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 .
Election/Restriction
Applicant’s election, without traverse, of Group I (claims 1-18) in the reply filed on November 18, 2025, to the restriction requirement dated September 24, 2025, is hereby acknowledged.
Accordingly, claims 1-18 have been examined in the instant Office action, whereas claims 19 and 20 have been withdrawn from consideration as drawn to a nonelected invention but remain pending with the present application.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 1-10 and 12-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as unpatentable over Tillman (US 2015/0121191 A1 to Tillman, published May 14, 2009).
Tillman discloses a system/method for producing of a CO2-rich product gas (‘enrichment’), the system/method comprising a steam shift reactor adapted for the production of shifted synthesis gas from a high pressure raw synthesis gas (syngas), wherein the shifted syngas contains hydrogen and carbon dioxide produced by a reaction of steam with carbon monoxide within the raw syngas; wherein a hydrogen separation unit separates the shifted syngas into a hydrogen-rich and hydrogen-lean tail gas that is reacted with oxygen to produce an oxidized product gas comprising water vapor and carbon dioxide; followed by dehydration in an apparatus adapted for removal of water vapor from the oxidized product gas, to provide a carbon dioxide enriched product gas possessing 95 percent by volume of carbon dioxide, and wherein the hydrogen removal unit may be integrated with the steam shift reactor (abstract; Figures 1-3; [0002]; [0003]; [0011]; [0012];,[0015] and claim 1of Tillman).
Tillman further discloses that this method for the production of carbon dioxide enriched rich product gas can be used in carbon dioxide sequestration processes from a high-pressure raw synthesis gas, wherein the apparatus is configured to remove compounds having nominal temperatures ("outlet temperatures") below the critical temperature of pure carbon dioxide and thus leave behind compounds having nominal critical temperatures at least as high as the critical temperature of pure carbon dioxide ([0011]; [0014]; [0015]; [0036]; [0073]; [0086]; [0105]; Table 1; claims 1 and 16 of Tillman). The syngas may contain sulfur dioxide that is removed by an absorber or sour shift ([0013]; [0017]; [0034]; [0048]; [0068]; [0073]; [0109]; and Table 1 of Tillman).
Tillman also teaches that the steam reactor further contains a catalyst/shift-catalyst for catalyzing the production for a water-gas shift, which can convert carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide, wherein the catalyst can be a copper on a mixed support zinc and aluminum oxide molar ratio ([0015]; [0020]; [0021]; [0033]; [0057]; claims 16, 26 and 28 of Tillman).
Although Tillman may not disclose all the concentrations/ratios disclosed in the present claims, particularly, the oxygen to carbon molar ratios and the steam to dry gas molar ratios, however, it would have been within the purview of one skilled in the art at the time of the filing of the present application to select optimal molar ratios of its various components to provide an enhanced enriched carbon dioxide gas product, as taught by Tillman itself in paragraphs [0020]; [0048]; [0058]; [0090]; and claims 26-27. Thus, the resultant enhanced molar/ratios recited in the present claims can be arrived by routine optimization of these component variable (See MPEP §2144.05 II A.
Thus, the instant claims are unpatentable over Tillman.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 11 is objected to as dependent upon a rejected base claim but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The method disclosed in Tillman, the closest prior art, does not teach or suggest its process for enriching syngas further including the steps of: measuring a temperature representative for the outlet temperature of the water-gas shift reactor; providing a reference temperature equal to/less than the critical temperature by a specified margin and comparing the temperature representative for the outlet temperature with the reference temperature; and varying the steam/dry gas ratio (S/DG ratio) in response to the result of the comparison, and either of the following:
wherein the synthesis gas stream is introduced into the synthesis gas reactor at an oxygen to carbon (O/C) ratio below the lower O/C limit and the SD/G ratio is decreased if the temperature representative for the outlet temperature rises above the reference temperature, or
wherein the synthesis gas stream is introduced into the synthesis gas reactor at an O/C ratio above the upper O/C limit and the S/DG ratio is increased if the temperature representative for the outlet temperature rises above the reference temperature.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN J FIGUEROA whose telephone number is (571)272-8916. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:30 am -6:00 pm. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, JOSEPH DEL SOLE can be reached on 571-272-1130. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. 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.
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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/JOHN J FIGUEROA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1763
March 16, 2026