DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaseda et al. US 2018/0001253 (hereafter Kaseda) and further in view of Nagayasu et al. US 2015/0139861 (hereafter Nagayasu), Jamtvedt et al. US 2014/0123851 (hereafter Jamtvedt), “Demister Pads/Mist Eliminators” Haver Standard brochure published 16 Nov. 2017 accessed at <https://haverstandard.com/assets/images/Download/Demister-Brochure.pdf> (hereafter Haver), Abdullah et al. “Investigating pressure drop across wire mesh mist eliminators in bubble column” Journal of Saudi Chemical Society (2011) 15, 1–9 (hereafter Abdullah), El-Dessouky et al. “New material for the wire mesh demister” published 22 Jan. 2016 (hereafter Dessouky), Fujita et al. US 2016/0151742 (hereafter Fujita).
Regarding claim 11, Kaseda teaches a method of operating a carbon dioxide capture system (Fig 1), comprising:
causing a carbon dioxide contained in a combustion exhaust gas (2) to be absorbed into an absorbing liquid containing an amine (¶20) in a carbon dioxide capturer (21);
washing the combustion exhaust gas from the carbon dioxide capturer with a mist of a first cleaning liquid (11) sprayed by a sprayer (62) in a first washer (60) to capture the amine contained in the combustion exhaust gas (¶34-36);
washing the combustion exhaust gas from the first washer with a second cleaning liquid (12) diffused and dropped by a cleaning liquid diffuser (72) in a second washer (70) to capture the amine contained in the combustion exhaust gas (¶39-40);
capturing, in a cleaning liquid mist capturer (92), the mist of the first cleaning liquid contained in the combustion exhaust gas from the first washer (¶43), and
trapping, in a washer exit demister (93), the amine contained in the combustion exhaust gas from the cleaning liquid mist capturer (¶43),
wherein the first washer has a receiver (63) arranged below the sprayer and configured to receive the mist of the first cleaning liquid, and a washing-capturing space (space of 61) arranged between the sprayer and the receiver, in the washing-capturing space the mist of the first cleaning liquid comes into gas-liquid contact with the combustion exhaust gas (¶34), and
wherein the cleaning liquid mist capturer includes a mist capture demister (92),
Kaseda does not teach:
in the washing-capturing space the mist of the first cleaning liquid comes into gas-liquid contact with the combustion exhaust gas while freely dropping
wherein the washing-capturing space is free of a structure in which the first cleaning liquid flows down on a surface of the structure,
wherein a porosity of the mist capture demister is larger than a porosity of the washer exit demister such that pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas passing through the mist capture demister is lower than pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas in the washer exit demister,
wherein the washer exit demister is adjacent to the mist capture demister, and
wherein a pressure of the first cleaning liquid supplied to the sprayer of the first washer is higher than a pressure of the second cleaning liquid supplied to the cleaning liquid diffuser of the second washer.
Nagayasu teaches a carbon dioxide capture system (Fig 1) comprising
capturing, in a cleaning liquid mist capturer (37), the mist of the first cleaning liquid (63) contained in the combustion exhaust gas from the first washer (washer comprising 62A; ¶47),
trapping, in a washer exit demister (36), the amine contained in the combustion exhaust gas from the cleaning liquid mist capturer (¶97),
wherein a porosity of the mist capture demister is larger than a porosity of the washer exit demister such that pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas passing through the mist capture demister is lower than pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas in the washer exit demister (¶96-97, where the large particle diameter collection of mist capturer 37 corresponds to a large porosity and the fine mist collection of demister 36 corresponds to a smaller porosity), and
wherein the washer exit demister is adjacent to the mist capture demister (¶96-97, as shown in Fig 1).
Nagayasu teaches where the system allows reduces the concentration of amine by collecting the mist (¶98).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kaseda (Fig 1) by incorporating the cleaning liquid mist capturer (Kaseda 93; Nagayasu 37) and the washer exit demister (Nagayasu 36) in order to reduce the concentration of amine by collecting the mist (Nagayasu ¶98). Further, the porosity of the mist capture demister being larger than the porosity of the washer exit demister allows larger particles to be collected before reaching the fine particle collector (¶96-98).
Haver teaches demisters (page 3) where pressure drop and efficiency are two variables that are inversely proportional (page 6, Design and Engineering Data).
Abdullah teaches demisters (page 3) where pressure drop and efficiency are two variables that are inversely proportional (page 3 last paragraph of Introduction).
Abdullah teaches where porosity and pressure drop are two variables that are proportional (page 3 equation 4).
Dessouky teaches a demister (page 1) wherein the porosity affects the pressure drop (page 4, first partial paragraph).
MPEP §2144.05 II A-B states that where the prior art recognized a variable to affect a result, a prima facie case of obviousness exists to optimize the variable.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the porosities of the mist capture and washer exit demisters, such that a porosity of the mist capture demister is larger than a porosity of the washer exit demister, as a matter of obvious optimization.
The modification would have resulted in wherein a porosity of the mist capture demister is larger than a porosity of the washer exit demister such that pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas passing through the mist capture demister is lower than pressure loss generated in a flow of the combustion exhaust gas in the washer exit demister.
Jamtvedt teaches a gas-liquid contactor which may optionally comprise a packing (¶27).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first washer (60) of Kaseda by substituting the no packing (¶27) of Jamtvedt as a matter of obvious substituting art recognized equivalents know for the same purpose (MPEP §2144.06 II).
The modification would have resulted in wherein the washing-capturing space is free of a structure in which the first cleaning liquid flows down on a surface of the structure.
Fujita teaches a method of operating a carbon dioxide system (abstract) wherein a pressure of the first cleaning liquid (11) supplied to the sprayer (21b) of the first washer (21) is higher than a pressure of the second cleaning liquid (12) supplied to the cleaning liquid diffuser (22b) of the second washer (22) in order to cool the liquid and reduce steam pressure and control water content (¶56-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first washer (60) of Kaseda by substituting the no packing (¶27) of Jamtvedt as a matter of obvious substituting art recognized equivalents know for the same purpose (MPEP §2144.06 II).
Response to Arguments
The following is a response to Applicant’s arguments filed 27 Apr. 2026:
Applicant argues that Kaseda in view of Nagayasu, Jamtvedt, Haver, Abdullah, and Dessouky does not teach all the limitation of amended claim 11.
Examiner agrees and the rejection is withdrawn. However, upon further search and/or consideration, claim 11 is unpatentable in view of Kaseda in view of Nagayasu, Jamtvedt, Haver, Abdullah, Dessouky, and Fujita.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN HOBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9914. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
/STEPHEN HOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1776
Prosecution Insights