DETAILED ACTION
The communication dated 1/23/2026 has been entered and fully considered.
Claim 23 was amended. Claims 1-23 are currently pending.
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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 1/23/2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that no search burden exists. This is not found persuasive because (a) The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art in view of their different classification; (b) The inventions have acquired a separate status in the art due to their recognized divergent subject matter; (c) The inventions require a different field of search (e.g., searching different classes/ subclasses or electronic resources, or employing different search strategies or search queries); (d) The prior art applicable to one invention would not likely be applicable to another invention; (e) The inventions are likely to raise different non-prior art issues under 35 U.S.C. 101 and/ or 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim 23 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 1/23/2026.
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 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Azar U.S. Publication 2004/0231697 (henceforth referred to as Azar).
As for claim 1, Azar teaches a system for cleaning a material (Fig. 1: part 20), the system comprising: a tank (Fig. 1: part 24); a plurality of ultrasonic transducers (28) disposed proximal to said tank; a computing device (Fig. 1: part 30) operatively coupled to said plurality of ultrasonic transducers, said computing device configured to activate at least one of said ultrasonic transducers to generate a plurality of pulsed ultrasonic waves configured to interact to produce ultrasonic shockwaves (paragraphs [0011]-[0012] and [0056]-[0058]; Figs. 1-2) within a target zone (Fig. 1: part 22) within said tank.
As for claim 2, Azar further teaches that the computing device is configured to activate each of said at least one of said ultrasonic transducers at a same time to generate said pulsed ultrasonic waves, and wherein said shockwaves result from constructive interference caused by a geometric arrangement of said activated ultrasonic transducers (paragraphs [0011]-[0012] and [0056]-[0058]; Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 3, Azar further teaches that the computing device is configured to generate a plurality of activation signals for each of said at least one of said ultrasonic transducers so as to produce said shockwaves within said target zone (paragraphs [0011]-[0012] and [0056]-[0058]; Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 4, Azar further teaches that at least a first activation signal and a second activation signal of said activation signals are phase delayed (paragraphs [0008] and [0058]-[0061]).
As for claim 5, Azar further teaches that a first set of said plurality of ultrasonic transducers are disposed on a first waveguide (Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 6, Azar further teaches that a second set of said plurality of ultrasonic transducers is disposed on a second waveguide (Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 7, Azar further teaches that said first set of ultrasonic transducers is disposed on a back surface of said first waveguide (Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 8, Azar further teaches that said first waveguide functions as an energy transfer medium (Figs. 1-2).
As for claim 9, Azar further teaches a transport device configured to transport the material through said target zone (paragraphs [0054]-[0055]).
As for claims 10-13, Examiner regards the operation of the claimed system as intended use of the apparatus’ structure. The system would be capable of operating as claimed (paragraphs [0011]-[0012] and [0056]-[0058]; Figs. 1-2). Apparatus claims cover what a device is, not what a device does. An apparatus claim may be unobvious even if it operates in the same way as the prior art, as long as there are structural differences. Hewlett-Packard Co. v. Bausch & Lomb Inc. 15 USPQ 2d 1525 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
As for claim 14, Azar further teaches that said plurality of ultrasonic transducers is configured to operate at a range of about 40 kHz to 200 kHz (paragraphs [0043]-[0058]).
As for claim 15, Azar further teaches that said plurality of ultrasonic transducers is configured to operate at a range of about 500 kHz to 2 MHz (paragraphs [0043]-[0058]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16-22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Azar U.S. Publication 2004/0231697, the closest prior art, differs from the instant claims in failing to teach the particular limitations of the drain and transport device as claimed. Furthermore, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system taught by Azar as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LEVON J SHAHINIAN whose telephone number is (571)270-1384. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30am-6:00pm.
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, Michael Barr can be reached at (571)272-1414. 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.
/LEVON J SHAHINIAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711