DETAILED CORRESPONDENCE
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 11 Dec. 2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
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.
Claim 8 is 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.
Claims 8 recites the limitation "the methane production part". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(d)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claims 4-5 and 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends.
Claim 4 recites “The CO2 utilizing method in cement production exhaust gas according to claim 1, comprising a step of supplying methane that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of a fossil fuel to the cement production facility.” Claim 1 recites “a step of supplying methane that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility”, where claim 4 does not further limit claim 1.
Claim 5 depends upon claim 1.
Claim 9 recites “The CO2 utilizing device in cement production exhaust gas according to claim 2, comprising a methane supply line that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of a fossil fuel to the cement production facility.” Claim 2 recites “a methane supply line that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility”, where claim 9 does not further limit claim 2.
Claim 10 depends upon claim 9.
Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-2 and 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. US 2013/0139695 (hereafter Chang) and further in view of Schildhauer et al. WO 2015/055349 published 23 Apr. 2015 (hereafter Schildhauer), Fecant et al. US 2019/0345031 published 14 Nov. 2019 and filed 6 Nov. 2017 (hereafter Fecant), and Hideto WO2018025482 published 8 Feb. 2018 as translated by EPO (hereafter Hideto).
Regarding claims 1 and 4-5, Chang teaches a CO2 utilizing method in cement production exhaust gas (¶21, Fig 10), comprising:
a step (SO2 absorber, ¶16-17) of harmful component removal that removes an acidic component (SO2) and a harmful component (where the amine and/or amino acid salt of the absorbent would be expected to remove at least a portion of either NOx, halogen, H2O, dusts and the like) from exhaust gas discharged from a cement production facility (¶21);
a step (step comprising CO2 absorber) of CO2 separation (CO2 absorber) and recover (shown at the condenser top) that separates and recovers CO2 by bringing the exhaust gas from which the acidic component and the harmful component are removed (show in Fig 10 at CO2+N2) into contact with a CO2 absorption material (¶10-11).
Chang does not teach a step of methane production that generates methane from CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover; a step of supplying methane that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility, wherein the cement production facility to which the methane is supplied is the cement production facility from which the exhaust gas that produced the methane discharged; wherein the cement production facility includes a calcination furnace calcining the cement materials and a cement burning kiln burning the calcined cement materials, wherein the methane is supplied to a burner of the calcination furnace or a burner of the cement burning kiln.
Schildhauer teaches CO2 utilization in cement production exhaust gas (page 1 line 22-33, page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) comprising a step of methane production (methanation page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) that generates methane from CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover (page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4).
Schildhauer further teaches where the methane can be used as a fuel in the natural gas grid (page 4 line 37 – page 5 line 4) and where a cement kiln uses fuel (Figs 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chang (Fig 10) by methanating the CO2 as taught by Schildhauer (page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) in order to allow methane use from the CO2 (page 2 lines 16-17).
Fecant teaches cement production comprising a step of supplying that supplies heat to the cement production facility (¶54-55) wherein the cement production facility includes a mill (100), preheater (200), calcination furnace (300) calcining the cement materials.
Hideto teaches cement production comprising a preheater (3), a calcination furnace (4) calcining the cement materials, a cement burning kiln (7) burning the calcined cement materials, and a cooler (9).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the furnace (Fecant 300, Hideto 4) and kiln (Hideto 7) of Fecant which are supplied with heat (¶54-55) in order to calcine the limestone (¶54-55) and produce cement (Hideto page 3).
Further, it would have been obvious for the supplied heat to be in the form of the generated methane because methane is a well known fuel and would have been available for fuel use in the above combination. Hideto teaches where the fuel may be natural gas (page 4). Schildhauer teaches where the methane can be used as a fuel (page 4 line 37 – page 5 line 4) and where a cement kiln uses fuel (Figs 1-2).
It would have been obvious to include a step of supplying methane that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility, wherein the cement production facility to which the methane is supplied is the cement production facility from which the exhaust gas that produced the methane discharged in order to use the locally available fuel/methane as the fuel/methane in the cement process (Hideto page 4; Schildhauer page 4 line 37 – page 5 line 4, Figs 1-2).
Regarding claim 2 and 9-10, Chang teaches a CO2 utilizing device in cement production exhaust gas (¶21, Fig 10), comprising a cement production facility (¶21) that is provided with
a harmful component removal unit (SO2 absorber, ¶16-17) that removes an acidic component (SO2) and a harmful component (where the amine and/or amino acid salt of the absorbent would be expected to remove at least a portion of either NOx, halogen, H2O, dusts and the like) from exhaust gas discharged from the cement production facility (¶21);
a CO2 separation (CO2 absorber) and recovery (shown at the condenser top) unit that separates and recovers CO2 by bringing the exhaust gas from which the acidic component and the harmful component are removed (show in Fig 10 at CO2+N2) into contact with a CO2 absorption material (¶10-11).
Chang does not teach methanation device generates methane from CO2 separated and recovered; a methane production unit that produces methane from the CO2 separated and recovered in the CO2 separation and recover unit; and a methane supply line that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility, wherein the cement production facility to which the methane is supplied is the cement production facility from which the exhaust gas that produced the methane discharged.
Schildhauer teaches CO2 utilization in cement production exhaust gas (page 1 line 22-33, page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) comprising a methanation device (methanation page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) that generates methane from CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover (page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4). Schildhauer teaches a methane production unit that produces methane from the C02 separated and recovered in the CO2 separation and recover unit (methanation page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4).
Schildhauer further teaches where the methane can be used as a fuel in the natural gas grid (page 4 line 37 – page 5 line 4) and where a cement kiln uses fuel (Figs 1-2).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chang (Fig 10) by methanating the CO2 as taught by Schildhauer (page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4) in order to allow methane use from the CO2 (page 2 lines 16-17).
The modification would have result in a methanation device that separates and recovers CO2 from exhaust gas from the cement production facility and generates methane from CO2 separated and recovered, the methanation device comprising: a harmful component removal unit that removes an acidic component and a harmful component from exhaust gas from the cement production facility, and a CO2 separation and recover unit that separates and recovers CO2 by bringing the exhaust from which the acidic component and the harmful component are removed into contact with a CO2 absorption material.
Fecant teaches cement production comprising a step of supplying that supplies heat to the cement production facility (¶54-55) wherein the cement production facility includes a mill (100), preheater (200), a calcination furnace (300) calcining the cement materials
Hideto teaches cement production comprising wherein the cement production facility includes a preheater (3), a calcination furnace (4) calcining the cement materials and a cement burning kiln (7) burning the calcined cement materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the furnace (Fecant 300, Hideto 4) and kiln (Hideto 7) of Fecant which are supplied with heat (¶54-55) in order to calcine the limestone (¶54-55) and produce cement (Hideto page 3).
Further, it would have been obvious to include a methane supply line that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of the fossil fuel to the cement production facility, wherein the cement production facility to which the methane is supplied is the cement production facility from which the exhaust gas that produced the methane discharged because methane is a well known fuel and would have been available for fuel use in the above combination. Hideto teaches where the fuel may be natural gas (page 4). Thus, it would have been obvious to include a methane supply line that supplies the generated methane as an alternative fuel to a part or entire of a fossil fuel to the cement production facility; the methane supply line is connected to a burner of the calcination furnace or a burner of the cement burning kiln, where Hideto teaches where the fuel may be natural gas (page 4) and Schildhauer teaches where the methane can be used as a fuel (page 4 line 37 – page 5 line 4) and where a cement kiln uses fuel (Figs 1-2).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. US 2013/0139695 (hereafter Chang) in view of Schildhauer et al. WO 2015/055349 published 23 Apr. 2015 (hereafter Schildhauer), Fecant et al. US 2019/0345031 published 14 Nov. 2019 and filed 6 Nov. 2017 (hereafter Fecant), and Hideto WO2018025482 published 8 Feb. 2018 as translated by EPO (hereafter Hideto) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Frydman et al. US 2010/0272619 (hereafter Frydman).
Regarding claim 3, Chang in view of Schildhauer, Fecant, and Hideto teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Chang does not teach a step of removing moisture between the step of CO2 separation and recover and the step of methane production, the step of removing moisture compresses CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover and removes moisture from the compressed CO2.
Frydman teaches CO2 utilization comprising acid gas removal (180), CO2 separation (184), and a step of removing moisture (120) after the step of CO2 separation and recover and the step of CO2 subsequent use (¶28), the step of removing moisture compresses CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover and removes moisture from the compressed CO2 (¶28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chang (Fig 10) by incorporating the removing moisture step (120) of Frydman in order to compress and dehydrate the CO2 (¶28), where compression increases the pressure and energy of the gas and dehydration removes water and increases the CO2 purity.
The modification would have resulted in a step of removing moisture (Frydman 120) between the step of CO2 separation and recover (Chang CO2 absorber; Frydman 184) and the step of methane production (Schildhauer page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4; Frydman ¶8 subsequent use) the step of removing moisture compresses CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover and removes moisture from the compressed CO2 (Frydman ¶28).
Claims 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. US 2013/0139695 (hereafter Chang) in view of Schildhauer et al. WO 2015/055349 published 23 Apr. 2015 (hereafter Schildhauer), Fecant et al. US 2019/0345031 published 14 Nov. 2019 and filed 6 Nov. 2017 (hereafter Fecant), and Hideto WO2018025482 published 8 Feb. 2018 as translated by EPO (hereafter Hideto) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Tingyu et al. CN110455091 published 15 Nov. 2019 as translated by EPO (hereafter Tingyu)
Regarding claims 6-7, Chang in view of Schildhauer, Fecant, and Hideto teaches all the limitations of claim 1.
Chang does not teach wherein the cement producing facility includes a calcination furnace calcining the cement materials, a cement burning kiln burning the calcined cement materials, and a cooler cooling the cement clinker after burned, wherein the exhaust gas occurred in the calcination furnace and the cement burning kiln is collected; wherein the cement production facility includes a material mill milling the cement materials, a preheater preheating the cement materials obtained by the material mill, a dust collector is connected the material mill, and a chimney connected to the dust collector for discharging the exhaust gas, and wherein the exhaust gas is collected between the material mill and the chimney before being discharged from the chimney.
Fecant teaches cement production comprising wherein the cement producing facility includes a calcination furnace (300) calcining the cement materials, and a cooler (400), wherein the exhaust gas occurred in the calcination furnace is collected (70); wherein the cement production facility includes a material mill (100) milling the cement materials, a preheater (200) preheating the cement materials obtained by the material mill.
Hideto teaches cement production wherein the cement producing facility includes a calcination furnace (4) calcining the cement materials, a cement burning kiln (7) burning the calcined cement materials, and a cooler (9) cooling the cement clinker after burned, wherein the exhaust gas occurred in the calcination furnace and the cement burning kiln is collected (G2); wherein the cement production facility includes a preheater (3) preheating the cement materials.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the mill (Fecant 100), preheater (Fecant 200; Hideto 3), furnace (Fecant 300, Hideto 4), kiln (Hideto 7), cooler (Fecant 400, Hideto 9), and gas collection (Fecant 70, Hideto G2) in order to calcine the limestone (¶54-55) and produce cement (Hideto page 3).
Tingyu teaches cement production (¶7-9) comprising a dust collector (8) is connected the material mill (6), and a chimney (10) connected to the dust collector for discharging the exhaust gas, and wherein the exhaust gas is collected between the material mill and the chimney before being discharged from the chimney (¶62, ¶6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the dust collector (8) and chimney (10) of Tingyu in order to clean and discharge the gas (¶7-9).
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. US 2013/0139695 (hereafter Chang) in view of Schildhauer et al. WO 2015/055349 published 23 Apr. 2015 (hereafter Schildhauer), Fecant et al. US 2019/0345031 published 14 Nov. 2019 and filed 6 Nov. 2017 (hereafter Fecant), and Hideto WO2018025482 published 8 Feb. 2018 as translated by EPO (hereafter Hideto) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Frydman et al. US 2010/0272619 (hereafter Frydman).
Regarding claim 8, Chang in view of Schildhauer, Fecant, and Hideto teaches all the limitations of claim 2.
Chang does not teach wherein a compression unit that compresses the recovered CO2 and a dehumidification unit that removes moisture from the compressed CO2 are provided between the CO2 separation and recover unit and the methane production part.
Frydman teaches CO2 utilization comprising acid gas removal (180), CO2 separation (184), and a compression unit (120) that compresses the recovered CO2 and a dehumidification unit that removes moisture (120) from the compressed CO2 are provided between the CO2 separation and recover unit and the methane production part (¶28).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Chang (Fig 10) by incorporating the compression and dehumidification unit (120) of Frydman in order to compress and dehydrate the CO2 (¶28), where compression increases the pressure and energy of the gas and dehydration removes water and increases the CO2 purity.
The modification would have resulted in wherein a compression unit (Frydman 120) that compresses the recovered CO2 and a dehumidification unit (Frydman 120) that removes moisture from the compressed CO2 are provided between the CO2 separation and recover unit (Chang CO2 absorber; Frydman 184) and the methane production part (Schildhauer page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4; Frydman ¶8 subsequent use).
a step of removing moisture (Frydman 120) between the step of CO2 separation and recover (Chang CO2 absorber; Frydman 184) and the step of methane production (Schildhauer page 2 line 35 – page 3 line 4; Frydman ¶8 subsequent use) the step of removing moisture compresses CO2 separated and recovered by the step of CO2 separation and recover and removes moisture from the compressed CO2 (Frydman ¶28).
Claimsd 11-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chang et al. US 2013/0139695 (hereafter Chang) in view of Schildhauer et al. WO 2015/055349 published 23 Apr. 2015 (hereafter Schildhauer), Fecant et al. US 2019/0345031 published 14 Nov. 2019 and filed 6 Nov. 2017 (hereafter Fecant), and Hideto WO2018025482 published 8 Feb. 2018 as translated by EPO (hereafter Hideto) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Tingyu et al. CN110455091 published 15 Nov. 2019 as translated by EPO (hereafter Tingyu).
Regarding claims 11-12, Chang in view of Schildhauer, Fecant, and Hideto teaches all the limitations of claim 2.
Chang does not teach wherein the cement production facility includes a calcination furnace calcining the cement materials, a cement burning kiln burning the calcined cement materials, and a cooler cooling the cement clinker after burned, wherein an exhaust gas collection line collecting the exhaust gas occurred in the cement burning kiln and the calcination furnace is provided; wherein the cement production facility includes a material mill milling the cement materials, a preheater preheating the cement materials obtained by the material mill, a dust collector is connected the material mill, and a chimney connected to the dust collector for discharging the exhaust gas, wherein the exhaust gas collection line is connected gas between the material mill and the chimney before being discharged from the chimney.
Fecant teaches cement production wherein the cement production facility includes a calcination furnace (300) calcining the cement materials, and a cooler (400) cooling the cement clinker after burned, wherein an exhaust gas collection line (70) collecting the exhaust gas occurred in the cement burning kiln and the calcination furnace is provided; wherein the cement production facility includes a material mill (100) milling the cement materials, a preheater (200) npreheating the cement materials obtained by the material mill,
Hideto teaches cement production wherein the cement production facility includes a calcination furnace (4) calcining the cement materials, a cement burning kiln (7) burning the calcined cement materials, and a cooler (9) cooling the cement clinker after burned, wherein an exhaust gas collection line (G2) collecting the exhaust gas occurred in the cement burning kiln and the calcination furnace is provided; wherein the cement production facility includes a preheater (3) preheating the cement materials obtained by the material mill.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the mill (Fecant 100), preheater (Fecant 200; Hideto 3), furnace (Fecant 300, Hideto 4), kiln (Hideto 7), cooler (Fecant 400, Hideto 9), and gas collection (Fecant 70, Hideto G2) in order to calcine the limestone (¶54-55) and produce cement (Hideto page 3).
Tingyu teaches cement production (¶7-9) comprising a dust collector (8) is connected the material mill (6), and a chimney (10) connected to the dust collector for discharging the exhaust gas, and wherein the exhaust gas is collected between the material mill and the chimney before being discharged from the chimney (¶62, ¶6).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the cement production (¶21) of Chang by incorporating the dust collector (8) and chimney (10) of Tingyu in order to clean and discharge the gas (¶7-9).
Response to Arguments
The following is a response to Applicant’s arguments filed 24 Nov. 2025:
Applicant argues that the rejection in view of Chang and Schildhauer is overcome by amendment.
Examiner agrees and the rejection is withdrawn. However, upon further search and/or consideration the claims are rejected in further view of Fecant and Hideto.
Applicant argues that Fecant and Hideto do not cure the deficiencies of Chang and Schildhauer.
Examiner disagrees as detailed in the rejection above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN HOBSON whose telephone number is (571)272-9914. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at 571-270-7872. 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.
/STEPHEN HOBSON/Examiner, Art Unit 1776