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 Objections
Claim 1-12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, the limitation “the filter medium” in line 8 appears to be referring “a flat filter medium” of line 6. Similarly the/said filter medium is recited in claims 2, 3, 4, 8 and 9. The limitation should be changed to the/said flat filter medium to provide proper antecedent basis and avoid any ambiguity with regard to what is being referred to by the/said filter medium.
In claim 1, lines 9 and 19, the limitation “the filter” appears to be referring to “a self-cleaning filter” of line 1. “the filter” is also recited in claims 2-12. The limitation should be changed to “the self-cleaning filter” to provide proper antecedent basis and avoid any ambiguity regarding what is being referred to by the filter.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-12 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 1 recites the limitation "the scraper element" in line 17. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Preceding limitation recites “at least one scraper element” indicating that there can be more than one scraper elements.
Claim 2 recites the limitation "the base, or lower, wall" in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the base wall" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 11 recites the limitation "the cover" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the cover" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Li et al. (CN 110801654A).
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a self-cleaning filter for liquids comprising a body (5) with a first chamber (refer chamber 51 in fig. 8) communicating with an inlet (1) for the inflow of a liquid to be filtered; a second chamber (refer chamber 52 in fig. 8) communicating with a liquid outlet (7); wherein the two first and second chambers are substantially superimposed (Refer fig. 7, fig. 8) and communicating with each other by means of a flat filter medium (4), wherein the first chamber (51) is also communicating with a discharge passage (8) that allows the elimination of unwanted material separated and retained by the flat filter medium (4), the self-cleaning filter further comprising a closing element (31) of the discharge passage (8), housed in the first chamber (51), and at least one scraper element (3), connected to said closing element (31), wherein the closing element (31) is mounted rotatably in the first chamber (refer the scraper having a rotating rod 33) around an axis (vertical axis) and can perform a circular trajectory that comprises a cleaning path and at least one closing position of the discharge passage (8), and wherein said at least one scraper element (3) is in contact with the filter medium (4) during the movement of the closing element (31) in the section of the cleaning path so that, following rotation, the scraper element (3) can remove any accumulation of unwanted materials deposited on the filter medium (4) and convey it toward the discharge passage (8) through which it is eliminated from the filter.
Regarding claim 2, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li further teaches that the first chamber (51) has a substantially cylindrical and flattened shape (refer fig. 7 and 8 indicating cylindrical chamber having flattened shape) and wherein the filter medium (4) and the discharge passage (8) are arranged at the base of said first chamber (51).
Regarding claim 3, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li further teaches that said filter medium (4) has a plan profile in the shape of a circular sector or circular ring sector (refer fig. 2) and wherein the discharge passage (8) also has a circular sector shape (refer fig. 2) substantially complementary to that of the filter medium (4).
Regarding claim 4, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li further teaches that the filter medium (4) is perforated metal sheet (refer fig. 2).
Regarding claim 5, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li further teaches that the closing element (31) comprises a support element (rotating rod 33), mounted on the body (2,5) rotatably (via seals 33) about a substantially vertical axis (Y), and a sealing element (bottom of 31 ), connected to the support element, which, in the closed position, rests on an edge (drain sealing ring 44) which delimits the discharge passage (42,8).
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.
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) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 110801654A), in view of Brancazio et al. (US 2021/0086112A1).
Regarding claim 9, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li does not teach that the closing element is connected to and is integral in rotation with disintegration elements of the layer of unwanted material accumulated on the filter medium, each disintegration element comprising one or more arms that extend radially with respect to the rotation axis (Y), each of which carries a plurality of prongs projecting downward and which extend almost to the base wall of the first chamber.
Brancazio teaches a filter device comprising a first chamber and second chamber separated by a filtration medium (refer fig. 1A, [0040], [0041]). The filter device comprises an impeller 120 having a shaft 130 and fins 140 extending from the shaft 130 in radial direction (Refer fig. 1A, [0049]). Brancazio discloses that more than one, more than two, or more than three fins may be present (refer [0050]), and that the fin(s) of the impeller may include a plurality of protrusions that sweep the filtration medium when the impeller is rotated (Refer [0051], fig. 1E).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of invention to modify the filter device of Li to provide the closing element connected to and is integral in rotation with disintegration elements of the layer of unwanted material accumulated on the filter medium, each disintegration element comprising one or more arms that extend radially with respect to the rotation axis (Y), each of which carries a plurality of prongs projecting downward and which extend almost to the base wall of the first chamber to enable breaking up particles too large in particle size and delump agglomerates or aggregates of solid particles as taught by Brancazio (refer [0051]).
Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al. (CN 110801654A).
Regarding claim 10, Li teaches limitations of claim 1 as set forth above. Li teaches that the body (5) has an opening (refer fig. 2, the opening is covered by plate 2) at an upper wall of the first chamber (51), the opening is closed by a cover (plate 2). Li does not disclose that the cover is removable, however, the court held that "if it were considered desirable for any reason to obtain access to the end of [the prior art’s] holder to which the cap is applied, it would be obvious to make the cap removable for that purpose.”; In re Dulberg, 289 F.2d 522, 523, 129 USPQ 348, 349 (CCPA 1961). Making the cover (2) removable/separable would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-8 and 11-12 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: Li teaches the self-cleaning filter device according to claim 5 as set forth above. However, Li fails to teach “wherein the sealing element (55) is mounted on the support element (51, 53) with slight clearance along a vertical direction and is subject to the action of elastic means (58) that press said sealing element (55) against the edge (25a) that delimits the discharge passage (26)” as recited in claim 6; “comprising a pneumatic actuator (110) adapted to press the sealing element (55) against the edge (25a) that delimits the discharge passage (26)” as recited in claim 7; “wherein the at least one scraper element (60) comprises a bar (62) arranged radial or slightly tangential with respect to the rotation axis (Y) of the closing element (50) and wherein said scraper element (60) is mounted on the support element (51, 53) with slight clearance in vertical direction and is subject to the action of elastic means (66) that press it against the filter medium (40) to facilitate the scraping action along the cleaning path” as recited in claim 8; “wherein the support element (51, 52) is pivoted on the cover (12) of the body, a shaft (70) to which a gear motor (71) that controls rotation of the closing element (50) is connected extending from the support element (51, 52)” as recited in claim 11; or “wherein the support element (51, 52) is pivoted on the cover (12) of the body, a shaft (70) to which a ratchet lever (91) is connected, in turn connected to a pneumatic actuator (92) that controls rotation of the closing element (50), extending from the support element (51, 52)” as recited in claim 12.
Brancazio et al. (US 2021/0086112A1) fails to remedy deficiencies of Li pertaining to claims 6-8 and 11-12.
Claims 6-8 and 11-15 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.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Born et al. (US 2019/0054400A1) teaches a continuous rotary plate filter apparatus and a method of using the apparatus to separate slurries into liquids and solids.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PRANAV PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5142. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 6AM-4PM.
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, Bobby Ramdhanie can be reached at (571) 270-3240. 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.
/PRANAV N PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights