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 .
Response to Amendments
This is a final office action in response to applicant's arguments and remarks filed on
12/23/2025.
Status of Rejections
The previous rejection is withdrawn in view of the of the Applicant’s amendments.
New grounds of rejection are necessitated by the Applicant’s amendments.
Claims 1-19 and 22-23 are pending and under consideration for this Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 8, 10-17, 19, and 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa et all (US 2018/0274113 A1) in view of Ballantine et al (US 2021/0156039 A1), Ono et al (US 2020/0002823 A1), and Davidson (US 2008/0296172 A1).
Claim 1: Kitagawa discloses a carbon dioxide electrolytic device (see e.g. [0002] and [0020] of Kitagawa), comprising:
an electrolysis cell (see e.g. #10 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa) including
a first accommodation part for accommodating at least carbon dioxide (see e.g. #15 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa),
a second accommodation part for accommodating an electrolytic solution containing water, or water vapor and a hydrogen carbonate or carbon dioxide (see e.g. #16 on Fig 1, [0018], and [0034] of Kitagawa),
a diaphragm provided between the first accommodation part and the second accommodation part (see e.g. #14 on Fig 2 and [0021] of Kitagawa),
a reduction electrode arranged in the first accommodation part (see e.g. #11 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa), and
an oxidation electrode arranged in the second accommodation part (see e.g. #12 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa),
a first power supply for a normal operation which supplies power to the electrolysis cell (see e.g. #70 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa), which is a variable power supply using renewable energy (see e.g. [0023] of Kitagawa).
Kitagawa does not explicitly teach the following:
a second power supply to supply a second power for a warm-up operating to the electrolysis cell, the second power being smaller than the first power;
a first power supply control unit connected to the first power supply and the electrolysis cell;
a second power supply control unit connected to the second power supply and the electrolysis cell; and
an integration control unit configured to control the first power supply control unit
and the second power supply control unit, and to switch the supply of power from the first power supply or the second power supply to the electrolysis cell,
wherein the integration control unit is configured to switch the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply.
Ballantine teaches an electrolysis system comprising
a first power supply control unit (portion of the switchgear module designed to protect the individual power supplies, see e.g. [0018] of Ballantine. “The switchgear module 110 may include any one or more of a transformer, a circuit breaker, a switch, or other hardware useful for interrupting power to each power supply 106”) connected to the first power supply for a normal operation which supplies power to the electrolysis cell (see e.g. #106 on Fig 1A and 1B and [0029] of Ballantine);
a second power supply for a warm-up operation to the electrolysis cell (“auxiliary power source”, see e.g. #126 on Fig 1A and 1B and [0055] of Ballantine) the second power supply being smaller than the first power (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine);
a second power supply control unit (bus, see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine) connected to the second power supply for a warm-up operation to the electrolysis cell (see e.g. #106 on Fig 1A and 1B and [0055] of Ballantine) the second power supply being smaller than the first power (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine); and
an integration control unit configured to control the first power supply control unit
and the second power supply control unit (see e.g. #142 on Fig 1A and 1B and [0042] of Ballantine), and to switch the supply of power from the first power supply or the second power supply to the electrolysis cell (see e.g. [0031] and [0060] of Ballantine),
wherein the integration control unit is configured to switch the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply when the first power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine. “The auxiliary power source 123 may provide power to the electrolyzer 108 during start - up, shut - down, and / or stand - by modes. Further, or instead, the auxiliary power source 123 may provide power to the electrolyzer 108 in instances in which the power source 120 becomes interrupted, with the auxiliary power source 123 sized to allow for safe shut down in some cases or sized to allow for sustained operation of the electrolyzer in other cases”).
The first and second power supplies and their corresponding control units and integration control units allows the electrolytic cells of Ballantine enables the system to have power “during start-up, shut-down, and / or stand-by modes. Further, or instead, the auxiliary power source 123 may provide power to the electrolyzer 108 in instances in which the power source 120 becomes interrupted, with the auxiliary power source 123 sized to allow for safe shut down in some cases or sized to allow for sustained operation of the electrolyzer in other cases” (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine). The start/warm up procedure using the auxiliary power source allows for a ramping up process that can be controlled based on safety and component health (see e.g. [0056] of Ballantine). Additionally, the dual power supply system can enable a night-time mode, which can advantageously “reduce the number of start-stop cycles for the electrolyzer that may otherwise degrade performance of the electrolyzer” (see e.g. [0060] of Ballantine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitigawa to include the missing limitations listed above and taught in Ballantine.
Kitigawa in view of Ballantine does not explicitly teach the integration control unit is configured to switch the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply when it is predicted that the first power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time, based on operating conditions of the first power supply. As shown above, Ballantine teaches swapping to the auxiliary power source during shut-down operations. Ono teaches an electrolyzer for carbon dioxide electrolysis (see e.g. abstract of Ono) comprising an integration control unit (electrolytic regulator, see e.g. #502 on Fig 1 of Ono) which controls the power systems (the system is swapped to a refresh mode, see e.g. [0063] of Ono) based on predictions that the first power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time (see e.g. [0061] of Ono), based on operating conditions of the first power supply (see e.g. [0061] and [0090] of Ono). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitigawa in view of Ballantine so that the controller is configured to control the power supplies when it is predicted that the first power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time, based on operating conditions of the first power supply as taught in Ono because predicting the reduction of voltage in the cell allows issues with the cell to be corrected earlier. The refresh mode of Ono turns shuts down the cell (see e.g. #S201 on Fig 13). Therefore, Kitigawa in view of Ballantine and Ono would swap the auxiliary power supply during the shut down of the refresh mode based on the disclosure of Ballantine.
Kitigawa does not explicitly teach a first cooling water flow path adjacent to the first accommodation part and through which a cooling water flows and a second cooling water flow path adjacent to the second accommodation part and through which the cooling water flows, each of the first and second cooling water flow paths different from the first and the second accommodation parts, the first cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the first accommodation part therebetween, and the second cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the second accommodation part therebetween, the cooling water being different from the electrolytic solution, wherein a cooling water supply unit configured to supply the cooling water to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling flow path; a cooling water control unit configured to control an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path.
Kitagawa does teach that the cell has a controlled temperature (“The electrochemical reaction cell 10 is preferably operated under a pressurized state or under a temperature adjusted state to enable high - efficiency electrochemical reaction cell 10”, see e.g. [0023]). Davidson teaches a device for cooling an electrolytic cell (see e.g. [0011]) wherein there is a first cooling water flow path adjacent to the first accommodation part and through which a cooling water flows and a second cooling water flow path adjacent to the second accommodation part and through which the cooling water flows (see e.g. the multiple #133 on Fig 1), each of the first and second cooling water flow paths different from the first and the second accommodation parts (see e.g. [0011]), the first cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the first accommodation part therebetween, and the second cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the second accommodation part therebetween (see e.g. #105 on Fig 1), the cooling water being different from the electrolytic solution (see e.g. [0035]: “Within coolant conduit 133 is a heat transfer medium, for example water”), wherein a cooling water supply unit configured to supply the cooling water to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling flow path (see e.g. [0035]); a cooling water control unit configured to control an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path (see e.g. [0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device of Kitagawa to incorporate the cooling system of Davidson because this system is suitable for controlling the temperature within the electrolytic cell.
As discussed above, Kitagawa in view of Ballantine teaches having start up, shut-down, and stand-by modes. During periods of start-up, the amount of power being delivered to the cell is different than during normal operation. Additionally, Kitagawa discloses controlling the temperature within the cell. A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention would recognize that the temperature of the cell is directly tied to the amount power being delivered to the cell.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the amount of water needed to cool the cell would also be directly tied to the amount power being delivered to the cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to configure the integration control unit to control the cooling water control unit so that an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path in a period when the second power is supplied to the electrolysis cell is smaller than an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path in a period when the first power is supplied to the electrolysis cell.
Claim 5: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that the first power supply comprises a variable power supply which converts one renewable energy like light energy and supplies the electric energy (see e.g. [0057[ of Kitagawa).
Claim 6: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that the second power supply comprises an electric power system (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine).
Claim 8: Kitagawa does not explicitly teach that an electrochemical reaction cell, which is different from the electrolysis cell, connected to the first power supply control unit.
Ballantine teaches a modular system having a plurality of electrolyzers (see e.g. [0004] of Ballantine), enabling the system to generate a variable amount of product based on costs (see e.g. [0016] of Ballantine). To support each electrolyzer, the first power supply can be connected to an additional cell (doing an elelectrochemcial cell, see e.g. [0029] of Ballantine) to provide redundancies between the cells to maintain power (see e.g. [0015] and [0019] of Ballantine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device to include the modular design taught in Ballantine to generate a variable amount of product based on costs and provide redundancies to maintain cell operation.
Claim 10: Kitagawa discloses a method of electrolyzing carbon dioxide (see e.g. [0002] and [0020] of Kitagawa), comprising:
performing a normal operation in which power is supplied from a first power supply to an electrolysis cell (see e.g. #70 on Fig 1 and [0020] of Kitagawa) including
a first accommodation part for accommodating at least carbon dioxide (see e.g. #15 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa),
a second accommodation part for accommodating an electrolytic solution containing water, or water vapor and a hydrogen carbonate or carbon dioxide (see e.g. #16 on Fig 1, [0018], and [0034] of Kitagawa),
a diaphragm provided between the first accommodation part and the second accommodation part (see e.g. #14 on Fig 2 and [0021] of Kitagawa),
a reduction electrode arranged in the first accommodation part (see e.g. #11 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa), and
an oxidation electrode arranged in the second accommodation part (see e.g. #12 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa); and
wherein the first power supply is a variable power supply using renewable energy (see e.g. [0023] of Kitagawa).
Kitagawa does not explicitly teach performing, when the power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time, or when it is predicted to be lower than the predetermined value for the predetermined period of time, based on operating conditions of the first power supply, a warm-up operation by switching the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply.
Ballantine teaches an electrolysis system and method comprising two power supplies, wherein when the power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time, based on operating conditions of the first power supply, a warm-up operation by switching the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply (see e.g. [0031] and [0055] of Ballantine). These steps allow the cell to be safely shut down or maintain power if the first power supply becomes interrupted (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the method of Kitigawa to include the step of performing, when the power supplied from the first power supply to the electrolysis cell is lower than a predetermined value for a predetermined period of time, or when it is predicted to be lower than the predetermined value for the predetermined period of time, a warm-up operation by switching the supply of power to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply to the second power supply as taught in Ballantine to ensure the cells can be safely shut down or maintain operation.
Kitigawa does not explicitly teach a first cooling water flow path adjacent to the first accommodation part and through which a cooling water flows and a second cooling water flow path adjacent to the second accommodation part and through which the cooling water flows, each of the first and second cooling water flow paths different from the first and the second accommodation parts, the first cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the first accommodation part therebetween, and the second cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the second accommodation part therebetween, the cooling water being different from the electrolytic solution, wherein a cooling water supply unit configured to supply the cooling water to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling flow path; a cooling water control unit configured to control an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path.
Kitagawa does teach that the cell has a controlled temperature (“The electrochemical reaction cell 10 is preferably operated under a pressurized state or under a temperature adjusted state to enable high - efficiency electrochemical reaction cell 10”, see e.g. [0023]). Davidson teaches a device for cooling an electrolytic cell (see e.g. [0011]) wherein there is a first cooling water flow path adjacent to the first accommodation part and through which a cooling water flows and a second cooling water flow path adjacent to the second accommodation part and through which the cooling water flows (see e.g. the multiple #133 on Fig 1), each of the first and second cooling water flow paths different from the first and the second accommodation parts (see e.g. [0011]), the first cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the first accommodation part therebetween, and the second cooling water flow path being opposite the diaphragm with the second accommodation part therebetween (see e.g. #105 on Fig 1), the cooling water being different from the electrolytic solution (see e.g. [0035]: “Within coolant conduit 133 is a heat transfer medium, for example water”), wherein a cooling water supply unit configured to supply the cooling water to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling flow path (see e.g. [0035]); a cooling water control unit configured to control an amount of the cooling water to be supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path (see e.g. [0035]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device of Kitagawa to incorporate the cooling system of Davidson because this system is suitable for controlling the temperature within the electrolytic cell.
As discussed above, Kitagawa in view of Ballantine teaches having start up, shut-down, and stand-by modes. During periods of start-up, the amount of power being delivered to the cell is different than during normal operation. Additionally, Kitagawa discloses controlling the temperature within the cell. A person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention would recognize that the temperature of the cell is directly tied to the amount power being delivered to the cell.
Additionally, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention that the amount of water needed to cool the cell would also be directly tied to the amount power being delivered to the cell. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the method so that an amount of the cooling water supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path in a period when the second power is supplied to the electrolysis cell is controlled to be smaller than an amount of the cooling water supplied to the first cooling water flow path and the second cooling water flow path in a period when the first power is supplied to the electrolysis cell.
Claim 11: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that in the warm-up operation, a current smaller than a current supplied from the first power supply, is supplied to the electrolysis cell from the second power supply (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine: “The auxiliary power source 123 may provide power to the electrolyzer 108 during start-up, shut-down , and / or stand-by modes . Further, or instead, the auxiliary power source 123 may provide power to the electrolyzer 108 in instances in which the power source 120 becomes interrupted, with the auxiliary power source 123 sized to allow for safe shut down in some cases or sized to allow for sustained operation of the electrolyzer in other cases”).
Claim 12: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that in the warm-up operation, when a state in which a current or a voltage flowing through the electrolysis cell is greater than a predetermined value is predicted to continue for a predetermined period of time, the current flowing through the electrolysis cell is increased from a zero-state to a predetermined current by the second power supply (the cells are ramped up to an operating setpoint, see e.g. Fig 2A and Fig 2B of Ballantine).
Claim 13: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that when performing the warm-up operation, an amount of carbon dioxide to be supplied to the electrolysis cell is controlled in accordance with an amount of power to be supplied from the second power supply to the electrolysis cell (the method of Ballantine controls the flow of reactant into the cell based on the mode the cells are in, see e.g. [0056], [0060], and Fig 2A of Ballantine).
Claim 14: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that when performing the warm-up operation, a product discharged from the first accommodation part of the electrolysis cell is discarded (see e.g. [0055] of Ballantine).
Claim 15: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that when performing the warm-up operation, the first power supply is disconnected from the electrolysis cell (the auxiliary power supply provides power for warm-up operations, see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine),
Kitagawa does not explicitly teach that the first power supply is connected to an electrochemical reaction cell, which is different from the electrolysis cell. Ballantine teaches a modular system having a plurality of electrolyzers (see e.g. [0004] of Ballantine), enabling the system to generate a variable amount of product based on costs (see e.g. [0016] of Ballantine). To support each electrolyzer, the first power supply can be connected to an additional cell (doing an elelectrochemcial cell, see e.g. [0029] of Ballantine) to provide redundancies between the cells to maintain power (see e.g. [0015] and [0019] of Ballantine). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device to include the modular design taught in Ballantine to generate a variable amount of product based on costs and provide redundancies to maintain cell operation.
Claim 16: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson discloses the first power supply comprises a variable power supply which converts one renewable energy like light energy and supplies the electric energy (see e.g. [0057[ of Kitagawa).
Claim 17: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that the second power supply includes a storage battery, a fuel cell, or an electric power system (see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine).
Claim 19: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson discloses a current supplied to the electrolysis cell from the second power supply in the warm-up operation is smaller than a current supplied to the electrolysis cell from the first power supply in the normal operation (the auxiliary power supply operates in stand-by mode, see e.g. [0031] of Ballantine).
Claim 22: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that the first cooling water flow path has a first plurality of sections, and the second cooling water flow path has a second plurality of sections arranged corresponding to the first plurality of sections (see e.g. #133 on Fig 1 of Davidson).
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kitagawa et al (US 2020/0087803 A1, referred to as Motoshige herein).
Claim 2: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson does not explicitly teach the following:
a detection unit configured to detect a reaction amount in the electrolysis cell; and
a gas control unit configured to control an amount of carbon dioxide to be supplied to the electrolysis cell based on a detection signal of the detection unit.
Motoshige discloses an electrolytic device for the reduction of carbon dioxide (see e.g. abstract of Motoshige), which includes a detection unit configured to detect a reaction amount in the electrolysis cell (“reaction product detector”, see e.g. [0014] of Motoshige); and a gas control unit (“pressure regulator”, see e.g. [0014] of Motoshige) configured to control an amount of carbon dioxide to be supplied to the electrolysis cell based on a detection signal of the detection unit (see e.g. [0014] of Motoshige). This system allows the controller to “suppress the successive fluctuations in production amount and composition of the reduction reaction product of CO2 due to the change in the applied voltage to the reduction electrode to thereby enhance the avail ability and utility value of the reduction reaction product” (see e.g. [0053] of Motoshige). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitagawa to incorporate the detection unit and the gas control unit taught in Motoshige so that the flow of carbon dioxide is controlled by the detection signal to suppress the successive fluctuations in production amount and composition of the reduction reaction product of CO2 due to the change in the applied voltage to the reduction electrode to thereby enhance the avail ability and utility value of the reduction reaction product.
Claim 3: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, Davidson, and Motoshige teaches that the detection unit is configured to detect at least either of a current and a voltage of the electrolysis cell (see e.g. [0046] of Motoshige).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Matsumoto et al (US 2021/0002775 A1)
Claim 4: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches an electrolytic solution supply unit configured to supply the electrolytic solution to the electrolysis cell (see e.g. [0021] of Kitagawa).
Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Sano does not explicitly teach an electrolytic solution control unit configured to control an amount of the electrolytic solution to be supplied to the electrolysis cell.
As stated above, the water and electrolytic solution are provided to the cell. However, Kitagawa does not provide specifics on how this achieved. Matsumoto discloses a carbon dioxide reaction device (see e.g. abstract of Matsumoto) comprising separate control units for the water and electrolytic solution (see e.g. #27 and #28 on Fig 1 of Matsumoto), which control the supply the solutions (see e.g. [0042] of Matsumoto). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitagawa to include the electrolytic solution control unit because Matsumoto teaches that these are suitable devices for controlling the electrolytic solution to electrolytic cells using carbon dioxide.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of McElroy et al (US 2003/0196893 A1).
Claim 7: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson teaches that the electrolysis cell includes
a discharge flow path discharging a product from the first accommodation part (see e.g. path leading from #15 to #30 on Fig 1 of Kitagawa).
Kitagawa in view of Ballantine does not explicitly teach that the discharge flow path has a produced gas flow path and an exhaust flow path capable of being switched by valves. McElroy teaches an electrolyte having a discharge flow path having a produced gas flow path and an exhaust flow path capable of being switched by valves which allows any contaminants and excess compounds built up in the cell to be discharged (see e.g. [0047] of McElroy). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitagawa to include a produced gas flow path and an exhaust flow path capable of being switched by valves in the discharge flow path as taught in Kitagawa so that the system can discharge any contaminants and excess compounds built up in the cell.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kim et al (KR 1798989 B1, KPION translation used for citation).
Claim 9: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson does not explicitly teach a capacitor connected in parallel with the electrolysis cell. Kim teaches an electrolytic cell (see e.g. abstract of Kim) that uses capacitors connected in parallel with the electrolysis cell (see e.g. #140 on Fig 2 of Kim) to “smooth” out noise caused by voltage changes than can reduce the lifespan of the electrodes and increase reproducibility (see e.g. page 3, paragraph starting with “In the meantime” of Kim). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitagawa to include capacitors connected in parallel with the electrolysis cell as taught in Kim to reduce the amount of noise delivered to the electrodes.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, Davidson, and Olah et al (US 2007/0254969 A1).
Claim 18: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Davidson, and Ono teaches a system for manufacturing a valuable material (see e.g. abstract and [0026] of Kitagawa), comprising:
the carbon dioxide electrolytic device according to claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above).
Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Davidson, and Ono does not explicitly teach a chemical synthesis device connected to the first accommodation part of the carbon dioxide electrolytic device, and configured to perform chemical synthesis to obtain a valuable material by using at least a part of gas discharged from the first accommodation part as a raw material. Kitagawa teaches that one of the products of the cell is methanol (see e.g. [0026] of Kitagawa). Olah teaches that methanol is one of the most important feed stocks, being used to form formaldehyde, acetic acid, polymers, paints adhesives, and more (see e.g. [0019] of Olah). Olah teaches that following the electrolytic synthesis of methanol from carbon dioxide (see e.g. [0086] of Olah), the methanol can be further reacted in a chemical synthesis device to form other products (see e.g. [0069] of Olah). It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the device of Kitagawa to include a chemical synthesis device connected to the first accommodation part of the carbon dioxide electrolytic device, and configured to perform chemical synthesis to obtain a valuable material by using at least a part of gas discharged from the first accommodation part as a raw material as taught in Olah to convert the methanol into other desired products such as formaldehyde, acetic acid, polymers, paints adhesives, and more.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Ono, and Davidson as applied to claim 1 above, and in further view of Kudo et al (US 2018/0265440 A1).
Claim 23: Kitagawa in view of Ballantine, Davidson, and Ono does not explicitly teach a first gas flow path arranged in the first accommodation part having a first plurality of sections and a second solution flow path arranged in the second accommodation part having a second plurality of sections disposed corresponding to the first plurality of sections.
Kudo teaches an electrolysis cell (see e.g. abstract) including a first accommodation part for accommodating at least carbon dioxide (see e.g. abstract) and second accommodation part for accommodating an electrolytic solution containing water (see e.g. abstract), wherein there is a first gas flow path arranged in the first accommodation part having a first plurality of sections a second solution flow path arranged in the second accommodation part having a second plurality of sections disposed corresponding to the first plurality of sections (see e.g. #12 and #23 on Fig 1) which help “uniformize flow” (see e.g. [0022]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device of Kitagawa to include teach a first gas flow path arranged in the first accommodation part having a first plurality of sections and a second solution flow path arranged in the second accommodation part having a second plurality of sections disposed corresponding to the first plurality of sections as taught in Kudo to create a more uniform flow of reactants.
Furthermore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instant invention to modify the device to have sections of the first colling water flow path arranged corresponding to the first plurality of sections, and sections of the he second cooling water flow path arranged corresponding to the second plurality of sections to maintain the temperatures of those solutions (see e.g. [0011] of Kitagawa and [0035] of Davidson).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 12/23/2025 with respect to the rejection(s) of the claim(s) under 35 USC 103 over Kitagawa in view of Sano have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made over Kitagawa in view of Davidson.
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 ALEXANDER W KEELING whose telephone number is (571)272-9961. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 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, Luan Van can be reached at 571-272-8521. 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.
/ALEXANDER W KEELING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1795