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.
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 plasma generator" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the examiner is interpreting claim 1 to recite “a plasma generator”.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the transfer line" in 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For the purposes of examination, the examiner is interpreting claim 1 to recite “a transfer line”.
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 Ben-Shalom et al., US 2018/0141838 (Shalom) in view of Connolly et al., US 2022/0316190 (Connolly).
Regarding claim 1, Shalom discloses a sterilization purification system of contaminated water (abstract, figs. 1, 3) comprising:
A contaminated water tank (REF E, see “water supply”, fig. 1) capable of storing contaminated water;
A pump (REF 1, ¶ 0083) capable of transferring contaminated water to a plasma generator (REF 20, 54, fig. 1, ¶ 0095) through a transfer line (conduit between REF E and REF 54, fig. 1);
A filter (REF 4, ¶ 0094) located between the pump (REF 1) and the plasma generator (REF 20, 54) capable of filtering contaminated water;
A plasma generator (REF 20, 54, fig. 1, ¶ 0095) capable of generating plasma in low-temperature water to sterilize and purify contaminated water (¶ 0119);
A power supply device (REF 218, fig. 3) that supplies power to the plasma generator;
A purified water tank (see “vessel”, ¶ 0092) capable of storing purified water treated in the plasma generator;
A first oxidant measuring unit (REF 56A, fig. 1, ¶ 0086) located between the plasma generator (REF 20, 54) and the purified water tank (downstream from “DISPENSE”, fig. 1) capable of measuring concentration of the oxidant contained in the purified water discharged from the plasma generator (¶ 0086);
A display unit capable of displaying an output of the system (REF 204, fig. 3, ¶ 0125); and
A control unit (REF 202, fig. 3) that controls operation of the pump, the plasma generator, the power supply, and the first oxidant measuring unit (fig. 4, ¶ 0139-0146).
Shalom does not disclose a system comprising a water quality detection sensor that measures water quality in the contaminated water tank and purified water tank, a display capable of displaying a water quality state provided by the water quality detection sensor, or a manager terminal that receives the water quality state of the contaminated water and purified water and controls operation of the sterilization purification system.
However, Connolly discloses a cold-plasma water purification system (abstract, fig. 7, ¶ 0073) comprising a water quality detection sensor that measures water quality of contaminated water (via REF 336, fig. 7, ¶ 0054) contained in a contaminated water tank (REF 320, fig. 7) and in a purified water tank (via REF 326, fig. 7, ¶ 0054), a display unit (see “display screen”, ¶ 0040) capable of displaying the water quality state provided by the water quality detection sensor (¶ 0040, 0048), and a manager terminal (REF 206, fig. 3, ¶ 0040) that receives a water quality state of the contaminated and purified water measured via the water quality detection sensor and controls operation of the sterilization purification system (¶ 0040-0041, 0048).
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Shalom to include the water quality detection sensor, display capability, and manager terminal as described in Connolly, since it has been shown that broadly providing sensors, display capabilities, and control means for water purification systems is common and effective for managing and controlling said water purification systems by control architecture and/or a user.
Claim(s) 2-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ben-Shalom in view of Connolly as relied upon in the rejection of claim 1 set forth above, and in further view of Han, US 2019/0127242 (Han).
Regarding claim 2, Shalom (in view of Connolly) does not disclose the particular configuration of the plasma generator recited in claim 2. However, Han discloses a plasma generator for water purification (abstract, figs. 1-5) comprising a tubular housing (REF 200, fig. 1), a first electrode (REF 210, figs. 3, 5, ¶ 0064) located inside the housing, and a second electrode (REF 220, figs. 3, 5, ¶ 0064) located inside the housing and between the first electrode and the inner wall of the housing.
At the time of invention, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to modify the plasma generator of Shalom (in view of Connolly) to have the configuration described in Han in order to increase the efficiency and durability of water treatment systems via plasma (Han, ¶ 0001, 0015).
Regarding claim 3, Han further discloses the first electrode (REF 210, fig. 5) has a spiral structure.
Regarding claim 4, Han further discloses the first electrode is coated with an insulating layer on a surface adjacent to the second electrode (¶ 0025).
Regarding claim 5, Han further discloses the second electrode (REF 220) has a mesh shape (¶ 0067) with an empty interior and is positioned adjacent to the inner wall of the housing at a certain distance (figs. 3-5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIRK R BASS whose telephone number is (571)270-7370. The examiner can normally be reached 8-4:30 EST Monday-Friday.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
DIRK R. BASS
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1779
/DIRK R BASS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights