DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Claim 25 is allowable. Claims 43-48, previously withdrawn from consideration as a result of a restriction requirement, require all the limitations of an allowable claim. Pursuant to the procedures set forth in MPEP § 821.04(a), the restriction requirement between inventions I, II, III and IV, as set forth in the Office action mailed on 22 February 2022, is hereby withdrawn and claims 43-48 are hereby rejoined and fully examined for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104. In view of the withdrawal of the restriction requirement, applicant(s) are advised that if any claim presented in a divisional application is anticipated by, or includes all the limitations of, a claim that is allowable in the present application, such claim may be subject to provisional statutory and/or nonstatutory double patenting rejections over the claims of the instant application. Once the restriction requirement is withdrawn, the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 121 are no longer applicable. See In re Ziegler, 443 F.2d 1211, 1215, 170 USPQ 129, 131-32 (CCPA 1971). See also MPEP § 804.01.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. There does not appear to be support for a second gas feed conduit.
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 30 and 44-48 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.
As to claim 30, the claim recites the limitation “the second gas feed conduit”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. As discussed above, this limitation also lacks support and it is further unclear as to how the apparatus would function with a second gas feed conduit.
As to claim 44, the claim introduces the limitations of “catholyte”, “anolyte”, “reaction gas” and “product gases”. However, claim 25, fully incorporated into claim 43 upon which claim 44 is dependent, already introduces the limitations of “catholyte”, “anolyte”, “carbon dioxide” (as reaction gas) and “gaseous reaction products”. Therefore, it is unclear as to if these new limitations intend to refer back to the earlier limitations or to new and separate limitations.
Further as to claim 44, the claim recites that the collectors and distributors “connect the feed conduits and discharge conduits”. However, this reads on an embodiment wherein each of the connectors and distributors connects all of the feed and discharge conduits, and it is unclear as to how that would be possible.
As to claim 45, the claim introduces the limitations of “ion exchange membrane” and “cathode” at lines 6-7. However, these limitations have previously been introduced (cathode in claim 25 and ion exchange membrane in claim 45 at line 4). Therefore, it is unclear as to if these new limitations intend to refer back to the earlier limitations or to new and separate limitations.
As to claim 46, the claim introduces the limitations of “diaphragm” and “cathode” at line 6. However, these limitations have previously been introduced (cathode in claim 25 and diaphragm in claim 46 at line 4). Therefore, it is unclear as to if these new limitations intend to refer back to the earlier limitations or to new and separate limitations.
As to claim 47, the claim recites that the velocity is “0.001 to 15 mis”. It is unclear as to what unit “mis” is.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 25, 26, 28, 29, 31-43 and 49 are allowed.
Claims 30 and 44-47 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The primary reason for the allowance of the claims, as successfully argued by Applicant, is the inclusion of, in a carbon dioxide containing cell as configured, a cathode vertical main extension of at least 30cm in combination with a cathode to rear wall spacing of not more than 5 cm configured specifically to achieve a carbon dioxide gas velocity of 0.001 to 15 m/s. The prior art fails to teach a 5 cm or less cathode to rear wall spacing in a carbon dioxide apparatus as claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 23 February 2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejections presented in the Office Action of 25 September 2025 have been withdrawn.
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 CIEL P Contreras whose telephone number is (571)270-7946. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM to 4 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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/CIEL P CONTRERAS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794