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 .
Examiner’s Comments
This is a second non-final rejection because it includes a rejection on newly cited art other than information submitted in an information disclosure statement filed under 37 CFR 1.97(c) with the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(p), of any claim not amended or amended in a way that does not necessitate a new ground of rejection by applicant or patent owner in spite of the fact that other claims may have been amended to require newly cited art.
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.
Claims 1–7 and 10–11 are 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.
Claim 1 is rejected because the term “the mixing device” lacks antecedent basis.
Claims 2–4 are rejected because they depend on claim 1.
Claim 5 is indefinite because the term “the ammonia recovery stream”, “the scrubber” lack antecedent basis.
Claim 6 is indefinite because it depends on claim 5.
Claim 7 is indefinite because the term “the ammonia recovery stream” “the scrubber” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim 10 is indefinite because the term “the scrubbing fluid storage tank” “the scrubber” lack antecedent basis.
Claim 11 is indefinite because it depends on claim 10. Claim 11 is also indefinite because the limitation of “the at least one vent gas stream” lacks antecedent basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102(a)(1)
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 5–7 and 10–11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Grotz et al., US 5,114,694 A (“Grotz”).
Regarding claim 5:
Grotz discloses that an apparatus (Grotz’s device as shown in Fig. 1, Grotz Fig. 1) for reducing or avoiding creation of wastewater when treating one or more streams output from ammonia manufacturing, comprising:
a mixing device positioned to receive at least one ammonia product stream from the ammonia manufacturing (Grotz discloses its aqueous solution is mixed with the anhydrous ammonia product of the plant in a step not shown to form a blended ammonia product, the structure responsible for the mixing step read on the claimed “mixing device”, Grotz col. 5, ll. 14–18), the at least one ammonia product stream comprising a liquid having ammonia at a concentration of between 99.2 weight percent (wt%) ammonia to 99.8 wt% ammonia (note that the claim directed to an apparatus, the ammonia product stream is not part of the claimed invention and Grotz’s invention is capable of mixing ammonia stream with any ammonia concentration);
the mixing device also positioned to receive a portion of the ammonia recovery stream from the scrubber (Grotz’s adsorber 3, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 34–40) to mix with the at least one ammonia product stream (Grotz discloses as anhydrous ammonia, Grotz col. 3, ll. 29–34) and output an ammonia product stream comprising a liquid having ammonia between 99.2 wt% ammonia and 99.8 wt% ammonia and water between 0.2 wt% water and 0.8 wt% water (Grotz discloses a small concentration of water about 0.2 wt% in ammonia product helps prevent corrosive to carbon steel storage equipment, Grotz col. 2, ll. 54–58, and Grotz also discloses its invention provides control of the ammonia concentration at a high level within the narrow range that is high enough to provide corrosion protection for carbon steel equipment and low enough to meet the specification for maximum allowable water in the anhydrous ammonia product, Grotz col. 3, ll. 33–39, Grotz therefore discloses the required concentration).
Regarding claim 7:
Grotz discloses that an apparatus (Grotz Fig.1) for reducing or avoiding creation of wastewater when treating one or more streams output from ammonia manufacturing, comprising:
a mixing device (Grotz discloses its aqueous solution is mixed with the anhydrous ammonia product of the plant in a step not shown to form a blended ammonia product, the structure responsible for the mixing step read on the claimed “mixing device”, Grotz col. 5, ll. 14–18)) positioned to receive a portion of the ammonia recovery stream from the scrubber (Grotz’s adsorber 3, Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 34–40) to mix with the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing (Grotz discloses as main product stream of anhydrous ammonia, Grotz col. 3, ll. 29–39) and output an ammonia product stream comprising a liquid having ammonia within a pre-selected ammonia concentration range and water within a pre-selected water concentration range (Grotz also discloses its invention provides control of the ammonia concentration at a high level within the narrow range that is high enough to provide corrosion protection for carbon steel equipment and low enough to meet the specification for maximum allowable water in the anhydrous ammonia product, Grotz col. 3, ll. 33–39; Grotz discloses a small concentration of water about 0.2 wt% in ammonia product helps prevent corrosive to carbon steel storage equipment, Grotz col. 2, ll. 54–58).
Regarding claim 10:
Grotz discloses that an apparatus (Grotz Fig.1) for reducing or avoiding creation of wastewater when treating one or more streams output from ammonia manufacturing, comprising:
a vapor conduit (Grotz’s vapor space 21, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 63–67) positioned between the scrubbing fluid storage tank (Grotz’s vessel 11, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 59–62) and the scrubber (Grotz’s adsorber 3, Grotz Fig. 3, col. 4, ll. 34–38) to feed vapor from the scrubbing fluid storage tank to the scrubber (Grotz’s vapor enter via conduit 19 and bubble through vessel 11 and enters adsorber 3, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 55–67).
Regarding claim 11:
Grotz discloses that the apparatus of claim 10, wherein:
the vapor conduit is connected to a vent stream feed line (Grotz’s conduit 19, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 55–59) for feeding that vapor to the scrubber (3 of Grotz, Grotz Fig. 1) along with the at least one vent gas stream (Grotz’s purge gas); or
the vapor conduit is connected to the scrubber for feeding the vapor from the scrubbing fluid storage tank at an inlet to the scrubber that is separate from an inlet of the vent stream feed line that provides the at least one vent gas stream to the scrubber.
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 text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
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.
The claims are rejected as follows:
Claims 1–4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Grotz et al., US 5,114,694 A (“Grotz”) in view of Liu et al., CN 207498095 U (“Liu”).
Regarding claim 1:
Grotz discloses an apparatus for treating one or more streams output from ammonia manufacturing (Grotz’s apparatus as shown in Fig. 1 treats purge gas of an ammonia synthesis system, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 3, ll. 29–39),
the apparatus comprising:
a scrubber (Grotz’s adsorber 3, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 34–39) positionable to receive at least one vent gas stream (Grotz’s purge gas via conduit 19, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 55–59) from the ammonia manufacturing (Grotz discloses such purge stream is from ammonia manufacture, Grotz, col. 1, ll. 6–7),
the scrubber (3 of Grotz) configured to treat vent gas of the at least one vent gas stream (19 of Grotz ) via a scrubbing liquid (Grotz discloses as liquid water via conduit 1, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 4, ll. 35–38) that is feedable to the scrubber (3 of Grotz) to remove ammonia (NH3) from the vent gas (19 of Grotz) and output an ammonia recovery stream (Grotz’s conduit 18) comprising a liquid that includes water and ammonia (Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 7–14) and also output at least one waste gas stream (Grotz’s scrubbed gas via conduit 22, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 1–6);
a scrubbing fluid storage tank (Grotz’s vessel 11, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 1) positioned and configured to receive a portion of the ammonia recovery stream output from the scrubber (3 of Grotz) to retain the portion of the ammonia recovery stream therein (as shown in Fig. 1),
wherein the scrubber (3 of Grotz) and the scrubbing fluid storage tank (11 of Grotz) are positioned such that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream output from the scrubber (via Grotz’s conduit 18) is feedable to the mixing device to mix with the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing (Grotz discloses its aqueous solution in conduit 18 is mixed with anhydrous ammonia product of the plant in a step now shown to form a blended ammonia product, Grotz col 5, ll. 7–17, the structure performing the mixing step would be the claimed “mixing device”) and output an ammonia product stream comprising a liquid having ammonia within a pre-selected ammonia concentration range and water within a pre-selected water concentration range (Grotz discloses its blended ammonia product will have a water concentration between desired minimum and maximum water concentrations, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 39–47).
Grotz does not disclose its device is for reducing or avoiding creation of wastewater. Grotz does not disclose that a portion of the ammonia recovery stream output from the scrubber and retained in the scrubbing fluid storage tank is subsequently feed the portion of the ammonia recovery stream to the scrubber as the scrubbing liquid. Grotz also does not disclose wherein the scrubber (3 of Grotz) and the scrubbing fluid storage tank (11 of Grotz) also being positioned and arranged so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the scrubbing fluid storage tank and the portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the mixing device are adjustable so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream fed to the scrubbing fluidstorage tank decreases when the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing is at a first flow rate and the portion of the ammonia recovery stream fed to the scrubbing fluid storage tank increases when the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing is at a second flow rate that is below the first flow rate; and the first flow rate for the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing being a flow rate at which the ammonia manufacturing operates at a range of 80% capacity to 100% capacity and the second flow rate for the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing being a flow rate at which the ammonia manufacturing operates at a range of 5% capacity to 25% capacity.
In the analogous art of treating output gas comprising ammonia, Liu discloses a similar structure, comprising a scrubber (Liu’s washing tower 6) positionable to receive at least one vent gas stream (Liu’s vent gas from steam pipeline 19, Liu Fig. 1, p. 3). Liu discloses that the scrubber 6 is configured to treat vent gas of the at least one vent gas stream via a scrubbing liquid (Liu’s liquid from recycling water tank 14, Liu Fig. 1, p. 3). Liu discloses that the scrubbing liquid from recycling water tank 14 is feedable to the scrubber 6 to remove ammonia (NH3) from the vent gas and output an ammonia recovery stream (Liu’s stream out from drain outlet connected to pump 7) comprising a liquid that includes water and ammonia (Liu’s stream out from drain outlet connected to pump 7 flows into ammonia-containing waste water recovery tank 8, which necessarily contains ammonia and water) and also output at least one waste gas stream (Liu’s stream that flows into gas-liquid separator 10, Liu Fig. 1, p. 3).
Liu discloses that a scrubbing fluid storage tank 8 positioned and configured to receive a portion of the ammonia recovery stream output from the scrubber 6 to retain the portion of the ammonia recovery stream therein and subsequently feed the portion of the ammonia recovery stream to the scrubber as the scrubbing liquid (Liu’s scrubbing fluid storage tank 8 is connected to Liu’s recycling water tank 14 and Liu’s recycling water tank 14 accommodates the scrubbing liquid. Liu Fig. 1, p. 3).
Liu discloses its model reduces the use of salt water, and greatly reduces production cost and saves sewage treatment cost. Since both Grotz and Liu are concerned with treating vent gas comprising ammonia, and both process involves water consumption, It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Liu’s design, which involves reusing of water by subsequently feed the portion of the ammonia recovery stream (in Grotz’s tank 11) to the scrubber (Grotz’s crubber 3) as the scrubbing liquid to save water usage as well as reduces production cost and saves sewage treatment cost. Such modification could be done by adding a branch to Grotz’s conduit 18.
With such modification, modified Grotz’s device would have a side benefit of reducing or avoiding creation of wastewater. Modified Grotz would have a portion of the ammonia recovery stream output from the scrubber and retained in the scrubbing fluid storage tank is subsequently feed the portion of the ammonia recovery stream to the scrubber as the scrubbing liquid the same way as shown by Liu.
As for the limitation of that the scrubber and the scrubbing fluid storage tank being positioned and arranged so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the scrubbing fluid storage tank and the portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the mixing device are adjustable so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream fed to the scrubbing fluid storage tank decreases when the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing is at a first flow rate and the portion of the ammonia recovery stream fed to the scrubbing fluid storage tank increases when the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing is at a second flow rate that is below the first flow rate, it is noted that this limitation is describing how the device functions without reciting any physical structure, the examiner focuses on the claimed structure rather than how the device functions. Here, Grotz discloses that a need of adjusting the flow rate entering its adsorber 3 and Grotz also discloses a flow ratio controller 32 to maintain a ratio of the flow of water in conduit 1 to the flow of incoming purge gas in conduit 19, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 39–57. Grotz also discloses that ratio set point of ratio controller 32 and/or the density set point of density controller 33 are adjusted from time to time to maintain a concentration in the anhydrous ammonia product of the plant at a desired level high enough for corrosion protection in the production storage requirement and low enough to meet product specifications, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 57–64. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to further modify Grotz to adjust the portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the to the scrubbing fluid storage tank and portion of the ammonia recovery stream feedable to the mixing device to meet the desired ratio of flow water entering the scrubber (which now has two parts, one from conduit 1 and the other part from ammonia recovery stream) and purge gas flow rate And to maintain a concentration in the anhydrous ammonia exiting the mixing device.
For the limitation of that “the first flow rate for the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing being a flow rate at which the ammonia manufacturing operates at a range of 80% capacity to 100% capacity and the second flow rate for the at least one ammonia product stream received from the ammonia manufacturing being a flow rate at which the ammonia manufacturing operates at a range of 5% capacity to 25% capacity”, such limitation describing how the device functions and the limitation of “ammonia manufacturing” is not part of the claimed apparatus for reducing or avoiding creation of waste water. Modified Grotz’s apparatus is capable of function at different flow rates and therefore meets the claimed limitation.
Regarding claim 2:
Modified Grotz discloses that the apparatus of claim 1, wherein a scrubbing fluid storage tank conduit (the structure connecting Grotz’s adsorber 3 and Grotz’s vessel 11 read on the claimed “scrubbing fluid storage tank conduit”) is positioned between the scrubber and the scrubbing fluid storage tank so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream is feedable to the scrubbing fluid storage tank (such structure is located in between to connect Grotz’s adsorber 3 and Grotz’s vessel 11) and a scrubber feed conduit is positioned between the scrubber and the scrubbing fluid storage tank so that the portion of the ammonia recovery stream is feedable from the scrubbing fluid storage tank to the scrubber as the scrubbing liquid (as modified in claim 1, where would be a conduit allows fluid in Grotz’s vessel 11 to enter Grotz’s scrubber 3, which read on the claimed “scrubber feed conduit”, Grotz Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 3:
While modified Grotz discloses that the apparatus of claim 2, comprising: a pump connected to the scrubber feed conduit so that the scrubbing liquid is outputtable from the scrubbing fluid storage tank to the scrubber, Liu discloses a pump 9 connected to the scrubber feed conduit so that the scrubbing liquid is outputtable from the scrubbing fluid storage tank 8 to the scrubber 6, Liu Fig. 1, p. 3. It would therefore have been obvious for one ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to include Liu’s pump 9 in modified Grotz to facilitate fluid flow.
Regarding claim 4:
Modified Grotz discloses that the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the scrubber and the scrubbing fluid storage tank are positioned and arranged so that wastewater is not formed from operation of the scrubber (modified Grotz does not form wastewater because waste water is either circle back to Grotz’s adsorber 3 or exiting conduit 18 and blend with anhydrous ammonia to form product, Grotz Fig. 1, col. 5, ll. 14–17).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to QIANPING HE whose telephone number is (571)272-8385. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30-5:00 M-F.
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 on (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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Qianping He/Examiner, Art Unit 1776