DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is responsive to application number 18/875,970 - A DRAIN SYSTEM AND A SHOWER OR SHOWER CABIN, filed on 12/17/24. Claims 1-23 are pending.
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Species C, Figs. 6-7 in the reply filed on 7/13/26 is acknowledged.
Claim 10 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Species, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 21 is 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.
Regarding claim 14, “the same level” and “the vertical level” are indefinite as they lack antecedent basis in the claim. Further, a level has not been defined in the claim or specification and is further indefinite.
Regarding claim 21 the phrase "ridge like" renders the claim(s) indefinite because the claim(s) include(s) elements not actually disclosed (those encompassed by "ridge like"), thereby rendering the scope of the claim(s) unascertainable. See MPEP § 2173.05(d).
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7-9, 11-12 and 22-23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Joller et al. (WO 2005 073474 A1).
Regarding claim 1 Joller shows a drain system (Fig. 1) for recovering thermal energy from a flow of shower or faucet greywater (Fig. 1), the system comprising: a drain collector (9) having a receiving surface for receiving greywater (Figs. 1-2), and a drain collector outlet (12) formed in the receiving surface for discharging greywater from the receiving surface, a heat exchanger (5) arranged downstream of the drain collector outlet and comprising a grey water inlet (14) and grey water outlet (15), the heat exchanger being configured to heat a flow of incoming cold water (4) with the greywater flowing from the grey water inlet to the grey water outlet (and the waste water tube of heat exchanger 5 in contact with the heat exchanger element 31 in which cold water flows in the opposite direction passing most of its heat energy to fresh water; significantly cooler waste water flows out of heat exchanger 5 through waste water outlet 15 and reaches level controller 16), an upstream filter (11) and a downstream filter (13), arranged to filter the greywater flowing along the receiving surface to the drain collector outlet, wherein the upstream filter comprises a first filter screen protruding from the receiving surface (Fig. 2 & 6) and the downstream filter comprises a second filter screen (Fig. 2) arranged upstream the drain collector outlet.
Regarding Claim 2 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, wherein the second filter screen of the downstream filter is a mesh covering the drain collector outlet (Fig. 2; Fine filter).
Regarding Claim 4 Joller shows the drain system according to claim,1 wherein the first filter screen of the upstream filter is arranged to encompass the drain collector outlet and the downstream filter (Fig. 2; encompasses the top/inlet).
Regarding Claim 7 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, wherein the first filter screen of the upstream filter has an outer side facing upstream to receive greywater, and an opposite inner side facing downstream (Figs. 1-2).
Regarding Claim 8 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, wherein the upstream filter and the downstream filter has different filtering performances (course and fine, respectively).
Regarding Claim 9 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1 wherein the upstream filter is a slit filter (Fig. 6).
Regarding Claim 11 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, wherein the receiving surface (at 9) comprises a first surface portion (at 9) arranged laterally outside of the upstream filter, and a second surface portion (Fig. 6 tub/shower surface between 11 and 13 holding 11 in place) arranged at least laterally inside of the upstream filter, wherein the upstream filter and the downstream filter are attached to the second surface portion and are removably arranged relative to the first surface portion (In the first case the filter element can be removed from the basin outlet for cleaning or replacing by first removing the coarse filter).
Regarding Claim 12 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 11, wherein a rim (upward portion of tub/shower surface; Fig. 6) of the second surface portion extends laterally outside from the upstream filter, the rim being arranged to extend along the upstream filter.
Regarding Claim 22 Joller shows a shower or shower cabin comprising: a shower arrangement (Fig. 1) having a shower mixer (7) configured to mix hot water from a hot water supply and pre-heated cold water from a cold water supply, and a shower head (8) fluidly connected to the shower mixer for supplying shower water; a drain system according to claim 1 (see Regarding claim 1 above).
Regarding Claim 23 Joller shows the shower or shower cabin according to claim 22, wherein the heat exchanger of the drain system is configured to heat a flow of incoming cold water with the greywater flowing from the grey water inlet to the grey water outlet, to provide the cold water as the pre-heated cold water of the shower arrangement (see Regarding claim 1 above).
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.
Claim(s) 3, 5-6 and 15-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joller et al. (WO 2005 073474 A1) in view of Dong (CN 201314069 Y).
Regarding Claim 3 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, but fails to show further comprising an intermediate filter arranged downstream of the upstream filter and upstream of the downstream filter, the intermediate filter comprising a third filter screen protruding from the receiving surface correspondingly to the first filter screen of the upstream filter. However, Dong shows a filter arrangement in which an intermediate filter (3; middle row of protruding ‘screen’) arranged downstream of the upstream filter (outside row near 2) and upstream of the downstream filter (inside row near 4), the intermediate filter comprising a third filter screen protruding from the receiving surface correspondingly to the first filter screen of the upstream filter (Fig. 1-2). Dong shows the upstream protruding from the receiving surface in a different arrangement than Joller shows. Because Dong shows additional options for filtering the grey water in a different configuration of filter screens, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Joller by substituting the first, intermediate (third), and second filter screens that additionally protrude from the receiving surface correspondingly for the purpose of providing additional filtration screens for catching additional debris in the grey water and preventing blockage of the outlet and the grey water inlet to the heat exchanger as shown by Dong.
Regarding Claim 5 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 3, wherein the first filter screen of the upstream filter is encompassing the third filter screen of the intermediate filter (Dong; Fig. 2).
Regarding Claim 6 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 5, but fails to show wherein each one of the first and third filter screens is shaped as an elliptical ring, or an annular ring. Joller as combined with Dong essentially shows the first and third filter screens are an annular ring. Dong further shows filter screen with annular ring openings (center openings at 4). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Joller as combined to include the first and third filter screens as an annular ring for the purpose of using another known shape and configuration for filtration as suggested by Dong.
Regarding Claim 15 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 1, but fail to further show a perforated plate comprising the second filter screen, the perforated plate comprising a plurality of perforations for guiding the first filter screen. However, Dong shows a perforated plate (4) with a plurality comprising the second filter screen, the perforated plate having perforations for guiding the first filter screen. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Joller to include a perforated plate comprising the second filter screen, the perforated plate comprising a plurality of perforations for guiding the first filter screen for the purpose of providing positive structure that would fit the drain as shown by Dong.
Regarding Claim 16 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 15, wherein the receiving surface comprises a first surface portion (at 3 Dong) from which the first filter screen protrudes, and a second surface portion formed by the perforated plate (4) and being removably arranged on top of the first surface portion (as combined with Dong; Fig. 1-2 of Dong).
Regarding Claim 17 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 16, wherein the perforated plate is configured to be moved from a first position in which the perforated plate rests on the first surface portion of the receiving surface, into a second position in which the perforated plate is vertically distant from the first surface portion receiving surface by a predetermined distance (as combined; In the first case the filter element can be removed from the basin outlet for cleaning or replacing by first removing the coarse filter)..
Regarding Claim 18 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 15, wherein the first filter screen is a slit filter comprising a plurality of posts in between the slits, and wherein each perforation in the plurality of perforations is configured to guide a corresponding post of the slit filter (Fig. 6 posts and slits at 11; and as combined; Figs. 1-2; Dong).
Regarding Claim 19 Joller as combined shows the drain system according to claim 17, wherein the plurality of posts has a predetermined height, and wherein the predetermined distance is at least the same as the predetermined height (as combined with Dong; Figs. 1-2).
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Joller et al. (WO 2005 073474 A1) in view of Buchan et al. (US Pub. 2018/0087248).
Regarding Claim 13 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 1, further comprising an alternative drain inlet (Fig. 2; an overflow/alternative drain is shown near 13 along the side of the receptacle) but fails to show the alternative drain is fluidly coupled to a by-pass conduit arranged to by-pass the heat exchanger. However, Buchan shows it is known to provide the bypass drain/overflow conduit directly to the outlet pipe (Fig. 1) and bypassing the main drain system. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Joller to include a conduit that bypasses the heat exchanger and the main drain and outlets directly to the outlet pipe as shown by Buchan for the purpose of preventing flooding from a plugged main drain/heat exchanger system.
Regarding Claim 14 Joller shows the drain system according to claim 13, but fails to show wherein the first filter screen of the upstream filter extend vertically to the same level or above the vertical level of the alternative drain inlet. However, this is a design consideration within the level of ordinary skill in the art. It is within the level of ordinary skill to provide an overflow or alternate drain at an appropriate level for its intended use of gravity flow of the shower/tub water. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Joller to include the alternate drain at an appropriate level for draining the shower pan or bathtub as desired.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-23 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19/140,665 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because contain limitations that are similar in scope.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Garcia Melico (US 9,651,310) shows the general state of the art; Schmid (US Pub. 2016/0341490) shows the general state of the art.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA whose telephone number is (571)270-5163. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Thursday, 9:30 AM to 6PM EST.
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, DAVID ANGWIN can be reached at 571-270-3735. 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.
/CHRISTINE J SKUBINNA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3754 7/28/2026
Prosecution Insights