Ex Parte Han et al

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardJan 31, 2013

10598662 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 31, 2013)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARKOFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 10/598,662 11/09/2006 Ki-Baek Han 5952-064 8632 24112 7590 01/31/2013 COATS & BENNETT, PLLC 1400 Crescent Green, Suite 300 Cary, NC 27518 EXAMINER ANDERSON, DENISE R ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 1779 MAIL DATE DELIVERY MODE 01/31/2013 PAPER Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte KI-BARK HAN, HYO-SANG KIM, MYUNG-GYOO ROH, MOON-HYUN HWANG, CHUL-HEE CHO, SUNG-HO PARK, SANG-WOONG YOO, SUNG-KYU HONG, SUNG-HOON LEE, and CHUN-KEYNG KIM ____________ Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 Technology Center 1700 ____________ Before CHUNG K. PAK, ROMULO H. DELMENDO, and JEFFREY T. SMITH, Administrative Patent Judges. PAK, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL The named inventors (hereinafter “Appellants”)1 appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s final rejection of claims 25through 44, 46 through 50, 52, and 53, all of the claims pending in the above identified application. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1 Appellants identify the real party in interest as “OTV S.A.” (See Appeal Brief filed September 28, 2010 (“App. Br.”) at 2. Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 2 The subject matter on appeal is directed to “a fine filtering apparatus having controllable packing density” and a method of using the same for the purpose of “improving filtration efficiency, the amount of clarified water, and filtering duration, and reducing the power consumption compared to a conventional filtering apparatus.” Details of the appealed subject matter are recited in illustrative independent claims 25, 34, and 41 reproduced below from the “CLAIMS APPENDIX” in the Appeal Brief: 25. A fine filtering apparatus for removing fine particles from water, the device comprising: a. an elongated housing forming a main body and having an impervious wall enclosing an interior cavity that extends through the housing; b. a plurality of flexible fibers extending within the cavity for contacting flowing water and removing fine particles from the water without separating a permeate from the water; c. the housing including a pair of opposed end portions wherein disposed adjacent a first end portion is a water inlet for receiving a stream of water, the inlet including an annular water guide jacket extending around the first end portion of the housing and being in fluid communication with the cavity for distributing the water within the cavity; d. a head jacket disposed extending around a second end portion of the housing; e. the header jacket including a clarified water outlet for discharging a clarified water from the cavity; Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 3 f. the header jacket also including a waste outlet for discharging a concentrated waste from the cavity; g. an air inlet for directing air into the cavity such that the air may contact the fibers and clean some of the fine particles from the fibers; h. a density control plate having an annular shape and disposed within the housing below the water guide jacket for increasing a density of the fibers below the water guide jacket and for generally inhibiting the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet; i. in one mode of operation of the fine filtering apparatus, the water is directed through the cavity and some of the fine particles are removed from the water producing the clarified water that is discharged from the cavity via the clarified water outlet; and j. in another mode of operation of the fine filtering apparatus, both the air and the water are directed through the cavity and some of the fine particles are cleaned from the fibers producing the concentrated waste that is discharged from the cavity through the waste outlet. 34. A fine filtering apparatus for removing fine particles from water directed from a water source, the device comprising: a. an elongated housing forming a main body and having an impervious outer wall comprising a substantial portion of the main body; b. an interior cavity extending through the housing and being substantially enclosed within the outer wall; c. a plurality of flexible fibers extending within the cavity for contacting flowing water and removing fine particles from the water; d. first and second end portions of the housing each disposed adjacent opposite first and second ends of the housing; Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 4 e. a water inlet disposed on the first end portion for directing the water into the cavity; f. the second end portion of the housing, including a clarified water outlet for discharging clarified water from the cavity and a waste outlet for discharging a concentrated waste from the cavity; g. an air inlet disposed adjacent the first end portion for directing air into the cavity for contacting the fibers and for cleaning some of the fine particles from the fibers; h. a density control plate for increasing the density of the fibers in an area of the cavity between the water inlet and the air inlet and wherein the increased density of the fibers generally inhibits the water from flowing in a direction from the water inlet towards the air inlet, the density control plate comprising an annular plate disposed within the housing between the water inlet and the air inlet and having an opening through which the fibers extend, wherein the annular plate constrains the fibers to the opening thereof, thereby increasing the density of the fibers in the opening of the annular plate and generally inhibiting the flow of water from the water inlet, through the opening of the annular plate, to the air inlet; i. in one mode of operating of the fine filtering apparatus, the water is directed through the cavity and some of the fine particles are removed from the water, producing the clarified water that is discharged via the clarified water outlet; and j. in another mode of operation of the fine filtering apparatus, both the air and the water are directed through the cavity and some of the fine particles are cleaned from the fibers producing the concentrated waste that is discharged via the waste outlet. Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 5 41. A method of treating water having fine particles therein with a device having a treatment cavity, an air inlet and a water guide jacket comprising a water inlet disposed on one portion of the device, and a clarified water outlet and a concentration waste outlet disposed on another portion of the device, the method including: a. closing the concentrated waste outlet and opening the clarified water outlet; b. directing the water into the water inlet in the water guide jacket and through the treatment cavity; c. increasing the density of a plurality of flexible fibers extending within the treatment cavity in an area below the water guide jacket using a density control plate to inhibit the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet; d. as the water is passed through the treatment cavity, flowing the water adjacent the plurality of flexible fibers extending within the treatment cavity and removing fine particles from the water without separating a permeate from the water; e. discharging the clarified water out the clarified water outlet; f. closing the clarified water outlet and opening the concentrated waste outlet; g. injecting air from the air inlet into the treatment cavity through openings disposed in a media fixing plate to which the fibers are attached and mixing the air with the water having the fine particles to form an air- water mixture; h. passing the air-water mixture through the treatment cavity and contacting the fibers and dislodging the fine particles captured on the fibers, Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 6 producing a concentrated waste including the air-water mixture and the dislodged fine particle; and i. discharging the concentrated waste through the concentrated waste outlet. (See App. Br. 27-33 (Claims App’x).) Appellants seek review of the following grounds of rejection maintained by the Examiner in the Answer: I. Claims 25, 26, 28, 31, 34-36, 39, and 53 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye2 in view of Raff; 3 II. Claim 27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff, Speckle4, and Ford;5 III. Claims 29 and 30 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff, Speckle, and Zha;6 IV. Claims 37 and 38 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff and Zha; V. Claims 32 and 33 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff, Speckle, and Barzuza; 7 VI. Claim 40 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff and Barzuza; 2 WO 02/24306 A1 published on March 28, 2002. 3 U.S. Patent 5,053,130 issued to Raff et al. on October 1, 1991. 4 U.S. Patent 4,219,426 issued to Speckle et al. on August 26, 1980. 5 U.S. Patent 4,793,932 issued to Ford et al. on December 27, 1988. 6 U.S. Patent 6,524,481 B2 issued to Zha et al. on February 25, 2003. 7 U.S. Patent 4,617,120 issued to Barzuza et al. on October 14, 1986. Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 7 VII. Claims 41-44, 46, 48 through 50, and 52 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff and Cote; 8 and VIII. Claim 47 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as unpatentable over Boye in view of Raff, Cote, and Barzuza. (See App. Br. 10 and Examiner’s Answer mailed December 3, 2010 (“Ans.”) at 4-37. DISCUSSION The Examiner’s § 103(a) rejections are all based on her determination that the collective teachings of Boye and Raff would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to employ a density control plate for increasing a density of the fibers between a water guide jacket and an air inlet to inhibit the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet as recited in claims 25, 34, and 41. (Ans. 4-37.) Thus, the dispositive question is: Has the Examiner demonstrated that the collective teachings of Boye and Raff would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to employ a density control plate for increasing a density of the fibers between the water guide jacket and the air inlet to inhibit the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet as recited in claims 25, 34, and 41? On this record, we answer this question in the negative. 8 U.S. Patent 5,607,593 issued to Cote et al. on Mar. 4, 1997. Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 8 As is apparent from page 8 of the Answer, the Examiner relies on Boye’s compressing means in the form of a clamp having two curved jaws 7a, and 7b or Boye’s inner and outer collar sealing means 11 and 12 as density control plates. (See also Boye, p. 12, l. 5 to p. 13, l. 9.) However, the Examiner acknowledges at page 9 of the Answer that Boye does not teach or suggest placing these so-called “density control plates” below a water guide jacket for inhibiting the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet as recited in claim 25, 34, and 41. (See, e.g., Ans. 9 and Boye, p. 12, l. 5 to p. 13, l. 9.) To remedy this deficiency, the Examiner further relies on ring 6b in Raff, which is said to be located between the end wall and the housing that includes a water jacket guide. (See, e.g., Ans. 9) As correctly explained by Appellants at pages 13-19 of the Appeal Brief, the Examiner’s reliance on such ring in Raff does not provide any reason for employing a density control plate for increasing a density of the fibers between the water guide jacket and the air inlet to inhibit the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward the air inlet as recited in claims 25, 34, and 41. In particular, the Examiner has not shown that Raff’s ring 6b is designed to be a density control plate capable of increasing the density of fibers or capable of inhibiting the water from flowing downwardly in a direction toward an air inlet as explained by Appellants at pages 14-16 and 18 of the Appeal Brief. Nor has the Examiner demonstrated that one of ordinary skill in the art would have been led to place a density control plate Appeal 2011-005586 Application 10/598,662 9 below a water jacket guide as indicated by Appellants at pages 16-17 of the Appeal Brief. For example, Boye’s compressing means for adjusting the density of the fibers relied upon by the Examiner as a density control plate is taught to be used for the purpose of avoiding early clogging of the filtering device. Yet, the Examiner has not shown that such early clogging prevention purpose of using a compressing means would have led one of ordinary skill in the art to place a density control plate between a water jacket guide and an air inlet. Accordingly, we concur with Appellants that the Examiner has not carried her initial burden of establishing a prima facie case of obviousness regarding the subject matter recited in the claims on appeal within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 103(a). SUMMARY In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Examiner rejecting the claims on appeal is reversed. REVERSED cam