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 .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the limitations of an underwater pump provided in the lower sink and a water sprinkler provided on the upper side of the mist catcher must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s) 5-6. Applicant is further directed to paragraphs 46-47 of the instant specification, however the limitations are not shown in the drawings. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 1-6 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.
Claim 1 is indefinite for the following reasons. Line 2 recites “which is a cleaning method of a wet exhaust gas treatment facility”, this appears redundant as the preamble previously recites “a cleaning method of an exhaust gas treatment facility”. What’s the difference between an exhaust gas treatment facility and a wet exhaust gas treatment facility. Additionally, the claim recites “supply and circulating a cleaning liquid”, it is unclear whether the cleaning liquid is being supplied to the exhaust gas treatment facility. Claim 2 is indefinite as the limitations should recite “the cleaning method of the “wet” exhaust gas treatment facility” for proper antecedent basis. Claim 3 is indefinite because it recites “adding a cleaning agent aqueous solution”, it is unclear how the “cleaning agent aqueous solution” is the same or different from “a cleaning component of the cleaning liquid”. Re claim 4, line 8, it is unclear whether “a predetermined value” is the same or different from “a predetermined value” recited in line 4. Claims 5-6 are indefinite because it is unclear whether “a water sprinkler” is the same or different from “a water sprinkler mechanism” recited in line 2 of claim 3.
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) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee et al. (US2007/0053803A1).
Re claim 1 Lee et al. teach a method for cleaning a scrubber for processing semiconductor waste gas comprising a burner chamber 1300 connected to a burner 1200, in connection to a wet tower 1500 (i.e. scrubber; Fig. 1). Paragraph 138 teaches supplying a semiconductor waste gas from a semiconductor fabrication process line through the waste gas supply tube 1111 connected to the burner 1200, wherein the waste gas is burned to produce particles. The particles drop to the water reservoir tank 1600 (paragraph 173)and further pass through a series of filters while ascending to a plurality of towers (1520, 1530, 1540; paragraphs 174-177), wherein the particles impact plates 1551 and drop into the water reservoir 1600. In the embodiment of Fig. 2a, cleaning liquid (i.e. water) is supplied and circulated via injection nozzles in each of the towers (paragraphs 169-170), wherein water from the injection nozzles disperses solid matter (particles) deposited on the burner and wet towers (i.e. cleaning target”; paragraphs 174-176, 191). Additionally, applicant is also directed to paragraph 159 which teaches supplying and circulating water from the water reservoir tank to the injection nozzles via a circulation pump. Paragraph 90 teaches a wet tower 1500 which serves to filter and capture particles transferred from the burning chamber using water from the injection nozzles (paragraphs 174-176). Paragraph 191 teaches a circulation pump 1640 wherein water passing through the heat exchanger is supplied to the wet tower 1500 and then dropped again to the first region 1613 of the water reservoir tank 1600. The limitations of cleaning a wet exhaust gas treatment facility are met since Lee et al. teach capturing particles from the burner and the wet tower (paragraph 18). Paragraphs 190, 199 teaches a pH sensor (Fig. 15b-c, 1619) connected to the water contained in the reservoir tank 1600. Particles produced after the semiconductor waste gas is burnt increases the acidity of the water. Therefore, a pH sensor is used to measure the acidity of the water and an amount of NaOH is put into the water through the sodium hydroxide inlet, thereby water contained in the water reservoir tank is maintained in a neutral state. Paragraph 199 further teaches that if the acidity exceeds a predetermined range, based on the pH sensor measurement, NaOH is added to the water reservoir tank 1600. Re claim 2, the exhaust gas treatment facility includes a burner which decomposes the exhaust gas using heat and a wet scrubber (i.e. wet tower), as described above. Re claim 3, Lee et al. teach a lower sink (i.e. water reservoir tank 1600), a water sprinkler mechanism (Fig. 2, injection nozzles, paragraphs 174-176) to which water is supplied and circulated and a circulation pump, adding a cleaning agent aqueous solution (i.e. NaOH; paragraph 190) to the water reservoir tank, supplying water to the water reservoir tank via the injection nozzles (paragraph 159). Paragraph 159 further teaches a water supply pump connected to the base injection nozzles for supplying fresh water. The limitations of adding the cleaning agent aqueous solution to the water sprinkler system are met since the NaOH is added to the water reservoir tank and paragraph 159 teaches a circulation pump connected to the nozzles for supplying water from the water reservoir tank, wherein the measurement value of water is measuring the pH of the water, as previously discussed above.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Harashima et al. (US2025/0222389A1) .
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Re claim 1, Harashima et al. teach cleaning a wet exhaust gas treatment facility (elements 1, 11; Fig. 1) comprising supplying and circulating a cleaning liquid (i.e. water, Fig. 1) via pump 14 to disperse solid matters (i.e. particles ) deposited on a cleaning target (i.e. combustion chamber 1). Paragraph 24 teaches a nozzle provided to let water flow along the inner wall of the combustion chamber 1, wherein the water absorbs a water soluble component in the combustion gas and traps micro particles, which are collected in pit 1a, which is then transferred to pit 11a, wherein gas present in scrubber 11 is sprayed by nozzles 16 from pump 14, such that the particles are trapped in the water in pit 11a. In reference of managing end of cleaning or additionally injecting a cleaning component to the cleaning liquid based on pH, applicant is directed to paragraph 27 which teaches an alkali 9 to add NaOH (paragraphs 27, 49), and based on the pH meter 53 of Fig. 2, regulating the pH of the water supplied to the combustion chamber (paragraphs 42-44, 48). Re claim 2, refer to Fig. 1, and paragraph 31, wherein the fine particles are trapped in pit 11a. Re claim 3, refer to Fig. 1, wherein the wet scrubber 11 has a lower sink 11a, a water sprinkler mechanism 16 to which water is supplied and circulated, a process of adding a cleaning agent aqueous solution (i.e. alkali 9) to the lower sink (1a, 11a), a process of supplying water to the lower sink via the sprinkler 16 in scrubber 11, wherein the alkali is added to the sprinkler system via pump 14, and measuring the pH of water supplied in the lower tank via pH meter 52,53 (Fig. 2).
Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Harashima et al. (US2023/0390694A1) .
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Re claim 1, Harashima et al. teach cleaning a wet exhaust gas treatment facility (elements 1, 11; Fig. 1) comprising supplying and circulating a cleaning liquid (i.e. water, Fig. 2) via pump 14 to disperse solid matters (i.e. particles ) deposited on a cleaning target (i.e. combustion chamber 1). Paragraph 31 teaches a nozzle provided to let water flow along the inner wall of the combustion chamber 1, wherein the water absorbs a water soluble component in the combustion gas and traps fine particles, which are collected in pit 1a, which is then transferred to pit 11a, wherein gas present in scrubber 11 are sprayed by nozzles from pump 14, such that particles are trapped in the water in pit 11a. In reference of managing end of cleaning or additionally injecting a cleaning component to the cleaning liquid based on pH, applicant is directed to paragraphs 34-37 which teaches an alkali adding apparatus 8 to add NaOH, and based on the pH meter 9, regulating the pH of the water supplied to the combustion chamber. Re claim 2, refer to Fig. 2 and paragraph 40, wherein the fine particles are trapped in pit 11a. Re claim 3, refer to Fi. 1, wherein the wet scrubber 11 has a lower sink 11a, a water sprinkler mechanism to which water is supplied and circulated, a process of adding a cleaning agent aqueous solution (i.e. alkali 3, 8) to the lower sink (1a, 11a), a process of supplying water to the lower sink via the sprinkler in scrubber 11, wherein the alkali is added to the sprinkler system via pump 14, and measuring the pH of water supplied in the lower tank via pH meter 9.
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) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US2007/0053803A1).
Re claim 4, Lee et al. do not specifically teach the limitations directed to when the cleaning agent is added or stopped during the cleaning process. However, Lee et al. do teach monitoring the acidity of the water and adding the NaOH to maintain a neutral state. In view of teachings of Lee et al., it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have determined when to add/ stop the addition of the cleaning agent of NaOH, depending upon the acidity being measured in order to maintain a neutral state in the water reservoir tank for purposes of preventing corrosion of structures present in the water reservoir tank.
Claim(s) 5-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (US2007/0053803A1) in view of Pan et al. (US11602715).
The examiner considers a “mist catcher” to read on “demister”, as a demister removes mist and therefore is considered as an equivalent term to “mist catcher”.
Lee et al. fail to teach the wet scrubber comprising a mist catcher and a pump provided in the lower sink, wherein water is supplied to a water sprinkler on the upper side of the mist catcher to clean the mist catcher and an inside of the wet scrubber lower than the mist catcher. Pan teaches a wet scrubber 10 comprising a demister 80, and further teaches a spray component 82 cleaning the demister by preventing the clogging of solid particles (abstract), wherein a pump 42 supplies water to the spray component (i.e. water sprinkler 82; Fig. 2) to spray the demister (col. 2, lines 55-65, col. 4, lines 30-40, col. 5, lines 1-10, col. 11, lines 1-30). Col. 11, lines 1-30 teaches a spray component 82 positioned above the demister 80, wherein the spray component 82 sprays atomized cleaning solution in a direction of the demister 80 such that solid particles on the demister can be washed away and dropped into the treatment tank 20 to prevent clogging of the demister. The limitations of cleaning the inside of the wet scrubber are met as a result of the particles being washed and falling into the treatment tank.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Lee et al. to include a demister, as taught by Pan, for purposes of providing a gas/liquid separation component for use to filter and block water mist raised in the cleaning solution. Furthermore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the method of Lee et al., to include cleaning the demister, as taught by Pan, for purpose of removing solid particles on the demister and to further prevent clogging of the demister.
Applicant is kindly reminded of their duty to disclose related prior art, as the claims are rejected as being anticipatory over the teachings of Harashima et al., as recited above.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yoon teaches a self-cleaning waste gas scrubber. Johnsgard et al. teach an effluent gas scrubber.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sharidan Carrillo whose telephone number is (571)272-1297. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 7:00am-4:00pm.
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.
Sharidan Carrillo
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1711
/Sharidan Carrillo/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1711 bsc