DETAILED ACTION
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 1-6 and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Hirozawa USPA 2019/0046929 A1.
Regarding claims 1 and 10, Hirozawa discloses a spiral membrane element comprising: a central tube (figure 1); and a membrane leaf (paragraph 82) that has a separation membrane and a permeation spacer and is wound around the central tube (figure 1; Abstract) ; wherein the permeation spacer has a plurality of grooves and a plurality of projections on one surface thereof (paragraph 27), the grooves and the projections each extend in a first direction and are arranged in a second direction perpendicular to the first direction on the one surface (figures 2-4), and when the groove has a width defined as W1 and the projection has a width defined as W2 in the second direction and the projection has a height defined as H, 9.1≤1000×{(W1/W2)/H}<18.2 is satisfied, where W1, W2, and H are in unit of μm (see comparative example 1: relationship = 12.7).
Regarding claim 2, Hirozawa discloses that a distance between a top portion that the projection on the one surface has and another surface of the permeation spacer is defined as T, the permeation spacer satisfies T≤450, where T is in unit of μm (figure 4; paragraph 38).
Regarding claim 3, Hirozawa discloses embodiments where a distance between a top portion that the projection on the one surface has and another surface of the permeation spacer is defined as T, the permeation spacer satisfies 0.35≤H/T≤0.65, where T is in unit of μm (figure 4; paragraphs 38 and 40).
Regarding claim 4, Hirozawa discloses embodiments where the permeation spacer satisfies H≤200 (figure 4; paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 5, Hirozawa discloses that the permeation spacer satisfies 1.2≤W1/W2<2.0 (see comparative example 1).
Regarding claim 6, Hirozawa discloses embodiments where the permeation spacer satisfies 600≤W1 (Table 2: groove width = 0.8 mm).
Regarding claim 8, Hirozawa discloses embodiments where the permeation spacer satisfies 100000≤W1×H (paragraph 40).
Regarding claim 9, the spiral membrane of Hirozawa could be used for separating an acid gas from a gas mixture (paragraph 59). Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. MPEP 2114.
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.
Claims 7 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hirozawa USPA 2019/0046929 A1.
Hirozawa is relied upon as above.
Regarding claim 7, Hirozawa does not disclose that the permeation spacer satisfies 500≤W2, but does disclose that W2 is not particularly limited and can be determined in accordance with the pressure at which the element is to be operated. Therefore, absent a proper showing of criticality or unexpected results, the value of W2 is considered to be a general condition that would have been routinely optimized by one having ordinary skill in the art in order to provide optimal performance depending on the pressure at which the element is to be operated. MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 11, Hirozawa discloses pressure filtration (paragraph 71), but does not expressly state generating a pressure difference by decompressing from a permeation side in the spiral membrane element. Nevertheless, generating a pressure difference by decompressing from a permeation side in the spiral membrane element, is well-known in the art of pressure filtration and would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art. MPEP 2144.03 (A-E).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7383. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571)270-7872. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights