 2. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is trying to refer to the same ‘anammox bacteria’ as recited on line 1 of claim 1, or a different anammox bacteria?
Claim 4 recites the limitation "anammox bacteria.” on lines 2-3. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is trying to refer to the same ‘anammox bacteria’ as recited on line 1 of claim 1, or a different anammox bacteria?
Claim 5 recites the limitation "anammox bacteria” on lines 3 and 4. It is unclear and confusing whether Applicant is trying to refer to the same ‘anammox bacteria’ as recited on line 1 of claim 1, or a different anammox bacteria?
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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Novak et al. (U.S. 2019/0375662 A1) (hereinafter “Novak”).
Regarding Claim 1:
Novak teaches a stormwater treatment system for attracting and retaining anammox bacteria (see FIG. 2, a treatment system 200 further including a plurality of zeolites 101 and anammox bacteria 104) (see paragraphs 4-9, 32-34, 41, 51-52, 66, 68-72 and 75), the stormwater treatment system comprising:
a subsystem capable of receiving stormwater including ammonia (see FIG. 1, a hollow tube 100 for use in a treatment system 200 in FIG. 2) (see paragraphs 9, 33-34, 51-52, 66 and 68-72), the stormwater having a flow rate (Examiner’s note: it is inherent for stormwater to enter into a system and/or subsystem at a flow rate) (see paragraphs 33-34, 51-52, 66 and 68-72); and
a plurality of carriers (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72), the plurality of carriers being positioned within the stormwater treatment system to contact the ammonia in the stormwater received by the subsystem (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72), remove a select amount of ammonia from the stormwater (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72), and produce an exit stream with less total nitrogen content than the stormwater (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-9, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72), wherein at least some of the plurality of carriers includes anammox bacteria (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72),
wherein the stormwater treatment system maintains anammox bacteria growth when not in contact with the stormwater having the flow rate (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Although Novak teaches a stormwater treatment system including feeding stormwater, one may broadly interpret that Novak does not explicitly teach the stormwater having a variable flow rate, as recited in independent claim 1.
However, it would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to one of ordinary skilled in the art to modify the stormwater treatment system of Novak to feed a stormwater source into the treatment system including the tube at a variable flow rate for optimization purposes (see paragraphs 33-34, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Regarding Claim 2:
Novak teaches the stormwater treatment system of claim 1, wherein at least some of the plurality of carriers include zeolite and are unseeded (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41-43, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Regarding Claim 3:
Novak teaches the stormwater treatment system of claim 1, wherein at least some of the plurality of carriers include zeolite and are pre-seeded with a mixed culture enriched in anammox bacteria (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41-43, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Regarding Claim 4:
Novak teaches the stormwater treatment system of claim 1, wherein at least some of the plurality of carriers do not include zeolite and are pre-seeded with a mixed culture enriched in anammox bacteria (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41-43, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Regarding Claim 5:
Novak teaches the stormwater treatment system of claim 1, wherein the plurality of carriers includes a combination of unseeded zeolite-including carriers, zeolite-including carriers pre-seeded with anammox bacteria, and carriers that do not include zeolite and are pre seeded with anammox bacteria (‘a plurality of hard polymer pieces’) (see paragraphs 5-8, 33-34, 41-43, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Regarding Claim 6:
Novak teaches the stormwater treatment system of claim 1, wherein the subsystem includes a raingarden, a stormwater treatment pond, or a stormwater collection vault or a dispersion well with at least one of an inlet, an outlet, and a storage vessel including a plurality of walls defining an inner cavity (see FIG. 1, a hollow tube 100 for use in a treatment system 200 in FIG. 2) (see paragraphs 9, 33-34, 51-52, 66 and 68-72).
Other References Considered
CORD-RUWISCH et al. (U.S. 2020/0062627 A1) (hereinafter “Cord”) teaches a water treatment method.
Smith (U.S. 2018/0327293 A1) (hereinafter “Smith”) teaches a system and method for removal of nitrogen from wastewater.
Boltz et al. (U.S. 2015/0336827 A1) (hereinafter “Boltz”) teaches a biofilm media system and method.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AKASH K. VARMA whose telephone number is (571)272-9627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 pm.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571)-272-0475. 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.
/AKASH K VARMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights