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 § 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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Akkala et al (Siva Ram AKKALA, et al., "Impact of Different Fins Designs on Performance of Solar Still Desalination System: a Review", Environment Development and Sustainability, June 18, 2023).
Regarding claim 1, Akkala teaches a study in the use of fins in solar still desalination systems (title, abstract), Akkala teaches several experimental studies in the use of fins including EI-Sebaii and co-researchers (2015) developed fin plate solar still to improve the output and rate of heat transfer (p. 19268-19269), Appadurai and Velmurugan (2015) that utilizes a storage tank, mini solar pond (vessel having an open top), and solar still having basin therein and transparent cover, the vessels are connected via piping network with valves from tank to vessel having open top to basin; the solar pond basin has three convective zones UCZ, NCZ, LCZ and fins of dimensions shown incorporated therein to improve solar absorption and enhance heat transfer (Fig 7, p.19269-19270), Velmurugan et al. (2008b) incorporated fins into a solar still basin inside a box with sawdust fiber insulation and glass cover and collection tray (Fig 8, p.19269-19271) and further Velmurugan et al. (2008a) utilized galvanized steel constructed basin having rectangular fins of dimensions 35 mm, length of 900 mm, and breadth of 1 mm with hose and plastic pipe piping networks and valves to obtain purified water in collection tank (Fig 9, p.19271-19272) Akkala found Various design modifications of rectangular fin evaluations carried out by multiple researchers conclude that efficiency and yield performance of the SS can be enhanced by augmenting fins with the heat storage materials such as sponges, pebbles, and rubbers (p. 19272).
However while the fins in gradient solar pond (vessel having an open top) and solar still having basin are separately taught by separate references, and not explicitly teaches the exact dimensions of the structures as claimed, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art and through routine constructional design choice to incorporate into a single design the fin in both gradient solar pond (vessel having an open top) and solar still having basin, as well as selecting optimum dimensions of the fins, and heights of basin angle through routine constructional design choice motivated to scale up and/or down the solar still designs of Akkala motivated by the teachings of Akkala that fins improve heat transfer performance of both gradient solar pond (vessel having an open top) and solar still having basin and therefore improve efficiency of the desalination system.
Regarding claim 2, Akkala has taught a review of lab scale systems which the skilled artisan would be expected to scale up and find, through routine optimization the optimum dimensions as claimed, see MPEP 2144.04 and 2144.05.
Regarding claim 3, Akkala has taught construction with galvanized metal.
Regarding claim 4, Akkala has taught a review of lab scale systems which the skilled artisan would be expected to scale up and find, through routine optimization the optimum dimensions as claimed, see MPEP 2144.04 and 2144.05.
Regarding claim 5, Akkala has taught a review of lab scale systems which the skilled artisan would be expected to scale up and find, through routine optimization the optimum dimensions as claimed, see MPEP 2144.04 and 2144.05.
Regarding claim 6, Akkala has taught use of sawdust as insulation.
Regarding claims 7-12, Akkala has taught a review of lab scale systems which the skilled artisan would be expected to scale up and find, through routine optimization the optimum dimensions as claimed, see MPEP 2144.04 and 2144.05.
Regarding claims 13-14, Akkala teaches the UCZ, NCZ and LCZ as claimed in the shape of open vessel as claimed in the manner connected as claimed and therefore the salinity would be expected.
Regarding claim 15, Akkala has taught the valves as claimed.
Regarding claim 16, Akkala has taught the collection tank connected with tray.
Regarding claim 17, Akkala teaches the systems are used for desalination of saline water and in use the system would be operated by wherein the distilling includes flowing the aqueous solution from the storage tank to the vessel having an open top and from the vessel having an open top to the basin, exposing the aqueous solution in the basin to sunlight; evaporating water from the aqueous solution in the basin to form evaporated water; condensing the evaporated water on the transparent cover; and collecting condensed water in the collection tray (abstract, p19269-19272).
Regarding claims 18-20, Akkala has taught a review of lab scale systems which the skilled artisan would be expected to scale up and find, through routine optimization the optimum throughputs and efficiency improvements as claimed, because absent a claimed difference there would not be unexpected results found in the claimed throughputs and efficiencies, see MPEP 2144.04 and 2144.05.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Further citations to desalination systems included herein are Abdullah Abdo (US 12,091,329), Macfarlane (US 11,261,103), Haidar (US 10,183,233), Walker (US 2017/0166455), Maiti (US 2015/0107983), Mueller (US 2014/0124356), Foster (US 7,153,395), Stark (US 4,487,659), Clavier (US 4,383,891), Eldifrawi (US 4,363,703), Eckland (UJS 4,326,498), La Rocca (US 4,135,985).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN MILLER whose telephone number is (571)270-1603. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 - 5.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at (571) 272-5954. 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.
/JONATHAN MILLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772
Prosecution Insights