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 14 and 16 are 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.
As to claim 14, 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).
As to claim 16, the claim does not end in a period, rendering unclear the full contents of the claimed language.
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.
Claims 11, 12 and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 5,788,820 to Liu (Liu).
As to claim 11, Liu teaches an electrochemical reactor, capable of performing the functional language of “capable of processing an organic mixture comprising a suspension of a solid and a liquid”, the reactor comprising an inner electrode (21), an outer electrode (31), the inner electrode (21) and the outer electrode (31) arranged concentrically forming a first cavity therebetween, two inlets (14), forming a first inlet and a second inlet, each separately inputting into the first cavity and thus capable of performing the functional language of “introducing the liquid into the first cavity” and “introducing the solid into the first cavity” such that “the liquid and the solid are introduced separately”, the inner electrode (21) rotatable around its longitudinal axis and provided with through holes acting as mixing elements (Column 3, Lines 26 to 49; Figure 2; MPEP 2114).
As to claim 12, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11. Liu further teaches that the reactor comprises a vessel (10) enclosing the inner electrode (21) and the outer electrode (31) forming a second cavity between the outer electrode (31) and the vessel (10), the cavity configured to be filled with a fluid and thus capable of being filed with thermostated fluid (Column 3, Lines 26 to 49; Figure 2; MPEP 2114).
As to claim 14, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11. Liu further teaches that the reactor comprises outlets (15 and 25) configured for allowing removal of electrolyzed reaction mixture from the reactor (Column 3, Lines 26 to 49; Figure 2; MPEP 2114).
As to claim 15, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 14. The outlets of Liu are capable of being connected to an inlet of another reactor (MPEP 2114), Liu specifically teaching outlets connected to downstream devices such as filters (Column 4, Lines 10-20).
As to claim 16, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11. Liu teaches that the inner electrode (21) and outer electrode (31) are concentric and thus that the inner diameter of the outer electrode is equal to the outer diameter of the inner electrode plus twice the interelectrode gap (Figure 2).
As to claim 17, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11. Liu teaches that the gap between the electrodes is constant (Figure 2).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of US 2011/0147204 A1 to Leiato et al. (Leiato).
As to claim 13, Liu teaches the apparatus of claim 11. However, Liu is silent as to the materials for forming the inner and outer electrodes. However, Leiato also discusses water electrolysis with concentric electrodes and teaches that both inner and outer electrodes can be effectively formed of, for example, stainless steel or titanium (Abstract; Paragraph 0027). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to form the inner and outer electrode of Liu of stainless steel or titanium with the reasonable expectation of effectively forming the electrodes as taught by Leiato.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CIEL P Contreras whose telephone number is (571)270-7946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM to 4 PM.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/CIEL P CONTRERAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights