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(b)
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 14-33 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 14 recites “a circulation pump (14) and connected conduit (13, 113, 213) configured to pump liquid … a conduit (15, 115, 215) for conveying vapor”. It is unclear if the conduits are the same or different.
Claims 15-33 depend upon claim 14.
Claims 15-22 recite the limitation "the mixing device". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. For examination purposes the limitation will be interpreted as “the mixing zone or device”.
Claim 16 recites the limitation “said column”. The limitation is indefinite because it is unclear if the column is the same as the previously recited “the vertical column”. Each feature should be referred to consistently to avoid confusion.
Claim 20 recites “a tank (10)”, where it is unclear if the limitation is the same or different than the claim 14 tank.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the tank". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because “a tank” is recited multiple times.
Claim 20 recites “a conduit”. It is unclear if the conduit is the same or different than the claim 14 conduit(s) of “a circulation pump (14) and connected conduit (13, 113, 213) configured to pump liquid … a conduit (15, 115, 215) for conveying vapor”.
Claim 22 recites “a horizontal column (116)”, where it is unclear if the limitation is the same or different than the claim 20 horizontal column.
Claim 27 recites the limitation "the conduit". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because antecedent basis for “conduit” is established multiple times.
Claim 31 recites “a conduit” twice. It is unclear if the conduit is the same or different than the claim 14 conduit(s) of “a circulation pump (14) and connected conduit (13, 113, 213) configured to pump liquid … a conduit (15, 115, 215) for conveying vapor” or the claim 20 conduit.
Claims 32-33 recite the limitation "the device". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because antecedent basis for “device” is established multiple times (i.e. “A device for reintroducing” and “a mixing zone or device (12, 112, 212) for mixing”). For examination purposes the limitation will be interpreted to refer to the device of the mixing zone or device.
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 14-15, 20-22, and 30-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Uk et al. KR20030073974 published 19 Sep. 2003 as translated by EPO (hereafter Uk).
Regarding claims 14 and 32-33, Uk teaches a device for reintroducing vapor into a volatile liquid, comprising:
a tank (10) for volatile liquid;
a circulation pump (140) and connected conduit (conduit between 140 and 150) configured to pump liquid from the tank through a mixing zone (120) for mixing vapor and liquid (¶38-44); and
a conduit (conduit between 10 and 20) for conveying vapor from a space above a liquid level (liquid level shown in Fig 1) to the mixing zone,
wherein the mixing zone is configured to ensure a pressure therein that is independent of the liquid level within the tank (¶33).
Regarding claim 15, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone is positioned within a liquid-tight vertical column (column between 130 and 100) filled with liquid to a level independent of the level within the tank (10), thereby ensuring the desired pressure (¶43, where the column is fully capable of having the claimed liquid level in accordance with MPEP 2114, 2115, 2173.05(g)).
Regarding claim 20, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone (120) is arranged proximate the bottom of a tank (10) and has an outlet connected to a horizontal column (130) arranged proximate the bottom of the tank, the horizontal column is connected to a conduit (horizontal section of conduit between 40 and 100) that runs upwards to an elevation higher than the elevation of the mixing device and independent of the liquid level in the tank, thereby ensuring the desired pressure (as shown in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 21, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone is arranged separately from the horizontal column (where the mixing zone and the horizontal column are separated by the vertical column).
Regarding claim 22, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone combined with a horizontal column (column between 150 and 120) forming an integral unit therewith (as shown in Fig 1).
Regarding claim 30, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 20. Uk further teaches wherein the conduit (horizontal section of conduit between 40 and 100) from the horizontal column terminates in a dropline (vertical section of conduit between 40 and 100).
Regarding claim 31, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 20. Uk further teaches the conduit (conduit between 10 and 20) is configured to convey vapor to a perforated end portion or box (130) arranged at the bottom of the vertical column, and the conduit (conduit between 140 and 150) is configured to pump liquid to a zone surrounding said end portion or box (where the liquid flowing through the conduit is released via 130 to the surrounding area).
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.
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uk as applied to claim 15 above.
Regarding claim 16, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 15. Uk further teaches said column being arranged within the tank (where Fig 1 shows the column arranged at least partly in the tank) and exhibiting an upper end (end connected to valve 100) in fluid communication with an inner volume of the tank
Uk does not teach wherein the mixing zone is arranged less than 5 meters from a bottom of the vertical column.
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 arrangement of the mixing zone in relation to the bottom of the vertical column, such as to be less than 5 meters, as a matter of obvious design choice (MPEP 2144.04 IV A) and to make the device compact.
Regarding claim 17, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 16.
Uk does not teach wherein the mixing zone is arranged between 2 meters and 5 meters from the bottom of the vertical column.
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 arrangement of the mixing zone in relation to the bottom of the vertical column, such as to be between 2 and 5 meters, as a matter of obvious design choice (MPEP 2144.04 IV A) and to make the device compact and to allow for servicing, where locating the mixing zone nearer to the bottom of the tank could make the zone more difficult to access.
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uk as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Aasen et al. US 2009/0306440 (hereafter Aasen).
Regarding claim 18, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 14. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone has an outlet (outlet facing 130) aligned with the column (as shown in Fig 1), said outlet pointing downward toward a bottom of the vertical column (as shown in Fig 1).
Uk does not teach wherein the mixing zone has an outlet with a central axis aligned with the central axis of the column.
Aasen teaches a mixing zone (Fig 4) for mixing a vapor and liquid (abstract) wherein the mixing zone has an outlet (outlet to the right of vanes 15) with a central axis aligned with the central axis of the outlet tube.
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 mixing zone (120) of Uk by incorporating the mixing zone (Fig 4) of Aasen in order to provide an inexpensive and efficient mixing zone (Aasen ¶8-10).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Uk as applied to claim 15 above, and further in view of Aasen et al. US 2009/0306440 (hereafter Aasen).
Regarding claim 19, Uk teaches all the limitations of claim 15. Uk further teaches wherein the mixing zone has an outlet (outlet facing 130) aligned with the column (as shown in Fig 1), said outlet pointing downward toward a bottom of the vertical column (as shown in Fig 1).
Uk does not teach wherein the mixing zone has an outlet with a central axis aligned with the central axis of the column.
Aasen teaches a mixing zone (Fig 4) for mixing a vapor and liquid (abstract) wherein the mixing zone has an outlet (outlet to the right of vanes 15) with a central axis aligned with the central axis of the outlet tube.
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 mixing zone (120) of Uk by incorporating the mixing zone (Fig 4) of Aasen in order to provide an inexpensive and efficient mixing zone (Aasen ¶8-10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 23-29 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 23, the closest prior art is KR20030073974 which teaches a device for reintroducing vapor into a volatile liquid, comprising a tank, a circulation pump, a conduit, and a horizontal column. The prior art does not teach the horizontal column as claimed including the vane blades.
Claims 26 and 28-29 depend upon claim 23.
Regarding claim 24, the closest prior art is KR20030073974 which teaches a device for reintroducing vapor into a volatile liquid, comprising a tank, a circulation pump, a conduit, and a horizontal column. The prior art does not teach the horizontal column as claimed including the vane blades.
Regarding claim 25, the closest prior art is KR20030073974 which teaches a device for reintroducing vapor into a volatile liquid, comprising a tank, a circulation pump, a conduit, and a horizontal column. The prior art does not teach the horizontal column as claimed including the vane blades.
Regarding claim 27, the closest prior art is KR20030073974 which teaches a device for reintroducing vapor into a volatile liquid, comprising a tank, a circulation pump, a conduit, and a horizontal column. The prior art does not teach the gas separation unit from the horizontal column as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN HOBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9914. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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.
/STEPHEN HOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights