|Publication number||USRE43350 E1|
|Application number||US 12/847,931|
|Publication date||8 May 2012|
|Filing date||30 Jul 2010|
|Priority date||5 May 1995|
|Publication number||12847931, 847931, US RE43350 E1, US RE43350E1, US-E1-RE43350, USRE43350 E1, USRE43350E1|
|Inventors||William B. Kerfoot|
|Original Assignee||Think Village-Kerfoot, Llc|
|Export Citation||BiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan|
|Patent Citations (106), Non-Patent Citations (75), Classifications (21), Legal Events (3)|
|External Links: USPTO, USPTO Assignment, Espacenet|
This application is a reissue of U.S. Pat. No. 7,645,380, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/997,452, filed Nov. 24, 2004, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,537,706, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/943,111, filed Aug. 30, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,872,318, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/606,952, filed Jun. 29, 2000, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,284,143, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/220,401, filed Dec. 24, 1998, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,083,407, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/756,273, filed Nov. 25, 1996, now U.S. Pat. No. 5,855,775, which is a-continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/638,017, filed Apr. 25, 1996, now abandoned, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 29/038,499, filed May 5, 1995, now abandoned. Each of these applications is incorporated by reference in its entirety.
1. Field of Invention (Technical Field)
The present disclosure relates to apparatuses for remediation of dissolved chlorinated hydrocarbons in aquifer regions by injecting micro-fine bubbles effective for active in situ groundwater remediation for removal of dissolved chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents and dissolved hydrocarbon petroleum products. Remediation of saturated soils may also be obtained by employment of the present apparatuses.
2. Background Prior Art
There is a well recognized need to cleanup subsurface leachate plumes in aquifer regions and contaminated sites including, in particular, dry-cleaning establishments and U.S. Military Air bases. Applicant is aware of prior art devices that have used injection of air to facilitate biodegradation of plumes.
However, an apparatus using micro-fine bubbles including a multi-gas oxidizing agent for the controlled remediation of a site containing poorly biodegradable organics, particularly dissolved chlorinated solvents, has not been shown.
In fact the Federal Agency (EPA, KERR Environmental Laboratory, ADA, Oklahoma) responsible for review of clean-up procedures at Marine Corp Air Base at Yuma, Ariz. has determined that there is no prior reference which discloses the use of the present apparatuses and has ordered independent pilot tests to provide test results confirming the results previously obtained by the present apparatuses.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,221,159, to Billings, shows injection of air into aquifer regions to encourage biodegradation of leachate plumes which contain biodegradable organics together with simultaneous soil vacuum extraction.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,269,943, METHOD FOR TREATMENT OF SOILS CONTAMINATED WITH ORGANIC POLLUTANTS, to Wickramanayake, shows a method for treating soil contaminated by organic compounds where an ozone containing gas is treated with acid to increase the stability of the ozone in the soil environment and the treated ozone is applied to the contaminated soil to decompose the organic compounds.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,525,008, REMEDIATION APPARATUS AND METHOD FOR ORGANIC CONTAMINATION IN SOIL AND GROUNDWATER, to Wilson, provides a method and apparatus for in-situ treatment of soil and groundwater contaminated with organic pollutants. It involves concentration of a reactive solution required to effect treatment of the contaminated area and injecting the reactive solution into one or more injectors that are inserted into the ground. The apparatus is scaled and positioned so as to assure flow and to allow reactive solution to flow through the contaminated area thereby reacting chemically. Preferably, the reactive solution is an aqueous solution of hydrogen peroxide and metallic salts.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,178,755, UV-ENHANCED OZONE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM, to Lacrosse, mixes wastewater with ozonated liquid within a multi-stage clarifier system and suspended solids are removed.
Notwithstanding the teachings of the prior art, there has not been shown an apparatus for remediating a site contaminated with poorly biodegradable organics, particularly dissolved chlorinated solvents, with micro-fine bubbles including an encapsulated multi-gas oxidizing agent in a controlled manner. In situ remediation is accomplished using the present instrumentalities by employing microporous diffusers which inject multi-gas bubbles containing an ozone oxidizing agent into aquifer regions to strip and rapidly decompose poorly biodegradable organics or to accelerate biodegradation of leachate plumes which contain biodegradable organics thereby overcoming at least some disadvantages of the prior art.
The present disclosure relates to sparging apparatuses for injection of oxidizing gas, in the form of small bubbles, into aquifer regions to encourage in situ remediation of subsurface leachate plumes.
In particular, sparging apparatuses are disclosed for employing microporous diffusers to inject micro-fine bubbles containing encapsulated gas bubbles into aquifer regions to encourage biodegradation of leachate plumes which contain biodegradable organics, or Criegee decomposition of leachate plumes containing dissolved chlorinated hydrocarbons. The sparging apparatuses, employing microporous diffusers for injecting an encapsulated multi-gas oxidizing agent, are particularly useful in promoting extremely efficient removal of poorly biodegradable organics, such as dissolved chlorinated solvents, without the use of vacuum extraction of undesirable by-products of remediation. Furthermore, remediation occurs by employing encapsulated multi-gas oxidizing agent for destroying organic and hydrocarbon material in place with out release of contaminating vapors.
Unlike the prior art, the contaminated groundwater is injected with an air/ozone mixture wherein micro-fine air bubbles strip the solvents from the groundwater and the encapsulated ozone acts as an oxidizing agent in a gas/gas reaction to break down the contaminates into carbon dioxide, very dilute HCl and water. This system is known as the C-Sparger® system.
The present system, hereinafter C-Sparger® system, is directed to low-cost removal of dissolved chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents such as perc from contaminated soil and groundwater aquifers. The C-Sparger® system employs microporous diffusers, hereinafter Spargepoints®, for producing micro-fine bubbles containing an oxidizing agent that decomposes chlorinated hydrocarbons into harmless byproducts. The C-Sparger® system also incorporates: means for pumping a multi-gas oxidizing mixture through the Spargepoint® into groundwater in a soil formation, a bubble production chamber to generate bubbles of differing size, a timer to delay pumping until large bubbles have segregated from small bubbles by rise time, and a pump which forces the fine bubbles and liquid out into the soil formation. The pumping means intermittently agitates the water in the well in which the C-Sparger® is installed in order to effectively disturb the normal inverted cone-shaped path of the bubbles injected by the Spargepoint®. Water agitation results in random bubble dispersion to ensure improved contact between the oxidizing agent (contained in each bubble) and the pollutant. The pulsing action promotes movement of the bubbles through the porous formation. It is the in situ stripping action and maintenance of low solvent gas concentration in the bubbles which increases the efficacy and speed of remediation of a site.
The apparatus of the present disclosure is particularly useful in efficiently removing poorly biodegradable organics, particularly dissolved chlorinated solvents, without the use of vacuum extraction, wherein remediation occurs by destroying organic and hydrocarbon material in place without the release of contaminating vapors.
The multi-gas system comprises an oxidizing gas encapsulated in micro-bubbles, generated from microporous diffusers, that are matched to soil porosity. A unique bubble size range is matched to underground formation porosity and achieves dual properties of fluid like transmission and rapid extraction of selected volatile gases. Bubble size is selected so as to maintain vertical mobility. In order to accomplish a proper matching, a prior site evaluation test procedure is devised to assess the effectiveness of fluid transmission at the remediation site.
Small bubbles with a high surface to gas volume ratio are advantageous in promoting rapid extraction of volatile organic compounds, such as PCE, TCE, or DCE. Pulsed injection of small bubbles and consequent rise time is matched to the short half-life of an oxidative gas, such as ozone, to allow rapid bubble dispersion into predominantly water-saturated geological formations, and extraction and rapid decomposition of the volatile organic material. The unique apparatus of the present disclosure provides for extraction efficiency with resulting economy of operation by maximizing contaminant contact with oxidant by selective rapid extraction providing for optimum fluidity of bubbles through media which can be monitored.
The use of microporous diffuser points provides a more even distribution of air into a saturated formation than the use of pressurized wells. A sparge system installed to remediate contaminated groundwater is made more cost-effective by sparging different parts of the plume area at sequenced times. Through the proper placement of sparge locations and sequence control, any possible off-site migration of floating product is eliminated. With closely spaced Spargepoints®, water mounding is advantageous because it prevents any off-site escape of contaminant. Water mounding is used to direct floating product toward extraction sites.
The microporous diffusers and multi-gas system, referred to as Spargepoints® and C-Sparger® Systems, are designed to remove dissolved organics and solvents (chlorinated hydrocarbons) such as PCE, TCE, and DCE from contaminated groundwater. The micro-fine bubbles, produced by the Spargepoints®, contain oxygen and ozone which oxidize the chlorinated hydrocarbons to harmless gases and weak acids. High initial concentrations of these dissolved organics have been, under some specific-circumstances, reduced to levels of 1 ppb or less in periods of a few weeks. None of the models to date are designed for explosive environments.
The present systems employ a plurality of configurations consisting of Series 3500 and Series 3600 C-Sparger® models. The 3600 Series is larger and has more capacity. Specifically, the 3600 Series has a better compressor rated for continuous use, a larger ozone generator, a second Spargepoint® below the first Spargepoint® in each well, and larger diameter gas tubing. Both model series have control units that can support: one (Models 3501 & 3601), two (Models 3502 & 3602) and three separate wells (Models 3503 & 3603). The one, two, and three well models differ in the number of relays, internal piping, external ports and programming of the timer/controller.
Normal operation for C-Sparger® systems includes carrying out, in series for each well, the following functions on a timed basis: pumping air and ozone through Spargepoint® diffusers into the soil formation, pumping aerated/ozonated water into the soils and recovering treated water above. Treatment is followed by a programmable period of no external treatment and multiple wells are sequenced in turn. Agitation with pumped water disturbs the usually inverted cone-shaped path of bubbles through the soils and disperses them much more widely. This increases contact and greatly improves efficiency and speed of remediation. Vapor capture is not normally necessary.
Series 3500 and 3600 systems include a control module, one to three well assemblies depending on specific model selected, a 1.0 ft. long submersible pump power-gas line for each well and a flow meter (to check Spargepoint® flow rates). Model Series 3500 & 3600 control modules have been successfully deployed outdoors in benign and moderate environments for prolonged periods of time. The control module must be firmly mounted vertically on 4×4 posts or on a building wall near the wells.
The actual placement depths, separations, number/size of wells and overall remediation system geometry are highly variable. Differences in specific pollutant, spill, soil, groundwater and climate characteristics can greatly influence the design and geometry of the overall remediation system. Monitoring wells are usually also needed. In short, specific circumstances and conditions are often critical, however, a generic or typical overall system is shown on
The Unique Use of Microfine Bubbles for Simultaneous Extraction/Decomposition.
The use of microporous Spargepoint® diffusers to create fine bubbles, which easily penetrate sandy formations to allow fluid flow, has unexpected benefits when used with multiple gas systems. Microfine bubbles accelerate the transfer rate of PCE from aqueous to gaseous state. The bubble rise transfers the PCE to the vadose zone. The ten-fold difference in surface-to-volume ratio of Spargepoint® diffuser microbubbles compared to bubbles from well screens results in a four-fold improvement in transfer rates. To block the gaseous state from reverting to a surface dissolved state in the vadose (unsaturated) zone, a microprocessor system shuttles an oxidizing gas through the vadose zone to chemically degrade the transported PCE.
If gaseous exchange is proportional to available surface area, with partial pressures and mixtures of volatile gases being held constant, a halving of the radius of bubbles would quadruple (i.e. 4×), the exchange rate. If, in the best case, a standard well screen creates air bubbles the size of a medium sand porosity, a microporous diffuser of 20 micron size creates a bubble one tenth ( 1/10) the diameter and then times the volume/surface ratio (Table 1).
Theoretically, the microporous bubbles exhibit an exchange rate of ten times the rate of a comparable bubble from a standard ten slot well screen.
Soil Vapor concentrations are related to two governing systems: water phase and (non-aqueous) product phase. Henry's and Raoult's Laws (DiGiulio, 1990) are commonly used to understand equilibrium-vapor concentrations governing volatization from liquids. When soils are moist, the relative volatility is dependent upon Henry's Law. Under normal conditions (free from product) where volatile organic carbons (VOC's) are relatively low, an equilibrium of soil, water, and air is assumed to exist. The compound, tetrachloroethene (PCE), has a high exchange coefficient with a high vapor pressure (atm) and low aqueous solubility (μmole/l). By enhancing the exchange capacity at least ten fold, the rate of removal should be accelerated substantially.
Ozone is an effective oxidant used for the breakdown of organic compounds during water treatment. The major problem in effectiveness is ozone's short half-life. If ozone is mixed with sewage-containing water above-ground, the half-life is normally minutes. However, if maintained in the gaseous form, the half-life of ozone can be extended up to 15 hours. Microbubbles can be used as extracting agents by pulling chlorinated solvents out of solution into the gaseous ozone as they enter the microbubble. The small bubble's high surface-to-volume ratio increases the exchange area and accelerates the consumption of HVOC within the bubble maximizing the concentration of gas transferred into the bubble (CS−C). The rate-limiting process is the area-specific diffusion (dominated by Henry's Constant), while the decomposition reaction occurs rapidly (assuming sufficient ozone).
Ozone reacts quickly and quantitatively with PCE to yield breakdown products of hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, and water.
Using microporous diffusers to inject ozone-containing bubbles may offset ozone's relatively short half-life. By encapsulating the ozone in fine bubbles, the bubbles would preferentially extract volatile compounds like PCE from the mixtures of soluble organic compounds they encountered. The ozone-mediated destruction of organics may then selectively target volatile organics pulled into the fine air bubbles. Even in a groundwater mixture of high organic content like diluted sewage, PCE removal could be rapid.
The unique combination of microbubble extraction and ozone-mediated degradation can be generalized to render volatile organic compounds amenable to rapid removal. The efficiency of extraction is directly proportional to Henry's Constant which serves as a diffusion coefficient for gaseous exchange (Kg).
In wastewater treatment the two-film theory of gas transfer (Metcalf and Eddy, Inc, 1991) states the rate of transfer between gas and liquid phases is generally proportional to the surface area of contact and the difference between the existing concentration and the equilibrium concentration of the gas in solution. Simply stated, if the surface-to-volume ratio of contact is increased, the rate of exchange will increase. If the gas (volatile organic compound, hereinafter “VOC”) entering the bubble (or micropore space bounded by a liquid film) is consumed, the difference is maintained at a higher entry rate than if the VOC is allowed to reach saturation equilibrium. In the present case, the consumptive gas/gas reaction of PCE to by-products of HCl, CO2, and H2O drives the transfer of PCE into the bubble.
The normal equation for the two-film theory of gas transfer is (Metcalf and Eddy, 1991):
Table 2 gives Henry's Constants (Hc) for a selected number of organic compounds and the second rate constants (Rc) for the ozone radical rate of reaction. The fourth column presents the product of both Hc and Rc (RRC) as a ranking of effectiveness. In actual practice diffusion is rate-limiting, resulting in the most effective removal with PCE (tetrachloroethylene).
TABLE 2 REMOVAL RATE COEFFICIENTS FOR THE MICROBUBBLE/OZONE PROCESS - C-SPARGE Ozone K2 Second order K1 Rate Organic Rate Constanta Henry's Removal Compound (M−1 SEC−1) Constantb Coefficient Benzene 2 5.59 × 10−3 .0110 Toluene 14 6.37 × 10−3 .0890 Chlorobenzene 0.75 3.72 × 10−3 .0028 Trichloroethylene 17 9.10 × 10−3 .1540 Tetrachloroethylene 0.1 2.59 × 10−2 .026 Ethanol .02 4.48 × 10−5 .0000008 Rc · Hc = RRC aFrom Hoigne and Bader, 1983 bFrom EPA 540/1-86/060, Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual
Elimination of the Need for Vapor Extraction
The need for vapor control exists when vapors of VOC's partitioned from the dissolved form into the microbubbles, reach the unsaturated zone, releasing vapors. Without reaction with a decomposing gas, such as ozone, a large mass can be transmitted in a short time, creating potential health problems near residential basement areas.
The combined extraction/decomposition process has the capacity to eliminate the need for vapor capture. If the ozone-mediated decomposition rate exceeds the vertical time-of-travel, vapors will either not be produced or their concentration will be so low as to eliminate the requirement for capture. By controlling the size of microbubbles and matching them to suitable slow rise times, the need for vapor control is eliminated.
The rise time of bubbles of different sizes was computed for water, producing the upwards gravitational velocity (Table 3). The upwards velocity provides the positive pressure to push the bubbles through the porous media, following Darcy's equation. By determining the rise rate in the field, the rise time, proportional to upwards pressure, can be calculated. The bubble size is very important. Once a bubble exceeds the pore cavity size, it is significantly retarded or trapped. Pulsing of the water phase provides a necessary boost to assure steady upwards migration and reduction of coalescence.
TABLE 3 TIME (MINUTES FOR UPWARD UPWARDS MIGRATION BUBBLE VELOCITY (3 METERS) (Coarse DIAMETER IN WATER Sand and Gravel) 10 mm .25 m/s 19 min 2 mm .16 m/s 30 min .2 mm .018 m/s 240 min
Elimination Rate of PCE Relative to Ozone Content
The reaction of ozone with tetrachloroethene (PCE) will produce degradation products of hydrochloric acid, carbon dioxide, and water. By adjusting the ozone concentration to match the dissolved PCE level, the PCE can be removed rapidly without excess ozone release to the air or release of PCE vapor into the unsaturated zone.
Accordingly, the object and purpose of the present disclosure is to provide microporous diffusers for removal of contaminants from soil and associated subsurface ground water aquifer, without applying a vacuum for extraction or relying on biodegradation processes.
Another object of the present disclosure is to provide multi-gas systems to be used in combination with the microporous diffusers to promote an efficient removal of poorly biodegradable organics, particularly dissolved chlorinated solvents, without vacuum extraction.
A further object of the present disclosure is to provide that remediation occurs by destroying organic and hydrocarbon material in place without release of contaminating vapors to the atmosphere.
The instrumentalities will be described for the purposes of illustration only in connection with certain embodiments; however, it is recognized that those persons skilled in the art may make various changes, modifications, improvements and additions on the illustrated embodiments all without departing from the spirit and scope of the present disclosure.
The present instrumentalities are directed to sparging apparatus for injection of an oxidizing gas in the form of small bubbles into aquifer regions to encourage in situ remediation of subsurface leachate plumes. In particular, microporous diffusers inject multi-gas bubbles into aquifer regions to encourage biodegradation of leachate plumes which contain biodegradable organics, or Criegee decomposition of leachate plumes containing dissolved chlorinated hydrocarbons.
In an embodiment, as shown in
Spargepoint® diffusers include several unique configurations as follows:
a. A direct substitute for a well screen comprising 30% porosity, 5-50 micron channel size and resistance to flow from 1 to 3 PSI. This configuration can take high volume flow and needs a selective annular pack (sized to formation). The use of high density polyethylene or polypropylene is light-weight, rugged and inexpensive.
b. A microporous diffuser can be placed on the end of a narrow diameter pipe riser KVA 14-291. This reduces the residence time in the riser volume.
c. A shielded microporous diffuser which is injected with a hand-held or hydraulic vibratory hammer. The microporous material is molded around an internal metal (copper) perforated tubing and attached to an anchor which pulls the Spargepoint® out when the protective insertion shaft is retracted. The unit is connected to the surface with 3/16 or ¼ inch polypropylene tubing with a compression fitting.
d. A thin Spargepoint® with molded tubing can be inserted down a narrow shaft for use with push or vibratory tools with detachable points. The shaft is pushed to the depth desired, then the Spargepoint® is inserted, the shaft is pulled upwards, pulling off the detachable drive point and exposing the Spargepoint®.
e. A microporous diffuser/pump combination placed within a well screen in such a manner that bubble production and pumping is sequenced with a delay to allow separation of large bubbles from the desired fine “champagne” bubbles. The pressure from the pump is allowed to offset the formation back pressure to allow injection of the remaining fine bubbles into the formation.
In the present apparatuses an improvement comprises several new equipment designs associated with the Spargepoint® diffusers. Most important is the submittal for HDPE porous material with well fittings and pass-through design which allows individual pressure and flow control as shown in
Secondly, the push-probe points have been developed for use with pneumatic tools, instead of drilling auger insertion.
Improvements on C-Sparger®/microporous Spargepoint® diffuser. One of the major pass-through Spargepoint® problems in horizontal sparging is the even distribution of air bubbles. If an inlet is attached to the end of a screen, the pressure drops continuously as air is released from the screen. The resulting distribution of flow causes most bubbles to be produced where the connection occurs with flow alternating outwards. The end of the screen produces little or no bubbles.
To allow even distribution of bubbles, either individual Spargepoints® are bundled (spaghetti tube approach) or the Spargepoints® are constructed in a unique way which allows interval tubing connections with flow and pressure control for each Spargepoint® region within the proposed arrangement. Tubing connected to a Spargepoint® passes through the Spargepoint® internally without interfering with the function of producing small bubbles on a smooth external surface. The tubing penetration reduces the internal gas volume of the Spargepoint®, thereby reducing residence time for oxidative gases (important since ozone has a certain half-life before decomposition), and allows three to four Spargepoints® to be operated simultaneously with equal flow and pressure. Each Spargepoint® can also be programmed to pulse on a timed sequencer, saving electrical costs and allowing certain unique vertical and horizontal bubble patterns. Spargepoint® diffusers can be fitted with an F480 thread with internal bypass and compression fittings,
(1) fits standard well screen;
(2) allows individual flow/pressure control;
(3) reduces residence time; and
(4) allows for casing/sparge instead of continuous bubbler.
Use of injectable points configured as molded, 18 Inch×40 inch HDPE molded into ¼ inch pp tubing or HDPE tubing allows a smooth tube to be inserted into a push probe with a detachable point. Use of “Bullet” prepacked Spargepoint® diffusers with a KVA “hefty system” prepacked sand cylinder and bentonite cylinder placed over tubing and porous point is advantageous. Also use of a porous point reinforced with inner metal tube (perforated) to allow strength throughout tubing resists disintegration of plastic during insertion.
Use of pressure/flow headers: Rotameter/mirror: A mirror placed at an angle in a well hole to allow site of a flowmeter reading scale to a point.
It is well recognized that the effectiveness of treatment is dependent upon the uniformity of gas dispersion as it travels through the formation. A porous structure, with appropriate packing, matches the condition of the pores of the soil with thirty percent (30%) pore distribution. The dispersion of bubbles as a fluid can be checked using Darcy's equation.
The use of microporous materials in the Spargepoint® to inject gases into groundwater saturated formations has special advantages for the following reasons:
The most effective range of pore space for the diffuser material selected depends upon the nature of the unconsolidated formation to be injected. The following serves as a general guide:
The surrounding sand pack placed between the Spargepoint® and natural material to fill the zone after drilling and excavation should also be compatible in channel size to reduce coalescing of the produced bubbles.
The permeability range for fluid injection function without fracturing would follow:
Permeability is defined as a measure of the ease of movement of a gas through the soil. The ability of a porous soil to pass any fluid, including gas, depends upon its internal resistance to flow, dictated largely by the forces of attraction, adhesion, cohesion, and viscosity. Because the ratio of surface area to porosity increases as particle size decreases, permeability is often related to particle size see Table 3.
|Cited Patent||Filing date||Publication date||Applicant||Title|
|US1920719||9 Jan 1932||1 Aug 1933||Stich Eugen||Aerating device|
|US2517525||13 Oct 1947||1 Aug 1950||Sun Oil Co||Catalytic reaction apparatus|
|US2845185||5 Oct 1954||29 Jul 1958||Winderweedle Jr Howell W||Shoe hanger|
|US2946446||17 Sep 1958||26 Jul 1960||Permanent Filter Corp||Filtration units|
|US3027009||28 Jan 1959||27 Mar 1962||Permanent Filter Corp||Filtration equipment|
|US3206178||16 Nov 1960||14 Sep 1965||Fmc Corp||Diffuser tube|
|US3219520||21 Oct 1960||23 Nov 1965||Hawley Products Co||Paper making apparatus and aerating device with electrical cleaning means|
|US3276994||9 Mar 1966||4 Oct 1966||Charles W Andrews||Sewage treatment|
|US3441216||16 Nov 1964||29 Apr 1969||Raymond J Good||Air diffuser unit for aerating sewage|
|US3545731 *||8 Nov 1966||8 Dec 1970||Gen Dynamics Corp||Apparatus for producing bubbles of very small,microscopic size|
|US3570218||11 Dec 1968||16 Mar 1971||Universal Oil Prod Co||Electrode configuration in an electrical precipitator|
|US3669276||6 Nov 1970||13 Jun 1972||Wilwood Inc||Shoe display bag and system|
|US3670817 *||5 Nov 1970||20 Jun 1972||Shell Oil Co||Method of gravel-packing a production well borehole|
|US3708206||20 Jul 1970||2 Jan 1973||Union Carbide Corp||Process for leaching base elements, such as uranium ore, in situ|
|US3808123 *||14 Dec 1971||30 Apr 1974||Buford C||Method and apparatus for the treatment of influent waters such as sewage|
|US3814394||17 Nov 1971||4 Jun 1974||M Murray||Apparatus for encapsulating hot gases from high stacks|
|US3823776||26 Apr 1973||16 Jul 1974||Mobil Oil Corp||Oil recovery method by oxidation and forming surfactants in situ|
|US3997447||7 Jun 1974||14 Dec 1976||Composite Sciences, Inc.||Fluid processing apparatus|
|US4007118||16 Oct 1975||8 Feb 1977||Cubic Corporation||Ozone oxidation of waste water|
|US4021347||9 Jan 1976||3 May 1977||Teller Ray E||Sewage treatment system|
|US4048072||23 Oct 1975||13 Sep 1977||Schramm, Inc.||Air diffusers|
|US4049552||17 Nov 1975||20 Sep 1977||Oregon Patent Development Company||Ozone generating system|
|US4064163||30 Dec 1976||20 Dec 1977||Amchem Products, Inc.||Process for the manufacture of aliphatic phosphonic acids|
|US4118447||20 Jun 1977||3 Oct 1978||Xodar Corporation||Aerator containing a ballast charge|
|US4178239||13 Nov 1974||11 Dec 1979||Union Carbide Corporation||Biological intermediate sewage treatment with ozone pretreatment|
|US4203837||16 Dec 1977||20 May 1980||Hoge John H||Process for removal of discrete particulates and solutes from liquids by foam flotation|
|US4268283||31 Dec 1979||19 May 1981||W-K-M Wellhead Systems, Inc.||Fluid control means for geothermal wells|
|US4298467||5 Jun 1980||3 Nov 1981||Panlmatic Company||Water treatment system|
|US4310057||30 May 1980||12 Jan 1982||Brame Durward B||Apparatus for extracting subterranean gas samples|
|US4351810||9 Jul 1981||28 Sep 1982||The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of Commerce||Method for removing sulfur dioxide from a gas stream|
|US4360234||20 Sep 1976||23 Nov 1982||Kennecott Copper Corporation||In-situ method and apparatus for sparging gas bubbles|
|US4614596||10 Jan 1985||30 Sep 1986||Wyness David K||Apparatus and method for dissolving a gas in an aqueous stream|
|US4622139||20 Mar 1985||11 Nov 1986||Brown Charles J||Aerator device|
|US4639314||18 Jan 1985||27 Jan 1987||Tyer Robert R||Fine bubble diffuser and diffuser system having filtered blow-down tube|
|US4684479||14 Aug 1985||4 Aug 1987||Arrigo Joseph S D||Surfactant mixtures, stable gas-in-liquid emulsions, and methods for the production of such emulsions from said mixtures|
|US4695447||17 Dec 1985||22 Sep 1987||Detox International Corporation||Destruction of inorganic hazardous wastes|
|US4696739||11 Aug 1986||29 Sep 1987||Aqua Strip Corporation||Water purification apparatus|
|US4730672||4 Mar 1987||15 Mar 1988||Midwest Water Resource, Inc.||Method of removing and controlling volatile contaminants from the vadose layer of contaminated earth|
|US4780215 *||8 Jun 1987||25 Oct 1988||Carlson Russell L||Water purification device|
|US4804050||30 Apr 1987||14 Feb 1989||K-V Associates, Inc.||Method of underground fluid sampling|
|US4832122||25 Aug 1988||23 May 1989||The United States Of America As Represented By The United States Department Of Energy||In-situ remediation system and method for contaminated groundwater|
|US4837153||22 Aug 1984||6 Jun 1989||Laurenson Jr John G||Compost air injection and evacuation system with improved air control|
|US4838434||17 May 1988||13 Jun 1989||University Of Utah||Air sparged hydrocyclone flotation apparatus and methods for separating particles from a particulate suspension|
|US4844795||13 May 1988||4 Jul 1989||Bassim Halwani||Method and apparatus for decontaminating the aquifer of hydrocarbons|
|US4849114 *||4 Mar 1988||18 Jul 1989||Ultrox International||Oxidation of toxic compounds in water|
|US4883589||17 May 1988||28 Nov 1989||New Jersey Institute Of Technology||System for removing contaminants from ground water|
|US4941957||30 Sep 1988||17 Jul 1990||Ultrox International||Decomposition of volatile ogranic halogenated compounds contained in gases and aqueous solutions|
|US4943305||26 May 1989||24 Jul 1990||Bruno Bernhardt||Aerating apparatus for expelling volatile impurities from ground water|
|US4960706||27 Mar 1989||2 Oct 1990||Baxter International, Inc.||Static oxygenator for suspension culture of animal cells|
|US4966717||10 Feb 1989||30 Oct 1990||Kern Donald W||Ozone injection system and method|
|US4971731||1 Dec 1989||20 Nov 1990||Deister Concentrator Company, Inc.||Method and apparatus for generating microbubbles in froth flotation mineral concentration systems|
|US5006250||4 Dec 1987||9 Apr 1991||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||Pulsing of electron donor and electron acceptor for enhanced biotransformation of chemicals|
|US5078921||12 Jul 1990||7 Jan 1992||The Deister Concentrator Company, Inc.||Froth flotation apparatus|
|US5080805||11 Oct 1988||14 Jan 1992||Helen Houser||Method and apparatus for removing iron from well water|
|US5116163||16 Jan 1991||26 May 1992||Ieg Industrie-Engineering Gmbh||Arrangement for driving out volatile impurities from ground water|
|US5120442||16 May 1991||9 Jun 1992||Dr. Karl Thomae Gmbh||Process for the simultaneous chemical and biological elimination of solid and liquid organic waste|
|US5122165||11 Jun 1991||16 Jun 1992||International Environmental Systems, Inc.||Removal of volatile compounds and surfactants from liquid|
|US5126111||20 May 1991||30 Jun 1992||Nutech Energy Systems Inc.||Fluid purification|
|US5133906||9 Oct 1990||28 Jul 1992||Tony Louis||Aerator|
|US5160655||15 Nov 1991||3 Nov 1992||Lever Brothers Company, Division Of Conopco, Inc.||Aqueous structured liquid detergent compositions containing selected peroxygen bleach compounds|
|US5167806||29 May 1991||1 Dec 1992||International Environmental Systems, Inc.||Gas dissolving and releasing liquid treatment system|
|US5178491||19 Jun 1991||12 Jan 1993||International Technology Corporation||Vapor-phase nutrient delivery system for in situ bioremediation of soil|
|US5178755||20 Feb 1992||12 Jan 1993||Estr Inc.||UV-enhanced ozone wastewater treatment system|
|US5180503||10 May 1991||19 Jan 1993||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||In-situ vapor stripping for removing volatile organic compounds from groundwater|
|US5190648 *||3 Apr 1990||2 Mar 1993||Ramsauer Larry R||Water purifying method and apparatus|
|US5205927||1 Aug 1990||27 Apr 1993||Battelle Memorial Institute||Apparatus for treatment of soils contaminated with organic pollutants|
|US5215680||10 Jul 1990||1 Jun 1993||Cavitation-Control Technology, Inc.||Method for the production of medical-grade lipid-coated microbubbles, paramagnetic labeling of such microbubbles and therapeutic uses of microbubbles|
|US5221159||7 Jun 1991||22 Jun 1993||Environmental Improvement Technologies, Inc.||Subsurface contaminant remediation, biodegradation and extraction methods and apparatuses|
|US5227184||29 May 1992||13 Jul 1993||American Water Purification, Inc.||Method for sanitizing food products|
|US5238437||7 Feb 1992||24 Aug 1993||Mattel, Inc.||Bubble dispensing doll|
|US5246309||16 May 1991||21 Sep 1993||Hobby Michael M||System and method for decontamination of contaminated ground|
|US5248395||26 Dec 1989||28 Sep 1993||Uop||Process for purifying aqueous media|
|US5254253||21 Aug 1992||19 Oct 1993||Zenon Environmental Inc.||Modular shipboard membrane bioreactor system for combined wastewater streams|
|US5259962||31 Aug 1992||9 Nov 1993||Later Roger C||Method and apparatus for decontamination of soils and other particulate materials|
|US5269943||13 Jul 1992||14 Dec 1993||Battelle Memorial Institute||Method for treatment of soils contaminated with organic pollutants|
|US5277518||27 Nov 1991||11 Jan 1994||Environmental Improvement Technologies, Inc.||Contaminant remediation, biodegradation and removel methods and apparatus|
|US5302286||17 Mar 1992||12 Apr 1994||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||Method and apparatus for in situ groundwater remediation|
|US5332333||27 Jan 1993||26 Jul 1994||Bentley Harold W||Vacuum extraction method and apparatus for removing volatile contaminants from the vadose layer of contaminated earth|
|US5348664||28 Oct 1992||20 Sep 1994||Stranco, Inc.||Process for disinfecting water by controlling oxidation/reduction potential|
|US5362400||26 Jun 1991||8 Nov 1994||Paref Ab||Process for the purification of water|
|US5364537||16 Jan 1992||15 Nov 1994||Otv (Omnium De Traitements Et De Valorisation)||Process for the oxidation of organic micropollutants in water using the O3 /H2 O2 combination|
|US5375539||21 Sep 1992||27 Dec 1994||Rippberger; Mark L.||Efficient removal of volatile compounds from soil or water|
|US5389267||18 Dec 1992||14 Feb 1995||The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University||In-situ vapor stripping for removing volatile organic compounds from groundwater|
|US5398757||22 Feb 1994||21 Mar 1995||K N Energy, Inc.||Mono-well for soil sparging and soil vapor extraction|
|US5402848||7 Apr 1994||4 Apr 1995||Kelly; Leo G.||Method and apparatus for conducting environmental procedures|
|US5403476||28 May 1993||4 Apr 1995||Ieg Industrie-Engineering Gmbh||Arrangement for removing impurities from ground water|
|US5406950||23 Dec 1993||18 Apr 1995||Mallinckrodt Medical, Inc.||Inhalable contrast agent|
|US5425598||12 Aug 1993||20 Jun 1995||Pennington; Leslie H.||System for sparging ground water contaminants|
|US5427693||19 Apr 1993||27 Jun 1995||O-Three Limited||Modular ozone water treatment apparatus and associated method|
|US5430228||24 Feb 1993||4 Jul 1995||Hughes Aircraft Company||Ozone methods for the destruction of chemical weapons|
|US5431286||6 Jan 1994||11 Jul 1995||Inco Limited||Recirculating column flotation apparatus|
|US5451320||10 Jul 1990||19 Sep 1995||International Environmental Systems, Inc., Usa||Biological process for groundwater and wastewater treatment|
|US5464309||20 Oct 1994||7 Nov 1995||Xerox Corporation||Dual wall multi-extraction tube recovery well|
|US5472294||10 Jan 1994||5 Dec 1995||Environmental Improvement Technologies, Inc.||Contaminant remediation, biodegradation and volatilization methods and apparatuses|
|US5480549||25 Jan 1994||2 Jan 1996||The United States Of America As Represented By The United States Department Of Energy||Method for phosphate-accelerated bioremediation|
|US5482630||20 Jun 1994||9 Jan 1996||Board Of Regents, The University Of Texas System||Controlled denitrification process and system|
|US5520483||10 Feb 1994||28 May 1996||Vigneri; Ronald J.||Method and system for remediation of groundwater contamination|
|US5525008||11 Jan 1995||11 Jun 1996||Wilson; James T.||Remediation apparatus and method for organic contamination in soil and groundwater|
|US5545330||1 Dec 1994||13 Aug 1996||Amerada Hess Corporation||Water treatment system|
|US5560737||15 Aug 1995||1 Oct 1996||New Jersey Institute Of Technology||Pneumatic fracturing and multicomponent injection enhancement of in situ bioremediation|
|US5588490||31 May 1995||31 Dec 1996||Geraghty & Miller, Inc.||Method and system to achieve two dimensional air sparging|
|US5609798||7 Jun 1995||11 Mar 1997||Msp Corporation||High output PSL aerosol generator|
|US5615974||4 Feb 1994||1 Apr 1997||Terra Vac, Inc.||Process for soil decontamination by oxidation and vacuum extraction|
|US5620593||12 Jun 1996||15 Apr 1997||Stagner; Joseph C.||Multi-stage in-well aerator|
|USRE34890||23 Sep 1993||4 Apr 1995||Gore Enterprise Holdings, Inc.||Waterproof shoe construction|
|JPH07178391A *||Title not available|
|1||Abstract JP 6-238260, Aug. 30, 1994, Karuto.|
|2||Canadian Application No. 2,441,259 Office Action dated Oct. 14, 2009, 7 pages.|
|3||Canadian Patent Application No. 2,351,257, Office Action dated May 1, 2009, 4 pages.|
|4||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc.'s Objections and Answers To Plaintiff's Interrogatories, Mar. 4, 2009, 10 pages.|
|5||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc.'s Objections and Responses To Plaintiff's Requests For Production of Documents and Things, Mar. 4, 2009, 54 pages.|
|6||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc.'s Supplemental Response to Plaintiffs Interrogatories Three and Four, Jul. 6, 2009, 164 pages.|
|7||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc.'s Supplemental Response to Plaintiffs Interrogatory Three, Jun. 25, 2009, 36 pages.|
|8||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, ThinkVillage-Kerfoot, LLC's Objections and Responses To Defendant's First Set of Requests For Production (Nos. 1-98) Apr. 9, 2009, 37 pages.|
|9||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, ThinkVillage-Kerfoot, LLC's Responses To Defendant's Interrogatories (Nos. 1-11) Apr. 9, 2009, 12 pages.|
|10||Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, ThinkVillage-Kerfoot, LLC's Supplemental Responses To Defendant's Interrogatories (Nos. 7 and 8) Jun. 2, 2009, 9 pages.|
|11||European Application No. 05793889.6 Extended European Search Report dated Dec. 15, 2011, 7 pages.|
|12||Makarov , A. M. & Sorokin, S.S., "Heat Exchange of a Bubble Coated with a Liquid Film on the Rear Surface," Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, vol. 30, No. 2, 1994, pp. 78-81.|
|13||PCT/US04/43634 International Search Report mailed May 18, 2005, 1 page.|
|14||PCT/US05/25478, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jan. 23, 2007, 4 pages.|
|15||PCT/US05/25478, International Search Report & Written Opinion, mailed Feb. 15, 2006, 4 pages.|
|16||PCT/USO4/43634 International Preliminary Report on Patentability, Jun. 26, 2006, 5 pages.|
|17||ThinkVillage-Kerfoot LLC v. Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc., Amended Answer and Counterclaims, Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Dec. 15, 2008, 7 pages.|
|18||ThinkVillage-Kerfoot LLC v. Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc., Answer and Counterclaims, Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Dec. 5, 2008, 7 pages.|
|19||ThinkVillage-Kerfoot LLC v. Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc., Complaint for Patent Infringement, US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Oct. 7, 2008, 5 pages.|
|20||ThinkVillage-Kerfoot LLC v. Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc., Plaintiff's Response to Defendant Groundwater & Environmental Services, Inc.'s Amended Counterclaims, Civil Action No. 1:08-cv-11711-GAO, Dec. 30, 2008, 5 pages.|
|21||U.S. Appl. No. 09/470,167 (U.S. 6,436,285) Selected pages from File History dated Aug. 23, 2002 through Mar. 29, 2001, 38 pages.|
|22||U.S. Appl. No. 09/860,659, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Aug. 13, 2002 through Aug. 23, 2004, 68 pages.|
|23||U.S. Appl. No. 09/943,111, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jan. 30, 2003 through Feb. 19, 2005, 47 pages.|
|24||U.S. Appl. No. 09/993,152, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Sep. 4, 2007 through Mar. 10, 2009, 59 pages.|
|25||U.S. Appl. No. 10/223,166 (U.S. 6,596,161) Selected pages from File History dated Nov. 6, 2002 through Jul. 22, 2003, 22 pages.|
|26||U.S. Appl. No. 10/354,584 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jul. 30, 2003 through Jul. 6, 2004, 32 pages.|
|27||U.S. Appl. No. 10/365,027, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Apr. 16, 2004 through May 2, 2005, 53 pages.|
|28||U.S. Appl. No. 10/602,256, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jan. 11, 2005 through Dec. 12, 2002, 33 pages.|
|29||U.S. Appl. No. 10/745,939, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jun. 22, 2006 through Jul. 22, 2008, 110 pages.|
|30||U.S. Appl. No. 10/794,994 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jul. 6, 2006 through Apr. 18, 2007,48 pages.|
|31||U.S. Appl. No. 10/895,015, Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jul. 14, 2006 through Feb. 9, 2009, 102 pages.|
|32||U.S. Appl. No. 10/910,441 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Dec. 1, 2004 through Sep. 12, 2005, 36 pages.|
|33||U.S. Appl. No. 10/916,863 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Dec. 28, 2006 through Oct. 8, 2008, 39 pages.|
|34||U.S. Appl. No. 10/963,353 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Aug. 23, 2005 through Dec. 13, 2006, 46 pages.|
|35||U.S. Appl. No. 10/963,361 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jul. 19, 2005 through Nov. 7, 2007, 99 pages.|
|36||U.S. Appl. No. 10/994,960 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Mar. 11, 2005 through Dec. 2, 2005, 36 pages.|
|37||U.S. Appl. No. 10/997,452 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jun. 27, 2007 through Mar. 23, 2009, 144 pages.|
|38||U.S. Appl. No. 11/145,871 , Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 9, 2009, 7 pages.|
|39||U.S. Appl. No. 11/145,871 Response to Office Action filed Jun. 18, 2009.|
|40||U.S. Appl. No. 11/145,871 selected pages from Image File Wrapper, Jun. 12, 2007 through Jun. 27, 2008, 82 pages.|
|41||U.S. Appl. No. 11/145,871, Office Action mailed Mar. 18, 2009, 16 pages.|
|42||U.S. Appl. No. 11/145,871, Response to Office Action filed Dec. 16, 2008, 12 pages.|
|43||U.S. Appl. No. 11/146,722 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jun. 7, 2005 through Sep. 18, 2006, 70 pages.|
|44||U.S. Appl. No. 11/272,446 Selected pages from File History dated Jan. 22, 2008 through May 1, 2009, 60 pages.|
|45||U.S. Appl. No. 11/328,475 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jun. 30, 2006 through Aug. 15, 2007, 45 pages.|
|46||U.S. Appl. No. 11/409,892 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Jul. 31, 2006 through May 21, 2009, 94 pages.|
|47||U.S. Appl. No. 11/409,892, Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 1, 2009,5 pages.|
|48||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,080 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated May 11, 2007 through Jan. 9, 2009, 83 pages.|
|49||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,080, Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 9, 2009, 4 pages.|
|50||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,080, Response to Office Action filed May 8, 2009, 4 pages.|
|51||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,223 Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 2, 2009, 7 pages.|
|52||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,223 Office Action mailed Jun. 15, 2009, 8 pages.|
|53||U.S. Appl. No. 11/485,223 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Feb. 26, 2008 through Mar. 11, 2009, 36 pages.|
|54||U.S. Appl. No. 11/594,019 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Apr. 25, 2007 through Oct. 29, 2008, 45 pages.|
|55||U.S. Appl. No. 11/849,413 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Sep. 4, 2007 through Mar. 10, 2009, 94 pages.|
|56||U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,467 Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 2, 2009, 8 pages.|
|57||U.S. Appl. No. 12/177,467 Selected pages from Image File Wrapper dated Dec. 29, 2008 through Jun. 12, 2009, 20 pages.|
|58||U.S. Appl. No. 12/254,359, Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 1, 2009, 7 pages.|
|59||U.S. Appl. No. 12/254,359, Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 6, 2009, 4 pages.|
|60||U.S. Appl. No. 12/259,051 Notice of Allowance dated Aug. 24, 2009, 7 pages.|
|61||U.S. Appl. No. 12/259,051, Office Action dated Mar. 24, 2009, 6 pages.|
|62||U.S. Appl. No. 12/259,051, Response to Office Action filed Jun. 23, 2009, 8 pages.|
|63||U.S. Appl. No. 12/272,462 Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 21, 2009, 8 pages.|
|64||U.S. Appl. No. 12/272,462, Response to Restriction Requirement filed Jul. 2, 2009, 12 pages.|
|65||U.S. Appl. No. 12/272,462, Restriction Requirement mailed Jun. 2, 2009, 5 pages.|
|66||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048 Office Action dated Jan. 13, 2010 , 18 pages.|
|67||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Advisory Action mailed Jun. 27, 2011, 4 pages.|
|68||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Office Action mailed Jul. 12, 2010, 19 pages.|
|69||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Office Action mailed Oct. 7, 2010, 21 pages.|
|70||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Response to Office Action filed Apr. 13, 2010, 20 pages.|
|71||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Response to Office Action filed Jan. 7, 2011, 10 pages.|
|72||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Response to Office Action filed May 31, 2011, 6 pages.|
|73||U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,048, Response to Office Action filed Sep. 10, 2010, 13 pages.|
|74||U.S. Appl. No.12/483,048, Office Action mailed Mar. 30, 2011, 18 pages.|
|75||Wilkins (ed.) et al. "Workshop on Monitoring Oxidation-Reduction Processes for Ground-water Restoration," EPA, (2000), 148 pages.|
|U.S. Classification||210/741, 210/760, 210/198.1, 210/908, 210/758, 210/170.07, 210/747.7, 405/128.75|
|International Classification||B09B3/00, C02F1/78|
|Cooperative Classification||C02F2103/06, B09C1/00, C02F1/78, B09C1/10, B09C1/08, B09C1/002|
|European Classification||B09C1/08, B09C1/00B, C02F1/78, B09C1/00, B09C1/10|
|21 Feb 2013||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: KERFOOT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MASSACHUSETTS
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:KERFOOT, WILLIAM B.;REEL/FRAME:029849/0615
Effective date: 20090306
Owner name: THINKVILLAGE-KERFOOT, LLC, COLORADO
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:KERFOOT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;REEL/FRAME:029849/0751
Effective date: 20090306
|12 Jun 2013||FPAY||Fee payment|
Year of fee payment: 4
|5 Jun 2015||AS||Assignment|
Owner name: KERFOOT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., MASSACHUSETTS
Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:THINKVILLAGE-KERFOOT, LLC;REEL/FRAME:035834/0089
Effective date: 20150423