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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because:
Figs. 1,9: (l) Character of lines, numbers, and letters. All drawings must be made by a process which will give them satisfactory reproduction characteristics. Every line, number, and letter must be durable, clean, black (except for color drawings), sufficiently dense and dark, and uniformly thick and well-defined. The weight of all lines and letters must be heavy enough to permit adequate reproduction. This requirement applies to all lines however fine, to shading, and to lines representing cut surfaces in sectional views. Lines and strokes of different thicknesses may be used in the same drawing where different thicknesses have a different meaning. MPEP 608.02.V; 37 CFR 1.84.(l).
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.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743).
Regarding claim 1, ZHANG teaches an outdoor water purification device (title, Figs.) including a portable non-electrical water purification system (abstract; L187), comprising:
a filter element set (Fig. 1 #7) including a pre-filter element (Fig. 1 #71) and a mid-filter element (Fig. 1 #71), wherein the mid-filter element includes a reverse osmosis filter element (L160-163);
a water pipeline including an inlet pipe head (Fig. 2 #5) and an outlet pipe head (Fig. 2 #6), wherein, from the inlet pipe head to the outlet pipe head, the pre-filter element and the mid-filter element are connected in series to the water pipeline sequentially (Fig. 3);
a manual pressurizer (Fig. 3 #2) provided on the water pipeline; and
a case (Fig. 1 #1) capable of accommodating part of the filter element set, the water pipeline, and the manual pressurizer, wherein the inlet pipe head and the outlet pipe head are connected to outside of the case (Figs. 1-2).
ZHANG does not teach the manual pressurizer is located between the pre-filter element and the mid-filter element. However, WANG teaches a water purification system and water purifier with same (title, Figs.) including a non-electrical water purification system, comprising:
a filter element set including a pre-filter element (Fig. 1 #10) and a mid-filter element (Fig. 1 #3), wherein the mid-filter element includes a reverse osmosis filter element (L104-105);
a water pipeline including an inlet pipe head (Fig. 1 #5) and an outlet pipe head (Fig. 1 #15), wherein, from the inlet pipe head to the outlet pipe head, the pre-filter element and the mid-filter element are connected in series to the water pipeline sequentially; and,
a booster pump (Fig. 1 #2) provided on the water pipeline and located between the pre-filter element and the mid-filter element.
One having ordinary skill in art would recognize that a booster pump may be provided before a reverse osmosis membrane module for the purpose of pressurizing the feed flow into the reverse osmosis membrane module for improved permeation and separation efficiency.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the device of ZHANG to locate the pump between the pre-filter element and the mid-filter element as taught by WANG in order to pressurize the feed flow into the reverse osmosis membrane module for improved permeation and separation efficiency. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Regarding claim 2, ZHANG teaches the filter element set further includes a post-filter element (Fig. 3 #8), and from the inlet pipe head to the outlet pipe head, the pre-filter element, the mid-filter element, and the post-filter element are connected in series to the water pipeline sequentially (Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5, ZHANG’s modified device teaches a pressure relief return pipeline (WANG Fig. 1 #4);
a water inlet end of the pressure relief return pipeline is connected to e.g. a water inlet end of the RO filter (Fig. 1);
a water outlet end of the pressure relief return pipeline is connected to a water inlet end of the booster pump; and,
from the water inlet end of the pressure relief return pipeline to the water outlet end of the pressure relief return pipeline, a pressure relief device (Fig. 1 #6) and a pressure relief return one-way valve (check valve; Fig. 1 #9) are connected in series to the pressure relief return pipeline sequentially (WANG L155-160).
Regarding claim 6, ZHANG’s modified device teaches a pressure gauge (WANG Fig. 1 #7) is provided between the pump and the RO filter.
Claim(s) 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743) and REEVES (US 20130146514).
Regarding claim 3, ZHANG teaches a water outlet end of the mid-filter element is connected to a drain pipeline (ZHANG Fig. 3 #9).
ZHANG does not teach a proportional valve. However, REEVES teaches a membrane treatment/separation plant and control system (title, Figs.) including a membrane unit (Fig. 2 #55) in a reverse osmosis plant (par. [0016]) comprising a water outlet end of the RO filter is connected to a concentrate pipeline (Fig. 2 #59); and
a proportional valve (Fig. 2 #63) is provided on the concentrate pipeline.
REEVES teaches that the proportional valve allows for flow control of concentrate fluid leaving the membrane unit, and control of fluid pressure on the membrane within the membrane unit (par. [0022]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device of ZHANG with a proportional valve on the drain line as taught by REEVES in order to control the concentrate flow and the pressure of the reverse osmosis membrane module for improved operational and separation efficiency. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Claim(s) 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743), REEVES (US 20130146514), and LINONG (CN 201864606).
Regarding claim 4, ZHANG does not teach a flushing pipeline and switching valve. However, LINONG teaches a reverse osmosis water purifier without waste water (title, Figs.) including a system comprising a pre-processor (Fig. 1 #2’), a booster pump (Fig. 1 #4’), RO filter (Fig. 1 #5’), a faucet (Fig. 1 as shown); and,
a flushing pipeline and a switching valve (Fig. 1 #9’) is led out between a concentrate valve (Fig. 1 #8’) and the RO filter.
LINONG teaches that the switching valve discharges water used for flushing the reverse osmosis membrane (L50-56).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device of ZHANG with a flushing pipeline and valve as taught by LINONG in order to flush the reverse osmosis membrane module to clean the membrane for improved operational efficiency. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743), and LINONG (CN 201864606).
Regarding claim 8, ZHANG does not teach an outlet faucet. However, LINONG teaches a reverse osmosis water purifier without waste water (title, Figs.) including a system comprising a pre-processor (Fig. 1 #2’), a booster pump (Fig. 1 #4’), RO filter (Fig. 1 #5’); and,
a faucet (Fig. 1 as shown or Fig. 2 #3), which provides a conventional means of discharging clean water to an end user (L267-268).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device of ZHANG with an outlet faucet as taught by LINONG in order to provide a conventional means of discharging clean water to an end user. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743), and FIFE (US 5266196).
Regarding claim 7, ZHANG does not teach the inlet pipe head is connected to a filter head. However, FIFE teaches a water filter (title, Figs.) including an inlet assembly (Fig. 2 #12) comprising a prefiltering foam tip (abstract; Fig. 2 #26), which prevents large particles from entering the filter and provides an efficient, effective prefiltering device (C5/L49-62).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device of ZHANG with a filter head as taught by FIFE in order to prevent large particles from entering the filter and provide an efficient, effective prefiltering device. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ZHANG (CN 209906481) in view of WANG (CN 215516743), and WU (CN 114483508).
Regarding claim 9, ZHANG teaches the manual pressurizer includes a pressurizing pump (Fig. 4 #23), and a handle (Fig. 4 #24),
the pressurizing pump is located inside the case (Fig. 1); and,
the handle is detachably located outside the case (L59).
ZHANG does not teach details such as a speed-increasing gearbox. However, WU teaches a miniature manual two-dimensional plunger pump (title, Figs.) including a manual pressurizer comprising a speed-increasing gearbox (abstract; Fig. 2 #27) is connected between a pressurizing pump (Fig. 2 #9) and a handle (Figs. 1-2 #30).
WU teaches the pump has good sealing performance, and a prolonged life with high speed and efficiency (abstract).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the device of ZHANG with the pump/gear box as taught by WU in order to provide a pump that has good sealing performance, and a prolonged life with high speed and efficiency. The references are combinable, because they are in the same technological environment of filtration. See MPEP 2141 III (A) and (G).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10-12 have allowable subject matter over the prior art of record. The prior art neither teaches, suggests, nor makes obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art a portable non-electrical water purification system comprising the combination of elements as claimed.
WANG (CN 114165419) discloses a booster pump and water purifier, but does not teach a gearbox or a handle.
EVANS (US 2351113) discloses a water purification apparatus having a handle and a pump and a filter.
BAUMGARTNER (WO 2008058613) discloses a device for the treatment of drinking water (title, Figs.) comprising a filter element set including a pre-filter element (Fig. 1 #2,3) and a RO filter element (Fig. 1 #5);
a manual pressurizer (Fig. 1 #4);
a case (Fig. 1 #1); and
a speed reduction gearbox (Fig. 1 #43-45).
Telephonic Inquiries
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIAM A ROYCE whose telephone number is (571)270-0352. The examiner can normally be reached M-F ~08:00~15:00.
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, Ben 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.
/Liam Royce/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
LIAM A. ROYCE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights