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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 28 July 2025 was filed in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “104” has been used to designate both “water extraction unit” and “collection cone”; and reference character “228” has been used to designate both “arm” and “motor”.
The drawings are objected to because:
The text matter “Radiator” should be removed from Fig. 4 because text matter should only be used when necessary for understanding of the figure. Since reference character “122” as shown in Fig. 4 has been used to designate “radiator”, the term “Radiator” is unnecessary.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 3 of paragraph 0014, “Extracted” should be changed to “extracted”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 12, 13, and 19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In line 2 of claim 12, “frost” should be changed to “the frost”, assuming that the aforementioned limitation refers to the frost recited in claim 10, from which claim 12 depends.
In line 1 of claim 13, “frost” should be changed to “the frost”, assuming that the aforementioned limitation refers to the frost recited in claim 10, from which claim 13 depends.
In line 2 of claim 19, “direct scraped frost” should be changed to “direct the scraped frost”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 - 9, 14, 16, and 20 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.
Regarding claim 1, the phrase “with accumulation in the collection receptacle” as recited in lines 6 - 7 is confusing because it is unclear what material is accumulating in the collection receptacle.
Regarding claim 5, the phrase “accumulation threshold” as recited in line 3 is confusing because it is unclear as to what material the accumulation threshold applies.
Regarding claim 14, the phrase “to release the collected frost upon actuation” as recited in line 2 is confusing because it is unclear what structural element is being actuated.
Regarding claim 16, the phrase “accumulation condition” as recited in line 2 is confusing because it is unclear as to what material is accumulating.
Regarding claim 20, the phrase “throughout rotation” is confusing because it is unclear whether the aforementioned limitation refers to rotation of the scraper arm or rotation of the non-planar surface.
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 - 3, 5, and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sowers, JR. et al. (US 2019/0271228) in view of Arcangeli (US 4,947,652). Regarding claim 1, Sowers discloses an apparatus for extracting and processing water from a particulate medium, comprising: a water extraction unit (thermal system 14) configured to collect water in the form of frost or condensate formed from vapor generated within the particulate medium (regolith 2); a collection receptacle (container 24) configured to store the collected frost or condensate (Figs. 3 and 3A; abstract; paragraphs 0064, 0065, and 0069 - 0076). Sowers fails to disclose a sensor configured to detect a condition associated with accumulation in the collection receptacle; and a controller configured to initiate an operational transition of the apparatus based at least in part on input from the sensor. Arcangeli teaches a sensor (sensor paddle 44) configured to detect a condition (level of ice in a collection bin 12) associated with accumulation in a collection receptacle (12); and a controller (electrical control circuit; see Fig. 3) configured to initiate an operational transition (stop operation of ice maker 10 upon excessive accumulation of ice within the bin 12) of the apparatus based at least in part on input from the sensor (44) (Figs. 1 - 3; abstract; col. 2, line 28 - col. 5, line 59) to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the sensor and controller as taught by Arcangeli to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle.
Regarding claim 2, Sowers discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except the operational transition comprises repositioning the water extraction unit from a collection configuration to an offload configuration. Arcangeli teaches the operational transition comprises repositioning the water extraction unit from a collection configuration (where ice flakes are discharged into an ice bin 12) to an offload configuration (filling of the ice bin 12 is stopped) (Figs. 1 - 3; abstract; col. 2, line 28 - col. 5, line 59) to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the sensor and controller as taught by Arcangeli to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle.
Regarding claim 3, Sowers discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except the sensor comprises a fill-level sensor positioned within or adjacent to the collection receptacle. Arcangeli teaches the sensor comprises a fill-level sensor (sensor paddle 44) positioned within or adjacent to the collection receptacle (12) (Figs. 1 and 2; col. 3, lines 8 - 68). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the sensor as taught by Arcangeli to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle.
Regarding claim 5, Sowers discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except the controller is further configured to initiate offloading of contents of the collection receptacle into a separate storage container upon reaching a defined accumulation threshold. Arcangeli teaches the controller (electrical control circuit) is further configured to initiate offloading of contents of the collection receptacle into a separate storage container upon reaching a defined accumulation threshold (as measured by sensor paddle 44) (Figs. 1 - 3; abstract; col. 2, line 28 - col. 5, line 59) to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the sensor and controller as taught by Arcangeli to stop filling of a collection receptacle upon detection of an excessive accumulation of ice in the collection receptacle. Examiner takes the position that the first step in the offloading process is to stop the accumulation of ice and since the controller as taught by Arcangeli is configured to stop the filling of an ice collection receptacle the controller as taught by Arcangeli is configured to initiate the offloading process.
Regarding claim 6, Sowers further discloses the water extraction unit (14) is mounted on a repositionable arm (strut) (paragraph 0068). Although Sowers fails to explicitly teach a controller actuates the arm to move between locations, it would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use a controller, such as an operator, to provide a means for initiating movement of the struts from the stored state to a deployed state.
Claims 7 - 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sowers, JR. et al. in view of Arcangeli as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Finger et al. (US 2019/0263699).
Regarding claim 7, Sowers in view of Arcangeli discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except a purification module configured to operate under reduced pressure conditions to separate contaminants from the collected frost or condensate. Finger teaches a purification module (water purification assembly) configured to operate under reduced pressure conditions to separate contaminants from the collected frost (ice) (paragraphs 0008, 0020, 0036, and 0037) to produce purified water, hydrogen, and oxygen from contaminated water derived from regolith-based resources. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the purification module as taught by Finger to produce purified water, hydrogen, and oxygen from contaminated water derived from regolith-based resources.
Regarding claim 8, Sowers in view of Arcangeli discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except a multi-stage vacuum distillation system configured to remove non-condensable gases and particulate contaminants. Finger teaches a multi-stage vacuum distillation system (700) configured to remove non-condensable gases and particulate contaminants (paragraph 0095). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the multi-stage vacuum distillation system as taught by Finger to produce purified water, hydrogen, and oxygen from contaminated water derived from regolith-based resources. Examiner notes that although paragraph 0095 of Finger teaches “In some implementations, the system 700 does not have a vacuum pump”, the aforementioned passage from Finger suggests that in other implementations, the system 700 has a vacuum pump.
Regarding claim 9, Sowers in view of Arcangeli discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except an electrolysis module configured to separate the water into gaseous hydrogen and gaseous oxygen. Finger teaches an electrolysis module configured to separate the water into gaseous hydrogen and gaseous oxygen (Fig. 1; paragraph 0058) so that the oxygen may be stored for use in life support applications and/or propulsion and the hydrogen may be stored for use in propulsion. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the electrolysis module as taught by Finger so that the oxygen may be stored for use in life support applications and/or propulsion and the hydrogen may be stored for use in propulsion.
Claims 10 - 12, 14, 15, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ethridge (US 9,581,021) in view of Sercel et al. (US 2020/0240267).
Regarding claim 10, Ethridge discloses an apparatus for collecting water-based frost from a surface, comprising: an arm (arm 325); a collection tray (containment structure 323) mechanically coupled to the arm (325) and configured to receive the removed frost; and a collection receptacle (condensation unit 320) configured to receive the frost from the collection tray, wherein the scraper arm, the collection tray, and the collection receptacle form a contiguous subassembly configured to rotate (around joint 342) relative to the surface (Figs. 3a and 3b; col. 14, line 20 - col. 15, line 52). Ethridge fails to disclose a scraper configured to contact and remove frost accumulated on the surface. Sercel teaches a water collection system including scrapers (not shown) for removing frost from a surface (paragraph 0075) to enhance gas dynamic efficiency and to minimize gas back-flow. It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the scrapers as taught by Sercel to control the frost thickness on the surface and to enhance the efficiency of the water collection apparatus.
Regarding claim 11, Ethridge further discloses the arm (325) is configured to move peripherally (using joint 342) along a conical or curved surface (surface of containment structure 323) (Fig. 3b; col. 15, lines 32 - 52).
Regarding claim 12, Ethridge fails to disclose a scraping edge configured to remove frost from the surface without substantially damaging the surface. Sercel teaches a scraper (which inherently includes an edge) configured to remove frost from the surface (paragraph 0075). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the scraper as taught by Sercel to control the frost thickness on the surface and to enhance the efficiency of the water collection apparatus. Although Sercel fails to explicitly teach the scraping edge configured to remove frost without damaging the surface. It would have been obvious to configure the scraping edge as taught by Sercel to not damage the surface in order to extend the working life of the surface and to reduce cost of materials associated with replacement/maintenance of the surface caused by contact between the scraper edge and the surface.
Regarding claim 14, Ethridge further discloses the collection receptacle (320) comprises an offloading portal configured to release the collected frost upon actuation. Ethridge discloses delivering material from the collection receptacle (320) to a rover collection system (col. 15, lines 54 - 57) and there would obviously be a portal in the collection receptacle to allow the material to move from the collection receptable to the rover collection system.
Regarding claim 15, Ethridge further discloses the contiguous subassembly is rotatable about a central axis (axis in joint 342 about which the contiguous subassembly rotates) (Fig. 3b). Ethridge fails to disclose a drive mechanism. Examiner takes the position that a drive mechanism would obviously be required to cause the arm to pivot about joint 342.
Regarding claim 18, Ethridge further discloses the scraper arm (325), collection tray (323), and collection receptacle (320) are mounted on a shared frame (roving vehicle 340) configured for removal and replacement as a unit (Fig. 3b; col. 15, lines 32 - 49).
Regarding claim 20, Ethridge further discloses the scraper arm (325) comprises an angled profile to maintain contact with a non-planar surface (surface of containment structure 323) (Fig. 3b). Examiner takes the position that the limitation “an angled profile” does not require a specific angle and, therefore, the scraper arm would inherently include an angled profile.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ethridge in view of Sercel et al. as applied to claim 10 above, and further in view of Arcangeli. Ethridge in view of Sercel discloses all of the claim limitation(s) except the collection tray includes one or more guide vanes or baffles configured to direct scraped frost toward a central receptacle inlet during rotation of the contiguous subassembly. Arcangeli teaches the collection tray (24) includes one or more guide vanes (paddle 44) configured to direct scraped frost toward a central receptacle inlet (Fig. 2; abstract; col. 2, line 28 - col. 5, line 59). It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, to have modified the apparatus as disclosed above with the guide vanes as taught by Arcangeli to provide a means for scraping the frost off of the surface and direct it to the collection receptacle, thereby optimizing the collection of the frost.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 13 and 17 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN D ANDRISH whose telephone number is (571)270-3098. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 6:30 AM - 4:00 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, Amber Anderson can be reached at 571-270-5281. 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.
/SEAN D ANDRISH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3678
SA
10/1/2026
