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 May 20, 2026 is acknowledged.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 7-9 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yang (CN-204589318 U).
Regarding Claim 1, Yang reference discloses an apparatus for oxygen production, the apparatus comprising:
a reactor positioned to receive a feed comprising oxygen and water for dehydrogenation of the feed and output dehydrogenated feed (Figure 1, numeral 9);
a cooler positioned to receive the dehydrogenated feed output from the reactor to cool the dehydrogenated feed to a temperature within a pre-selected temperature range (Figure 1, numeral 7); and
an adsorption system positioned to receive at least a portion of the cooled dehydrogenated feed after it is output from the cooler to remove moisture and/or impurities from the dehydrogenated feed to output an oxygen gas stream that is comprised of at least 90 volume percent (vol%) oxygen (Figure 1, numeral 5 – adsorption tank and Abstract – high pure oxygen inherently contains at least 90 volume percent oxygen).
Regarding Claim 7, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1, wherein the reactor is connectable to the adsorption system so that a portion of the dehydrogenated feed output from the reactor is feedable to the adsorption system as a regeneration gas (Figure 1, numerals 4 and 9).
Regarding Claim 8, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 7, comprising a treatment device positioned between the reactor and the adsorption system to treat the portion of dehydrogenated feed output from the reactor to form the regeneration gas for feeding to the adsorption system (Figure 1, numeral 6 – steam water separator).
Regarding Claim 9, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 7, wherein the treatment device is a phase separator that outputs a liquid stream comprising impurities separated from the dehydrogenated feed to form the regeneration gas (Figure 1, numeral 6 – steam water separator).
Regarding Claim 14, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1, comprising:
a phase separator positioned between the cooler and the adsorption system to remove water from the cooled dehydrogenated feed as a liquid waste stream before the cooled dehydrogenated feed is fed to the adsorption system (Figure 1, numeral 6 – steam water separator).
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.
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(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yang (CN-204589318 U) in view of Luo et al. (CN-104498983 A).
Regarding Claim 2, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1, comprising:
a compressor system positioned upstream of the reactor to compress the feed to a pre-selected reactor feed pressure before the feed is fed to the reactor (“Contents of the utility model” section, paragraph 4, a membrane press, the separated oxygen compressor).
However, Yang does not disclose a reactor feed heating system positioned to heat the feed to a temperature within a pre-selected reactor feed temperature range before the feed is fed to the reactor and receive the dehydrogenated stream output from the reactor as a heating medium for heating the feed. Luo et al. reference discloses a similar system for producing high pure oxygen wherein the electrolytic oxygen being preheated using the heating from the catalytic reaction and combustion (Abstract and Paragraphs [0010]-[0012]). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to preheat the feed as taught by Luo et al., since Luo et al. states at Abstract that such a modification would obtain high-purity oxygen.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 10-13 and 15 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding Claim 3, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 2 except for a liquefaction unit having at least one liquefier positioned to receive at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream output from the adsorption system to liquify the oxygen gas stream and a separator positioned to receive liquified oxygen from the liquefaction unit to output a liquid oxygen stream and an oxygen gas stream; and a feed pre-cooler positioned upstream of the compressor system and/or the reactor feed heating system, the feed pre-cooler positioned to cool the feed before the feed is fed to the compressor system and/or the reactor feed heating system, the feed pre-cooler positioned to receive at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream output from the separator as a cooling medium to cool the feed. Luo et al. (CN-104498983 A) reference discloses a similar system for producing high pure oxygen wherein the electrolytic oxygen being preheated using the heating from the catalytic reaction and combustion (Abstract and Paragraphs [0010]-[0012]). However, neither Yang nor Luo et al. reference disclose the claimed liquefaction unit and a feed-pre-cooler. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify and/or combine the above teachings to come up with the claimed liquefaction unit and feed-pre-cooler.
Regarding Claim 4, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 2 except for a liquefaction unit having at least one liquefier positioned to receive at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream output from the adsorption system to liquify the oxygen gas stream and a separator positioned to receive liquified oxygen from the liquefaction unit to output a liquid oxygen stream and an oxygen gas stream, the oxygen gas stream being outputtable to feed at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream to the cooler as a cooling medium for cooling of the dehydrogenated feed; the cooler positioned to output the cooling medium as a warmed cooling medium to feed toward the adsorption system as a regeneration gas for regeneration of adsorbent material of at least one adsorber of the adsorption system. Luo et al. (CN-104498983 A) reference discloses a similar system for producing high pure oxygen wherein the electrolytic oxygen being preheated using the heating from the catalytic reaction and combustion (Abstract and Paragraphs [0010]-[0012]). However, neither Yang nor Luo et al. reference disclose the claimed liquefaction unit and a separator. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify and/or combine the above teachings to come up with the claimed liquefaction unit and separator.
Regarding Claim 5, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 2 except for a liquefaction unit having at least one liquefier positioned to receive at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream output from the adsorption system to liquify the oxygen gas stream and a separator positioned to receive liquified oxygen from the liquefaction unit to output a liquid oxygen stream and an oxygen gas stream, the oxygen gas stream being outputtable to feed at least a portion of the oxygen gas stream toward the adsorption system as a regeneration gas for regeneration of adsorbent material of at least one adsorber of the adsorption system. Luo et al. (CN-104498983 A) reference discloses a similar system for producing high pure oxygen wherein the electrolytic oxygen being preheated using the heating from the catalytic reaction and combustion (Abstract and Paragraphs [0010]-[0012]). However, neither Yang nor Luo et al. reference disclose the claimed liquefaction unit and a separator. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify and/or combine the above teachings to come up with the claimed liquefaction unit and separator.
Claim 6 depends on Claim 5.
Regarding Claim 10, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1 except for a regeneration gas heat exchanger positioned to heat a regeneration gas to a temperature within a pre-selected regeneration gas temperature range for feeding the regeneration gas to the adsorption system; and wherein the reactor is connectable to the regeneration gas heat exchanger so that a portion of the dehydrogenated feed output from the reactor is feedable to the regeneration gas heat exchanger as a heating medium for heating the regeneration gas. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify the system of Yang with the claimed regeneration gas heat exchanger.
Claim 11 depends on Claim 10.
Regarding Claim 12, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1 except for a regeneration gas heat exchanger positioned to heat a regeneration gas to a temperature within a pre-selected regeneration gas temperature range for feeding the regeneration gas to the adsorption system; and a moisture removal unit positioned between the adsorption system and the regeneration gas heat exchanger, the moisture removal unit configured to receive regeneration gas output from the adsorption system to remove moisture from the regeneration gas and subsequently feed the regeneration gas to the regeneration gas heat exchanger to be heated to the temperature within the pre-selected regeneration gas temperature range for being fed back to the adsorption system in a closed-loop arrangement. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify the system of Yang with the claimed regeneration gas heat exchanger and moisture removal unit.
Claim 13 depends on Claim 12.
Regarding Claim 15, Yang reference discloses the apparatus of claim 1 including a phase separator positioned between the cooler and the adsorption system to remove water from the cooled dehydrogenated feed as a liquid waste stream before a first portion of the cooled dehydrogenated feed is fed to the adsorption system (Figure 1, numeral 6 – steam water separator). However, Yang does not disclose a regeneration gas heat exchanger positioned between the phase separator and the adsorption system; and wherein the phase separator is connectable to the adsorption system and the regeneration gas heat exchanger such that a second portion of the cooled dehydrogenated feed is feedable to the regeneration gas heat exchanger to be heated to a pre-selected regeneration gas temperature for being fed to the adsorption system as a regeneration gas. There is no motivation/suggestion to modify the system of Yang with the claimed regeneration gas heat exchanger.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUY-TRAM NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3167. The examiner can normally be reached M-W, 7:00am - 3pm, EST.
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, Claire X Wang can be reached at 571-270-1051. 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.
/HUY TRAM NGUYEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 1774
