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 Interpretation
Independent claims 1 and 13 recite a liquid filtration system. In each of claims 1 and 13 the filter subsystem is recited as being “capable of attachment to a container opening of a container”. Thus, claims 1 and 13 are interpreted as not including the container as the container is recited as an intended use of the claimed invention. Similarly, claim 28 is directed to a filtration system comprising a threaded attachment mechanism configured to secure attachment of a filter subsystem to a container. The filter subsystem and container are interpreted as an intended use for the threaded attachment mechanism.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-3, 5, 10, 12, 19-20 and 26-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 28 recite the filter media is electrically neutral. The specification as originally filed does not expressly state that the filter media is electrically neutral; the specification does not discuss the charge or non-charge of the filter media at all. Therefore, the specification as originally filed does not reasonably convey to one skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter.
The additional claims are rejected as depending from claim 1 or 28.
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 13-17, 19-20 and 26-28 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 13 recites a filter subsystem capable of attachment to threads at a container opening. Thus, it is clear the container is not being positively recited as part of the system. However, lines 6-7 recite the filter media resides at the container opening. This limitation requires the container to be present in order for the filter media to be located as claimed. Therefore, it is unclear if the container is part of the claimed invention or not. For examination purposes, the container is assumed to not be part of the claimed invention.
Claim 27 recites the filter subsystem comprises a filter media. It is unclear if the claim is reciting an additional filter media to the filter media already recited in claim 1. For examination purposes the filter media of claim 27 is assumed to be the same filter media recited in claim 1.
Claim 28 recites a liquid filtration system comprising a threaded attachment mechanism “configured to secure attachment of a filter subsystem at a threaded opening of a container holding a liquid containing microplastic particulates”. It does not appear that the filter subsystem is being positively recited as part of the filtration system as the threaded attachment mechanism need only be configured to secure a filter subsystem. It also does not appear that the container holding a liquid containing microplastic particulates is being positively recited as part of the filtration system. It is unclear if these elements are meant to be positively recited as part of the claimed invention or if they are recited as intended uses of the claimed invention. For examination purposes, any limitations in the claim directed to the filter subsystem or the container or the orientation of the filter subsystem to the container do not provide any further structural limitations to the claimed threaded attachment mechanism.
The additional claims are rejected as depending from one of the above claims.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 5, 19 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 5 recites the material of the container and the liquid being water. The claimed invention is directed to a filtration system and the container is an intended use for the system but the container is not part of the claimed invention. Therefore, limitations directed to the container do not provide any further limitations to the claimed invention. Likewise, the liquid being water is an intended liquid to be used with the claimed invention and does not provide any further limitations to the system.
Claim 19 recites limitations directed to the filter subsystem which is not positively recited as part of the claimed filtration system and therefore does not provide any further structural limitations to the claimed apparatus.
Claim 26 recites limitations directed a filter cartridge which is part of the filter subsystem which is not part of the claimed apparatus. Therefore, the claim does not provide any further limitations to the apparatus.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 5, 10, 12-17, 19-20 and 26-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nohren US 6,193,886.
Claim 1, Nohren teaches a filtration system comprising: a filter subsystem (10) capable of direct attachment to a container opening of a container, the filter subsystem further comprising a filter media (14, 29) configured to receive and pass liquid therethrough to be filtered and installed absent a protective cover, the filter subsystem comprising: an attachment mechanism (18) having threads (21) which enable attachment of the filter subsystem directly to compatible container threads at a container opening, wherein the filter media is electrically neutral and is configured to reside in the container opening, the attachment mechanism further comprises an internal opening, and an external opening distal from the internal opening, the internal opening enable access of the filter media to a liquid within the container, the external opening enables external access of the filter subsystem to filter liquid passed through the filter subsystem (fig. 1, claims 1 and 10-11).
Claims 2-3 and 27, the filter subsystem is configured to filter micro-particulates from liquid (abstract); the filter media is a cylindrical carbon filter (29) configured to filter micro-particulates (abstract); an inner cover (20) over the external opening to prevent loss of liquid when not being accessed (fig. 1); and the internal opening of the filter subsystem comprises the filter media (fig. 1).
Claim 5 recites limitations directed to the container which is not part of the claimed invention and therefore does not further limit the filtration system.
Claim 12, Nohren further teaches the filter subsystem contains plastic (225), which is considered to be recyclable and the filter subsystem may be thrown away if no longer needed and is therefore considered disposable.
Claim 13, Nohren teaches a filtration system comprising: a filter subsystem (10) capable of attachment to threads (21) at a container opening of a container and configured to pass fluid therethrough to be filtered for micro-particulates by a filter media (14, 29) of the filter subsystem, and an attachment mechanism (18) configured to enable secure attachment of the filter subsystem directly to the threads at the container opening wherein the filter media is configured to reside at the container opening, the attachment mechanism further comprises an internal opening and an external opening distal to the internal opening, the internal opening enables access by the filter media of the filter subsystem to fluid in the container, the filter media configured and installed to filter fluid while absent a protective cover, the externa opening enable external access to filtered fluid passed through the filter subsystem (fig. 1, abstract).
Claims 14-17, Nohren further teaches the filter media is configured to filter micro-plastic particulates from the fluid as the fluid is pushed or drawn through the filter subsystem (fig. 1, abstract); the filter media is a carbon cylindrical filter (29) configured to filter micro-particulates (fig. 1, abstract, col. 6, lines 22-44); the attachment mechanism is compatible with container threads of a container and is configured to secure directly over a container opening via the container threads (fig. 1); and the filter media is of a filter cartridge configured to extend into a container opening in a neck portion of the container (fig. 1).
Claim 28, Nohren teaches a filtration system (10) comprising: a threaded attachment mechanism (18) having threads configured to secure attachment of a filter subsystem directly to threads at a threaded opening of a container, the threaded attachment mechanism further capable of receiving a bottom end cap and receive a top end cap in abutment (fig. 1). The additional limitations of the claim are directed to a filter subsystem and a container which are not positively recited as part of the claimed filtration system.
Claim 19 does not provide any further structural limitations to the claimed filtration system.
Claim 20, Nohren further teaches the threaded attachment mechanism is compatible with threads of a threaded opening of a container and configured to secure a filter subsystem over the container opening (fig. 1). The recitation of the container being plastic does not provide any further structural limitations to the claimed apparatus as the container is not part of the claimed system. Nohren does teach the container (11) being plastic.
Claim 26, Nohren further teaches the threaded attachment mechanism is capable of receiving any kind of a filter subsystem having any kind of filter cartridge as long as the filter subsystem can attach to the ring (19) (fig. 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 13 and 28 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN M KURTZ whose telephone number is (571)272-8211. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5.
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, 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.
/BENJAMIN M KURTZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1779