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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-4, and 6-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1, 3-4, and 6-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 3 and 2, 4-17 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12,085,000. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because Claims 3 and 2, 4-17 of the U.S. Patent No. 12,085,000 discloses all the limitations of the present Claims 1, 3-4 and 6-20.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 6, 15, 17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Pei et al. (CN-102989520 A).
Regarding Claim 1, Pei et al. reference discloses a housing for a selective catalyst reactor for processing exhaust gas from a combustion engine of a combined heat and power system, the housing comprising an annular shaped plate structure forming an elongate accommodation wall defining an inner accommodation volume for containing a catalyst to be flown through by the exhaust gas, wherein the annular shaped plate structure includes a set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions (Figure 1, numerals 1- catalyst framework, 2 – catalyst monomer, 3 – side plate having same geometry and dimensions);
wherein the set of plate elements form corner elements of the annular shaped plate structure (Figure 1, numeral 3 – side plate; 1 side of the catalyst frame has 4 side plates) and wherein the corner elements are provided, along their circumferential contour, with an upstanding flange contacting a corresponding flange of an adjacent corner element (Figure 1, numeral 3 – side plate and the flange to connect the adjacent corner element).
Regarding Claim 3, Pei et al. reference discloses the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 1, wherein the annular shaped plate structure includes an additional set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions, and wherein the additional set of plate elements form intermediate plate elements located between adjacent corner elements (Figure 1, numeral 3 – side plate; 1 side of the catalyst frame has 4 side plates).
Regarding Claim 6, Pei et al. reference discloses the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 1, wherein the corner elements are arranged and mounted next to each other in a circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure (Figure 1, numeral 3 – side plate).
Regarding Claim 15, Pei et al. reference discloses the method for constructing the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 1, comprising a step of providing a kit of parts for constructing the housing for a selective catalyst reactor, the kit of parts comprising the set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions for being arranged and mounted in a circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure of the housing, the set of plate elements configured to form corner elements for the annular shaped plate structure, and a step of arranging and mounting the corner elements next to each other in a circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure of the housing (Figure 1 and Abstract).
Regarding Claim 17, Pei et al. reference discloses the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 3, wherein the intermediate elements are generally rectangular (Figure 1, numeral 3 – side plate).
Regarding Claim 19, Pei et al. reference discloses the method according to claim 15, wherein the kit of parts includes intermediate plate elements to be located between adjacent corner elements in the annular shaped plate structure, and wherein the method further comprises a step of arranging and mounting the intermediate elements in the circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure of the housing (Figure 1 and Paragraph [0020]).
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.
Claim(s) 4, 7-14, 18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pei et al. (CN-102989520 A) in view of LV et al. (CN-104018923 A).
Regarding Claim 4, Pei et al. reference discloses the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 1 except for the annular shaped plate structure includes at least one window module provided with a movable window element. LV et al. discloses at least one of the plate element defines a window module having a movable window (Figure 2, numerals 13, 13.1, 14, and 15) which allows catalysts and other parts to be loaded into the inner volume of the housing (Figure 2, numeral 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a movable window as taught by LV et al., since LV et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would prevent the solid granule deposited urea crystal and engine exhaust.
Regarding Claim 7, Pei et al. reference discloses the housing for a selective catalyst reactor according to claim 1 except for a multiple number of annular shaped plate structures arranged in series aligned along a common longitudinal axis so as to form the elongate accommodation wall, wherein at least two annular shaped plate structures each includes the set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions, wherein the at least two annular shaped plate structures have the same dimensions in a longitudinal direction. LV et al. reference discloses a marine compact SCR catalyst muffler comprising a multiple number of annular shaped plate structures arranged in series aligned along a common longitudinal axis so as to form the elongate accommodation wall, wherein at least two annular shaped plate structures each includes the set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions, wherein the at least two annular shaped plate structures have the same dimensions in the longitudinal direction (Figures 1 and 2, numeral 2 – two sets of annular shaped plate structures). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the catalyst structure of Pei et al. with a multiple number of annular shaped plate structures arranged in series as taught by LV et al., since LV et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would prevent the solid granule deposited urea crystal and engine exhaust.
Regarding Claims 8-14, Pei et al. reference discloses the claimed housing for a selective catalyst reactor except for the at least two annular shaped plate structures have a rectangular geometry, in cross sectional view, the structures having a width dimension and a height dimension, the width dimension and the height dimension, respectively, of the at least two annular shaped plate structures are the same and a stiffening intermediate plate including a frame having the same dimensions as the at least two annular shaped plate structures, in cross sectional view, the stiffening intermediate plate further including stiffening elements forming flow openings, the stiffening intermediate plate is arranged between the two annular shaped plate structures, aligned along the common longitudinal axis, a gas inlet section formed as truncated cone having a proximal end with a relatively small entry opening for connection with an exhaust tube of the combustion engine, and a distal end with a relatively large exit opening for connection with an annular shaped plate structure or stiffening intermediate plate, wherein the relatively small entry opening of the truncated cone is eccentric relative to the relatively large exit opening of the truncated cone, the kit of parts comprising the set of plate elements having the same geometry and dimensions for being arranged and mounted in a circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure of the housing, the set of plate elements form corner elements for the annular shaped plate structure, the kit of parts including intermediate plate elements to be located between adjacent corner elements in the annular shaped plate structure (Figures 1-2, numeral 2 – two sets of annular shaped plate structures, 13 – plate elements are the same for both sets, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 – stiffening intermediate plate, and 1, 3 – gas inlet and outlet, 4 and 5 – truncated cone).
Regarding Claim 18, Pei et al. reference discloses the kit of parts according to claim 14 except for at least one window module provided with a movable window element. LV et al. discloses at least one of the plate element defines a window module having a movable window (Figure 2, numerals 13, 13.1, 14, and 15) which allows catalysts and other parts to be loaded into the inner volume of the housing (Figure 2, numeral 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a movable window as taught by LV et al., since LV et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would prevent the solid granule deposited urea crystal and engine exhaust.
Regarding Claim 20, Pei et al. reference discloses the method according to claim 19 except for the kit of parts further includes at least one window module provided with a movable window element, and wherein the method further comprises a step of arranging and mounting the at least one window module the circumferential direction for forming the annular shaped plate structure of the housing. LV et al. discloses at least one of the plate element defines a window module having a movable window (Figure 2, numerals 13, 13.1, 14, and 15) which allows catalysts and other parts to be loaded into the inner volume of the housing (Figure 2, numeral 9.1, 9.2, and 9.3). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use a movable window as taught by LV et al., since LV et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would prevent the solid granule deposited urea crystal and engine exhaust.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY-TRAM NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3167. The examiner can normally be reached M-W, 7:00am - 3pm, EST.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/HUY TRAM NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1774