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/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of claims 50-66, Group I in the reply filed on 11/10/2025 is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/24/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 54 is objected to because of the following informalities: “The method of claim 52” is incorrect. Claim 52 recites “The anaerobic digester of claim 50”, where independent claim 50 is an anaerobic digester. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 65 is objected to because their either appears to be typographical error or a lack of antecedent basis on line 5 of said claim. In particular, the following: “gas to the a storage region…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 50-60 and 63-64 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by DE202016106267U1-Jope (all citations are made to the machine English translation, also, JOPE Beteiligungs GmbH is the holding company, as inventor(s) name(s) is unknown, hereinafter Jope) .
Regarding claim 50, Jope discloses an anaerobic digester (a membrane roof for covering a container, such a container can be a biomass reactor, a basin or a lagoon, para. [0001], lines 1-2) comprising: a biomass storage container (container, 71, para. [0047], line 1, Fig. 2); a cover (sealing film 2, para. [0047], line 1, Fig. 2, where film 2 cover container 71, shown in Fig. 2) positioned over the biomass storage container; and one or more weights positioned on a top surface of the cover (compensating element 3 is a tube structure shown positioned on a top surface of container 71, para. [0043], line 1, Fig. 2), wherein the cover and at least one of the weights form a pleated portion of the cover (compensating element 3 can be filled with a gas, or a liquid and when filled film 2 can form a pleat as shown in Figs. 1 and 2, para. [0048], indicate the two states of element 3).
Regarding claim 51, Jope discloses wherein the cover is rectangular or square and the pleated portion is a corner of the cover (cover—film 2, has a rectangular shape as shown in Fig. 1; Jope discloses a plurality of tubular compensating elements, in particular arranged parallel to one another, can be provided. Thus, the above-described effect of a balancing element can be multiplied, para. [0027], lines 1-2).
Regarding claim 52, Jope discloses wherein the cover is sealed at an outer edge of the anaerobic digester to form a water collection region (the membrane roof seals a gas volume located in a container from the environment. Thus, gas that arises, for example biogas, can be advantageously collected and used, para. [0016]).
Regarding claim 53, Jope discloses wherein at least one of the weights is a tube (compensating element 3 is a tube, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2) that is connected to the water collection region (the membrane roof seals a gas volume located in a container from the environment. Thus, gas that arises, for example biogas, can be advantageously collected and used, para. [0016]).
Regarding claim 56, Jope discloses wherein at least one of the weights is positioned at the center of the cover (compensating element 3 is positioned at the center of cover 2 shown in Figs. 1-2), and wherein a weight is arranged in each corner of the cover(compensating element 3 forms a corner or an edge of cover 2, as shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 57, Jope discloses wherein the cover is configured to expand from a first position to a second position upon an increase in gas generated in the biomass storage container (Fig. 2 shows the two different states of expansion of cover 2 as indicated by top in solid line and one at the bottom in dashed line, para. [0048]).
Regarding claim 58, Jope discloses wherein at least one of the weights is a hollow tube, a solid tube, a rock-filled tube, or a water-filled tube (compensating element 3 is in the form of a tube, para. [0043], Fig. 1).
Regarding claim 59, Jope discloses further comprising one or more sensors configured to indicate a gas level or slurry level of the anaerobic digester (sensor for determining the gas pressure can be located in the interior of the biomass reactor (para. [0035]; gas sensor 20, para. [0051], line 1) wherein the one or more sensors comprise: (i) a pressure sensor attached to at least one of the weights (Jope discloses the sensors, a pressure regulation and/or voltage regulation can be implemented, which can function, for example, via the compensating element, para. [0026]); (ii) a line-of-sight sensor configured to monitor a top level of the cover or a slurry separation liner; or (iii) an angular sensor array attached to the cover or a slurry separation liner.
Regarding claim 60, Jope discloses one or more gas membranes or a slurry separation liner positioned between the biomass storage container and the cover (membrane roof 1of container 71, shown in Fig. 2).
Regarding claim 63, Jope discloses a thermal management system (water is fille through element 3, para. [0031], lines 1-2), wherein the thermal management system comprises a circulation device configured to: (i) flow warm water from the surface of the anaerobic digester cover to the biomass storage (compensating element 3can be filled with water, para. [0031]); (ii) flow warm water from the water collection region to the biomass storage container; or (iii) flow warm water from the biomass storage container surface of the anaerobic digester to the cover.
Regarding claim 64, Jope discloses wherein the warm water is flowed through at least one of the weights (compensating element 3, para. [0031]).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 54 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE202016106267U1-Jope (all citations are made to the machine English translation, also, JOPE Beteiligungs GmbH is the holding company, as inventor(s) name(s) is unknown, hereinafter Jope) as applied to claim 52 above, and further in view of US 9,567,247 B2-Josse et al. (hereinafter Josse).
Regarding claim 54, Jope teaches the invention discussed above in claim 52. However, Jope does not explicitly teach a water recovery and re-use system.
For claim 54, Josse teaches an invention relating to wastewater treatment, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis and gasification (col. 1, lines 17-18) and Josse teaches a gas/liquid heat exchanger (col. 5, lines 47-48), which reads on the instant claim limitation of a water recovery and re-use system.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the apparatus of Jope and further include a gas/liquid heat exchanger (water recovery and re-use system), as taught by Josse, because Josse teaches the heat recovered as hot water can be used for drying of a digestate (col. 5, lines 48-49).
Claims 55 and 65-66 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE202016106267U1-Jope (all citations are made to the machine English translation), as applied to claim 50 above, and further in view of US 9,815,721 B2-Smith.
Regarding claim 55, Jope teaches the invention discussed above in claim 50. Further, Jope teaches a biomass storage container which can be a slurry lagoon (para. [0001], lines 1-2), and also discussed above. Also, Fig. 2 of Jope shows container 71 having one or more tapered sidewalls as indicated. However, Jope does not explicitly teach a mixer of the container wherein the mixer comprises at least one input or output pipe and one or more angled mixing outlets having an operational angle matched to the taper angel of one or more of the tapered biomass storage container sidewalls.
For claim 55, Smith teaches an anaerobic digestion system including a clarifier, a batch reactor, and a digester (col. 1, lines 63-65) and Smith teaches a digester 500 (shown in Fig. 11) having tapered sidewalls (also shown in Fig. 11) where digester 500 comprises control mixing valves 614 (Fig. 11, shows the mixing valves are angled to digester 500, col. 50, lines 6-7, Fig. 11) and digester 500 an angled flexible portion tube 504 which has an angled outlet portion 506 and angled inlet 502, which is angled to the tapered sidewall of digester 500, shown below in annotated Fig. 11), which reads on the instant claim limitation of a mixer of the container wherein the mixer comprises at least one input or output pipe and one or more angled mixing outlets having an operational angle matched to the taper angel of one or more of the tapered biomass storage container sidewalls.
PNG
media_image1.png
550
1156
media_image1.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the apparatus of Jope and further include a mixer of the container wherein the mixer comprises at least one input or output pipe and one or more angled mixing outlets having an operational angle matched to the taper angle of one or more of the tapered biomass storage container sidewalls as taught by Smith. Further, Smith teaches the angle of flexible portion 504 of inlet 502 and outlet 506 included in digester 500 allow the projection of the digestate stream in two different directions; the streaming generates vortices which mix the contents in the digester 500 (col. 25, lines 33-41).
Regarding claim 65, Jope teaches the invention discussed above in claim 50. Further, Jope teaches water being filled via a pump to compensation element 3. Further, the region or space of container 71 corresponds to storage, which is located under the cover (film 2, Fig. 2).
However, Jope does not explicitly teach an energy storage and recovery system wherein the energy storage and recovery system comprises a gas pressure driven electrical generator coupled to one or more storage containers and configured to generate power using gas from the one or more storage containers, wherein the generator is configured to provide an exhaust gas to the a storage region of anaerobic digester.
For claim 65, Smith teaches Smith teaches an anaerobic digestion system including a clarifier, a batch reactor, and a digester (col. 1, lines 63-65) and Smith teaches an electrical generator 869 which is fueled by gases produced by the digestion system 100 (col. 49, lines 30-33) and Fig. 1 shows generator 869 supplying power top receptacles 475 (waste heat exchanger) and biological reactors 350 and 360, which reads on the instant claim limitation of an energy storage and recovery system wherein the energy storage and recovery system comprises a gas pressure driven electrical generator coupled to one or more storage containers and configured to generate power using gas from the one or more storage containers, wherein the generator is configured to provide an exhaust gas to the a storage region of anaerobic digester.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the apparatus of Jope and further include an energy storage and recovery system wherein the energy storage and recovery system comprises a gas pressure driven electrical generator coupled to one or more storage containers and configured to generate power using gas from the one or more storage containers, wherein the generator is configured to provide an exhaust gas to the a storage region of anaerobic digester as taught by Smith. Further, Smith teaches the energy logic 1752 also uses gas flow rates, gas pressure data, and gas composition data to control the electrical generator 869 to meet the electrical loads of the digestion system 100, and the heat source 600 to meet the heat loads of the digestion system 100 (col. 54, lines 22-26).
Regarding claim 66, Jope teaches the invention discussed above in claim 65. However, Jope does not explicitly teach wherein the wherein the energy storage and recovery system comprises one or more of a compressor, dryer, cooler, or liquefaction stage and is configured to extract gas from a storage region of the anaerobic digester and store it in one or more storage containers.
For claim 66, Smith teaches Smith teaches an anaerobic digestion system including a clarifier, a batch reactor, and a digester (col. 1, lines 63-65) and Smith teaches cooling fluid from the electrical generator 869 is pumped through the waste heat exchanger 475 and the exhaust gas generated by the electrical generator 869 is pulled through the same waste heat exchanger 474 (col. 48, lines 64-67).
Claim 61 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DE202016106267U1-Jope (all citations are made to the machine English translation) as applied to claim 60 above, and further in view of US20120264198A1-Hater et al. (hereinafter Hater).
Regarding claim 61, Jope teaches the invention discussed above in claim 60. Further, Jope teaches at least one membrane (membrane 1, shown in Figs. 1-2). However, Jope does not explicitly teach at least one of the membranes is selectively permeable between methane and carbon dioxide, CO2, or wherein the digester further comprises one or more additional weights on a top surface of the slurry separation liner.
For claim 61, Hater teaches an invention relating to in-situ dry anaerobic composters as well as methods for their construction and operation (para. [0003]) and Hater teaches cover 25 can be formed from a combination of layers—both permeable and impermeable (para. [0039], line 8-10), where cover 25 may be made of geotextile materials which are highly permeable to gases when used for cover 25 (para. [0045], lines 7-10), which reads on the instant claim limitation of at least one of the membranes is selectively permeable between methane and carbon dioxide, CO2.
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to take the apparatus of Jope and further include at least one of the membranes is selectively permeable between methane and carbon dioxide, CO2 as taught by Hater, because Hater teaches the permeability of the layers of the cover act as a barrier to prevent damage to underlying liner layers (para. [0045], line 9-11).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 62 is 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: for claim 62, the prior art fails to teach or fairly suggest a gas filtrations system configured to process gas extracted from the biomass storage container, wherein the processing of gas comprises removal of one or more of hydrogen sulfide and CO2 to generate refined biogas, and wherein the gas filtration system is further configured to provide refined biogas to a region between the one or more gas membranes and the cover, where the limitations are in combination with the claim as a whole.
The closest prior art is DE202016106267U1-Jope, US 9,567,247 B2-Josse et al. (hereinafter Josse), US20120264198A1-Hater, and US 9,815,721 B2-Smith. Jope teaches an invention relating to invention relates to a membrane roof for covering a container. For example, such a container can be a biomass reactor, a basin or a lagoon. Such containers typically require a cover which prevents the escape of gas which arises, since this gas is to be used, for example for operating a combined heat and power plant. Josse teaches an invention relating to wastewater treatment, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis and gasification. Hater teaches an invention relating to in-situ dry anaerobic composters as well as methods for their construction and operation. Smith teaches an anaerobic digestion system including a clarifier, a batch reactor, and a digester. However, Jope, Josse, Hater, and Smith do not teach or fairly suggest a gas filtrations system configured to process gas extracted from the biomass storage container, wherein the processing of gas comprises removal of one or more of hydrogen sulfide and CO2 to generate refined biogas, and wherein the gas filtration system is further configured to provide refined biogas to a region between the one or more gas membranes and the cover
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LENORA A. ABEL whose telephone number is (571)272-8270. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:00am-4:00pm.
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, Michael Marcheschi can be reached at (571) 272-1374. 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.
/L.A.A./Examiner, Art Unit 1799
/MICHAEL L HOBBS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1799