DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-12 are pending, of which claims 1-8 have been withdrawn.
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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see response pages 5-6, filed 1/16/26, with respect to JP 2017047410 (“Toshiaki ‘410”) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Applicant argues that claim 9 has been amended to recite that the glass transition temperature of the material is less than 30 °C. Examiner agrees that Toshiaki ‘410 does not teach an acid gas absorbent material with a glass transition temperature of less than 30 °C. The prior rejections of claims 9-12 have therefore been withdrawn. However, upon further search, additional prior art has been found that meets these limitations.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McDanel, et al. “Effect of monomer structure on curing behavior, CO2 solubility, and gas permeability of ionic liquid-based epoxy-amine resins and ion-gels”. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 54, 16 (2015): 4396-4406 (“McDanel”) in view of in view of JP 2017047412 (“Toshiaki ‘412”, cited in IDS of 12/1/22, Applicant provided translation used for citations).
Regarding claim 9, McDanel teaches an acid gas absorbent material (see e.g. page 4397, second full paragraph, starting “Herein, we report…”). The material of McDanel consists primarily of an amine-containing resin (Id.). The glass transition temperature of the materials taught by McDanel range from 9-38 °C, including multiple examples of less than 30 °C (see e.g. Table 2).
McDanel is silent as to the surface area of the resin. However, Toshiaki ‘412 teaches a similar amine containing resin for acid gas absorption that, like the product of McDanel is the product of a reaction between an epoxy compound and an amine compound (see e.g. paragraphs [0001] and [0009]). Toshiaki ‘412 teaches that by using dilute conditions when reacting the amine and epoxy the resulting resin has a large surface area, which is advantageous for absorption properties (see e.g. paragraph [0084]), resulting in a surface area over 1 m2/g (see e.g. paragraph [0060]). Accordingly, prior the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to use dilute conditions during the epoxy-amine reaction of McDanel as taught by Toshiaki ‘412 in order to increase the surface area over 1 m2/g and thereby improve the absorption properties of the material.
Regarding claim 10, McDanel teaches that the resin comprises an amine monomer component and an epoxy monomer component (see e.g. FIG. 1 showing the combinations of epoxy components and amine components used).
Regarding claim 11, the resins of McDanel have an amine density well over 8 mmol/g, including the first material shown in FIG. 6, which has an amine density of about 17 mmol/g (see e.g. FIG. 6).
Regarding claim 12, the resins of McDanel have a CO2 capacity of between 0.7-1.0 mmol/g (see e.g. FIG. 4). Given the amine density of up to 17 mmol/g, and using the amine utilization rate formula provided in the instant Specification at paragraph [0024], the amine utilization rate of the materials of McDanel is 4.1-5.8. Using the formula for in resin diffusion rate provided in paragraph [0024] of the instant application, the materials of McDanel would have an in resin acid gas diffusion rate of greater than 1.2 if the surface area is between 3.4 and 4.8 m2/g or less. As Toshiaki ‘412 teaches using a material with a surface area of 1-10 m2/g, the ranges of the prior art overlap significantly with the claimed range (see e.g. Toshiaki ‘412 at paragraph [0060]).
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 ERIC S SHERMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET.
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.
/E.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736