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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 26 December 2025 has been entered.
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.
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 12, 13, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keshner et al. (US 2020/0055672) in view of Geerlings et al. (US 2004/0126293).
Regarding claim 12, the reference Keshner et al. discloses a system for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the system comprising:
a facility configured to produce a waste gas stream comprising from greater than 0 vol% to less than 40 vol% carbon dioxide (see paras. [0029]; [0059]; [0071]);
a pre-concentrator (205, 303) configured for increasing a concentration of carbon dioxide in the waste gas stream, producing a concentrated byproduct stream (see paras. [0062]-[0065]; Figs. 2, 3, 9);
a water dissolution system (211, 307, 500A; 950) configured for dissolving the carbon dioxide in water, producing a dissolved byproduct stream and an undissolved byproduct stream (see paras. [0062]-[0065]; [0072]; [0090]; [0100]; Figs. 2, 3, 9); and
an injection well (214, 980) operable to inject the dissolved byproduct stream into a reservoir containing mafic or ultramafic rock to allow components of the concentrated byproduct stream to react in situ with components of the mafic rock to precipitate and store components of the byproduct stream in the reservoir (see Abstract; paras. [0007]; [0009]; [0015]; [0062]; [0101]; Figs. 2, 9).
The reference Keshner et al. teaches that the pre-concentrator (i.e., the separator element 205, 303) can be a conventional separator employed for separating carbon dioxide from other gases (see paras. [0015]; [0063]). The reference Keshner et al., however, does not specifically disclose wherein the pre-concentrator (i.e., the separator element 205, 303) is one or more selected from the group consisting of a monoethanolamine (MEA) solution absorption unit, a pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit, a metal-organic framework (MOF) unit, and a chemical looping combustion unit.
However, as evidenced by the reference Geerlings et al. (see paras. [0021]; [0036]-[0039]; Fig. 1), it is conventional in the art to employ a solvent extraction technique involving a monoethanolamine (MEA) solution absorption unit (1) for separating carbon dioxide gas from a waste gas stream (4) containing low concentration carbon dioxide to produce a concentrated carbon dioxide product stream (16) (see paras. [0021]; [0036]-[0039]; Fig. 1).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ a monoethanolamine solution absorption unit, as claimed by applicant, in place of the pre-concentrator (i.e., separator element 205, 303) of Keshner et al. in application were it is desired to employ a convention solvent extraction technique as taught by Geerlings et al. for producing, the concentrated byproduct stream comprising carbon dioxide, since the reference Keshner et al. teaches that a conventional apparatus typically employed for separating carbon dioxide from waste gases may be employed in place of the disclosed separator (205, 303) of Keshner et al. (see paras. [0015]; [0063]).
Regarding claim 13, the references Keshner et al. and Geerlings et al., teach the system, where the type of rock present in the reservoir includes igneous rock, such as volcanic rock or basalt (see Keshner et al.: paras. [0007]; [0009]). Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to inject the dissolved byproduct stream into a reservoir containing broken and fractured basaltic rock or silicate rock, since the reference Keshner et al. teaches injecting a highly concentrated solution of carbon dioxide in water into a reservoir containing broken and fractured rock that can react with dissolved carbon dioxide in the water to attain a rapid and economical conversion of carbon dioxide into stable carbonates (see paras. [0032]-[0034]). Further, the reference Keshner et al. teaches that the type of rock suitable to react with the dissolved carbon dioxide include igneous rock, such as volcanic rock or basalt (see paras. [0007]; [0009]; [0015]), which are considered to encompass the basaltic rock or silicate rock recited in claim 13.
Regarding claim 15, the references Keshner et al. and Geerlings et al. teach the system, wherein the pre-concentrator is configured to increase the CO2 concentration from less than 10 vol% to above 40 vol% (see Keshner et al.: para. [0071]; Geerlings et al.: para. [0036]-[0039]).
Regarding claim 16, the references Keshner et al. and Geerlings et al. teach the system, where the facility includes a power production facility (see Keshner et al.: paras. [0007]; [0070]; [0073]).
Regarding claims 17 and 18, the references Keshner et al. and Geerlings et al. teach the system, where the reservoir can be between about 300 m and 850 m below the surface (see Keshner et al. para. [0093]). Further, as no structural distinction is seen between the instantly claimed system and the system of Keshner et al. and Geerlings et al, the reservoir as taught of Keshner et al. can suitably be at temperature in the range as claimed by applicant.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lessanework T Seifu whose telephone number is (571)270-3153. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9:00 am - 6:30 pm; F 9:00 am - 1:00 pm.
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.
/LESSANEWORK SEIFU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774