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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 04 August 2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 04 August 2026 has been considered. It is acknowledged that claim 5 has been amended by Applicant. Accordingly, claims 5-6 and 9-12 are under full consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections are considered persuasive and the 35 U.S.C. 112 are therefore withdrawn.
Applicant’s argument that Fujimara’s first and second delivery ports, as identified in annotated Fig. 16, are associated with different chambers has been considered but is not persuasive. The rejection does not rely upon Fujimura alone for the claimed arrangement of the delivery ports. As set forth in the Office Action, Matsuzawa is relied upon for teaching a thermal decomposition furnace separate from the heating furnace. Applicant’s argument that Fujimura and Matsuzawa individually fail to disclose every limitation does not address the rejection based on the references in combination. One cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant’s arguments regarding the compositions of the gases have been considered but are not persuasive. Claim 5 is directed to a hydrogen production apparatus. The newly added limitations characterize the material delivered through the respective first and second delivery ports as containing particular gaseous species, but Applicant has not identified, nor does the claim require, any additional or different structure of either delivery port resulting from the recited gas compositions. Thus, the fact that Fujimura identifies the gases passing through the corresponding ports as combustion exhaust gas and generated gas does not establish a structural distinction between the claimed apparatus and the apparatus resulting from the applied combination.
Applicant’s argument that Wang discloses only a single gas stream undergoing two-stage heat exchange has been considered but is not persuasive. The rejection does not rely upon Wang for teaching the respective mixed gases delivered from the first and second delivery ports. Rather, Wang is relied upon for the more limited teaching of employing multiple heat exchangers in series to provide staged heat exchange. The rejection is based upon the combined teachings of the references and does not require that each reference individually disclose all features of the claimed invention. Fujimura separately teaches the relevant gaseous streams and further teaches heat exchange involving these streams. Wang’s teaching of serial heat exchange is relied upon to modify the heat-exchange arrangement of the modified Fujimura system, rather than to replace Fujimura’s respective gas streams with Wang’s single gas stream. Accordingly, Applicant’s argument that Wang individually employs only one gas stream does not address the combination as proposed in the rejection.
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 5-6, 9, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura (JP-2003238973-A) in view of Matsuzawa et al. (US-20100043683-A1), hereinafter “Matsuzawa”, and Wang (US-5843395-A), further in view of Vengateson (Design of multiple shell and tube heat exchangers in series: E shell and F shell).
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 remover; 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 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 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), the heat exchange unit includes a first heat exchange unit that exchanges heat between the mixed gas delivered from the second delivery port 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] and annotated Fig. 16), the raw material gas introduction unit introduces the raw material gas heat-exchanged by the 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]), 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 is understood 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
Fujimara does not explicitly teach separate furnaces. However, Matsuzawa discloses a thermal decomposition furnace (gasification furnace 2; see [0073]) separate from the heating furnace (combustion furnace 1; see [0073]). This would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because it would allow material in one furnace to flow in a pattern different than that of the other furnace (see Matsuzawa [0073]).
Matsuzawa, in addition to Fujimara, also discloses a particle introduction port through which the particles separated by the cyclone are guided (bed material 11 introduced via the downcomer 12 is directed to the supply flow; see [0075] and Figs. 5-6), a first delivery port through which a mixed gas generated in the storage tank is delivered (take-out produced gas 20; see [0072] and Figs. 5-6), 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 (supply flow passage 25; see [0075] and Figs. 5-6), 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 (bed material introduced via the downcomer 12 is directed to the supply flow passage 25; see [0075] and Figs. 5-6). This configuration would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing dates of the claimed invention because it would have enabled directing of bed material to the supply flow passage via a circuitous flow passage; see Matsuzawa [0022]).
Fujimara further discloses the mixed gas delivered from the first delivery port exchanging heat (see Fig. 16, heat recovery device 37), but does not explicitly teach a second heat exchange unit that exchanges heat between the mixed gas delivered from the first delivery port and the raw material gas heat-exchanged by the first heat exchange unit. However, Wang discloses the use of heat exchangers in series (the mixed stream from the waste stream mixer is directed to and preheated in a first heat exchanger and in a second heat exchanger; see Col. 3 Lines 13-15).
Fujimara and Wang are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hydrogen production. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Fujimara by incorporating the teachings of Wang and including first and second heat exchangers arranged in series with respect to the raw material gas, such that the raw material gas is heat-exchanged in the first heat exchanger and subsequently heat exchanged in the second heat exchanger. Doing so would enable exchanging heat to achieve a first temperature in the first heat exchanger, and a second temperature in the second exchanger (see Wang, Col. 3 Lines 15-18). Further, it is well known and established in the art that use of multiple heat exchangers in series is often required depending on the degree of temperature cross. A certain number of heat exchangers are required to be connected in series such that the temperature cross in each exchanger is within allowable limit. The determination of the number of exchangers for the given terminal temperatures is essential during heat exchanger design phase, and is well within the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art, wherein routine experimentation would lead a person of ordinary skill in the art to determine the proper number of heat exchangers required in order to maintain allowable temperature cross limits (see Vengateson; Abstract).
Regarding the limitations claiming, “the mixed gas delivered from the first delivery port containing hydrogen and methane” and “the mixed gas delivered from the second delivery port containing carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide”, these do not distinguish the claimed apparatus from the apparatus of modified Fujimara. The recited gas compositions merely characterize the material conveyed through the claimed apparatus and do not expressly or impliedly require any additional or different structure of the first delivery port, second delivery port, storage tank, or heat exchange units. The inclusion of material or an article worked upon by a claimed apparatus does not impart patentability to an otherwise structurally identical apparatus. See MPEP 2115; n re Otto, 312 F.2d 937, 136 USPQ 458, 459 (CCPA 1963); see also In re Young, 75 F.2d 996, 25 USPQ 69 (CCPA 1935) and In re Casey, 370 F.2d 576, 152 USPQ 235 (CCPA 1967).
Regarding Claim 6, Fujimara, Matsuzawa, Wang, and Vengateson together disclose the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5. Fujimara further discloses 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 9, Fujimara, Matsuzawa, Wang, and Vengateson together disclose the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5. Fujimara further discloses a third 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 third 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]).
Regarding Claim 12, Fujimara, Matsuzawa, Wang, and Vengateson together disclose the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5. Fujimara further discloses 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]).
Claims 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujimura (JP-2003238973-A) in view of Matsuzawa et al. (US-20100043683-A1), hereinafter “Matsuzawa”, and Wang (US-5843395-A), further in view of Vengateson (Design of multiple shell and tube heat exchangers in series: E shell and F shell), as applied to claim 5, and in view of Takatani (JP-2001354405-A).
Regarding Claim 10, Fujimara, Matsuzawa, Wang, and Vengateson together disclose the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5.
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 11, Fujimara, Matsuzawa, Wang, and Vengateson together disclose the hydrogen production apparatus according to claim 5. Fujimara further discloses 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
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
Prosecution Insights