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
In light of the amendments filed on 30 June 2025, the 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection has been withdrawn. It is acknowledged that Applicant amended claims 1, 4, 5, and 8, and that claim 7 was cancelled by Applicant. Claims 1-6 and 8 are currently pending in the application and are under full consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 30 June 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The respective arguments are addressed below:
Applicant argues that the heat exchanger of Fujimara does not exchange heat between the combustion exhaust gas separated by the cyclone an oxidant. Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Fujimara discloses the combustion exhaust gas exchanging heat with the regenerating gas (see [0172]) and the regenerating gas is disclosed as being an oxygen, which is an oxidant (see [0171]).
Applicant argues that the combustion exhaust gas of Fujimara is not the combustion exhaust gas discharged from the heating furnace because “the char combustion chamber is a separate entity from the catalyst regeneration unit and has no relation to it”, nor is it the combustion exhaust gas separated by the cyclone. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Fujimara discloses the gasification chamber, combustion chamber, gas reforming chamber and catalyst regeneration chamber are integrated into a single furnace (see [0040]) and discloses the combustion exhaust gas entering the heat exchanger from the char combustion unit (see [0172]), which contains the cyclone (see [0122]).
Applicant argues that Figure 16 of Fujimara only shows one gas outlet and therefore does not disclose a second delivery port. Examiner respectfully disagrees as the combustion chamber and gasification chamber of Figure 16 are incorporated in the same furnace, as explained, and operate as a single storage tank with a partition. Figure 16 clearly shows two gas deliveries, as pointed out in the annotated drawing included in the non-final office action and further included in this office action. The claimed features, depicted in Figure 6 of the instant application, are directly matched by the features of figure 16, which are annotated for clarity in the non-final office action and under the claim 5 rejection of this office action. Applicant further argues that a port is not “necessarily present” in the device of Fujimara. Examiner respectfully disagrees, as Figure 16 of Fujimara clearly depicts, with lines, gas exiting one unit and entering another, thereby indicating an opening specifically intended for transferring gas out, which is understood by those in the art to be a delivery port.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 4-6, and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Fujimura (JP-2003238973-A).
Regarding Claim 1, Fujimura discloses a hydrogen production apparatus (to be reformed into CO and H2; see [0049]) comprising: a heating furnace ( the gasification chamber, combustion chamber, gas reforming chamber and catalyst regeneration chamber are integrated into one furnace; see [0041]) that burns fuel supplied by a fuel supply unit (the fuel is decomposed into low molecular weight hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide; see [0048]) and heats catalyst particles (heat and regenerate catalyst particles; see [0043]); a cyclone (cyclone type dust collector; see [0122]) that is connected to a downstream side of the heating furnace (from the gasification chamber 11-1 is introduced into the dust remover; see [0095]) and separates the catalyst particles and a combustion exhaust gas (into the dust removal apparatus 17, where the catalyst C and ash J are removed from the combustion exhaust gas G; see [0094]); and a thermal decomposition furnace (Cracking (thermal decomposition reaction) occurs over a catalyst; see [0048]) including a storage tank that stores the catalyst particles separated by the cyclone (and then the catalyst is collected; [0122]) and a raw material gas introduction unit that introduces a raw material gas (The gas reforming device 12 is supplied with the reforming gas GR and also with the generated gas GA; see [0170]) containing at least hydrocarbon (“generated gas GA from the gasification of the raw material A”; see [0079] and “raw material A is rich in fixed carbon, such as coal or woody biomass”; see [0066]) from a lower portion of the storage tank (supplied from the bottom of the reforming reaction chamber 267 together with the product gas GA; see [0220]); a first heat exchange unit (heat exchanger 70; see [0172]) that exchanges heat between the combustion exhaust gas (heated by heat exchange with the combustion exhaust gas from the char combustion chamber; see [0172]) separated by the cyclone (dust removal (in a cyclone type dust remover) occurs in the char combustion chamber; see [0122]) and an oxidant (“the regeneration gas GT… is heated by heat exchange with the combustion exhaust gas”; see [0172] and “regeneration is carried out using the regenerating gas GT (combustion regeneration using oxygen)”; see [0171]); and an oxidant supply unit that supplies the oxidant heat-exchanged by the first heat exchange unit to the heating furnace (The regeneration gas GT supplied to the catalyst regeneration device is heated by heat exchange… and is then supplied; see [0172]).
The limitation claiming, “that introduces a raw material gas containing at least hydrocarbon from a lower portion of the storage tank” is a functional limitation. The Courts have held that apparatus claims must be structurally distinguishable from the prior art in terms of structure, not function. See In re Danley, 120 USPQ 528, 531 (CCPA 1959); and Hewlett-Packard Co. V. Bausch and Lomb, Inc., 15 USPQ2d 1525, 1528 (Fed. Cir. 1990) (see MPEP §§ 2114 and 2173.05(g)). The manner of operating an apparatus does not differentiate an apparatus claim from the prior art, if the prior art apparatus teaches all of the structural limitations of the claim. See Ex Parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (BPAI 1987). Hence, the limitation of introducing a raw material containing a hydrocarbon does not further define the actual structure of the hydrogen production apparatus, but merely sets forth a manner of operating the hydrogen production apparatus. Functional limitations that do not limit the structure need not be given further due consideration in determining patentability of an apparatus.
Regarding Claim 4, Fujimura discloses the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a carbon recovery unit that removes solid carbon from a mixed gas delivered from the storage tank (and char (unburned carbon) generated when gasifying combustibles to produce generated gas in the gasification device is sent to the char combustion device; see [0028]), wherein the fuel supply unit supplies, as the fuel, the mixed gas from which the solid carbon has been removed to the heating furnace (char (unburned carbon) that is generated as a result of the gasification of the combustible materials, the generated gas produced in the gasification chamber is sent to the gas reforming system and reformed; see [0020]).
Regarding Claim 5, Fujimura discloses a hydrogen production apparatus (to be reformed into CO and H2; see [0049]) comprising: a heating furnace (the gasification chamber, combustion chamber, gas reforming chamber and catalyst regeneration chamber are integrated into one furnace; see [0041]) that burns fuel supplied by a fuel supply unit (the fuel is decomposed into low molecular weight hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide; see [0048]) and heats catalyst particles (heat and regenerate catalyst particles; see [0043]); a cyclone (cyclone type dust collector; see [0122]) that is connected to a downstream side of the heating furnace (from the gasification chamber 11-1 is introduced into the dust remover; see [0095]) and separates the catalyst particles and a combustion exhaust gas (into the dust removal apparatus 17, where the catalyst C and ash J are removed from the combustion exhaust gas G; see [0094]); and a thermal decomposition furnace (Cracking (thermal decomposition reaction) occurs over a catalyst; see [0048]) including a storage tank that stores the catalyst particles separated by the cyclone (and then the catalyst is collected; [0122]) and a raw material gas introduction unit that introduces a raw material gas (The gas reforming device 12 is supplied with the reforming gas GR and also with the generated gas GA; see [0170]) containing at least hydrocarbon (“generated gas GA from the gasification of the raw material A”; see [0079] and “raw material A is rich in fixed carbon, such as coal or woody biomass”; see [0066]) from a lower portion of the storage tank (supplied from the bottom of the reforming reaction chamber 267 together with the product gas GA; see [0220]), wherein the storage tank includes a particle introduction port through which the catalyst particles separated by the cyclone are guided (and then the catalyst CA is collected; see [0122]), a first delivery port through which the mixed gas generated in the storage tank is delivered (see e.g. Fig. 16 annotated below), and a second delivery port which is provided between the particle introduction port and the first delivery port and through which the mixed gas generated in the storage tank is delivered (see e.g. Fig. 16 annotated below), and the fuel supply unit supplies, as the fuel, the mixed gas delivered from the storage tank to the heating furnace through the second delivery port (may be supplied from the bottom of the reforming reaction chamber 267 together with the product gas GA; see [0220] and Fig. 16 annotated below). Even though Fujimura does not explicitly refer to introduction and delivery “ports”, it would be inherent that ports are present due to Fujimura’s invention’s abilities to deliver and introduce materials.
PNG
media_image1.png
702
779
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 6, Fujimura discloses the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5, further comprising a partition plate (partition wall; see [0222]) which is provided in the storage tank and partitions an inside of the storage tank into a first chamber in which the first delivery port is provided and a second chamber in which the second delivery port is provided (see Fig. 16 annotated above).
Regarding Claim 8, Fujimura discloses the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 1, further comprising a heat exchange unit that exchanges heat between a mixed gas delivered from the storage tank and the raw material gas (The generated gas GA is heat exchanged with the combustion exhaust gas GC from the char combustion chamber 11-2 via a heat exchanger 71; see [0173]), wherein the raw material gas introduction unit introduces the raw material gas heat-exchanged by the second heat exchange unit into the storage tank (The gas reforming device 12 is supplied with the generated gas GA from the gasification chamber 11-1, and the catalyst regenerating device 13 is supplied with the regenerating gas GT; see [0174]).
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura (JP-2003238973-A) in view of Takatani (JP-2001354405-A).
Regarding Claim 2, Fujimura discloses the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 1.
Fujimura does not explicitly teach a hydrogen separation unit. However, Takatani discloses a hydrogen separation unit that separates hydrogen from a mixed gas delivered from the storage tank (hydrogen is separated from the reformed gas by the hydrogen separation means; [0007]), wherein the fuel supply unit supplies, as the fuel, the hydrogen separated by the hydrogen separation unit to the heating furnace (the fuel components (H2, CO in the reformed gas); see [0013]).
Fujimura and Takatani are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of catalytic reforming. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Fujimura by incorporating the teachings of Takatani and providing a hydrogen separator. Doing so would enable the production of purified hydrogen for industrial use (see e.g. Takatani [0011]).
Regarding Claim 3, Fujimura discloses the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the mixed gas is used as fuel for the heating furnace (may be supplied from the bottom of the reforming reaction chamber 267 together with the product gas GA; see [0220]).
Fujimura does not explicitly teach a hydrogen separation unit. However, Takatani discloses a hydrogen separation unit that separates hydrogen from a mixed gas delivered from the storage tank (hydrogen is separated from the reformed gas by the hydrogen separation means; [0007]), wherein the fuel supply unit supplies, as the fuel, the mixed gas obtained after the hydrogen is separated by the hydrogen separation unit to the heating furnace (the off-gas obtained after hydrogen is separated from the reformed gas by the hydrogen separation means is supplied to the fluidized-bed catalyst direct heating type heat exchanger as combustion gas; see [0007]). This would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because providing a hydrogen separation unit would enable the production of purified hydrogen for industrial use (see e.g. Takatani [0011]) and using the mixed gas as fuel would enable fluidization and combustion (see e.g. Takatani [0007]).
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 ALYSSA LEE KUYKENDALL whose telephone number is (571)270-3806. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Claire Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/A.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774