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 .
Status of claims
Claims 1-17 as amended on 7/23/2026 are pending.
Claims 18-20 were canceled by applicants.
Claims 1-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to nonelected inventions. Applicant timely traversed the restriction requirement in the reply filed on 4/24/2025.
Claims 13-17 as amended on 7/23/2026 are under examination in the instant office action.
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 13-17 as amended are/remain rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) and US 9,561,958 (Quintero et al).
The cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) teaches the use of multiple parallel bioreactors for continuous gas fermentation (entire document) including the use of parallel series of primary bioreactors and parallel series of secondary bioreactors connected by a central bleeding line 107 (Figures 1-2; col. 3, lines 14025). The gas used for fermentation is a syngas rich in CO with optional hydrogen stream (col. 7, line 47; col. 8, lines 33-37; col. 17, lines 1-12) including CO-containing waste gas from industrial process (col.16, lines 9-11). The system of parallel primary bioreactors and parallel secondary bioreactors are all in communication through a central bleeding line (107 on figures 1-2). Each bioreactor comprises an inlet conduit for receiving fermentation broth (col. 3, line 43) and outlet conduit for passing out fermentation broth/product (col. 11, line 44). In particular, each bioreactor in a parallel series is controlled by and has individual bleed pump 105 and inoculation valve 106 connected to a central line 107.
The cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) explicitly acknowledges that the use of multiple parallel bioreactors connected to the feeding/bleeding central line has advantages over the use of one large bioreactor or two sequentially linked bioreactors in faster start-up and greater flexibly during operations because it allows for compensation of loss of any given bioreactor in the system (par. bridging col. 9-10).
The cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) teaches applications of “alternating and standby bioreactors” in the event when one of bioreactors becomes non-operational or in “standby mode”, the other bioreactor is supplied with fermentation medium via the central bleed line, thereby, being in functional and operational mode (col. 6, lines 40-46; col.13, lines 1-10).
Thus, as applied to the claimed steps d-h: the cited method comprises steps of operating parallel system of primary bioreactors or at least two or more primary bioreactors:
d) introducing a gaseous substrate (syngas stream with CO and H2) into a first primary bioreactor to promote growth of microorganisms and to produce one or more products (col. 5, lines 35-42)
e) introducing a gaseous substrate (syngas stream with CO and H2) into a second primary bioreactor or into one or more other primary bioreactors with a second medium (a second fermentation fluid coming from first primary bioreactor via central line) to promote microbial growth and products (col. 5, lines 43-47).
Further, as applied to steps f-g): in the cited method products produced within the bioreactors are removed to a permeate stream conduit and passed to a recovery zone (col. 11, lines 46-49). Thus, the cited method comprises steps of removing fermentation fluids and isolating products from bioreactors.
Furthermore , as applied to steps f-g): when at least one (or more) bioreactor becomes non-operational (“standby mode”) the other bioreactor are in operational modes and provide for fermentation of gas substrate (col. 6, lines 40-46; col.13, lines 1-10); wherein operating bioreactors substitute for standby non-operating bioreactors “simultaneously” (meaning that one bioreactor is in standby mode while the other is in operating mode); wherein the non-operating standby bioreactors are further reinoculated and/or recharged with additional fermentation broth of “fresh broth” or with “fresh broth and fresh microbe” coming from the central bleed line 107 (col.13, lines 17-20);
The operation is a continuous fermentation of incoming syngas as result of using alternative bioreactors in operational mode when the at least one bioreactor becomes non-operational (“standby” mode); thereby,
h) steps d-g are repeated several times with each next event when at least one bioreactor becomes again non-operational (“standby” mode) and operational bioreactor substitutes again for non-operational bioreactor.
Therefore, the cited method of US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) for continuous fermentation of incoming gas substrate comprises the use of parallel bioreactors connected by one central line supplying fresh medium and removing fermentation products, wherein alternative operational bioreactor substitutes for function of non-operational bioreactor within the meaning of the claim 13-recited steps d) through h).
Further, with regard to claim 13, steps a) though c): The cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) acknowledges that CO-rich syngas is produced from several sources including natural gas, industrial waste gas and others (col. 16, lines 7-30). But the reference does not clearly describe preparing syngas from natural gas by partial oxidation.
However, it is known, for example: see US 9,561,958 (Quintero et al), that natural gas (which mostly consists of methane) is emitted (as a gaseous waste emission) during extraction of liquid hydrocarbons, such as oils, from grounds; that natural gas is/might be converted into liquid state (natural liquid gas or LHG) as intended for ease of transportation; that natural is/might be converted to syngas in close proximity of hydrocarbon processing facilities (see US 9,561,958 at col. 9, lines 30-59) and that natural gas (CH4) is oxidized in partial oxidation chambers (POX) into CO-rich syngas (see US 9,561,958 at abstract and at col. 10, lines 3-5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time the claimed invention was filed to provide/prepare syngas for syngas fermentation in the method of US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) by partial oxidation of natural gas emitted during hydrocarbon processing with a reasonable expectation of success because it is a well-known and used practice as evidenced by US 9,561,958 (Quintero et al) and because US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) acknowledges natural gas as a source of syngas fermentation.
Thus, the claimed invention as a whole was clearly prima face obvious, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Thus, the claimed subject matter fails to patentably distinguish over the state art as represented be the cited references. Therefore, the claims are properly rejected under 35 USC § 103.
As applied to claims 14-15: The cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) clearly acknowledges that CO-rich syngas is/can be sourced or produced from solid municipal waste or biomass (“comminuted solid waste”) and waste emission gas from industrial process; for example: see col. 17, line 5; see col.16, lines 9-11.
As applied to claims 16: The method of the cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) comprises applications of a cell recycle system (col. 11, line 51).
As applied to claim 17: although the cited US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) does not explicitly describe a recovery of products from lysed microbes. However, if a specific desired product is intracellular microbial bacterial product, then it would be obvious for one of skill in the art to lyse microbial cells to isolate the intracellular product.
Thus, the claimed invention as a whole was clearly prima face obvious, especially in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
Thus, the claimed subject matter fails to patentably distinguish over the state art as represented be the cited references. Therefore, the claims are properly rejected under 35 USC § 103.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 7/23/2026 have been fully considered but not found persuasive.
With regard to claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 9,988,598 (Collet et al) and US 9,561,958 (Quintero et al) Applicant’s main argument that the method of Collect is continuous and that it utilizes continuous bioreactors but not alternating.
This is not persuasive because Collet clearly teaches (col. 13, lines 1-16) that in the event that one primary bioreactor 101 becomes non-operational, the at least one other primary bioreactor (102-104) continues fermentation of syngas and provides for fermentation fluid via central line 107 to other bioreactors that operate simultaneously to the event of non-operating state of the first. Thus, function of second bioreactor substitutes or compensates for the function of non-operating (“standby”) bioreactor. Then the non-operating bioreactor is recharged (col.13, lines 17-20). The syngas fermentation process of the cited reference is “continuous” as result of alternating non-operational (standby) and operational bioreactors within the meaning of claim-recited use of bioreactor in standby mode simultaneously with step e (or step d) which comprises use of bioreactors in “operational mode”.
Some of applicants arguments are drawn to distinction between “fresh” broth and “used” broth (response page 3). In the cited reference the primary bioreactors are clearly provided with “fresh” fermentation broth via central line; and reinoculation/recharge temporary non-operating bioreactor is provided with the same additional fermentation broth available to all bioreactors.
Further, Applicants argue that that cited prior art is missing the claim-recited element such as NGL or natural gas liquid (response page 3). However, the cited US 9,561,958 (Quintero et al) teaches that natural gas is/might be converted into liquid state (natural liquid gas or LHG) as intended for ease of transportation (col. 9, lines 40-41, lines 45-47).
Thus, the claimed subject matter fails to patentably distinguish over the state art as represented be the cited references. Therefore, the claims are properly rejected under 35 USC § 103.
No claims are allowed.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 VERA AFREMOVA whose telephone number is (571)272-0914. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday: 8.30am-5pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sharmila Landau can be reached at (571) 272-0614. 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.
Vera Afremova
October 14, 2026
/VERA AFREMOVA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1653
