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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s arguments filed 06/06/2025 have been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending in the application, the 112 rejections previously set forth are withdrawn in view of the arguments and amendment.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/18/2025 has been entered, the 112 rejections previously set forth are withdrawn in view of the remarks.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 04/21/2022 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 11 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites a concentration membrane, while membranes are known in the art, the specification indicates the concentration membrane may also be an evaporation pond, a boiler system, evaporative coolers, or other systems that concentrate the amount of desired constituent ([0054]), a concentration membrane is interpreted to include at least a membrane, an evaporation pond, a boiler system, evaporative coolers, or other systems that concentrate the amount of desired constituent, or equivalents thereof.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cheng (US PG Pub 2018/0245180), in view of Priegnitz (US 5,470,464), in view of Chin (US PG Pub 2004/0129137), in view of Cox (US 4,999,102).
With respect to claim 1, Cheng teaches extraction of lithium from brines (title, abstract), passing brine into a bed of sorbent, washing the sorbent with a dilute stream (a second stream), the sorbent in a column (an extraction system comprising at least one tank, the sorbent in the tank), followed by nanofiltration and forward osmosis ([0011-0014, 0050, 0074-0078], a concentration membrane, processing the extracted at least one constituent in the second stream into at least one output stream); to extract at least a portion of lithium into the sorbent ([0075], sorbent material extracts at least one constituent from the brine input stream).
Cheng is silent as to one or more valves for selectively directing a brine input stream and a second stream to the at least one tank, or the at least one tank is configured to maintain a substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream that is presented to the sorbent material and travels along at least a portion of a length of the at least one tank.
Cheng teaches passing brine into and out of a bed of sorbent (abstract). Priegnitz teaches modular adsorptive separation processes for separating a mixture of compounds (C1/L5-12, C3/L35-52, C7/L46-62), passing a feed stream comprising a mixture of compounds into a first valve which selectively directs flow into a first adsorbent chamber, passing a desorbent stream into a valve which selectively directs the desorbent into a chamber, and withdrawing an extract stream (C9/L14-49), that an operational problem in small scale units is to prevent the loss of sharp concentration profiles which the adsorbent creates and which are necessary to perform the desired function (C1-C2), and preserving the sharp concentration profile through the use of a flow scheme utilizing valves to control flow between beds (C3/L1-35). Cheng teaches extraction of lithium, as Priegnitz teaches sharp concentration profiles are necessary to perform the desired function (C1-C2), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Priegntiz’ flow scheme and valve arrangement into Cheng’s taught method in order to preserve a sharp concentration profile, as according to Priegnitz, the use of the flow scheme alleviates the need for a “pump around” pump and prevents destruction of the sharp concentration profiles which the adsorbent creates and which are necessary to perform the desired function (C2/L55-C3/L35).
Applicant amended to require: the at least one tank further comprising: a first manifold; a second manifold, with columns between the manifolds.
Cheng teaches a bed of sorbent, Preignitz teaches an apparatus comprising a number of chambers forming a simulated moving bed comprising a plurality of columns interconnected through rotary valves (abstract, C3-C4, Fig. 1). The taught combination does not explicitly teach first and second manifolds wherein the plurality of columns are located between the first manifold and the second manifold.
Cox teaches uniform distribution and collection devices including manifold systems for use in columns or cells for systems including simulated moving beds and adsorber-desorber systems (abstract, C1), cells (the term cell intended to include “vessel” and “column” or other similar structures, at least one tank), conduits, plenums, and nozzles of the distributor and collector provide nearly identical hydraulic flow paths from inlet segments within the cell (segments at least providing a plurality of columns) a manifold system which can function as a distributor or collector (C2/L1-67, first manifold and second manifolds with columns between).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Cheng and Pregnitz with Cox’ taught manifold system as the manifolds maintain an interface between phases in a cell and assure even distribution across the entire cell (C2/L30-63), and the courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date, see MPEP §2143.
With respect to claims 2 and 3, the system of claim 1, is taught above. The taught combination provides the structural components of the system, or a valve and inputs to the tank, the composition of the stream is drawn to an intended use, examiner notes intended use of the apparatus is not accorded patentable weight where the statement of intended use does not distinguish over the prior art apparatus (see MPEP 2114), Cheng teaches desorption by washing the sorbent with the dilute stream comprising water (0051) the second stream comprises a stripping solution configured to remove the at least one constituent from the sorbent material, the second stream comprises water or water containing metal salts.
With respect to claim 4, the method of claim 4, is taught above. Cheng teaches the efficiency of the process is sustained with low pressure drop ([0049]), Priegnitz teaches pilot scale plants, mixing problems increase as the size of the plant decreases (C2/L55-67), high differential pressures make prior solutions impractical, and an objective of the invention is to provide a high pressure plant which solves those issues (C3/L4-20), the tank is sized such that the tank maintains the substantially constant pressure within the tank). Additionally, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”, and a plurality of columns as discussed above.
With respect to claim 5, the system of claim 2, is taught above. Priegnitz teaches a modular pilot scale system, and a plurality of columns, and a sharp concentration profile as discussed above, the claim requires the at least one tank is sized such that the substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream. Additionally, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”.
With respect to claim 6, the system of claim 1 is taught above. Cheng teaches nanofiltration and forward osmosis ([0011-0014, 0050, 0074-0078], purification membrane unit).
With respect to claim 7, the system of claim 1, is taught above. Cheng teaches LiX2Al(OH)3 ([0033, 0044-0048], Priegnitz teaches zeolites, etc (C7/L45-620), the sorbent material comprises lithium aluminate, aluminum- based materials, aluminum-oxygen based materials, manganese, manganese oxides, gallium-based materials, cobalt oxides, transition metal oxides, transition metal sulfides, transition metal phosphates, aluminum phosphates, gallium phosphates, antimony oxides, antimony phosphates, tin oxides, tin phosphates, silicon-based materials, germanium-based materials, transition metal silicates, aluminum- gallium silicates, germanium, tin, antimony silicates, sulfides, titanates, indiumates, indium tin oxides, mixed transition metal oxides, phosphates, organophosphates, polymers containing organophosphates, polyethers, ion-exchange resins, bohemite-based materials, aluminum-oxyhydroxides, activated alumina, or a combination thereof).
With respect to claim 8, the system of claim 1, is taught above. The taught combination teaches multiple tanks, examiner notes the limitations related to flows of streams is directed to an intended use, the taught combination is capable of the recited function. In the interest of compact prosecution, Cheng teaches sorbent in a column, Priegnitz teaches multiple beds or modules to simulate continuous countercurrent flow (C3L20-52, the at least one tank comprises a first tank and a second tank), each receiving multiple flows (C3/L35-C4/L43), where the beds are interconnected through valves, in an embodiment feed stream enters bed H while desorbent enters bed A, a second tank receives a flow of the brine input stream while a first tank receives a flow of the second stream;
With respect to claim 9, the system of claim 8, is taught above. The taught combination teaches multiple tanks and valves, examiner notes the limitations related to order of valve opening are directed to an intended use, the taught combination is capable of the recited function. In the interest to compact prosecution, Priegnitz teaches multiple beds and multiple valves, and the maintenance of a sharp concentration profile as discussed above, and preserving the sharp concentration profile through the use of a flow scheme utilizing valves to control flow between beds (C3/L1-35), and sequential delivery of feed streams (C7/16-45, the one or more valves sequentially deliver the brine input stream to the first tank and then the second tank and sequentially deliver the second stream to the first tank and the second tank while maintaining the substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream in at least one of the first tank and the second tank).
With respect to claim 10, the system of claim 1, is taught above. Examiner notes the constituent is drawn to an intended use, intended use of the apparatus is not accorded patentable weight where the statement of intended use does not distinguish over the prior art apparatus (see MPEP 2114), Cheng teaches lithium ([0011-0014]).
With respect to claim 11, Cheng teaches extraction of lithium from brines (title, abstract), passing brine into a bed of sorbent, washing the sorbent with a dilute stream (a method comprising: accessing a brine input stream and a second stream, selectively directing the brine input to a tank), the sorbent in a column (at least one tank, the sorbent in the tank), to extract at least a portion of lithium into the sorbent ([0075], extracting, by a sorbent material contained within the tank, a constituent from the brine input stream), streams passing into and out the bed/column present to the sorbent material and travels along at least a portion of a length of the at least one tank ([0050-0051]), followed by nanofiltration and forward osmosis ([0011-0014, 0050, 0074-0078], processing by a concentration membrane the extracted at least one constituent in the second stream into at least one output stream); to extract at least a portion of lithium into the sorbent ([0075], sorbent material extracts at least one constituent from the brine input stream), passing the brine stream dilute stream in steps and desorption by washing with the dilute steam (selectively directing the streams, and the second stream is configured to strip the constituent from the sorbent material).
Cheng does not explicitly the tank is configured to provide a substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream that is flowed through the at least a portion of the length of the at least one tank.
Cheng teaches passing brine into and out of a bed of sorbent (abstract). Priegnitz teaches modular adsorptive separation processes for separating a mixture of compounds (C1/L5-12, C3/L35-52, C7/L46-62), passing a feed stream comprising a mixture of compounds into a first valve which selectively directs flow into a first adsorbent chamber, passing a desorbent stream into a valve which selectively directs the desorbent into a chamber, and withdrawing an extract stream (C9/L14-49), that an operational problem in small scale units is to prevent the loss of sharp concentration profiles which the adsorbent creates and which are necessary to perform the desired function (C1-C2), and preserving the sharp concentration profile through the use of a flow scheme utilizing valves to control flow between beds (C3/L1-35). Cheng teaches extraction, as Priegnitz teaches sharp concentration profiles are necessary to perform the desired function (C1-C2), it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Priegntiz’ flow scheme into Cheng’s taught method in order to preserve a sharp concentration profile, as according to Priegnitz, the use of the flow scheme alleviates the need for a “pump around” pump and prevents destruction of the sharp concentration profiles which the adsorbent creates and which are necessary to perform the desired function (C2/L55-C3/L35). Cheng teaches a plurality of successive or parallel forward osmosis units and nanofiltration units (0014-0018, 0052-0064, an array of concentration membrane units).
Applicant amended to require: a first manifold, a second manifold, wherein the plurality of columns are located between the first manifold and the second manifold.
Cheng teaches a bed of sorbent, Preignitz teaches an apparatus comprising a number of chambers forming a simulated moving bed comprising a plurality of columns interconnected through rotary valves (abstract, C3-C4, Fig. 1). The taught combination does not explicitly teach a tank with first and second manifolds with columns between.
Cox teaches uniform distribution and collection devices including manifold systems for use in columns or cells for systems including simulated moving beds and adsorber-desorber systems (abstract, C1), cells (the term cell intended to include “vessel” and “column” or other similar structures, at least one tank), conduits, plenums, and nozzles of the distributor and collector provide nearly identical hydraulic flow paths from inlet segments within the cell (segments providing a plurality of columns) a manifold system which can function as a distributor or collector (C2/L1-67, first manifold and second manifolds with columns between).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combination of Cheng and Pregnitz with Cox’ taught manifolds system as the manifolds maintain an interface between phases in a cell and assures even distribution across the entire cell (C2/L30-63), and the courts have held that combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the filing date, see MPEP §2143.
With respect to claim 12, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches desorption by washing the sorbent with the dilute stream comprising water (0051) the second stream comprises a stripping solution configured to remove the at least one constituent from the sorbent material, the second stream comprises water or water containing metal salts.
With respect to claim 13, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches the efficiency of the process is sustained with low pressure drop ([0049]), Priegnitz teaches pilot scale plants, mixing problems increase as the size of the plant decreases (C2/L55-67), high differential pressures make prior solutions impractical, and an objective of the invention is to provide a high pressure plant which solves those issues (C3/L4-20), the tank is sized such that the tank maintains the substantially constant pressure within the tank). Additionally, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”.
With respect to claim 14, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Priegnitz teaches a sharp concentration profile as discussed above, the at least one tank is sized such that the at least one tank creates a substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream. Additionally, see MPEP 2144.04 IV. A. “where the only difference between the prior art and the claims was a recitation of relative dimensions of the claimed device and a device having the claimed relative dimensions would not perform differently than the prior art device, the claimed device was not patentably distinct from the prior art device”.
With respect to claim 15, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches a plurality of successive or parallel forward osmosis units and nanofiltration units (0014-0018, 0052-0064, an array of purification membrane units upstream of the array of concentration membrane units.
With respect to claim 16, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches LiX2Al(OH)3 ([0033, 0044-0048], Priegnitz teaches zeolites, etc (C7/L45-620), the sorbent material comprises lithium aluminate, aluminum- based materials, aluminum-oxygen based materials, manganese, manganese oxides, gallium-based materials, cobalt oxides, transition metal oxides, transition metal sulfides, transition metal phosphates, aluminum phosphates, gallium phosphates, antimony oxides, antimony phosphates, tin oxides, tin phosphates, silicon-based materials, germanium-based materials, transition metal silicates, aluminum- gallium silicates, germanium, tin, antimony silicates, sulfides, titanates, indiumates, indium tin oxides, mixed transition metal oxides, phosphates, organophosphates, polymers containing organophosphates, polyethers, ion-exchange resins, bohemite-based materials, aluminum-oxyhydroxides, activated alumina, or a combination thereof).
With respect to claim 17, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches sorbent in a column, Priegnitz teaches multiple beds or modules to simulate continuous countercurrent flow (C3L20-52, the at least one tank comprises a first tank and a second tank), each receiving multiple flows (C3/L35-C4/L43), where the beds are interconnected through valves, in an embodiment feed stream enters bed H while desorbent enters bed A, a second tank receives a flow of the brine input stream while a first tank receives a flow of the second stream.
With respect to claims 18 and 19, the method of claim 17, is taught above. Priegnitz teaches multiple beds and multiple valves, and the maintenance of a sharp concentration profile as discussed above, and preserving the sharp concentration profile through the use of a flow scheme utilizing valves to control flow between beds (C3/L1-35), and sequential delivery of feed streams (C7/16-45, the one or more valves sequentially deliver the brine input stream to the first tank and then the second tank and sequentially deliver the second stream to the first tank and the second tank while maintaining the substantially sharp concentration profile between the brine input stream and the second stream in at least one of the first tank and the second tank).
With respect to claim 20, the method of claim 11, is taught above. Cheng teaches lithium ([0011-0014]).
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, 4, 5, 7-14, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,229,880.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent requires substantially the same components with respect to the apparatus claims, with respect to the method claims, the instant application is simply the method of operation of the recited components.
Instant claims 1 and 11: brine and dilute/second stream selectively directed to a tank extraction with sorbent, concentration membrane, sharp concentration profile, modular; reference claims 1 a tank, sorbent, concentration membrane, concentration profile, modular; reference claim 7: valves. Claim 4/12, pressure: reference claim 1, claim 5/14: reference claim 1, claim 7/16: reference claim 3, claim 8/17: reference claim 4, claim 9/18/19: reference claim 7, claim 10: reference claim 6.
Claims 12, 13 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,229,880 in view the rejections above.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-14, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,498,031.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent requires substantially the same components with respect to the apparatus claims, with respect to the method claims, the instant application is simply the method of operation of the recited components.
Instant claims 1 and 11: brine and dilute/second stream selectively directed to a tank extraction with sorbent, concentration membrane, sharp concentration profile, modular; reference claims 1 a tank, sorbent, concentration membrane, concentration profile, modular. Claim 4/12, pressure: reference claim 1, claim 5/14: reference claim 1, claim 8/17: reference claim 3, claim 9/18/19: reference claim 6, claim 10/20: reference claim 1.
Claims 12, 13, 7, 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,498,031 in view the rejections above.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-14, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,582,391.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent requires substantially the same components with respect to the apparatus claims, with respect to the method claims, the instant application is simply the method of operation of the recited components.
Instant claims 1 and 11: brine and dilute/second stream selectively directed to a tank extraction with sorbent, concentration membrane, sharp concentration profile, modular; reference claims 1 a tank, sorbent, concentration membrane, concentration profile, modular. Claim 4/12, pressure: reference claim 11, claim 5/14: reference claim 11, claim 7, 16: reference claim 16, claim 8/17: reference claim 17, claim 9/18/19: reference claim 20, claim 10/20: reference claim 19.
Claims 12, 13, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,582,391 in view Cheng and Priegnitz in view the rejections above.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-14, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11,904,276.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent requires substantially the same components with respect to the apparatus claims, with respect to the method claims, the instant application is simply the method of operation of the recited components.
Instant claims 1 and 11: brine and dilute/second stream selectively directed to a tank extraction with sorbent, concentration membrane, sharp concentration profile, modular; reference claims 1 a tank, sorbent, concentration membrane, concentration profile, modular. Claim 4/12, pressure: reference claim 11, claim 5/14: reference claim 11, claim 7, 16: reference claim 16, claim 8/17: reference claim 17, claim 9/18/19: reference claim 20, claim 10/20: reference claim 19.
Claims 12, 13, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 11,904,276 in view the rejections above.
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7-14, 16-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 12,172,129.
Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the reference patent method requires substantially the same components.
Instant claims 1 and 11: brine and dilute/second stream selectively directed to a tank extraction with sorbent, concentration membrane, sharp concentration profile, modular; reference claims 1 a tank, sorbent, concentration membrane, concentration profile, modular, pressure: reference claim 4, claim 5/14: reference claim 6, claim 7, 16: reference claim 8, claim 8/17: reference claim 9, claim 9/18/19: reference claim 11, claim 10/20: reference claim 1.
Claims 12, 13, are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 12,172,129 in view the rejections above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEANNIE MCDERMOTT whose telephone number is (571)272-4479. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30 - 5:00 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, Vickie Kim can be reached at 571-272-0579. 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.
/JEANNIE MCDERMOTT/Examiner, Art Unit 1777
/BRADLEY R SPIES/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1777