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 .
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.
Claim(s) 15-19, 22, 29, and 31 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kibby (US 5316565 A), and in further view of Gaiffi (US 20110120138 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Kibby discloses a process that involves converting hydrogen and
carbon monoxide to produce methane and water (Kibby [C3 L51-55]), the decomposing of
methane into carbon and hydrogen (Kibby [C3 L65-68]), and producing carbon monoxide and a
reduced substance where carbon material is used as the reducing agent (Kibby [C4 L5-10]). The
prior art further specifies that the steps in the process would follow one after the other where
methane produced would be used in the next step, followed by carbon being used in the
following reaction, with carbon monoxide being funneled back to the first step (Kibby [C4 L10-
20]).
Kibby does not disclose the pressure of the system to be within a 1 to 30 bar range. However, Gaiffi, who teaches a process for converting hydrogen feedstocks using pyrolysis, discloses that CH4 production (step (a)) is done under a pressure of 2-80 bar (Gaiffi [0017]). Furthermore, the prior art also addresses the pressure conditions for methane pyrolysis (step (b)) where the reactions are done under the same conditions as the hydropyrolsis reaction, which is a pressure between 2-80 bar(Gaiffi [0018]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to apply the pressure range given by Gaiffi in order to cause the pyrolysis reaction to occur. Furthermore, "[W]here the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation." In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955). See MPEP 2144.05.
Regarding claim 16, Kibby discloses the reduction of a carbonaceous material and metal
oxides (Kibby[C8 L6-11]), with silicon also being mentioned as a material that can be produced
using this process (Kibby [C2 L19-25]). While Kibby does not directly mention the conversion of
reducing silicon oxide to silicon or silicon carbide. One of ordinary skill in the art would have
understood that silicon production when conducted in the process of Kibby, would entail the
reduction of silicon oxide to silicon/silicon carbide via the reaction and oxidization of carbon-to-
carbon monoxide.
Regarding claim 17, Kibby discloses that the heat from the products in step A, is
combined with the compounds in the carbon and aluminum monoxide reaction step, which
would then result in carbon monoxide (Kibby [C4 L24-30]). As the products are funneled to the
reactor, they take the heat with them, therefore transferring the heat from the methanation
reaction into the separation/purification step of the process. Therefore, this disclosure fulfils
the limitations set by the instant claim requiring the heat from the methanation reaction would
go toward the separation/purification of carbon monoxide.
Regarding claims 18 and 19, Kibby discloses the use of produced hydrogen in subsequent stages as a reactant (Kibby [C4 L10-14]). This disclosure fulfils the limitations set in
the instant claims requiring the hydrogen produced in steps b) to be used in a) as well as the
hydrogen produced in step d) being used in step a).
Regarding claim 22, Kibby discloses additional input gasses that are added in between
stages A and C (Kibby [C4 L56-60, Tables I-III]) one stream of gas includes, methane. This
disclosure fulfils the limitation set in the instant claim requiring at least one stream from
outside the circular process comprising H2, CH₄, CO, CO₂ and/or C is introduced into the circular
process, or wherein at least one stream comprising H₂, CH₄, CO, CO₂ and/or C is extracted from
the circular process to supply external demand and/or for storage of carbon.
Regarding claim 29, Kibby discloses a process in which hydrogen and carbon monoxide react to produce methane and water (Kibby [C3 L51-55]). Therefore, this disclosure fulfils the limitation set in the instant claim requiring hydrogen and carbon monoxide are reacted to produce methane and water by a surplus of hydrogen.
Regarding claim 31, Kibby discloses in step C that a portion of methane carbon oxide gas is sent to a fluidized bed of carbon where reduction occurs (Kibby [C4 L5-10]). While Kibby does not disclose that the mixing of materials is for electrode production, it would have been obvious that one of ordinary skill in the art would mix carbon with an additional substance during a reduction process in order to increase the yield of carbon monoxide.
Claim(s) 20 and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Kibby (US 5316565 A), in view of Gaiffi (US 20110120138 A1)
Regarding claim 20, Kibby does not disclose the specific process in which the hydrogen
is produced with or without carbon capture and storage. However, Isobe discloses a hydrogen
production method where water electrolysis occurs in a reactor following a pyrolysis reaction
(Isobe [0051]). Furthermore, Isobel also discloses the presence of a carbon preform which will
accumulate carbon from the system, in order to increase hydrogen yield (Isobe[0045]). It would
have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, that in order to further separate hydrogen
molecules from the products of the previous step, water electrolysis and some form of carbon
capture would be used to produce a pure hydrogen stream.
Regarding claim 21, Kibby does not disclose that the water produced in the reaction
cycle would go towards water electrolysis. However, in the prior art, Isobel notes the water
from the separator would go into oxygen generating assembly (OGA) where water electrolysis
would take place (Kibby [0051]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to use the water produced from previous reactions in order to optimize the cost and maintain a
continuous reaction process.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kibby (US
5316565 A), in view of Gaiffi (US 20110120138 A1) and further in view of Siegel (US 8568512 B2).
Regarding claim 23, Kibby does not disclose biogas being used as an additional methane
source. However, Siegel discloses that a raw biogas stream composes of 54 mole percent
methane (Siegel [C4 L5-10]). With this in mind, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art that the addition of biogas would be a useful way to renew the amount of
methane in a reaction system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 28 and 30 are objected to as being 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.
Reasons for Indicating Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claims 28 and 30, Kibby discloses a process that involves converting hydrogen and carbon monoxide to produce methane and water (Kibby [C3 L51-55]), the decomposing of
methane into carbon and hydrogen (Kibby [C3 L65-68]), and producing carbon monoxide and a reduced substance where carbon material is used as the reducing agent (Kibby [C4 L5-10]). Gaiffi, teaches a process for converting hydrogen feedstocks using pyrolysis, discloses that (step (a)) and (step (b)) are conducted under a pressure of 2-80 bar (Gaiffi [0017]). Isobe further discloses a hydrogen production method where water electrolysis occurs in a reactor following a pyrolysis reaction (Isobe [0051]). Lastly Siegel, discloses that a raw biogas stream composes of 54 mole percent methane (Siegel [C4 L5-10]).
However, the prior references do not teach or suggest a purification and conditioning of a gaseous product to result in a CO and CO2 content of less than 0.5%vol. Therefore, claim 28 and its dependent claim (claim 30) are considered to be novel and nonobvious.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Applicant Remarks page 7-8, filed October 28, 2025, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 15-24 under 35 U.S.C. 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kibby, Gaiffi, Isobe, and Seigel .
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANNETTE H PHAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-6:30 EST.
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 5712703591. 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.
/ANNETTE PHAN/Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736