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 .
This is a first action on the merits of the application. Claims 1-13, 15-17, and 19-22 are pending.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because its length exceeds 150 words. Correction is required. See MPEP § 608.01(b)(I)(C).
Applicant is respectfully advised of the following typographical errors:
p. 1, line 25: “whereas in colder weather”; p. 26, line 36: “liberate the water stored therein.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 28. It is noted that “28” appears to be a typographical error for “38.” See p. 26, line 36: “external gas outlet 38.”
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claim 2 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2: Applicant is respectfully advised to amend each instance of “a water-sorbent bed” (parts “i)” and “ii)”) to acknowledge the antecedent of “a plurality of water-sorbent beds” (line 5) and to distinguish these terms from one another. Suggested text is “contacts a water-sorbent bed of the plurality of water-sorbent beds for storing water” and “contacts another water-sorbent bed of the plurality of water-sorbent beds for releasing the water.”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
Claim limitation “means for recovering heat” (claim 19) has been interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because it uses a generic placeholder “means” coupled with functional language “for recovering heat” without reciting sufficient structure to achieve the function. Furthermore, the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
A review of the specification shows that the following appears to be the corresponding structure described in the specification for the 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph limitation: a heat exchanger (p. 25, line 34).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 2, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 2: It is unclear if the limitations following “preferably” (second-to-last line) are required by the claim or not. For the purposes of examination only, the text following “preferably” is interpreted as being required by the claim.
Claims 19 and 20 are rejected because of their dependence from claim 2.
Claim 20: It is unclear if the limitations following “preferably” (second-to-last line) are required by the claim or not. In addition, it is unclear how the text following “preferably” relates to the preceding text, as “preferably” suggests a narrowing of the previous limitation, but the previous limitation (“the heat exchanger is used to provide heat to another part of the exhaust system”) relates to where heat is used, but the following limitation (“to provide the further flow of heated gas”) appears to refer to somehow providing a gas stream from the heat exchanger rather than a narrowing of where recovered heat (claim 19) is used. It is unclear how the text following “preferably” can be interpreted for the purposes of examination. It is noted that “another part” in claim 20 is interpreted as excluding the providing of heat to the dehumidifier system.
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 nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 5-6, 10-12, and 21-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia et al. (CN107661684A) in view of Anand et al. (US 5,779,768).
Regarding claim 1, Xia discloses a system (Fig.) for treating an exhaust gas ([0063]) comprising olefins, alkanes, aromatic hydrocarbons and trace amounts of sulfides, ammonia nitrogen and other components to be captured ([0064]) (i.e., an exhaust system for the treatment of a humid exhaust gas comprising a species to be treated) comprising:
fine filtration dehumidifier 11 fed by a pipeline with volatile organic waste gas ([0057], [0063]) (i.e., a dehumidifier system comprising a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas);
a pipeline for providing a first stream to activated carbon adsorption towers 12 ([0063]) (i.e., a first gas inlet for providing a flow of dehumidified exhaust gas);
an inlet leading to the activated carbon adsorption towers to deliver low-pressure superheated steam ([0064], see translation of detail of figure below) (i.e., a second gas inlet for providing a flow of heated gas);
PNG
media_image1.png
222
222
media_image1.png
Greyscale
the activated carbon adsorption towers which can be desorbed with the steam ([0064]) (i.e., a plurality of sorbent beds for releasably storing the species);
a condenser 13 to cool a high-concentration organic waste gas and separate a liquid phase ([0065]) (i.e., a treatment unit comprising a condensing unit for recovering the species in liquid form); and
outlets leading from the tops of the towers 12 to the atmosphere (Fig.) (i.e., first and second exhaust gas outlets);
wherein piping from the fine filtration dehumidifier 11 leads to the towers 12 (i.e., wherein the flow of dehumidified exhaust gas provided by the first gas inlet is received from the dehumidifier system).
However, Xia does not explicitly disclose a valve system configured to establish independently for each sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second configuration, wherein i) in the first configuration the flow of the dehumidified exhaust gas from the first gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for storing the species and then passes to the first gas outlet; and ii) in the second configuration the flow of heated gas from the second gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for releasing the species, passes to the treatment unit and then passes to the second exhaust gas outlet; wherein the valve system is configured to ensure that at least one sorbent bed is in the first configuration and, at least one other sorbent bed is in the second configuration.
Anand discloses a system (Fig. 1) for adsorbing condensable components using first and second activated carbon adsorbent beds that are purged with heated gas (claim 1; col. 9, line 50). Anand teaches valves to enable the adsorbing and purging of the beds (e.g., col. 6, lines 26-28; col. 7, lines 5-6).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Xia by providing a valve system configured to establish independently for each sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second configuration, wherein i) in the first configuration the flow of the dehumidified exhaust gas from the first gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for storing the species and then passes to the first gas outlet; and ii) in the second configuration the flow of heated gas from the second gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for releasing the species, passes to the treatment unit and then passes to the second exhaust gas outlet; wherein the valve system is configured to ensure that at least one sorbent bed is in the first configuration and, at least one other sorbent bed is in the second configuration as taught by Anand because (1) Xia teaches that adsorption and desorption are carried out alternately (Xia, [0040]) (i.e., a system configured to ensure that at least one sorbent bed is in the first configuration and, at least one other sorbent bed is in the second configuration), but doesn’t disclose the details of valving to effect the alternation; and (2) a valve system was known in the art to effect the alternation between adsorption and desorption phases in an adsorption cycle (Anand, col. 6, lines 26-28; col. 7, lines 5-6).
Regarding claim 5, Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose that the humid exhaust gas comprises from 1 to 5000 ppm of the species. However, the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. See also MPEP 2112.01(I) (“when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent”).
Regarding claim 6, Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose that the humid exhaust gas is at a temperature at least 25°C below an effective catalyst treatment temperature. However, the inclusion of the material or article worked upon by a structure being claimed does not impart patentability to the claims. See MPEP 2115. See also MPEP 2112.01(I) (“when the structure recited in the reference is substantially identical to that of the claims, claimed properties or functions are presumed to be inherent”).
Regarding claim 10, Xia discloses a biological trickling filter 81 and a biological filter 82 (([0058]) upstream of the fine filter dehumidifier 11 (i.e., wherein the system further comprises one or more material filters to pre-filter the exhaust gas).
Regarding claim 11, Xia discloses a biological trickling filter 81 upstream of the towers 12 that uses liquid to remove sulfides ([0058]) such as hydrogen sulfide ([0059]) (i.e., wherein the system comprises a contaminant sorbent material upstream of the plurality of sorbent beds, wherein the contaminant is selected from H2S).
Regarding claim 12, Xia teaches that adsorption and desorption are carried out alternately (Xia, [0040]) in two towers 12, so it would have been obvious to provide valving in the embodiment of Xia in view of Anand to ensure that one tower/sorbent bed is in the second configuration, and the other tower/sorbent bed (i.e., the remainder of the plurality) is in the first configuration.
Regarding claim 21, Xia teaches that the system is for a petrochemical enterprise wastewater treatment plant ([0005]) (i.e., a waste water treatment plantcomprising the exhaust system according to claim 1).
Regarding claim 22, Xia teaches that the system is used in a process (i.e., a method) (claim 1), so it would have been obvious to carry out a method of treating a humid exhaust gas comprising a species to be treated comprising passing a humid exhaust gas through the exhaust system according to Xia in view of Anand.
Claims 2, 7-8, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia in view of Anand, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Othmer (US 4,405,343).
Regarding claim 2, Xia teaches two dehumidifiers that are used alternately ([0033]) (i.e., a plurality of water-sorbent beds), with humid gas received from a pipeline from a biological filtration tank ([0063]) (i.e., a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas) and a pipeline for the dehumidified gas to pass to the towers 12 (i.e., a further gas outlet in fluid communication with the first gas inlet).
However, Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas; water-sorbent beds comprising a water storage material for releasably storing water; an external gas outlet; a dehumidifier valve system configured to establish independently for each water-sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second dehumidifier configuration, wherein: i) in the first dehumidifier configuration the flow of the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for storing water and then passes to the further gas outlet; and ii) in the second dehumidifier configuration the further flow of heated gas from the further gas inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for releasing the water to form a heated humidified gas which then passes to the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier valve system is configured to ensure that at least one water-sorbent bed is in the first dehumidifier configuration and, preferably at least one other water-sorbent bed is in the second dehumidifier configuration.
Othmer discloses adsorbers 207 for dehydrating a gas (Fig. 2; col. 5, lines 23-24; col. 9, line 3) comprising desiccant particles (col. 6, lines 2-3) (i.e., water-sorbent beds comprising a water storage material for releasably storing water). Othmer teaches a line 201 for receiving the stream to be treated (col. 8, lines 66-67) (i.e., a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas; a water storage material arranged to receive the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet); a line 254 for heated desorbing gas (col. 9, line 34) (i.e., a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas); a line 261 for exhausting desorbing gas (col. 9, line 57) (i.e., an external gas outlet); valves which through proper adjustment can cut the passage of gas over from adsorption to regeneration when an adsorbent is fully charged (col. 9, lines 18-22) (i.e., a dehumidifier valve system configured to establish independently for each water-sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second dehumidifier configuration, wherein: i) in the first dehumidifier configuration the flow of the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for storing water and then passes to the further gas outlet; and ii) in the second dehumidifier configuration the further flow of heated gas from the further gas inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for releasing the water to form a heated humidified gas which then passes to the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier valve system is configured to ensure that at least one water-sorbent bed is in the first dehumidifier configuration and, preferably at least one other water-sorbent bed is in the second dehumidifier configuration).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Xia in view of Anand by providing a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas; water-sorbent beds comprising a water storage material for releasably storing water; an external gas outlet; a dehumidifier valve system configured to establish independently for each water-sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second dehumidifier configuration, wherein: i) in the first dehumidifier configuration the flow of the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for storing water and then passes to the further gas outlet; and ii) in the second dehumidifier configuration the further flow of heated gas from the further gas inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for releasing the water to form a heated humidified gas which then passes to the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier valve system is configured to ensure that at least one water-sorbent bed is in the first dehumidifier configuration and, preferably at least one other water-sorbent bed is in the second dehumidifier configuration as taught by Othmer because (1) Xia teaches two dehumidifiers that are used alternately (Xia, [0033]), but doesn’t disclose the details of valving to effect the alternation; and (2) the proper use of valves can cut the passage of gas over from adsorption to regeneration when an adsorbent is fully charged (Othmer, col. 9, lines 18-22).
Regarding claim 7, Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose that the second gas inlet incorporates a heating device for providing the flow of heated gas.
Othmer teaches a heat exchanger 255 for heating desorbing gas (col. 9, lines 34-35).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Xia in view of Anand by providing a second gas inlet that incorporates a heating device for providing the flow of heated gas as taught by Othmer because (1) Xia teaches a superheated steam flow but does not discuss how it was heated (Xia, Fig.); and (2) a heat exchanger can be used to heat a desorbing gas (Othmer, col. 9, lines 34-35).
Regarding claim 8, Xia teaches superheated steam ([0063]; Fig.) (i.e., a gas that is over 100°C). It has been held that obviousness exists where claimed ranges overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Regarding claim 19, Othmer teaches that desorbing gas charged with water heats the desorbing gas via heat exchanger 255 (col. 9, lines 34-36) (i.e., wherein the dehumidifier system further comprises means for recovering heat from the heated humidified gas).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia in view of Anand, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Pahwa et al. (US 2015/0153051 A1).
Xia teaches two dehumidifiers ([0033]) (i.e., a plurality of water-sorbent beds), with humid gas received from a pipeline from a biological filtration tank ([0063]) (i.e., a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas) and a pipeline for the dehumidified gas to pass to the towers 12 (i.e., a further gas outlet for receiving dehumidified exhaust gas passing through the water storage material, which is in fluid communication with the first gas inlet).
However, Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose a water storage material arranged to receive the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet; an external gas outlet arranged downstream of a selected portion of the water storage material; and a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas, arranged to pass through the selected portion of the water storage material to release water stored therein and to form a heated humidified gas which passes through the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier system is configured so that the selected portion of the water storage material changes over time.
Pahwa discloses a dehumidifier with a desiccant wheel 1 containing a desiccant material such as silica gel or a halide salt that has a strong affinity for water that receives process air 4 that is cooler and wetter (i.e., a water storage material arranged to receive the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet); a reactivation airstream 8 with warm, moist air which is typically exhausted to the outside environment (i.e., an external gas outlet arranged downstream of a selected portion of the water storage material); and a reactivation air supply 7 heated by an external heat source 6 (i.e., a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas, arranged to pass through the selected portion of the water storage material to release water stored therein and to form a heated humidified gas which passes through the external gas outlet); wherein desiccant wheel 1 is continuously rotated between the process and reactivation sectors so the dehumidification process is continuous and the humidity of the air leaving the process sector 2 is stable (i.e., wherein the dehumidifier system is configured so that the selected portion of the water storage material changes over time) (Fig. 1; [0068]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Xia in view of Anand by providing a water storage material arranged to receive the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet; an external gas outlet arranged downstream of a selected portion of the water storage material; and a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas, arranged to pass through the selected portion of the water storage material to release water stored therein and to form a heated humidified gas which passes through the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier system is configured so that the selected portion of the water storage material changes over time as taught by Pahwa because a desiccant wheel can provide a dehumidification process that is continuous and produces a gas stream with stable humidity (Pahwa, [0068]).
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xia in view of Anand, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Oyelakin et al. (US 2019/0262766 A1).
Xia in view of Anand does not explicitly disclose one or more sensors for the species in communication with each sorbent bed to determine a species loading status.
Oyelakin discloses an emission control system comprising a plurality of adsorbent vessels (Abstract; Fig. 1) for adsorbing VOCs and hydrogen sulfide ([0011]). Oyelakin teaches a gas analyzer 810 with a VOC sensor (Fig. 8; [0042]) to determine when breakthrough occurs ([0039]) to switch a vessel from an adsorption process to a regeneration process ([0013]).
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Xia in view of Anand by providing a sensor for the species in communication with each sorbent bed to determine a species loading status as taught by Oyelakin because a specified or selected breakthrough point can be sensed so that an automated control system may switch a vessel from an adsorption process to a regeneration process (Oyelakin, [0013]).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
REJECTION 1
Claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 15, 17, 19, 21, and 22 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 2, 3, 1, 4, 1, 7, 17, 20, 22, 24, and 25 of copending Application No. 18069636 (reference application) in view of Anand et al. (US 5,779,768).
Claim 1 appears to differ from claim 1 of the reference application in that (i) the reference application does not consider a treatment unit comprising a condensing unit; and (ii) the reference application does not suggest a plurality of sorbent beds and a valve system to effect storing and releasing phases in the sorbent beds.
Regarding (i), this limitation is optional.
Regarding (ii), Anand teaches adsorbent beds and valves to enable the adsorbing and purging of the beds (e.g., col. 6, lines 26-28; col. 7, lines 5-6). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of claim 1 by providing a plurality of sorbent beds and a valve system to effect storing and releasing phases in the sorbent beds as taught by Anand because (1) the claim of the reference application requires a portion of a storage material to be heated to release a species over time, but does not detail the configuration of the storage material; and (2) storage material can be provided in two beds, with valving to effect the bed in the release phase over time.
In addition, claims 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 15, 17, 19, 21, and 22 correspond to claims 2, 3, 1, 4, 1, 7, 17, 20, 22, 24, and 25 of the reference application.
REJECTION 2
Claims 1, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 7, 8, and 1 of 12,325,003 B2 (reference document) in view of Xia et al. (CN107661684A) and Anand et al. (US 5,779,768).
Claim 1 appears to differ from claim 1 of the reference document in that (i) the reference document does not consider a treatment unit comprising a condensing unit; (ii) the reference document does not suggest a plurality of sorbent beds and a valve system to effect storing and releasing phases in the sorbent beds; and (iii) the reference document does not suggest a dehumidifier system with an associated inlet and outlet.
Regarding (i), this limitation is optional.
Regarding (iii), Xia teaches an exhaust gas treatment system for removing ammonia ([0002], [0064]). Xia teaches that adsorption systems have strict requirements for the humidity of a waste gas ([0007]) and provides dehumidifiers upstream of adsorption towers ([0033], [0040]). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of claim 1 by providing a dehumidifier system as taught by Xia because adsorption systems have strict requirements for the humidity of a waste gas ([0007]).
Regarding (ii), Anand teaches adsorbent beds and valves to enable the adsorbing and purging of the beds (e.g., col. 6, lines 26-28; col. 7, lines 5-6). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of claim 1 by providing a plurality of sorbent beds and a valve system to effect storing and releasing phases in the sorbent beds as taught by Anand because (1) the claim of the reference application requires a portion of a storage material to be heated to release a species over time, but does not detail the configuration of the storage material; and (2) storage material can be provided in two beds, with valving to effect the bed in the release phase over time.
In addition, claims 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, and 15 correspond to claims 1, 2, 7, 8, and 1 of the reference document.
REJECTION 3
Claims 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1, 12, and 13 of 12,011,690 B2 (reference document) in view of Xia et al. (CN107661684A).
Claim 1 appears to differ from claim 1 of the reference document in that (i) the reference document does not consider a treatment unit comprising a condensing unit; and (ii) the reference document does not suggest a dehumidifier system with an associated inlet and outlet.
Regarding (i), this limitation is optional.
Regarding (ii), Xia teaches an exhaust gas treatment system for removing ammonia ([0002], [0064]). Xia teaches that adsorption systems have strict requirements for the humidity of a waste gas ([0007]) and provides dehumidifiers upstream of adsorption towers ([0033], [0040]). Therefore, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of claim 1 by providing a dehumidifier system as taught by Xia because adsorption systems have strict requirements for the humidity of a waste gas ([0007]).
In addition, claims 4, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, and 21 correspond to claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 1, 12, and 13 of the reference document.
REJECTION 4
Claims 1, 10, 11, 13, and 16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 3, 10, 11, 12, and 13 of 12,427,475 B2 (reference document).
Claim 1 appears to differ from claim 3 of the reference document in that (i) the reference document does not consider a treatment unit comprising a condensing unit; (ii) the reference document claims a method; and (iii) the reference document claims additional limitations.
Regarding (i), this limitation is optional.
Regarding (ii), the method describes a system for carrying out the method, so the system is obvious in view of the method.
Regarding (iii), a less-limited claim is obvious in view of a corresponding more-limited claim.
In addition, claims 10, 11, 13, and 16 correspond to claims 10, 11, 12, and 13 of the reference document.
Additional Claim Objections
Claims 4, 9, 15-17, and 20 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.
Allowable Subject Matter
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
A thorough search for pertinent prior art did not locate any prior art that discloses or suggests the invention recited in claims 4, 9, 15-17, and 20.
The concept of an exhaust system for the treatment of a humid exhaust gas comprising a species to be treated, the system comprising: a dehumidifier system comprising a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas; a first gas inlet for providing a flow of dehumidified exhaust gas; a second gas inlet for providing a flow of heated gas; a plurality of sorbent beds for releasably storing the species; a treatment unit comprising either: one or more catalysts for decomposing the species; or a condensing unit for recovering the species in liquid or aqueous form; first and second exhaust gas outlets; and a valve system configured to establish independently for each sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second configuration, wherein: i) in the first configuration the flow of the dehumidified exhaust gas from the first gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for storing the species and then passes to the first gas outlet; and ii) in the second configuration the flow of heated gas from the second gas inlet contacts a sorbent bed for releasing the species, passes to the treatment unit and then passes to the second exhaust gas outlet; wherein the valve system is configured to ensure that at least one sorbent bed is in the first configuration and, at least one other sorbent bed is in the second configuration; wherein the flow of dehumidified exhaust gas provided by the first gas inlet is received from the dehumidifier system (claim 1);
wherein: i) the species is ammonia, the catalyst is an ammonia oxidation catalyst and wherein each sorbent bed comprises an ammonia storage material; or ii) the species is formaldehyde, the catalyst is a formaldehyde oxidation catalyst and wherein each sorbent bed comprises a formaldehyde storage material; or iii) the species is methane, the catalyst is a methane oxidation catalyst and wherein each sorbent bed comprises a methane storage material; or (iv) the species comprises VOCs, the catalyst is an oxidation catalyst and wherein each sorbent bed comprises a VOC storage material (claim 4);
wherein dehumidified exhaust gas is supplied to both the first and second gas inlets, or wherein the second gas inlet is an air inlet (claim 9);
wherein the treatment unit comprises one or more catalysts for decomposing the species, and wherein a further heater is provided immediately upstream of the one or each catalyst (claim 15);
wherein the valve system is further configured to establish independently for each sorbent bed fluid communication a third configuration for cooling of the sorbent bed, wherein gases are prevented from leaving the sorbent bed (claim 16);
wherein the treatment unit comprises one or more catalysts for decomposing the species, and wherein the flow of heated gas is heated with heat obtained from the catalytic treatment of the species, whereby the system can be maintained in an autothermal condition (claim 17);
wherein the dehumidifier system comprises: a humid air inlet for providing a flow of humid exhaust gas; a further gas inlet for providing a further flow of heated gas; a plurality of water-sorbent beds, comprising a water storage material, for releasably storing water; a further gas outlet in fluid communication with the first gas inlet; an external gas outlet; and a dehumidifier valve system configured to establish independently for each water-sorbent bed fluid communication in a first or second dehumidifier configuration, wherein: i) in the first dehumidifier configuration the flow of the humid exhaust gas from the humid air inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for storing water and then passes to the further gas outlet; and ii) in the second dehumidifier configuration the further flow of heated gas from the further gas inlet contacts a water-sorbent bed for releasing the water to form a heated humidified gas which then passes to the external gas outlet; wherein the dehumidifier valve system is configured to ensure that at least one water- sorbent bed is in the first dehumidifier configuration and, preferably at least one other water-sorbent bed is in the second dehumidifier configuration (claim 2); wherein the dehumidifier system further comprises means for recovering heat from the heated humidified gas (claim 19); wherein the means is a heat exchanger and the heat exchanger is used to provide heat to another part of the exhaust system, preferably to provide the further flow of heated gas (claim 20)
is considered to define patentable subject matter over the prior art.
The closest prior art is Xia et al. (CN107661684A), which discloses a system (Fig.) for treating an exhaust gas ([0063]) comprising olefins, alkanes, aromatic hydrocarbons and trace amounts of sulfides, ammonia nitrogen and other components to be captured ([0064]) comprising:
fine filtration dehumidifier 11 fed by a pipeline with volatile organic waste gas ([0057], [0063]);
a pipeline for providing a first stream to activated carbon adsorption towers 12 ([0063]);
an inlet leading to the activated carbon adsorption towers to deliver low-pressure superheated steam ([0064]);
the activated carbon adsorption towers which can be desorbed with the steam ([0064]);
a condenser 13 to cool a high-concentration organic waste gas and separate a liquid phase ([0065]); and
outlets leading from the tops of the towers 12 to the atmosphere (Fig.).
Regarding claims 4, 15, and 17, Xia teaches a thermal oxidation furnace ([0015]), but does not suggest catalytic oxidation.
Regarding claim 9, Xia does not suggest that dehumidified exhaust gas is supplied to both the first and second gas inlets, or that the second gas inlet is an air inlet, since superheated steam is provided at the equivalent of the second inlet.
Regarding claim 16, Xia does not suggest a third configuration for cooling. Carlsson (US 2011/0017061 A1) discloses a system with three adsorbent beds (Abstract; Fig. 1) in which a bed B2 is placed in a cooling mode while a gaseous stream 10 bypasses the bed in a bypass 20 ([0010]). The proportion of the gaseous stream through the bypass can be varied, with it possible to flow the entire stream to the bypass ([0039]). However, Carlsson does not suggest that gases are prevented from leaving the sorbent bed in the cooling mode.
Regarding claim 20, Xia does not suggest using recovered heat from a heat exchanger to provide heat to another part of the exhaust system other than a dehumidifier system. Othmer (US 4,405,343) teaches that desorbing gas charged with water can be used to heat desorbing gas via heat exchanger 255 (col. 9, lines 34-36), but the heat recovered by the heat exchanger is used to heat adsorbers 207 for dehydrating a gas (Fig. 2; col. 5, lines 23-24; col. 9, line 3).
Claim 20 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GABRIEL E GITMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7934. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:15-5:45pm.
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, In Suk Bullock can be reached at 571-272-3471. 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.
/GABRIEL E GITMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1772