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 .
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because legal phraseology, i.e., “comprising”, on lines 2 and 4 of the abstract, should be avoided in the abstract. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “helical or spiral groove cut into the inner surface of the first treatment apparatus”, as recited by instant claim 3, must be shown or the feature canceled from the claim. No new matter should be entered. It is noted that at least lines 22 and 24 on page 7 of the specification specifically state that the helical or spiral groove is not shown within the drawings of the instant application.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
INFORMATION ON HOW TO EFFECT DRAWING CHANGES
Replacement Drawing Sheets
Drawing changes must be made by presenting replacement sheets which incorporate the desired changes and which comply with 37 CFR 1.84. An explanation of the changes made must be presented either in the drawing amendments section, or remarks, section of the amendment paper. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). A replacement sheet must include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of the amended drawing(s) must not be labeled as “amended.” If the changes to the drawing figure(s) are not accepted by the examiner, applicant will be notified of any required corrective action in the next Office action. No further drawing submission will be required, unless applicant is notified.
Identifying indicia, if provided, should include the title of the invention, inventor’s name, and application number, or docket number (if any) if an application number has not been assigned to the application. If this information is provided, it must be placed on the front of each sheet and within the top margin.
Annotated Drawing Sheets
A marked-up copy of any amended drawing figure, including annotations indicating the changes made, may be submitted or required by the examiner. The annotated drawing sheet(s) must be clearly labeled as “Annotated Sheet” and must be presented in the amendment or remarks section that explains the change(s) to the drawings.
Timing of Corrections
Applicant is required to submit acceptable corrected drawings within the time period set in the Office action. See 37 CFR 1.85(a). Failure to take corrective action within the set period will result in ABANDONMENT of the application.
If corrected drawings are required in a Notice of Allowability (PTOL-37), the new drawings MUST be filed within the THREE MONTH shortened statutory period set for reply in the “Notice of Allowability.” Extensions of time may NOT be obtained under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 for filing the corrected drawings after the mailing of a Notice of Allowability.
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 1-16, and 18-28 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.
In claim 1, applicant introduces “an inlet” and “an outlet” with respect to each of the first and second treatment chambers, then refers to “the inlet” and “the outlet” at multiple locations within the claim without specifying which “inlet” or “outlet” (that of the first or second treatment chamber) is being referred to, thereby providing a vague and indefinite recitation of the claimed apparatus.
It is noted that instant claim 5 specifies that the “fluid”, by way of the alternative expression “and/or”, may be either “a composition comprising lignin”, or “a hydrocarbon containing material”. Based upon the alternative expression within claim 5, “the hydrocarbon containing material” of instant claim 6, which depends from claim 5, may not in fact exist, thereby rendering claim 6 meaningless, or at least vague and indefinite, since claim 6 relies upon a material being worked on by the apparatus, which may not exist by a proper alternative reading of instant claim 5. Likewise, based upon the alternative expression within claim 5, “the lignin” of instant claims 7-15, and 18, which depend from claim 5, may not in fact exist, thereby rendering claims 7-15, and 18 meaningless, or at least vague and indefinite, since claims 7-15, and 18 each rely upon a material being worked on by the apparatus, which may not exist by a proper alternative reading of instant claim 5.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1, 2, 5-16, and 18-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being clearly anticipated by WO 2012/105536 A1.
WO 2012/105536 A1 (Figs. 8-17; the English Machine translation) teaches a system (apparatus), as recited by instant independent claim 1, for treating a fluid comprising: a first treatment apparatus (sections 51-53 of Fig. 14, for example) having an inlet (30) and an outlet (the downstream end of section 53) defining a first treatment chamber, the inlet (30) being in fluid communication with a source of the fluid (F1 in tank 3), the first treatment chamber including means (61), in the form of a spiral or helical element (claim 2) extending in the length direction of the first treatment chamber, for disturbing the flow profile of the fluid received from the source and flowing through the chamber to create vortices in the flowing fluid (see Fig. 13), thereby to condition the fluid for further treatment; a second treatment apparatus (sections 54 and 55 of Fig. 14, for example) having an inlet (the upstream end of section 54) and an outlet (40), defining a second treatment chamber, the inlet of the second treatment chamber being in fluid communication with the first treatment apparatus to receive the conditioned fluid, the second treatment apparatus further comprising a nano-bubble generating device (81, see the abstract of the English Machine translation) to form nano-bubbles in the fluid as it flows through the second treatment chamber prior to being expelled via the outlet (40), and a pump (P in Fig. 8) arranged to cause the flow of the fluid through the respective first and second treatment apparatus.
With regard to the specific materials worked on by the apparatus, as set forth by dependent claims 5-16, and 18-28, such cannot be considered to impart patentability to the apparatus claims, since the apparatus as taught by the reference clearly anticipates the claimed apparatus structure as set forth by instant claims 1, 2, 5-16, and 18-28. The reference apparatus is clearly capable of being used to work on any of the claimed fluids, as set forth within the instant claims, since the reference apparatus clearly anticipates the specific structure of each of the claimed apparatus elements, as set forth by instant claims 1, 2, 5-16, and 18-28.
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2012/105536 A1 taken together with KR 10-1711607 B1.
WO 2012/105536 A1 (Figs. 8-17; the English Machine translation) as applied above, substantially discloses applicant’s invention as recited by instant claim 3, except for static mixer being in the form of a helical or spiral groove cut into the inner surface of the treatment apparatus to create vortices within the flowing fluid.
KR 10-1711607 B1 (Figs. 2-5; English Abstract) disclose a fluid treatment chamber similar to that of the first fluid treatment chamber of WO ‘536, wherein the helical or spiral element is in the form of a helical or spiral groove cut into the inner surface of the treatment apparatus, rather than a centrally located separate helical or spiral element located within the treatment chamber. Wherein replacing a centrally located separate helical or spiral element within a static mixer treatment chamber, with a helical or spiral groove cut into the inner surface of the treatment chamber would allow for greater fluid throughput by reducing the pressure drop along the length of the treatment chamber, it would have been obvious for an artisan at the time of the filing of the application, to substitute internal spiral or helical grooves on the inner surface of the treatment chamber for the centrally located spiral or helical element of WO ‘536, in view of KR ‘607, since such would provide for greater production of the desired product stream per unit time by eliminating the pressure drop inducing central helical or spiral element.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2012-105536 A1, taken together with KR 10-2016-0085940 A.
WO 2012/105536 A1 (Figs. 8-17; the English Machine translation) as applied above, substantially discloses applicant’s invention as recited by instant claim 4, except for pump being a vacuum pump in fluid communication with the outlet of the second treatment apparatus.
It is noted that applicant’s disclosure as to the structure of “vacuum pump” is apparently limited to the supposition that “such a pump provides reduced or limited mixing of the separated hydrocarbons with the other materials to maximize the separation and recovery from tank 22” (see the instant specification at page 7, lines 6-9). As such, the instant disclosure is silent as to the actual construction of the so-called “vacuum pump”, and apparently is reliant upon the ordinary level of skill within the art at the time of the filing of the application to provide an adequate disclosure of the pump structure.
KR 10-2016-0085940 A (Fig. 3; English Machine translation, specifically the paragraph under the heading TECHNICAL-FIELD) discloses a fluid treatment apparatus for forming a fluid having large number of nano-sized bubbles contained therein, wherein a pump (500) is provided such that the vacuum side of the pump is arranged to be in direct fluid communication with the outlet end of the nano-bubble forming fluid treatment apparatus (200), which includes a grooved structure cut into the inner surface of the fluid treatment apparatus. Wherein the pump of KR ‘940 is positioned within the fluid treatment apparatus to act as a vacuum pump for drawing fluid through the fluid treatment chamber, it would have been obvious for an artisan at the time of the filing of the application, to substitute the downstream vacuum pump of KR ‘940 for the upstream pressure pump of WO ‘536, since such would provide for a more uniform product stream by eliminating pulsed or surge flow at the upstream end of the fluid treatment apparatus, as known to occur with pressure pumps arranged at the inlet end of a treatment device.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Applicant should note the pump (34) of Russell et al (US 2017/0259219 A1) located at the downstream end of a nano-bubble generating device for drawing fluid through the device, rather than pushing fluid into the device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES S BUSHEY whose telephone number is (571)272-1153. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 6:30-5:00.
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.
/C.S.B/7-19-26
/CHARLES S BUSHEY/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights