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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendments filed by Applicant on 20 November 2025 are acknowledged. In light of Applicant’s amendments, the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejection of claim 2 has been withdrawn. It is acknowledged that claims 1-3 and 20 have been amended, claims 12 and 15-19 have been cancelled, and claims 21-26 have been added by Applicant. Accordingly, claims 1-11, 13-14, and 20-26 are currently pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 3, 20-21, and 26 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.
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 1-7 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg et al. (US-20070217972-A1), hereinafter “Greenberg”, in view of Sasson (WO-2016181401-A1) and Biogradlija (Hydrogen to power O&G drilling rigs).
Regarding Claim 1, Greenberg discloses a system (see [0042]) comprising: a reactor configured for catalytic water splitting (catalyst to support the water split reaction; see [0038]) to produce hydrogen (for generating hydrogen; see Abstract) and byproduct solids via contact of water and aluminum (aluminum-based water split reaction; see [0027]) in the presence of a catalyst comprising a metal oxide (a metal oxide initiator; see [0029]) wherein the reactor comprises one or more inlets whereby water, aluminum, the catalyst, or a combination thereof are introduced to a reaction chamber of the reactor (water is drawn from… and forced upwardly into the reactor cartridge via an inlet pipe; see [0044]), an outlet for hydrogen (Hydrogen produced by the reaction exits the top; see [0058]), and an outlet for a slurry comprising water, catalyst, and solids comprising aluminum oxide, aluminum hydroxide, or a combination thereof (The reaction products, in turn, are simply drained out of the reactor; as noted above, the reaction products are safe and environmentally benign, and may be recycled; see [0046]).
Greenberg does not explicitly teach a separator. However, Sasson discloses a solid/liquid separation apparatus (separation units; see [61]) configured to separate the solids from the slurry to provide a solids-reduced slurry (separation of the bicarbonate slurry… into a solid phase… and a liquid phase; see [83]).
Greenberg and Sasson are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of catalytic hydrogen production. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Greeberg by incorporating the teachings of Sasson and including a solid/liquid separator. Doing so would allow for the collection of solids and recycle of liquids (see [85]).
Regarding the limitation claiming “a water treatment apparatus operable to produce a low-total dissolved solids (TDS) from a high-TDS water, wherein the low-TDS water comprises a lower amount of total dissolved solids than the high-TDS water”, the separator of Sasson meets this limitation. A solid liquid separator that separates solids out of a slurry, wherein water is the primary liquid component, is treating water to reduce the amount of total dissolved solids in the water/liquid. Therefore, the separator of modified Greenberg meets the limitations of the claimed water treatment apparatus and effectively operates as such. Sasson also discloses wherein the water [in the reactor] comprises the low-TDS water (Lines (11A) and (11B) are used to recycle streams of the liquid component(s) of the reaction mixture from separation unit (9A) and (9B) to reactors (7A) and (7B), respectively; see [61]). Doing so allows adjustment to produce hydrogen at a rate sufficient to meet demand (see Sasson [70]).
Greenberg also does not explicitly teach oilfield equipment. However, Biogradlija discloses oilfield equipment that is operable via the hydrogen as fuel and/or via electricity produced from the hydrogen (Because hydrogen is so adaptable, oilfield service providers and operators may employ portable fuel cell power solutions for a variety of uses, including running complete drilling rigs; see Para. 3).
Greenberg discloses a compact and portable water-splitting apparatus for generating hydrogen that is readily transportable, either by itself or in conjunction with portable user equipment (see [0011]), wherein the produced hydrogen can be sent to a fuel cell (see [0013]). Biogradlija discloses complete drilling rigs that are operable by portable fuel cell power solutions for a variety of uses (see Para. 3). KSR Rationale A (see MPEP 2141) states that it is obvious to “combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the water-splitter of Greenberg with the drilling rig of Biogradlija in order to achieve the predictable result of decarbonization (see Biogradlija, Para. 2), with the added benefit of zero emissions at the point of use (see Biogradlija, Para. 3).
Regarding Claim 2, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the systemof claim 1. Greenberg further discloses recycling water (the water supplied to the reactor assembly… may in turn include water recuperated from the gas stream and fuel cell exhaust; see [0058]) and recycling the slurry of reaction products (see [0046]). Sasson further discloses a recycle line fluidly connecting the solid/liquid separation apparatus with the reactor (recycle line exiting separation unit is connected to an inlet opening in said reactor; see [64]), whereby at least a portion of the solids-reduced slurry can be recycled to the reactor (to recycle liquid stream from said separation unit; see [64]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a recycle line to recycle the liquid stream from the separation unit because it would decrease overall system volume and mass (see Greenberg [0058]).
Regarding Claim 4, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Greenberg further discloses the catalyst comprising metal oxide and/or metal hydroxide (a metal oxide initiator; see [0013]) and wherein the solids-reduced slurry comprises an aqueous metal hydroxide and/or metal oxide solution (products of the reaction are… calcium hydroxide… the reaction product is recyclable; see [0033]) and wherein the solids comprise aluminum oxide (A1203) (also forms… A1203; see [0034]).
Regarding Claim 5, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Greenberg further discloses one or a plurality of hydrogen fuel cells (hydrogen gas to a fuel cell; see [0013]) operable to produce electricity (electricity production is the primary function of a hydrogen fuel cell) and byproduct water from the hydrogen (water recuperated from the gas stream and fuel cell exhaust; see [0058]).
Regarding Claim 6, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Greenberg further discloses a hydrogen storage apparatus configured to store at least a portion of the hydrogen or the energy thereof (a spaced gap above the upper end of the sleeve that forms a collection chamber 78 for the hydrogen; see [0053]).
Regarding Claim 7, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Biogradlija further discloses the oilfield equipment comprises hydraulic fracturing equipment (Because hydrogen is so adaptable, oilfield service providers and operators may employ portable fuel cell power solutions for a variety of uses, including running complete drilling rigs; see Para. 3). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to employ hydraulic fracturing equipment as the oilfield equipment because hydraulic fracturing equipment is naturally a part of a complete drilling rig.
Regarding Claim 10, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Greenberg further discloses the catalyst comprising a metal oxide selected from sodium oxide, potassium oxide, calcium oxide (The initiator is suitably an alkaline earth metal oxide, such as calcium oxide (CaO); see [0030]).
Regarding Claim 23, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Sasson further discloses equipment that produces the produced water (reaction mixture is discharged from reactor (7A), and allowed to flow through discharge line into a separation unit, where the reaction mixture is separated into… a liquid component, consisting of formate-containing aqueous phase; see [67]), wherein the equipment that produces the produced water is on-site at a same location as the reactor (in this case, the equipment that produces the produced water is the reactor). This would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because it can reduce solid bicarbonate in the reactor to below a predetermined threshold level (see Sasson [67]).
Regarding Claim 24, Greenberg discloses a compact and portable water-splitting apparatus for generating hydrogen that is readily transportable, either by itself or in conjunction with portable user equipment (see [0011]), wherein the produced hydrogen can be sent to a fuel cell (see [0013]). Biogradlija discloses complete drilling rigs that are operable by portable fuel cell power solutions for a variety of uses (see Para. 3). KSR Rationale A (see MPEP 2141) states that it is obvious to “combine prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the portable and readily transportable apparatus of modified Greenberg at the site of the drilling rig of Biogradlija in order to achieve the predictable result of decarbonization (see Biogradlija, Para. 2), with the added benefit of zero emissions at the point of use (see Biogradlija, Para. 3).
Regarding Claim 25, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Sasson further discloses wherein the reactor further comprises a heat exchanger configured for the removal of heat from the reaction chamber (reactor equipped with conventional heating and cooling means, e.g., external jacket or internal coil; see [60]). This modification would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because it would enable temperature control of the reactor (see Sasson [76]).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg et al. (US-20070217972-A1), hereinafter “Greenberg”, in view of Sasson (WO-2016181401-A1), Biogradlija (Hydrogen to power O&G drilling rigs), and Peng et al. (US-8920772-B2), hereinafter “Peng”.
Regarding Claim 3, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Modified Greenberg does not explicitly teach water treatment via carbon dioxide contact, evaporation, or distillation.
However, Peng discloses wherein a treatment apparatus (thermal water purification system; see Col. 2 Line 43) operable to produce the low-total dissolved solids (TDS) water from the high-TDS water (to form a first steam stream and a first contaminant-enriched raw water stream; see Col. 2 Lines 44-45) comprises an apparatus configured for heating the high-TDS water (heating at least a portion of the raw water stream by indirect heat transfer; see Col. 2 Lines 38-39) to produce the low-TDS water via evaporation (thereby evaporating a portion of the at least a portion of the raw water stream… to form a first steam stream and a first contaminant-enriched raw water stream… the first contaminant-enriched raw water stream having a higher concentration of the contaminants; see Col. 2 Lines 40-50) and/or distillation (multiple effect distillation process utilizing a working fluid to exchange heat from the reformate to an evaporator of the multiple effect distillation process where raw water is introduced to the evaporators; see Col. 6 Lines 36-39).
Greenberg and Peng are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hydrogen production. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Greenberg by incorporating the teachings of Peng and providing a water treatment device that incorporates evaporation and/or distillation. Doing so would reduce or eliminate costs associated with dissipating excess waste heat and can also provide flexibility to balance heat load and other operating conditions (see Peng Col. 2 Lines 17-20).
Regarding Claim 26, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 25. As explained in the claim 3 rejection, Peng discloses wherein the water treatment apparatus is configured for heating the high-TDS water to produce the low-TDS water via evaporation and/or distillation. Peng further discloses wherein a heat exchanger is fluidly connected with the water treatment apparatus such that heat removed from the reaction chamber is utilized in the water treatment apparatus (withdrawing a reformate from a reformer, heating at least a portion of the raw water stream by indirect heat transfer with the reformate, thereby cooling the reformate and thereby evaporating a portion of the raw water stream; see Col. 2 Lines 37-42). This modification would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because it can reduce or eliminate costs associated with dissipating excess waste heat (see Peng, Col. 2 Lines 17-18).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg et al. (US-20070217972-A1), hereinafter “Greenberg”, in view of Sasson (WO-2016181401-A1), Biogradlija (Hydrogen to power O&G drilling rigs), and Woodall et al. (US-8080233-B2), hereinafter “Woodall”.
Regarding Claim 8, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1.
Modified Greenberg does not explicitly teach the catalyst comprising a liquid metal. However, Woodall discloses the catalyst comprising a liquid metal (This liquid-phase alloy thus initiates the hydrogen-producing reaction; see Col. 2 Lines 49-50) selected from gallium, indium, tin, or a combination thereof (the liquid-phase alloy is 80% by weight gallium and 20% by weight indium; see Col. 2 Lines 55-57).
Greenberg and Woodall are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of catalytic water splitting to generate hydrogen. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Greenberg by incorporating the teachings of Woodall and providing a liquid metal catalyst. Doing so would help initiate the hydrogen-producing reaction more quickly and at a lower temperature; see Woodall, Col. 3 Lines 3-5).
Regarding Claim 9, Greenberg, Sasson, and Biogradlija together disclose the system of claim 1. Modified Greenberg does not explicitly teach the catalyst comprising a liquid metal. However, Woodall discloses the catalyst comprising a liquid metal (This liquid-phase alloy thus initiates the hydrogen-producing reaction; see Col. 2 Lines 49-50), wherein the liquid metal has a melting point in a range of from about 20 to about 40C, from about 25 to about 40C, or from about 25 to about 35C (AL-GA alloy freezing/melting point temperature (26.6oC); see Col. 10 Lines 58-59). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have used a liquid metal with the specified melting point in the catalyst because it would help initiate the hydrogen-producing reaction more quickly and at a lower temperature; see Woodall, Col. 3 Lines 3-5).
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg et al. (US-20070217972-A1), hereinafter “Greenberg”, in view of Biogradlija (Hydrogen to power O&G drilling rigs).
Regarding Claim 20, the limitations of claim 20 do not exceed those of claim 1 and exactly match with the exception of claim 1 including a separator. Please refer to the claim 1 rejection as the rejection of claim 20 shares the same rationale.
Claims 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Greenberg et al. (US-20070217972-A1), hereinafter “Greenberg”, in view of Sasson (WO-2016181401-A1), Biogradlija (Hydrogen to power O&G drilling rigs), Peng et al. (US-8920772-B2), hereinafter “Peng”, and Little et al. (US-8227127-B2), hereinafter “Little”.
Regarding Claim 21, Greenberg, Sasson, Biogradlija, and Peng together disclose the system of claim 3. Modified Greenberg does not explicitly teach CO2 contact. However, Little discloses a water treatment apparatus that comprises an apparatus configured for contacting high-TDS water (The aqueous electrolyte solution may contain sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, nitrate, carbonate salts, bicarbonate or other salts; see Col 8 Line 67 – Col. 9 Line 2) with carbon dioxide (CO2) (Hydroxide base produced in the cathode region is transported to a gas-liquid contact device… and exposing… solution to the air or carbon dioxide contaminated gas streams; see Col. 7 Lines 25-31) to produce the one or more metal carbonates (addition of calcium or magnesium ions to a concentrated or enriched carbonate or bicarbonate solution will precipitate calcium or magnesium carbonate salts; see Col. 7 Lines 49-51) and separate the precipitant comprising the one or more metal carbonates from low-TDS water (a separation chamber produces highly concentrated carbonate and bicarbonate salts or solutions… solvent such as methanol, ethanol, or acetone will also precipitate carbonate salts from a concentrated carbonate or bicarbonate solution; see Col. 7 Lines 42-55), and wherein the CO2 is produced by the oilfield apparatus and/or is produced from equipment at a same location as that of the oilfield apparatus (The carbon dioxide may be captured by reacting, sequestering, removing, transforming or chemically modifying gaseous carbon dioxide in the atmosphere or a gas stream. The gas stream may be flue gas, fermentation gas effluent, air, biogas, landfill methane, or any carbon dioxide-contaminated natural gas source; see Col. 13 Lines 1-6).
Greenberg and Little are both considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of hydrogen production. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Greenberg by incorporating CO2 as disclosed by Little. Doing so can enable the apparatus to be used as a large-scale fuel or commodity for reducing global carbon dioxide pollution (see Little, Col. 8 Lines 36-38).
Regarding Claim 22, Greenberg, Sasson, Biogradlija, and Peng together disclose the system of claim 3. The early limitations of claim 22 do not exceed those of claim 21. Please refer to the rejection of claim 21 as the rejection of these limitations in claim 22 follow the same rationale. Regarding the limitation claiming, “wherein the CO2 is a component of an exhaust gas produced by fracturing operations on-site at a same location as the oilfield equipment and the reactor, an exhaust gas produced via a power plant, an exhaust gas produced from a cement plant, or a combination thereof”, Little discloses that the carbon dioxide may be captured from a gas stream, wherein the gas stream may be flue gas, fermentation gas effluent, air, biogas, landfill methane, or any carbon dioxide-contaminated natural gas source (see Col 13 Lines 1-6). This modification would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention because it allows for carbon dioxide capture (see Little, Col. 13 Line 1).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 ALYSSA LEE KUYKENDALL whose telephone number is (571)270-3806. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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.
/A.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 1774
/CLAIRE X WANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights