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.
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 11 and 16 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.
Regarding claim 11, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Examiner recommends removal of the phrase to overcome this rejection.
Regarding claim 16, the term “optionally” renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Examiner recommends removing the phrase from claim 16 and introducing the limitation without the term optionally in a dependent claim to overcome this rejection, or replacing “optionally” with –configured to be—if Applicant intends the limitation to be part of the claim.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: securement mechanism in claim 4; filtration mechanism in claim 9; and disinfection mechanism in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4-9, 11-14, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent 8,024,823 (hereinafter Sanaghan, Jr.) in view of US Patent 9,732,503 (hereinafter Erbach).
Regarding claim 1, Sanaghan, Jr. discloses a water recycling system (100) for toilets comprising: a first receptacle (160) for collecting shower water (col. 2, ln. 45-49); a second receptacle (120)
Regarding claim 2, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said first receptacle is adapted to collect water from sources from at least one of a shower, a bathtub, and a sink (col. 2, ln. 45-49).
Regarding claim 4, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein a securement mechanism (180) for attachment to the toilet tank cover (fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said first receptacle (160) is manually lifted and poured into said second receptacle (120) to facilitate refilling the toilet tank following flushing (fig. 3).
Regarding claim 6, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein the materials of said first and second receptacles (120, 160) are made of plastic (col. 4,ln. 25-27; col. 4, ln. 4-6). “Even though product-by-process claims are limited by and defined by the process, determination of patentability is based on the product itself. The patentability of a product does not depend on its method of production. If the product in the product-by-process claim is the same as or obvious from a product in the prior art, the claim is unpatentable even through the prior product was made by a different process” (In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695, 698,227 USPQ 964, 966 (Fed. Circ. 1985) (see MPEP 2113). In the instant case, since the end product is the same as the claimed product, the method in which it was produced, i.e. by injection molding, does not patentably distinguish from the product of the prior art.
Regarding claim 7, Sanaghan, Jr. fails to show wherein said first receptacle includes graduated markings to indicate the volume of water contained. Sanaghan, Jr. however does teach it is common to include markings on the second receptacle to easily determine the volume of fluid contained (col. 4, ln. 32-33). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include graduated markings to indicate the volume of water contained on the first receptacle of Sanaghan, Jr. as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Sanaghan, Jr. for the second receptacle. Such a modification would produce the expected result of allowing a user to determine a volume within the container being filled.
Regarding claim 8, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said system is adaptable to different toilet models and bathroom configurations (col. 5, ln. 60-64).
Regarding claim 9, Sanaghan, Jr. shows further comprising a filtration mechanism (186) (fig. 6) for removing debris from the collected water.
Regarding claim 11, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said first receptacle (160) is configured to collect water from external sources including rainwater from at least one of a downspout and Air conditioner condense discharge (a user could place the receptacle outside and underneath a downspout or air conditioner discharge line if so desired; there is nothing to structurally preclude a user from performing the intended function in the claim language).
Regarding claim 12, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said first receptacle is designed with visual indicators to differentiate types of collected water (col. 4, ln. 24-33; different types of transparency could for example indicate different types of collected water if a user so desired).
Regarding claim 13, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said system is equipped for use in residential, commercial, or public settings (system is capable of being used with residential, commercial or public settings if so desired; there is nothing to structurally preclude a user from performing the intended use in the claim language).
Regarding claim 14, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said system is customizable to accommodate larger volumes of water for non-residential use (col. 4, ln. 15-23).
Regarding claim 17, Sanaghan, Jr. shows a method for recycling water in a toilet system, comprising the steps of: collecting water in a first receptacle (160) (col. 2, ln. 15-20; 45-47); nsecond receptacle (20) for storing and dispensing collected water into a toilet tank. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the method of Sanaghan, Jr. to include a step of nesting the first receptacle within the second receptacle to conveniently store and house the first receptacle as evidenced by the teachings of Erbach.
Regarding claim 18, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein water is collected during activities including at least one of showering, bathing, and using a sink (col. 2, ln. 45-49).
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanaghan, Jr. and Erbach as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 9,932,147 (hereinafter Ahlm).
Regarding claim 3, Sanaghan, Jr. shows wherein said first receptacle (160) includes a handle and a spout (see fig. 3) but fails to show the spout having notches to aid gripping. Attention is turned to Ahlm in the same field of endeavor of dispensing receptacles which shows including notches (490) on a spout to aid in gripping of the receptacle (col. 4, ln. 12-17). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to modify the first receptacle of Sanaghan, Jr. to include a spout having notches to aid gripping as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings mentioned above.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanaghan, Jr. and Erbach as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent 1,134,556 (hereinafter Recker).
Regarding claim 10, Sanaghan, Jr. fails to show further comprising a disinfection mechanism to ensure the cleanliness of the collected water. Attention is turned to Recker in the same field of endeavor of flushing toilets which shows including a disinfection mechanism (4) mounted in an aperture of a toilet tank lid (2) to provide disinfectant material to flushing water in a toilet tank. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include a disinfection mechanism to ensure the cleanliness of the collected water as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Recker mentioned above.
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sanaghan, Jr. and Erbach as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US Patent Application Publication 2020/0318332 (hereinafter Christian).
Regarding claim 15, Sahaghan, Jr. fails to show wherein said second receptacle further includes an adjustable flow control device to regulate the transfer of water to the toilet tank. Attention is turned to Christian in the same field of endeavor of water recycling systems which shows including an adjustable flow control device (34) with a receptacle (10) to allow a user to control the flow of recycled water exiting the receptacle. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention to include an adjustable flow control device to regulate the transfer of water to the toilet tank as is known in the art and evidenced by the teachings of Christian mentioned above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 16 would be allowable if rewritten or amended 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US Patent 6,408,450 is directed to the state of the art of toilet lids having apertures that receive a container.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JANIE M LOEPPKE whose telephone number is (571)270-5208. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM-5PM ET.
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, David Angwin can be reached at (571) 270-3735. 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.
/JANIE M LOEPPKE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754