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 Amendment
The Amendment filed 5 November 2025 has been entered. Claims 1, 7-8, and 25 are amended; claim 20 is cancelled. Accordingly, claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 18, 25-26, and 28-30 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the claims have overcome each and every 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed 7 August 2025.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Pg. 21, lines 4-5, recite "Error! Reference source not found…".
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 18, 25-26, and 28-30 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.
The term “about” in claims 1 and 25 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “about” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The quantity associated with the working capacity of the adsorbent of claims 1 and 25 is therefore rendered indefinite by the use of the term "about".
Claims 2, 4-5, 7-8, 18, 26, and 28-30 are indefinite as they depend from an indefinite base and fail to cure the deficiencies of the base claim.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watando (US 2014/0024127) in view of Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process").
Regarding Claim 1, Watando discloses a method for recovering an amine contained in a gas or in a solution, the method comprising: introducing the solution (the solution containing an amine meets the limitation of a wash liquid stream having a first concentration of amines) to an adsorbent material so that said adsorbent may retain the amine (claim 1). Retention of the amine to the adsorbent would necessarily produce a resulting liquid steam with a reduced concentration of amines.
Watando is silent to the amines being in a wash liquid stream exiting a wash section in an acid gas scrubbing process.
Watando, however, discloses the method is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056].
Kato discloses acid gas recovery [0014], wherein an absorption tower takes in exhaust gas containing CO2 and absorbs the CO2 into an absorbent containing amine [0016]. Kato further discloses amines accompanying the exhaust gas leaving the absorption unit [0023]. Kato further discloses recovering the amine accompanying the exhaust gas using a cleaning liquid [0023], which meets the limitation of amines in a wash liquid stream exiting a wash section in an acid gas scrubbing process.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Kato to provide a wash liquid stream exiting the wash section of an acid gas scrubbing process, wherein the wash liquid stream has a first concentration of amines, as the method of Watando is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056], and the wash liquid stream of Kato is an amine-containing solution generated in a CCS process [0016].
Watando is further silent to the adsorbent material’s working capacity.
Watando, however, discloses adsorbents comprising activated carbon [0038].
Choi discloses using a fixed bed reactor with activated-carbon to remove amines (Abstract). Choi further discloses an adsorption capacity of 0.15-0.25 g-amine/g-adsorbent (Fig. 5 (a)), wherein the adsorbents are coconut-based activated carbon (CNAC), coal-based activated carbon (CAC), impregnated activated-carbon with phosphoric acid (PAC), and K-doped activated-carbon (KDAC) (pg. 3, par. 3). Choi further discloses amines could cause various environmental issues such as water and air pollution when the CO2 capture process is operated during the long-term and is released to the atmosphere from the CO2 capture process (pg. 1, par. 1). Choi further discloses higher adsorption capacity compared to existing amine removal technology (pg. 8, par. 1).
Regarding the working capacity of the adsorbent in claim 1, it appears that 0.15-0.25 g-amine/g-adsorbent taught by Choi overlaps the claimed range of about 0.15 g-amine/g-adsorbent to about 0.5 g-amine/g-adsorbent such that the range taught by Choi obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Choi to provide an adsorbent with a working capacity of about 0.15 g-amine/g-adsorbent to about 0.5 g-amine/g-adsorbent in order to provide a higher adsorption capacity compared to existing amine removal technology, as amines could cause various environmental issues such as water and air pollution, as recognized by Choi (pg. 8, par. 1; pg. 1, par. 1).
Regarding Claim 2, Watando further discloses the amine-containing solution comprises an amine and water [0060].
Kato discloses the cleaning liquid (cleaning liquid meets the limitation of wash liquid) is pure water [0024].
Regarding Claim 4, Watando discloses the method is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056], such that the acid gas being scrubbed is CO2.
Kato discloses acid gas recovery [0014], wherein an absorption tower takes in exhaust gas containing CO2 and absorbs the CO2 into an absorbent containing amine [0016], such that Kato meets the limitation wherein the acid gas being scrubbed is CO2.
Regarding Claim 5, Watando discloses adsorbents comprising activated carbon [0038].
Choi discloses adsorbents are coconut-based activated carbon (CNAC), coal-based activated carbon (CAC), impregnated activated-carbon with phosphoric acid (PAC), and K-doped activated-carbon (KDAC) (pg. 3, par. 3).
Regarding Claim 8, Watando further discloses the solid adsorbent is preferably packed in a cartridge or column (packed cartridge or column meets the limitation of a fixed adsorbent bed; [0039]).
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watando (US 2014/0024127) in view of Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process") and Yazawa (US 4,612,290).
Regarding Claim 7, Watando, Kato, and Choi teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Watando discloses examples of amines to be recovered include (i) primary amines, (ii) secondary amines, (iii) tertiary amines, (iv) cyclic amines, (v) other aliphatic amines, aromatic amines, multivalent amines, and alkanolamine compounds, (vi) amine derivatives, and (vii) mixtures thereof [0022].
Watando is silent to the amines being hydrophobic amines.
Yazawa discloses hydrophobic amines include primary amines such as heptylamine, octylamine and nonylamine; secondary amines such as dicyclohexylamine, benzylmethylamine, and (trialkylmethyl) long-chain secondary amines (such as, for example, lauryl(tributylmethyl)amine, and dodecenyl(tributylmethyl)amine); and tertiary amines such as p-methyl-N,N-diethylaniline, benzyldimethylamine, N-phenylmorpholine, dioctylmethylamine, and trioctylamine (Col. 5, lines 8-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Yazawa to remove hydrophobic amines, as the amines of Watando are not limited and include primary amines, secondary amines, and tertiary amines [0022], and primary, secondary, and tertiary amines may be hydrophobic, as recognized by Yazawa (Col. 5, lines 8-17).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watando (US 2014/0024127) in view of Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process") and Hu (US 6,740,406).
Regarding Claim 18, Watando, Kato, and Choi teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Watando is silent to the adsorption efficiency of the adsorbent.
Watando, however, teaches an activated carbon sorbent for the adsorption of amines [0038].
Hu discloses activated carbon particles having an adsorption efficiency with respect to odoriferous agents of at least 30% (claim 1), the odoriferous agent being triethylamine or trimethylamine (triethylamine and trimethylamine meet the limitation of an amine; claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Hu wherein the adsorbent material has an average adsorption efficiency which is at least 30%, as this is a process parameter well-known in the art of adsorbing amines using activated carbon, as recognized by Hu.
Watando is further silent to the run time of the adsorbent.
Choi illustrates a breakthrough curve for the activated carbon adsorbents, wherein the breakthrough time of amines is 1,104-2,202 min (Fig. 4a; pg. 5, par. 4), which is equivalent to 18.4-36.7 hours. Breakthrough time represents a decline in amine adsorption, such that a run time of less than 18.4-36.7 hours would be appropriate.
Regarding the run time in claim 18, it appears that less than 18.4-36.7 hours taught by Choi overlaps the claimed range of 1-15 hours such that the range taught by Choi obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claims 25-26 and 28-29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watando (US 2014/0024127) in view of Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process") and Widger (“Selective Removal of Nitrosamines from a Model Amine Carbon-Capture Waterwash Using Low-Cost Activated-Carbon Sorbents”).
Regarding Claim 25, Watando discloses a method for recovering an amine contained in a gas or in a solution, the method comprising: introducing the solution (the solution containing an amine meets the limitation of a wash stream having a first concentration of amines) to an adsorbent material so that said adsorbent may retain the amine (claim 1). Retention of the amine to the adsorbent would necessarily produce a resulting liquid steam with a reduced concentration of amines. Watando further discloses in performing a CCS process based on chemical adsorption, it is necessary to be so careful that the amine and degradation products thereof in the absorption solution may not leak out from the CCS apparatuses, such as, the absorption tower, the regeneration tower, and the like [0008].
Watando is silent to the amines being in a wash liquid stream exiting a wash section in an acid gas scrubbing process.
Watando, however, discloses the method is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056].
Kato discloses acid gas recovery [0014], wherein an absorption tower takes in exhaust gas containing CO2 and absorbs the CO2 into an absorbent containing amine [0016]. Kato further discloses the absorbing solution is an aqueous solution containing 10 to 70% by weight of an amine compound [0019]. Kato further discloses amines accompanying the exhaust gas leaving the absorption unit [0023], such that Kato meets the limitation wherein at least a portion of the solvent is absorbed by the exhaust gas thereby forming a gas having an increased concentration of amine and a reduced concentration of acid gas. Kato further discloses recovering the amine accompanying the exhaust gas using a cleaning liquid [0023], which meets the limitation of washing the gas with the increased concentration of amine with a wash liquid in a wash section thereby removing at least a portion of the amine from the gas and absorbing the removed amine into the wash liquid.
Regarding the percentage of water in the amine solution in the absorber in claim 25, it appears that 10 to 70% by weight of an amine compound taught by Kato overlaps the claimed range of a solution having less than 50% water such that the range taught by Kato obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Kato to introduce exhaust gas containing acid gas into an absorber vessel, the vessel containing a solvent comprising a solution having less than 50% water and one or more amines; flowing the exhaust gas through the solvent whereby at least a portion of the acid gas from the exhaust gas is absorbed by the solvent and at least a portion of the solvent is absorbed by the exhaust gas thereby forming a gas having an increased concentration of amine and a reduced concentration of acid gas; washing the gas with the increased concentration of amine with a wash liquid in a wash section thereby removing at least a portion of the amine from the gas and absorbing the removed amine into the wash liquid, as the method of Watando is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056], and the wash liquid stream of Kato is an amine-containing solution generated in a CCS process [0016].
Watando is further silent to the adsorbent material’s working capacity.
Watando, however, discloses adsorbents comprising activated carbon [0038].
Choi discloses using a fixed bed reactor with activated-carbon to remove amines (Abstract). Choi further discloses an adsorption capacity of 0.15-0.25 g-amine/g-adsorbent (Fig. 5 (a)), wherein the adsorbents are coconut-based activated carbon (CNAC), coal-based activated carbon (CAC), impregnated activated-carbon with phosphoric acid (PAC), and K-doped activated-carbon (KDAC) (pg. 3, par. 3). Choi further discloses amines could cause various environmental issues such as water and air pollution when the CO2 capture process is operated during the long-term and is released to the atmosphere from the CO2 capture process (pg. 1, par. 1). Choi further discloses higher adsorption capacity compared to existing amine removal technology (pg. 8, par. 1).
Regarding the working capacity of the adsorbent in claim 1, it appears that 0.15-0.25 g-amine/g-adsorbent taught by Choi overlaps the claimed range of about 0.15 g-amine/g-adsorbent to about 0.5 g-amine/g-adsorbent such that the range taught by Choi obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Choi to provide an adsorbent with a working capacity of about 0.15 g-amine/g-adsorbent to about 0.5 g-amine/g-adsorbent in order to provide a higher adsorption capacity compared to existing amine removal technology, as amines could cause various environmental issues such as water and air pollution, as recognized by Choi (pg. 8, par. 1; pg. 1, par. 1).
Watando is further silent to recycling the wash stream having the second, reduced concentration of amines to the wash section in order to be reused therein, whereby providing a recycled wash stream with a relatively low concentration of amines to the wash section improves effectiveness of amine removal in the wash section thereby reducing the concentration of amines in the acid gas scrubbing process gas effluent.
Widger discloses removal of amines (MEA) from simulated amine-based CCS washwater (pg. 10918, Col. 2, par. 3). Widger further illustrates recycling a cleaned wash water to the wash water section in order to be reused therein (Abstract figure), which meets the limitation of recycling the wash stream, having the second, reduced concentration of amines to the wash section in order to be reused therein. Widger teaches recycling wash water such that the limitation whereby providing a recycled wash stream with a relatively low concentration of amines to the wash section improves effectiveness of amine removal in the wash section thereby reducing the concentration of amines in the acid gas scrubbing process gas effluent is necessarily present.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Widger to recycle the wash stream having the second, reduced concentration of amines to the wash section in order to be reused therein, whereby providing a recycled wash stream with a relatively low concentration of amines to the wash section improves effectiveness of amine removal in the wash section thereby reducing the concentration of amines in the acid gas scrubbing process gas effluent, in order to reduce the cost and resources of supplying additional wash water.
Regarding Claim 26, Watando further discloses the amine-containing solution comprises an amine and water [0060].
Kato discloses the cleaning liquid (cleaning liquid meets the limitation of wash liquid) is pure water [0024].
Regarding Claim 28, Watando discloses the method is advantageous for recovering an amine from an amine-containing solution generated in CCS (carbon capture and storage) processes [0056], such that the acid gas being scrubbed is CO2.
Kato discloses acid gas recovery [0014], wherein an absorption tower takes in exhaust gas containing CO2 and absorbs the CO2 into an absorbent containing amine [0016], such that Kato meets the limitation wherein the acid gas being scrubbed is CO2.
Regarding Claim 29, Watando discloses adsorbents comprising activated carbon [0038].
Choi discloses adsorbents are coconut-based activated carbon (CNAC), coal-based activated carbon (CAC), impregnated activated-carbon with phosphoric acid (PAC), and K-doped activated-carbon (KDAC) (pg. 3, par. 3).
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Watando (US 2014/0024127) in view of Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process") and Widger (“Selective Removal of Nitrosamines from a Model Amine Carbon-Capture Waterwash Using Low-Cost Activated-Carbon Sorbents”) and Yazawa (US 4,612,290).
Regarding Claim 30, Watando, Kato, Choi, and Widger teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 25.
Watando discloses examples of amines to be recovered include (i) primary amines, (ii) secondary amines, (iii) tertiary amines, (iv) cyclic amines, (v) other aliphatic amines, aromatic amines, multivalent amines, and alkanolamine compounds, (vi) amine derivatives, and (vii) mixtures thereof [0022].
Watando is silent to the amines being hydrophobic amines.
Yazawa discloses hydrophobic amines include primary amines such as heptylamine, octylamine and nonylamine; secondary amines such as dicyclohexylamine, benzylmethylamine, and (trialkylmethyl) long-chain secondary amines (such as, for example, lauryl(tributylmethyl)amine, and dodecenyl(tributylmethyl)amine); and tertiary amines such as p-methyl-N,N-diethylaniline, benzyldimethylamine, N-phenylmorpholine, dioctylmethylamine, and trioctylamine (Col. 5, lines 8-17).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Watando to incorporate the teachings of Yazawa to remove hydrophobic amines, as the amines of Watando are not limited and include primary amines, secondary amines, and tertiary amines [0022], and primary, secondary, and tertiary amines may be hydrophobic, as recognized by Yazawa (Col. 5, lines 8-17).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see "Remarks", pg. 9, par. 1-3, filed 5 November 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4-5, 7-8, 18, 20, 25-26, and 28-30 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) and 35 U.S.C. 103 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 in view of Watando (US 2014/0024127) and Kato (JP 2019135034) and Choi ("Removal NH3 and Amine using activated-carbon at Amine-based CO2 Capture Process").
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 SLONE ELZABETH SIMKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-3214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/S.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Prosecution Insights