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 .
Drawings
Examiner notes that “reaction chamber (34)” is formed by the “reaction zones (18)” of each plasma unit (16). However, the drawings are objected to as follows:
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “18” has been used to designate both “reaction zone” and “reaction chamber”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) 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 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.
Claims 1-44 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kong (2017/0058220) in view of Kong et al. (US 6,372,156) (hereinafter Kong II).
With respect to claim 1, Kong teaches a gasifier (Figure 1, 10), comprising:
an input (near the top) for receiving a material (12) to be processed:
an output (at the bottom) (as illustrated);
one or more plasma units (16), each plasma unit (16) including;
an outer wall (Figure 2, 20 & 22) that defines an internal reaction zone (24) (as illustrated); and
one or more sets of electrode assemblies (32), wherein each set of electrode assemblies (32) includes an anode electrode and a cathode electrode (para. [0025]), wherein each of the anode electrode and the cathode electrode includes an electrode tip (36) exposed to the reaction zone (24);
wherein each set of electrode assemblies (32) is connected to a power supply (Figure 4, 44) for energizing the anode electrode and the cathode electrode with a power signal to cause arcing in the reaction zone (24) between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (para. [0024]);
wherein the one or more plasma units (Figure 1, 16) are disposed between the input (at the top of apparatus (10)) and the output (at the bottom thereof) (as illustrated) so that the reaction zones (24) of the one or more plasma units (16) define a reaction chamber (as illustrated in Figure 2) such that the material to be processed flows through the reaction chamber from the input to the output and is subject to the arcing produced by the one or more sets of electrode assemblies (32) in the one more plasma units (16) (as illustrated in Figures 1 & 2) (para. [0021]-[0025]).
Kong fails to teach providing a plasma torch disposed adjacent the reaction chamber and having an output that emits plasma into the reaction chamber.
Kong II teaches a gasifier (Figure 3), comprising:
an input (240) for receiving a material to be processed:
an output (242);
one or more plasma units, each plasma unit (214) including;
an outer wall/(reactor vertical wall) that defines an internal reaction zone (as illustrated – where hybrid plasma (250) extends); and
one or more sets of electrode assemblies/(plasma torches (214)), and a plasma torch (212) disposed adjacent the reaction chamber (215) and having an output that emits plasma (250) into the reaction chamber (215) in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system (col. 4, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to provide a plasma torch disposed adjacent the reaction chamber and having an output that emits plasma into the reaction chamber in the apparatus of Kong, as taught by Kong II, in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system.
With respect to claim 2, Kong II further teaches wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed near the input (240) (as illustrated in Figure 3).
With respect to claim 3, wherein the plasma torch is disposed near the output. Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong to direct plasma radially into the reaction zone (36) of the one of the one or more plasma units (16), and thereby, the plasma torch would be disposed near the output.
With respect to claim 4, Kong teaches wherein the reaction chamber (24) has a longitudinal axis extending from the input to the output (as illustrated in Figures 1-4) and Kong in view of Kong II teaches wherein the plasma torch (Figure 3, 212) is oriented to direct the plasma in a stream longitudinally into the reaction chamber (as illustrated – where hybrid plasma (250) extends).
With respect to claim 5, Kong teaches including a plurality of plasma units (16) and wherein the plasma torch ((212) – in view of Kong II) is oriented to direct the plasma into the reaction zone (24) of at least two of the plurality of plasma units (16) - (as illustrated – plasma (250) in Kong II extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, Kong in view of Kong II would provide that the plasma would be directed into the reaction zone (24) of at least two of the plurality of plasma units (16) in Kong).
With respect to claim 6, Kong II further teaches wherein the plasma torch/first torch/(Figure 3, 212) is disposed in one of the one or more plasma units and extends through the outer wall of the one of the one or more plasma units (16) (in Kong in view of Kong II) to direct plasma radially into the reaction zone (36) of the one of the one or more plasma units (16) – Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong to direct plasma radially into the reaction zone (36) of the one of the one or more plasma units (16).
With respect to claim 7, Kong teaches wherein each of the electrode assemblies (32) includes one or more working gas (Figure 4, 40) passageways (58) and a working gas outlet/(near tip (36)) that conducts a working gas (40) into the reaction zone (24) of one of the plasma units (16) (as illustrated in Figures 2 & 4).
With respect to claim 8, Kong teaches wherein the working gas (Figure 4, 40) emitted via the one or more electrode assemblies (Figure 2, 32) is subjected to one or more arcs within the reaction zone (24) of the one of the plasma units (16) to form a plasma (para. [0024], [0031], [0033]).
With respect to claim 9, wherein the plasma emitted by the plasma torch ignites one or more arcs between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode of at least one set of electrode assemblies.
Regarding limitations recited in claim 9 which are directed to a manner of operating disclosed device, neither the manner of operating a disclosed device (i.e. ignites one or more arcs) nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”
With respect to claim 10, Kong teaches wherein each of the one or more plasma units (16) is circular in cross section defining a cylindrical reaction zone (24) (as illustrated in Figures 2-3).
With respect to claim 11, Kong teaches including a plurality of plasma units (16) stacked longitudinally to define an elongated cylindrical reaction chamber (as illustrated in Figure 1).
With respect to claim 12, Kong teaches wherein each of the plurality of plasma units (16) includes two or more sets of electrode assemblies (32) (as illustrated in Figures 1-2).
With respect to claim 13, Kong in view of Kong II teaches wherein the plasma torch (Figure 3, 212) emits a plasma flame (250) that passes through the reaction zone (215) of at least two of the plasma units (214) to interact with one or more arcs produced by the electrode assemblies (214) of each of the at least two plasma units (as illustrated) - (as illustrated – plasma (250) extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, Kong in view of Kong II would provide that the plasma would interact with one or more arcs produced by the electrode assemblies of each of the at least two plasma units (16) in Kong).
With respect to claim 14, Kong teaches a gasifier (Figure 1, 10), comprising:
a reaction chamber (Figure 2, 24) formed by a continuous outer wall extending between a first open end (near the top) (Figure 1) and a second open end (at the bottom) (as illustrated) defining a longitudinal axis between the first open end (near the top) and the second open end (at the bottom) (as illustrated):
at least one set of electrodes (32) extending through the outer wall between first open end (near the top) and the second open end (at the bottom) (as illustrated in Figures 1-3) into the reaction chamber (24), each set of electrodes including an anode electrode and a cathode electrode (para. [0024]), wherein each of the anode electrode and the cathode electrode includes an electrode tip (36) (Figures 2-4) and wherein each set of electrodes (32) is connected to a power supply (Figure 1, 70) for energizing the anode electrode and the cathode electrode with a power signal to cause arcing in the reaction chamber between the anode electrode tip and the cathode electrode tip (para. [0024]).
Kong fails to teach providing a plasma torch disposed adjacent the reaction chamber and having an output that emits plasma into the reaction chamber.
Kong II teaches a gasifier (Figure 3), comprising:
an input (240) for receiving a material to be processed:
an output (242);
one or more plasma units, each plasma unit (214) including;
an outer wall/(reactor vertical wall) that defines an internal reaction zone (as illustrated – where hybrid plasma (250) extends); and
one or more sets of electrode assemblies/(plasma torches (214)), and a plasma torch (212) disposed adjacent the reaction chamber (215) and having an output that emits plasma (250) into the reaction chamber (215) in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system (col. 4, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to provide a plasma torch disposed adjacent the reaction chamber and having an output that emits plasma into the reaction chamber in the apparatus of Kong, as taught by Kong II, in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system.
With respect to claim 15, Kong II further teaches wherein the plasma torch (212) emits plasma (250) as a plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) (as illustrated in Figure 3).
With respect to claim 16, Kong II further teaches wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis, and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed perpendicularly to the first plane to emit the plasma (250) into the reaction chamber (215) perpendicularly to the first plane (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 17, Kong II further teaches wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (as illustrated in Figure 3), and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed to emit the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction parallel to the first plane - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction parallel to the first plane.
With respect to claim 18, Kong II further teaches wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (as illustrated in Figure 3), and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed to emit the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction that is parallel to and within the first plane - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction that is parallel to and within the first plane.
With respect to claim 19, Kong II further wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (as illustrated), and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed to emit the plasma into the reaction chamber (215) in a direction that intersects the first plane at a non-zero angle (as illustrated in Figure 3).
With respect to claim 20, Kong teaches including a material (12) input (at the top) of gasifier (10) and a material (14) output (at the bottom), wherein the at least one set of electrodes (32) is disposed so that the anode electrode and the cathode electrode of the set of electrodes (32) are disposed laterally across the reaction chamber (24) (as illustrated in Figures 1-3) and wherein the plasma torch (212) (in view of Kong II – Figure 3) is oriented to direct the plasma (250) in a stream longitudinally into the reaction chamber (215) (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 21, Kong teaches wherein the reaction chamber (Figure 1) includes a plurality of plasma units (16), each plasma unit (16) including an outer wall (20 & 22) defining a reaction zone (Figure 2, 24) within the confines of the outer wall (20 & 22) and at least one set of electrodes (32), and wherein the plasma units (Figure 1, 16) are stacked on each other to align the outer walls of the plasma units (16) so that the reaction zones (24) of the plurality of plasma units (16) form the reaction chamber (as illustrated in Figures 1-2).
With respect to claim 22, Kong in view of Kong II teaches wherein the plasma torch (212) is oriented to direct the plasma into the reaction zone (24) of at least two of the plurality of plasma units (16) - (as illustrated – plasma (250) in Kong II extends along the entire length of the apparatus, therefore, Kong in view of Kong II would provide that the plasma would be directed into the reaction zone (24) of at least two of the plurality of plasma units (16) in Kong).
With respect to claim 23, Kong teaches wherein the reaction chamber (24) includes one or more cylindrical plasma units (16) formed by a cylindrical outer wall (as illustrated in Figures 1-3), and wherein the plasma torch is disposed in one of the one or more plasma units and extends through the outer wall of the one of the one or more plasma units to direct plasma radially into the reaction zone of the one of the one or more plasma units – Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong to direct plasma radially into the reaction zone (36) of the one of the one or more plasma units (16).
With respect to claim 24, Kong teaches wherein one or more of the electrodes (32) includes one or more working gas (Figure 4, 40) passageways (58) and a working gas outlet/(near tip (36)) that conducts a working gas (40) into the reaction chamber (24) (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 25, Kong teaches wherein the working gas (40) emitted via the one or more electrodes (32) is subjected to one or more arcs within the reaction chamber during operation of the gasifier (10) (para. [0024]).
With respect to claim 26, wherein the plasma emitted by the plasma torch ignites one or more arcs between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode of at least one set of electrode assemblies.
Regarding limitations recited in claim 9 which are directed to a manner of operating disclosed device, neither the manner of operating a disclosed device (i.e. ignites one or more arcs) nor material or article worked upon further limit an apparatus claim. Said limitations do not differentiate apparatus claims from prior art. See MPEP § 2114 and 2115. Further, process limitations do not have patentable weight in an apparatus claim. See Ex parte Thibault, 164 USPQ 666, 667 (Bd. App. 1969) that states “Expressions relating the apparatus to contents thereof and to an intended operation are of no significance in determining patentability of the apparatus claim.”
With respect to claim 27, Kong teaches a method of processing a material, comprising:
receiving an input material (Figure 1, 12) to be processed within a reaction chamber (Figure 2, 24) (within gasifier (10)) (Figure 1),
energizing one or more sets of electrodes (32), each set of electrodes (32) including an anode electrode and a cathode electrode (para. [0025]), each anode electrode and cathode electrode having an electrode tip (Figure 2, 36) exposed to the reaction chamber (24);
creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode tip (36) and the cathode electrode tip (36) within the reaction chamber (24) to subject at least some of the input material (12) to electrical arcing (para. [0024]).
Kong fails to teach creating plasma in a plasma torch; and injecting the plasma from a plasma torch into the reaction chamber to expose at least some of the input material to the plasma from the plasma torch.
Kong II teaches a gasifier (Figure 3), comprising:
an input (240) for receiving a material to be processed:
an output (242);
one or more plasma units, each plasma unit (214) including;
an outer wall/(reactor vertical wall) that defines an internal reaction zone (as illustrated – where plasma (250) extends); and
one or more sets of electrode assemblies/(plasma torches (214)), and a plasma torch (212) disposed adjacent the reaction chamber (215) and having an output that emits plasma (250) into the reaction chamber (215) to expose at least some of the input material to the plasma from the plasma torch (col. 6, lines 1-20) in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system (col. 4, lines 60-67).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to create plasma in a plasma torch; and inject the plasma from a plasma torch into the reaction chamber to expose at least some of the input material to the plasma from the plasma torch in the method of Kong, as taught by Kong II, in order to ionize the material being fed at the top into plasma which is then chemically activated by the plasma from the plasma units, and to thereby improve arc effectiveness and increase overall enthalpy of system.
With respect to claim 28, Kong II further teaches wherein injecting the plasma (Figure 3, 250) from the plasma torch (212) includes emitting a plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 29, Kong II further teaches wherein creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (Figure 3, 214) within the reaction chamber (215) includes creating the electrical arc/(arc between opposing tips of electrodes (214)) in a first plane laterally across the reaction chamber (215) (as illustrated), and wherein emitting the plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) includes emitting the plasma flame (250) perpendicularly to the first plane (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 30, Kong II further teaches wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (as illustrated in Figure 3), and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed to emit the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction parallel to the first plane - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction parallel to the first plane.
With respect to claim 31, Kong II further teaches wherein the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) extend into the reaction chamber (215) in a first plane perpendicular to the longitudinal axis (as illustrated in Figure 3), and wherein the plasma torch (212) is disposed to emit the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction that is parallel to and within the first plane - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma into the reaction chamber in a direction that is parallel to and within the first plane.
With respect to claim 32, Kong II further teaches wherein creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) within the reaction chamber (215) includes creating the arc/(arc between opposing tips of electrodes (214)) in a first plane laterally across the reaction chamber (215), and wherein emitting the plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) includes emitting the plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) at a non-zero angle with respect to the first plane (as illustrated in Figure 3).
With respect to claim 33, Kong II further teaches wherein creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (214) within the reaction chamber (215) includes creating the arc/(arc between opposing tips of electrodes (214)) in a first plane laterally across the reaction chamber (215) (as illustrated), and wherein emitting the plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) includes emitting the plasma flame (250) such that the plasma flame crosses the first plane (as illustrated).
With respect to claim 34, Kong teaches wherein energizing the one or more sets of electrodes (Figures 2 & 3, 32) includes energizing a plurality of sets of electrodes (32) at a longitudinal location with respect to the input (near the top of gasifier (10)) (Figure 1) to create multiple arcs across the reaction chamber (Figures 2-3, 24) at the longitudinal location (as illustrated in Figures 1-3) (para. [0020]).
With respect to claim 35, Kong teaches wherein energizing the one or more sets of electrodes includes energizing a first set of electrodes at a first longitudinal location with respect to the input to create at least one arc across the reaction chamber at the first longitudinal location and energizing a second set of electrodes at a second longitudinal location with respect to the input that is different than the first longitudinal location, to create at least one arc across the reaction chamber at the second longitudinal location (para. [0038] & [0040]).
With respect to claim 36, Kong II further teaches wherein injecting the plasma from the plasma torch (212) into the reaction chamber (215) includes injecting a plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) such that the plasma flame (250) crosses the arc created by the first set of electrodes (214) (as illustrated in Figure 3), and teaches wherein the plasma flame (Figure 4, 350) does not cross all of the arcs created by the second set of electrodes/(RF coils (315)). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to adjust the intensity of the flame being emitted from the plasma torch in Kong in view of Kong II such that the flame does not cross the arc created by the second set of electrodes in the plasma units (32) of Kong, in order to control the rate of reaction and material residence time.
With respect to claim 37, Kong teaches wherein energizing the one or more sets of electrodes includes energizing a first plurality of sets of electrodes at a first longitudinal location with respect to the input to create a first plurality of arcs across the reaction chamber at the first longitudinal location and energizing a second plurality of sets of electrodes at a second longitudinal location with respect to the input that is different than the first longitudinal location, to create a second plurality of arcs across the reaction chamber at the second longitudinal location (para. [0038] & [0040]).
With respect to claim 38, Kong II further teaches wherein injecting the plasma from the plasma torch (212) into the reaction chamber (215) includes injecting a plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) such that the plasma flame (250) crosses the first plurality of arcs created by the first plurality of sets of electrodes (214) (as illustrated in Figure 3), and teaches wherein the plasma flame (Figure 4, 350) does not cross all of the arcs created by the second plurality of sets of electrodes/(RF coils (315)). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to adjust the intensity of the flame being emitted from the plasma torch in Kong in view of Kong II such that the flame does not cross the second plurality of arcs created by the second plurality of sets of electrodes in the plasma units (32) of Kong, in order to control the rate of reaction and the material residence time.
With respect to claim 39, Kong in view of Kong II teaches wherein injecting the plasma (250) from the plasma torch (212) into the reaction chamber (215) includes injecting a plasma flame (250) into the reaction chamber (215) such that the plasma flame (250) crosses the entire length of the apparatus (200); therefore, it would be obvious that Kong in view of Kong II would provide a flame (250) crosses both the first plurality of arcs created by the first plurality of sets of electrodes (Figures 2 & 3, 32) and the second plurality of arcs created by the second plurality of sets of electrodes (32).
With respect to claim 40, Kong teaches wherein creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode within the reaction chamber (24) includes creating the arc radially across a circular reaction chamber (24) (as illustrated in Figures 1-3) by an anode electrode and a cathode electrode disposed across the circular reaction chamber (para. [0024]), and wherein emitting the plasma flame into the reaction chamber includes emitting the plasma flame radially into the reaction chamber - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma flame radially into the reaction chamber.
With respect to claim 41, Kong teaches wherein creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (32) within the reaction chamber (24) includes creating the arc (near tip (36)) at a first longitudinal location with respect to the input (as illustrated in Figures 1-3), and wherein emitting the plasma flame into the reaction chamber includes emitting the plasma flame radially into the reaction chamber at the first longitudinal location - Kong II teaches disposing the plasma torch/first torch/(212) laterally from plasma units/(second torch/electrode units (214)) as an alternative arrangement to the first torch (212) being above the second torch (214) (col. 6, lines 33-45), therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to consider an alternate arrangement and have the plasma torch (212) of Kong II extend through the wall of the plasma units (16) of Kong and would therefore be capable of emitting the plasma flame radially into the reaction chamber at the first longitudinal location.
With respect to claim 42, Kong teaches injecting working gas (Figure 4, 40) into the reaction chamber (24) (Figure 2) from an electrode assembly (32) including the anode electrode or the cathode electrode (para. [0024], [0031], [0033]).
With respect to claim 43, Kong teaches creating plasma from the working gas by exposing the working gas to an arc created between the anode electrode and the cathode electrode (para. [0024]).
With respect to claim 44, Kong II further teaches igniting one or more arcs between a set of electrodes within the reaction chamber using the plasma from the plasma torch – Kong II explicitly teaches that plasma torch (12) can provide pre-ionization of materials flowed into the reactor, as well as continuous ignition of high power torch (14) (col. 4, lines 60-67); therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing for the invention to ignite one or more arcs between a set of electrodes (214) within the reaction chamber (215) using the plasma from the plasma torch (212) as a viable alternative to other methods of ignition.
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.
Claim 27 is provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2 of copending Application No. (19/285,602). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
With respect to instant claim 27, claims 1-2 of copending application 19/285,602 encompass instant claim 27 as follows: a method of processing a material, comprising:
receiving an input material to be processed within a reaction chamber (claim 1),
energizing one or more sets of electrodes, each set of electrodes including an anode electrode and a cathode electrode (claim 1), each anode electrode and cathode electrode having an electrode tip exposed to the reaction chamber (claim 1); creating an electrical arc between the anode electrode tip and the cathode electrode tip within the reaction chamber to subject at least some of the input material to electrical arcing (claim 1);
creating plasma in a plasma torch (claim 2); and
injecting the plasma from a plasma torch into the reaction chamber to expose at least some of the input material to the plasma from the plasma torch (claim 2).
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAITY V CHANDLER whose telephone number is (571)272-8520. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-6:00PM.
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, BASIA RIDLEY can be reached at 571-272-1453. 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.
/KAITY V CHANDLER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725