DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement filed December 9, 2025 fails to comply with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.98(a)(4) because it lacks the appropriate size fee assertion. It has been placed in the application file, but the information referred to therein has not been considered as to the merits.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 5 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Froment et al. (“Thermodynamic equilibrium calculations of the volatilization and condensation of inorganics during wood gasification”).
With regard to Claim 5, Froment teaches a syngas composition comprising <100 ppm methane by volume (Table 5, PFR at 1300 C; <0.01 vol% CH4 = <100 ppm CH4).
Froment teaches the syngas composition comprising antimony, present in an amount of 3 ppmv (Table 6, Auto. EFR 1300 °C).
Converting ppmv to ppmw, using the autothermal conditions at 1300 °C, gives the following:
Molar mass of 30 vol% H2, 46 vol% CO, 17 vol% H2O, and 11 vol% CO2: (0.30 x 2.016 g/mol) + (0.46 x 28.010 g/mol) + (0.17 x 18.016 g/mol) + (0.11 x 44.009 g/mol) = 21.393 g/mol
Molar mass of Sb = 121.760 g/mol; 3 ppmv x (121.760/21.393) = 17.075 ppmw Sb
Therefore, Froment teaches antimony, present in an amount of 17.075 ppmw. All ppms are on a dry basis.
While Froment is silent to the syngas composition comprising titanium present in an amount of at least 5 ppmw and not more than 40,000 ppmw, the process disclosed by Froment and the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would produce substantially identical products. See MPEP 2112.01.I.
Paragraph 0223 of the instant specification discloses that the gasification reactor “may be operated at a temperature of… at least 1300°C and/or… not more than 1600°C” and that “the reaction temperature may be autogenous”. Further, Paragraph 0071 of the instant specification discloses exemplary feedstocks for gasification: “Exemplary biowaste materials include, but are not limited to, cotton, wood, saw dust, food scraps, animals and animal parts, plants and plant parts, and manure”.
Froment discloses autothermal wood gasification at 1300°C (Table 5) wherein Ti is present at 25.3 ppm in the wood feedstock.
Therefore, it would be expected for the process of Froment to produce a syngas composition comprising titanium present in an amount of at least 5 ppmw and not more than 40,000 ppmw.
Once a reference teaching a product appearing to be substantially identical is made the basis of a rejection, and the examiner presents evidence or reasoning tending to show inherency, the burden shifts to the applicant to show an unobvious difference. "[T]he PTO can require an applicant to prove that the prior art products do not necessarily or inherently possess the characteristics of his [or her] claimed product. Whether the rejection is based on ‘inherency’ under 35 U.S.C. 102, on ‘prima facie obviousness’ under 35 U.S.C. 103, jointly or alternatively, the burden of proof is the same, and its fairness is evidenced by the PTO’s inability to manufacture products or to obtain and compare prior art products." In re Best, 562 F.2d 1252, 1255, 195 USPQ 4380, 483-34 (CCPA 1977)), see MPEP 2112. Applicant has not clearly shown an unobvious difference between the instant invention and the prior art’s product.
With regard to Claim 14, Froment teaches the syngas composition comprising halides, comprising HCl, HF, KCl, and NaCl, present in a total amount of (2.5+2+24+1.3) = 29.8 ppmv (Table 6, Auto. EFR 1300 °C).
Converting ppmv to ppmw, using the autothermal conditions at 1300 °C, gives the following:
Molar mass of 30 vol% H2, 46 vol% CO, 17 vol% H2O, and 11 vol% CO2: (0.30 x 2.016 g/mol) + (0.46 x 28.010 g/mol) + (0.17 x 18.016 g/mol) + (0.11 x 44.009 g/mol) = 21.393 g/mol
Molar mass of HCl = 36.46 g/mol; 2.5 ppmv x (36.46/21.393) = 4.261 ppmw HCl
Molar mass of HF = 20.00 g/mol; 2 ppmv x (20.00/21.393) = 1.87 ppmw HF
Molar mass of KCl = 74.555 g/mol; 24 ppmv x (74.555/21.393) = 83.64 ppmw KCl
Molar mass of NaCl = 58.44 g/mol; 1.3 ppmv x (58.44/21.393) = 3.551 ppmw NaCl
Therefore, Froment teaches halides, comprising HCl, HF, KCl, and NaCl, present in a total amount of (4.261 + 1.87 + 83.64 + 3.551) = 93.322 ppmw.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 6-10, filed December 5, 2025, with respect to the rejections of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) over Chiche (“Synthesis Gas Purification”), of claim 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Chiche, and of claims 5 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Trapp et al. (US 2020/0248086 A1) and Gillespie et al. (US 2017/0226436 A1) as evidenced by Shirley et al. “Chemical characterisation is rough: the impact of topography and measurement parameters on energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy in biominerals”, in view of Despen et al. (US 2015/0126362 A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive.
Regarding the rejections over 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C. 103, Chiche, Trapp, and Gillespie as evidenced by Shirley in view of Despen do not disclose the syngas composition comprising methane, wherein the amount of methane present is not more than 1000 ppm by volume of methane on a dry basis. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn.
However, upon further consideration, new grounds of rejection are made of claims 5 and 14 under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) over Froment et al. (“Thermodynamic equilibrium calculations of the volatilization and condensation of inorganics during wood gasification”).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7302. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5, F 7:30-4.
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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. 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.Y.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/RICHARD M RUMP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights