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.
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 non-obviousness.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-8, 21, 25, 31, 32, 36, 39, 45-46 and 53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schechter (WO 2019/193594) in view of Macfarlane et al. (US Patent Application Publication no. 2021/0079534).
Regarding claim 1, Schechter discloses a unit for producing ammonia from a nitrogen-containing feedstock (abstract; paragraphs 2, 20), comprising: a nitrogen reduction unit (100; figure 2B; paragraph 122) comprising:
an inlet (130) through which the feedstock is introduced into the unit (100; figure 2B; paragraph 125),
a cathode (110 - in cathode zone 112) comprising a porous active catalyst (paragraphs 119, 138, 139, 156; claim 21) configured to be in fluid communication with the feedstock once introduced into the nitrogen reduction unit (100) through the inlet (130; paragraphs 124-126),
wherein the active catalyst reduces one or more nitrogen containing components in the feedstock to ammonia thereby providing an ammonia product stream (paragraphs 123, 162, 169-185, 202-204), and
an outlet (160) in fluid communication with the cathode (110) and arranged downstream of the cathode for removal of ammonia from the nitrogen reduction unit (110; paragraphs 127-128; figure 2B);
an anode (120) electrically connected to the cathode; and aqueous electrolyte in fluid communication with the anode and cathode.
Schechter fails to teach wherein the porous active catalyst comprises a transition metal catalyst electrodeposited onto a porous conductive substrate.
Macfarlane teaches a system for the production of ammonia wherein an iron catalyst cathode was prepared by an electrodeposition method on a porous conductive substrate (paragraphs 170; 455-456 – the cathodic substrate is highly conductive, porous and the catalyst may be deposited on the substrate in several ways including direct electrodeposition to provide a high density of electrochemically active sites for the reduction of dissolved N2 molecules to ammonia).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to deposit the catalyst onto the porous conductive substrate of Schechter by electrodeposition, as taught by Macfarlane in order to provide a high density of electrochemically active sites for the reduction of dissolved N2 molecules to ammonia.
Regarding claim 2, the cathode of Schechter comprises a transition metal catalyst deposited on a porous conductive substrate (paragraphs 8-21, 25, 226).
Regarding claim 4, Schechter further teaches wherein the porous conductive substrate is carbon paper (paragraphs 111, 114-117).
Regarding claims 6-7, Schechter discloses transition metal catalysts selected from iron and cobalt, among others (paragraphs 8-9).
Regarding claim 8, the cobalt of Schechter may be a cobalt oxide (paragraph 34).
Regarding claim 21, Schechter teaches a nitrate reduction system for reducing nitrate in a feedstock to ammonia (abstract; paragraphs 2, 20; figure 2B), comprising: the unit of claim 1 (discussed in detail above); and an energy source configured to power the system (paragraph 158).
Regarding claim 25, Schechter further discloses an ammonia storage device (paragraphs 33; 128, 144-145).
Regarding claim 31, Schechter discloses a nitrogen reduction unit (100) for reducing nitrogen in an input gas to ammonia (abstract; paragraphs 2, 20; figure 2B), comprising:
an inlet (130, 210) through which the input gas is introduced into the unit (paragraphs 125, 129);
an anode (120; paragraph 124);
a cathode (110) comprising a porous active catalyst structure configured to be in fluid communication with the input gas (paragraphs 119, 124-126, 138, 139, 156; claim 21; shown in figure 2B),
wherein the input gas (130) is flowed perpendicular to the active catalysis (as shown in figure 2B the input gas is perpendicular to the cathode 110) and flows through the active catalyst (the cathode is porous - paragraphs 119, 124-126, 138, 139, 156), which reduces one or more nitrogen containing components in the input gas to ammonia thereby providing an ammonia product stream (160; paragraphs 127-128);
an aqueous electrolyte in fluid communication with the anode and cathode (paragraphs 76, 145, 163, 166, 172); and
an outlet (160) in fluid communication with the cathode (110) and disposed downstream of the cathode (paragraphs 32, 127-128).
Schechter fails to teach wherein the porous active catalyst comprises a transition metal catalyst electrodeposited onto a porous conductive substrate.
Macfarlane teaches a system for the production of ammonia wherein an iron catalyst cathode was prepared by an electrodeposition method on a porous conductive substrate (paragraphs 170; 455-456 – the cathodic substrate is highly conductive, porous and the catalyst may be deposited on the substrate in several ways including direct electrodeposition to provide a high density of electrochemically active sites for the reduction of dissolved N2 molecules to ammonia).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to deposit the catalyst onto the porous conductive substrate of Schechter by electrodeposition, as taught by Macfarlane in order to provide a high density of electrochemically active sites for the reduction of dissolved N2 molecules to ammonia.
Regarding claim 32, the cathode of Schechter comprises a transition metal catalyst deposited on a porous conductive substrate (paragraphs 8-21, 25, 226).
Regarding claim 36, Schechter discloses transition metal catalysts selected from iron and cobalt, among others (paragraphs 8-9).
Regarding claim 39, the input gas of Schechter comprises N2 (figure 2B; paragraphs 74-76, 125-126).
Regarding claim 45, Schechter teaches a nitrogen reduction system for reducing nitrogen in an input gas to ammonia (abstract; paragraphs 2, 20; figure 2B), comprising: a nitrogen reduction unit of claim 31 (discussed above); and an energy source configured to power the system (paragraph 158).
Regarding claim 46, Schechter discloses a method for preparing ammonia using the unit of claim 1 (discussed in detail above), comprising:
flowing the feedstock into the inlet (130; paragraphs 125-126), wherein upon contacting the active catalyst structure one or more nitrogen containing species present in the feedstock is reduced to ammonia to provide an ammonia product stream (paragraphs 123, 162, 169-185, 202-204); and
flowing the ammonia product stream to the outlet (160; paragraphs 127-128).
Regarding claim 53, Schechter teaches a method for preparing ammonia using the nitrogen reduction unit of claim 31 (discussed in detail above), comprising:
flowing the input gas into the inlet (130; paragraphs 125-126), wherein upon contacting the active catalyst structure nitrogen is reduced to ammonia to provide an ammonia product stream (paragraphs 123, 162, 169-185, 202-204); and flowing the ammonia product stream to the outlet (160; paragraphs 127-128).
Claims 19-20, 22, 27, 29 and 50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Schechter and Macfarlane as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Fu et al. (“Alternative Route for Electrochemical Ammonia Synthesis by Reduction of Nitrate on Copper Nanosheets”; Applied Materials Today; vol. 19; 2020).
Regarding claim 19, Schechter teaches all the features discussed above, but fails to discloses a nitrogen oxidation unit upstream of the nitrogen reduction unit.
Fu discloses an electrochemical system for the synthesis of ammonia by obtaining nitrate from the electrochemical oxidation of nitrogen prior to its electrolytic reduction to produce ammonia (figure 1 shown an electrooxidation step followed by an electrocatalysis step for electrochemical reduction of nitrate to ammonia; See sections 1 and 2). This route addresses water environmental issues by upgrading waste or cheap nitrate to high-value ammonia (see section I).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to add a nitrogen oxidation unit upstream of the nitrogen reduction unit (100) of Schechter because as taught by Fu, this route addresses water environmental issues by upgrading waste or cheap nitrate to high-value ammonia.
Regarding claim 20, the nitrogen oxidation unit of Fu comprises: an inlet through which an input gas containing nitrogen is introduced into the nitrogen oxidation unit (as shown in figure 1; See Section I); the anode in contact with an anolyte, wherein the anode is configured to be in fluid communication with the input gas and the anode comprising a catalyst configured to oxidize nitrogen in the input gas to nitrate thereby providing a nitrate product stream (as shown in figure I – nitrogen is oxidized to produce nitrate); and a nitrate product stream outlet in fluid communication with the anode and the nitrate reduction unit (the nitrate is subjected to electrolysis to produce ammonia. Electrolytic cells inherently comprise an anode and a cathode; figure 1).
Regarding claim 22, the energy source of Fu may comprise a wind energy source or a solar cell (as shown in figure 1).
Regarding claim 27, Schechter discloses a nitrate reduction system for reducing a nitrate in a feedstock to ammonia (abstract; paragraphs 2, 20; figure 2B), comprising: the unit of claim 19 (as discussed above); and an energy source configured to power the system (paragraph 158).
Regarding claim 28, Schechter further discloses wherein the nitrate reduction system comprises an anion exchange membrane disposed between the nitrogen oxidation unit and the nitrate reduction unit (figures 2B; 20B – an anionic membrane is sandwiched between the anode and the cathode; paragraphs 221, 259), wherein the anion exchange membrane is in fluid communication with the nitrogen oxidation unit and the nitrate reduction unit and the membrane inherently facilitates diffusion and migration of nitrate from the nitrogen oxide unit to the nitrate reduction unit (paragraphs 221, 259).
Regarding claim 29, the nitrate reduction unit (110) of Schechter comprises a second inlet through which a second feedstock is introduced into the unit (2 inlets 112 and 210 are present; figure 2B; paragraphs 125, 129).
Regarding claim 50, Schechter discloses a method for preparing ammonia using the unit of claim 19 (as discussed above), wherein upon contacting the active catalyst structure nitrate is reduced to ammonia to provide an ammonia product stream; and flowing the ammonia product stream to the outlet (paragraphs 123, 127-128, 162, 169-185, 202-204 of Schechter), further comprising:
flowing the input gas containing nitrogen into the inlet of the nitrogen oxidation unit, wherein upon contacting the anode nitrogen is oxidized to nitrate thereby providing a nitrate product stream (figure 1 shown an electrooxidation step followed by an electrocatalysis step for electrochemical reduction of nitrate to ammonia; See sections 1 and 2 of Fu); and
flowing the nitrate product stream to the nitrate reduction unit (as shown in figure 1).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-4, 6-8, 21, 25, 31-33, 36, 39, 45-46 and 53 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. The applicant argues that Schechter fails to teach wherein the porous active catalyst comprises a transition metal catalyst electrodeposited onto a porous conductive substrate. Therefore, after further search and consideration, new grounds of rejections have been presented in view of Macfarlane et al.
Applicant's arguments filed on March 10, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicants argue that the Fu disclosure is a generic teaching of possible pathways to provide nitrate sources. As such, Fu fails to provide the sufficient specificity to reasonably be considered to disclose, suggest, or motivate the nitrogen oxidation unit, as presently claimed. The combination of Schechter and Fu is based on impermissible hindsight reconstruction.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees. Fu discloses an electrochemical system for the synthesis of ammonia by obtaining nitrate from the electrochemical oxidation of nitrogen prior to its electrolytic reduction to produce ammonia. Figure 1 shows an electrooxidation step followed by an electrocatalysis step for electrochemical reduction of nitrate to ammonia (sections 1 and 2). This route addresses water environmental issues by upgrading waste or cheap nitrate to high-value ammonia (section I). The previous rejections in view of Schechter and Fu are still deemed proper and are maintained.
In response to applicant's argument that the examiner's conclusion of obviousness is based upon improper hindsight reasoning, it must be recognized that any judgment on obviousness is in a sense necessarily a reconstruction based upon hindsight reasoning. But so long as it takes into account only knowledge which was within the level of ordinary skill at the time the claimed invention was made, and does not include knowledge gleaned only from the applicant's disclosure, such a reconstruction is proper. See In re McLaughlin, 443 F.2d 1392, 170 USPQ 209 (CCPA 1971).
In view of applicant’s amendments to claims 6 and 36, the previous rejections under 35 USC 112(b) or 35USC 112(pre-AIA ), second paragraph, have been withdrawn.
Conclusion
In view of the new grounds of rejection presented above, this Office Action is made non-final.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZULMARIAM MENDEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9805. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30p.
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, James Lin can be reached at 571-272-8902. 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.
/ZULMARIAM MENDEZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1794
Prosecution Insights