DETAILED ACTION
This detailed action is in response to the amendments filed on 10/16/2024, and any subsequent filings.
Notations “C_”, “L_” and “Pr_” are used to mean “column_”, “line_” and “paragraph_”.
Claims 1-12 are 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 .
Claim Interpretation
Claim 2 is being interpreted such that the LED light source of Claim 1 may be the same or distinct from the white light source, red light source, blue light source and green light source of Claim 2.
Claim 2 is being interpreted such that the “each light source” refers to the aforementioned white light source, red light source, blue light source and green light source of Claim 2.
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 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 directed towards an apparatus for treating wastewater containing tritium, then lists several components. It is unclear which of the components performs the treating wastewater containing tritium, rendering the claim indefinite.
Dependent claims not recited above require all of the limitations of independent Claim 1, and therefore are rejected for the same reasons set forth above.
Claim 5 reads “the gas supply cable layer”, whereas Claim 4, upon which Claim 5 depends, reads “a plurality of gas supply cable layers”. It is unclear to which of the “plurality of gas supply cable layers” of Claim 4 “the gas supply cable layer” of Claim 5 refers, rendering the claim indefinite.
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.
(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.
Claims 1-2, 6, 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’). Machine translations accompany this detailed action and the claims are mapped to those translations and the drawings in the original documents.
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus (Claims 1-2 and 6) and a method (Claims 9 and 11).
Regarding Claims 1-2 and 6, Lee ‘275 discloses an apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium (abstract),
a container (Fig. 1, pg. 6/Pr4-last Pr, tanks 100, 210 and 220) for storing wastewater, containing tritium;
an LED cable including an LED light source (Fig. 1, pg. 6/Pr7-8, LED light source 20);
a gas supply cable (Fig. 1, pg. 6/Pr7, carbon dioxide supply unit 10); and
a transparent cover sealing the container (pg. 8/Pr3),
wherein the gas supply cable is provided to supply air and carbon dioxide (pg. 7/Pr3) in a form of fine bubbles (pg. 7/Pr1, minute hole of bubble generating apparatus 41, Fig. 2).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 2: the LED cable comprises a white light source, a red light source, a blue light source and a green light source in one cable (pg. 6/Pr7-8, wavelength of LED light source 20 is similar to sunlight. Sunlight encompasses the visible light spectrum), or a combination of cables including each light source in a separate cable.
Claim 6: the apparatus further comprises a cooler, a heater, or a combination thereof (Fig. 1, pg. 6/Pr1, temperature controller 50 may be a cooling device or a heater) in the container containing wastewater.
Regarding Claims 9 and 11, Lee ‘275 discloses a method for treating wastewater, containing tritium (abstract), comprising:
an operation of pouring wastewater (pg. 5/Pr6, step S100, waste liquid flows into tank), containing tritium, into a container of the apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of claim l (see analysis of Claim 1);
an operation of injecting microalgae (pg. 5/Pr7 and pg. 6/Pr3 and 5) into the container; and
an operation of inducing photosynthesis by using light of an LED cable (pg. 6/Pr7) under micro bubbles supplied by a gas supply cable (pg. 6/Pr6).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 11: the microalgae is at least one selected from tetraselmis (pg. 5/Pr3), dunaliella (pg. 5/Pr3), chlorella (pg. 5/Pr3-4), nanno chloropsis (pg. 5/Pr3), isochrysis (pg. 5/Pr3), chlamydomonas, golenkinia, hematococcus, spirulina (pg. 5/Pr4), scenedesmus, and chaetoceros.
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.
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 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’) in view of Japanese Publication JP2019193588A (‘Toshiaki’). Machine translations accompany this detailed action and the claims are mapped to those translations and the drawings in the original documents.
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 3, Lee ‘275 teaches the apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 1, except that the fine bubbles comprise bubbles having an average particle diameter of 10 nm to 100 μm.
Toshiaki teaches that the fine bubbles comprise bubbles having an average particle diameter of 10 nm to 100 μm ([0007]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the fine bubbles of Lee ‘275 to have an average particle diameter of 10 nm to 100 μm, as demonstrated by Toshiaki, to balance residence time and supply while culturing algae (Toshiaki, [0007]) using photosynthesis (Toshiaki, [0002]). Note that both Lee ‘275 and Toshiaki involve inducing photosynthesis (Lee ‘275, pg. 6/Pr6 and Toshiaki, [0002]) in microalgae (Lee ‘275, pg. 5/Pr3-4 and Toshiaki, [0006]).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’).
The Applicant’s claims are directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claims 4-5, Lee ‘275 teaches the apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 1, including that the gas supply cable is formed of a plurality of gas supply cable layers in a vertical direction with respect to a bottom of the container (Lee ‘275, Fig. 1), except that the plurality of gas supply cable layers are in a vertical direction at an interval of 50 to 100 cm with respect to a bottom of the container.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to choose an interval with respect to a bottom of the container of Lee ‘275 such that bubbles are emitted and circulation is conducted (Lee ‘275, pg. 7/Pr1).
Additional Disclosures Included:
Claim 5: the gas supply cable layer forms a horizontal two-dimensional network (Lee ‘275, Fig. 1).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’) in view of U.S. Publication US20190040347A1 (‘Kim ‘347’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 7, Lee ‘275 teaches the apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 1, including a cooler in the container in which gas is present (Lee ‘275, Fig. 1, pg. 6/Pr1) and the location of the cooler is not restricted to the cooler illustrated in Lee ‘275, Fig. 1 (Lee ‘275, pg. 6/Pr1).
Kim ‘347 also relates to an apparatus for treating wastewater ([0001]), including a cooler (Fig. 1, [0070], air chiller 403) in an upper region of the container in which gas is present (Fig. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the cooler of Lee ‘275 to be in an upper region of the container in which gas is present, as demonstrated by Kim ‘347, because the location of the cooler is not restricted to the cooler illustrated in Lee ‘275, Fig. 1 (Lee ‘275, pg. 6/Pr1) and a cooler in an upper region of the container is capable of regulating the temperature of the algae culture when the temperature of the culture exceeds a maximum temperature to maintain suitable culture temperature (Kim ‘347, [0009] and [0111]).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’) in view of U.S. Publication US20150353379A1 (‘Lee ‘379’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 8, Lee ‘275 teaches the apparatus for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 1, except that a lower surface of the cover comprises at least one protrusion with an inclined surface.
Lee ‘379 also relates to an apparatus for treating wastewater (abstract), including that a lower surface of the cover comprises at least one protrusion with an inclined surface (Lee ‘379, Fig. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for a lower surface of the cover of Lee ‘275 to comprise at least one protrusion with an inclined surface, as demonstrated by Lee ‘379, so that when vapor rises and is cooled (Lee ‘379, [0081]), the vapor recondenses (Lee ‘379, [0082]) and slides downwards along the surface (Lee ‘379, [0086]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’) in view of Publication Mass transfer in intermittent horizontal gas-liquid flow and application to photobioreactors (‘Valiorgue’, Pierre Valiorgue. Transfert de masse dans les écoulements gaz-liquide horizontaux intermittents et application aux photobioréacteurs. Mécanique des fluides [physics.class-ph]. Université Claude Bernard- Lyon I, 2012. Français).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 10, Lee ‘275 teaches the method for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 9, except that the fine bubbles are supplied in an amount of 1.0 to 20.0 m3/hr.
Valiorgue also relates to microalgae (abstract), including that the fine bubbles are supplied in an amount of 1.0 to 20.0 m3/hr (pg. 77, Fig. 3.5. Example calculation:
1
×
10
-
3
N
∙
m
3
s
×
3600
s
h
r
=
5.4
N
∙
m
3
h
r
).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to supply the fine bubbles of Lee ‘275 in an amount of 1.0 to 20.0 m3/hr, as demonstrated by Valiorgue, to optimize flow rates for dissolution (Valiorgue, pg. 77).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Korean Patent KR101611275B1 (‘Lee ‘275’) in view of U.S. Publication US20150001149A1 (‘Kuehnle’).
The Applicant’s claim is directed towards a method.
Regarding Claim 12, Lee ‘275 teaches the method for treating wastewater, containing tritium, of Claim 9, including that the wastewater in the container is maintained at a temperature of 15 to 25°C (Lee ‘275, pg. 5/last Pr-pg. 6/Pr1), except that the wastewater in the container is maintained at pH of 6 to 8.
Kuehnle also relates to a method for treating wastewater (abstract), including that the wastewater in the container is maintained ([0166]) at pH of 6 to 8 ([0096] and [0166]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the wastewater of Lee ‘275 to be maintained at pH of 6 to 8, as demonstrated by Kuehnle, to regulate the pH to improve algae growth (Kuehnle, [0020]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN whose telephone number is (703)756-4613. The examiner can normally be reached Monday to Friday, 8 am to 6 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, 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.
/BOI-LIEN THI NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 1779
/Bobby Ramdhanie/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1779
Prosecution Insights