DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph 0031, “5 bar desorption at 298” should read “5 bar desorption at 298 K”.
In paragraphs 0073, 0097, and 0098, “usuable” should read “usable”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claim 18 is objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 18, line 3, “disposed in storage cavity of the vessel” should read “disposed in the storage cavity of the vessel”.
In Claim 18, line 5, “usuable” should read “usable”.
In Claim 18, line 6, “desorption at 298,” should read “desorption at 298 K,”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 11 and 12 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 11 recites the limitation "the gas" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 12 is rejected due to its dependence on the rejected claim 11.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the gas" in line 1. It is unclear what “the gas” refers to.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Moghadam et al. (“Computer-aided discovery of a metal-organic framework with superior oxygen uptake”).
With regard to Claim 1, Moghadam discloses a natural gas storage material comprising a porous metal-organic framework material (Abstract; We also report a world-record holding material for oxygen storage, UMCM-152, which delivers 22.5% more oxygen than the best known material to date, to the best of our knowledge).
While Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material having one or more sites for reversibly storing methane and having a usable methane storage capacity of greater than or equal to about 208 cm3(STP)/cm3 under pressure swing conditions of 80 bar adsorption to 5 bar desorption at 298 K, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material, and therefore a suitable natural gas storage material. See MPEP 2112.01.
With regard to Claim 2, Moghadam discloses the porous metal-organic framework material having a gravimetric surface area of greater than or equal to about 2,000 m2/g (Fig. 5c; Storage pressure 80 bar).
With regard to Claim 3, while Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material having a pore volume of greater than or equal to about 1 cm3/g to less than or equal to about 2.2 cm3/g, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material. See MPEP 2112.01.
With regard to Claim 4, Moghadam discloses the porous metal-organic framework material having an average pore diameter of greater than or equal to about 7 Angstrom to less than or equal to about 20 Angstrom (Fig. 5a; Storage pressure 80 bar).
With regard to Claim 5, while Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material having a volumetric surface area of greater than or equal to about 1,800 m2/cm3 to less than or equal to about 2,700 m2/cm3, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material. See MPEP 2112.01.
With regard to Claim 6, Moghadam discloses the porous metal-organic framework material having a single crystal density of greater than or equal to about 0.4 g/cm3 to less than or equal to about 1 g/cm3 (Fig. 5d; Storage pressure 80 bar).
With regard to Claim 7, Moghadam discloses the porous metal-organic framework material having a void fraction of greater than or equal to about 0.7 to less than or equal to about 0.85 (Fig. 5b; Storage pressure 80 bar).
With regard to Claims 8, 13 and 15-17, Moghadam discloses catena-((μ8-5-(3,5-bis(4-carboxyphenyl)phenyl)benzene-1,3-dicarboxylato)-diaqua-di-copper] (UMCM-152) as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material (Abstract; We also report a world-record holding material for oxygen storage, UMCM-152, which delivers 22.5% more oxygen than the best known material to date, to the best of our knowledge).
With regard to Claim 9, while Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material wherein the usable methane storage capacity is greater than or equal to about 216 cm3(STP)/cm3, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material. See MPEP 2112.01.
With regard to Claim 10, Moghadam discloses the material wherein the metal-organic framework is activated by treatment with supercritical carbon dioxide (CO2) (Page 7, UMCM-152 synthesis, Ethanol was removed by supercritical CO2 activation).
Claims 11 and 12 are construed as an intended use and not accorded patentable weight. The composition of Moghadam appears to be substantially identical to the material of Claim 1 and thus is considered to be configured to be used as claimed. See MPEP 2111.02.
With regard to Claim 18, Moghadam teaches a natural gas storage system comprising a vessel having at least one port for fluid communication and a storage cavity, and a porous metal-organic framework material disposed in the storage cavity of the vessel (Abstract; We also report a world-record holding material for oxygen storage, UMCM-152, which delivers 22.5% more oxygen than the best known material to date, to the best of our knowledge; Page 7, UMCM-152 synthesis; Ethanol was removed by supercritical CO2 activation and then the sample was transferred into the surface area analyzer tube using a glove box filled with argon).
While Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material having one or more sites for reversibly storing methane and having a usable methane storage capacity of greater than or equal to about 208 cm3(STP)/cm3 under pressure swing conditions of 80 bar adsorption to 5 bar desorption at 298 K, and wherein the porous metal-organic framework material is capable of reversibly storing a gas comprising methane via adsorption and desorption within the storage cavity of the vessel, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material, and therefore a suitable natural gas storage material. See MPEP 2112.01.
With regard to Claim 19, Moghadam discloses catena-((μ8-5-(3,5-bis(4-carboxyphenyl)phenyl)benzene-1,3-dicarboxylato)-diaqua-di-copper] (UMCM-152) as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material (Abstract; We also report a world-record holding material for oxygen storage, UMCM-152, which delivers 22.5% more oxygen than the best known material to date, to the best of our knowledge).
With regard to Claim 20, while Moghadam does not explicitly disclose the porous metal-organic framework material wherein the usable methane storage capacity is greater than or equal to about 216 cm3(STP)/cm3, the composition of Moghadam and of the instant invention are substantially identical and thus would have the same properties. Both Moghadam and the instant invention disclose UMCM-152 as a suitable porous metal-organic framework material. See MPEP 2112.01.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Shen et al. (“Effects of textural and surface characteristics of metal-organic frameworks on the methane adsorption for natural gas vehicular application”) teaches methane adsorption characteristics of 46 different MOFs.
Chen et al. (EP 2675815 B1) teaches MOFs for optimized methane storage.
Matzger et al. (US 2013/0305922 A1) teaches microporous coordination polymers (MCPs) for gas dehumidification.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI whose telephone number is (571)270-7302. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:30-5, F 7:30-4.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at 571-270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDUL-RAHMAN YUSUF WALEED SMARI/Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736