DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I, claims 1-15 in the reply filed on 7/23/26 is acknowledged.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3, and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wei (US 2012/0274078 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wei discloses an apparatus comprising: an input gas supply 63; a downstream reactor 28 inlet (paragraph 21); a solar-thermal reactor comprising a solar collector 58 and a reactor 50 that is heated by the solar collector, the reactor comprising: a housing (see Figure 3) having an inlet 64 for receiving a hydrocarbon input gas and an outlet 20 for expelling an output gas 71, wherein the inlet 64 is in fluid communication with the input gas supply 63 and the outlet is in fluid communication with the downstream reactor inlet (paragraph 21); a reaction chamber 54 enclosed by the housing and in fluid communication with the inlet 64 and the outlet 20 (see Figure 3); and a catalyst 52 arranged inside the reaction chamber (paragraph 30); wherein the heat applied to the reactor by the solar collector can heat the catalyst to a reaction temperature (paragraph 36); and wherein input gas can flow from the input gas source and through the thermal reactor from the inlet to the outlet to be chemically converted into the output gas that is directed to the downstream reactor inlet to a secondary reactor (see Figure 1).
Regarding claim 3, Wei discloses that the solar collector is a parabolic trough solar collector and the reactor is arranged in a focal region of the parabolic trough solar collector (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 4, Wei discloses that the housing is a tube formed from at least quartz (paragraph 30).
Claims 1 and 5-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wegeng (US 2013/0025192 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Wegeng discloses an apparatus comprising: an input gas supply and a solar-thermal reactor comprising a solar collector and a reactor that is heated by the solar collector (paragraph 53), the reactor comprising: a housing having an inlet for receiving a hydrocarbon input gas and an outlet for expelling an output gas, wherein the inlet is in fluid communication with the input gas supply (paragraphs 54-56) and the outlet is in fluid communication with downstream storage (paragraph 57); a reaction chamber enclosed by the housing and in fluid communication with the inlet and the outlet and a catalyst arranged inside the reaction chamber (paragraphs 66-68); wherein the heat applied to the reactor by the solar collector can heat the catalyst to a reaction temperature (paragraph 75); and wherein input gas can flow from the input gas source and through the thermal reactor from the inlet to the outlet to be chemically converted into the output gas that is directed to the storage (see Figure 3).
Regarding claim 5, Wegeng discloses that the solar collector is moveable and can be oriented to increase or decrease an amount of solar radiation focused into the focal region (paragraph 60).
Regarding claim 6, Wegeng discloses a preheater (paragraph 11).
Regarding claim 7, Wegeng discloses that an inert heat transfer media is arranged in the reaction chamber of the preheating stage (paragraph 80).
Regarding claim 8, Wegeng discloses that the reactor comprises a cooling stage that includes a heat sink (paragraph 56).
Regarding claim 9, Wegeng discloses that the reactor comprises a mixing stage comprising a first inlet and a second inlet (paragraph 55).
Regarding claim 10, Wegeng discloses that the reactor comprises temperature gradients (paragraph 75).
Regarding claim 11, Wegeng discloses multiple catalyst stages (paragraph 77).
Regarding claim 12, Wegeng discloses that the reactor comprises temperature gradients (paragraph 75).
Regarding claims 13 and 14, Wegeng discloses that the reactor comprises an auxiliary heater comprising a housing that is coaxial with the reactor and that encloses a heating chamber (paragraph 39). The limitations associated with the fluid are intended use. Wegeng discloses a hot working fluid (paragraph 89).
Regarding claim 15, Wegeng discloses a hot working fluid (paragraph 89).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wegeng as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Bordoloi (US 2016/0001269 A1).
Wegeng discloses the use methane with CO2 as an input (paragraph 52) and hydrogen with CO as the effluent (paragraph 53) but does not disclose that the claimed catalyst. Bordoloi—in an invention for reforming using solar energy—discloses the use of multi-cationic aluminate spinel catalysts for their high melting temperature, high mechanical strength at elevated temperature, high chemical inertness, good thermal shock resistance and catalytic properties (paragraph 10). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention to utilize the catalyst of Bordoloi as the catalyst in Wegeng for its high melting temperature, high mechanical strength at elevated temperature, high chemical inertness, good thermal shock resistance and catalytic properties as suggested by Bordoloi.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to IMRAN AKRAM whose telephone number is (571)270-3241. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9a-5p.
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.
/IMRAN AKRAM/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1725
Prosecution Insights