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 .
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.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jiang et al. (US 9,255,232) in view of Tsangaris et al. (US 2008/0147241).
Regarding claim 1, the reference Jiang et al. discloses a dual-bed gasification apparatus (see col. 6, lines 59-65; Fig. 1) comprising: a gasifier (20) having a bed and a freeboard (see col. 8, lines 15-23; Fig. 1); a combustor (30) having a bottom end and a top end (see col. 13, lines 13-28; Fig. 1); a lower branch conduit (25) connecting the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30); the lower branch conduit (25) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30)(see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); an upper branch conduit (35) connecting the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20); the upper branch conduit (35) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the combustor (20) to the gasifier (20) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the upper branch conduit (35) having an upper portion, a middle portion, and a lower portion (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1). The reference Jiang et al., however, does not specifically disclose a solid circulation monitoring system comprising a plurality of pressure sensors, each measuring a pressure at a location within the dual-bed gasification apparatus while the dual-bed gasification apparatus is in operation.
The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches a control system for use in controlling one or more processes implemented in a gasification system for the conversion of carbonaceous feedstock into a gas, which may be used for one or more downstream applications (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the control system operatively controls various local, regional and/or global processes related to the overall gasification process, and thereby adjusts various control parameters thereof adapted to affect these processes for a selected result (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that various sensing elements and response elements are therefore distributed throughout the controlled system and used to acquire various process, reactant and/or product characteristics, compare these characteristics to suitable ranges of such characteristics conducive to achieving the desired result, and respond by implementing changes to in one or more of the ongoing processes via one or more controllable process devices (see Abstract; paras. [0141]; [0168]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that the various sensing elements include pressure sensors to monitor the pressure throughout the entire gasification system, and data relating to the pressure of the system can be used by the control system to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see para. [0188]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that pressure drop across each individual component of the gasification system can also be monitored via a plurality of pressure sensing elements to rapidly pinpoint developing problems during an ongoing process to generate gas suitable for use in a selected downstream operation, or to maximize process outputs and efficiencies (see para. [0190]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., and modified the dual-bed gasification apparatus of Jiang et al. to include a plurality of pressure sensors at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at various locations where pressure fluctuations are likely to occur while the dual-bed gasification apparatus is in operation, and predictably arrived at the instantly claimed solid circulation monitoring system, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]). Furthermore, the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claims 2 and 4, the reference Jiang et al. is silent with respect to the dual-bed gasification apparatus further comprising a plurality of temperature sensors located at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, as required in claims 2 and 4.
The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches a control system for use in controlling one or more processes implemented in a gasification system for the conversion of carbonaceous feedstock into a gas, which may be used for one or more downstream applications (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the control system operatively controls various local, regional and/or global processes related to the overall gasification process, and thereby adjusts various control parameters thereof adapted to affect these processes for a selected result (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that various sensing elements and response elements are therefore distributed throughout the controlled system and used to acquire various process, reactant and/or product characteristics, compare these characteristics to suitable ranges of such characteristics conducive to achieving the desired result, and respond by implementing changes to in one or more of the ongoing processes via one or more controllable process devices (see Abstract; paras. [0141]; [0168]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that the various sensing elements can include a plurality of temperature sensors for sensing the temperature at various locations throughout the gasification system so as to monitor and adjust, via response elements, the ongoing process to generate a product gas suitable for use in the selected downstream application and maximize process outputs and efficiencies (see paras. temperature [0106]; [0147]; [0180]; [0187]).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to similarly provide a plurality of temperature sensors at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., including a temperature sensor T1 measuring a temperature TP1 at the bottom end of the combustor (30); a temperature sensor T2 measuring a temperature TP2 in the top end of the combustor (30); a temperature sensor T3 measuring a temperature TP3 directly upstream of the gasifier bed; and a temperature sensor T4 measuring a temperature TP4 within the gasifier bed, as claimed by applicant, to help monitor temperature fluctuations that may arise at the various locations within the gasifier and combustor, as doing so would amount to nothing more than a use of a known device for its intended use in a known environment to accomplish an entirely expected result. As evidence by the reference Tsangaris et al. (see paras. [0147]; [0180]; [0181]; [0187]), it is typical in the art to arrange a plurality of temperature sensors to monitor the temperature at various locations within a gasification system.
Regarding claim 3, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 3, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 5, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 5, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 6, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 6, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 7, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 7, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 8, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 8, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 9, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 9, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 10, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 10, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 11, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 11, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 12, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressure sensors is arranged does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide the plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 12, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 13, the reference Jiang et al. discloses a system for controlling solids circulation in a dual-bed gasification apparatus, the dual-bed gasification apparatus (see col. 6, lines 59-65; Fig. 1) comprising: a gasifier (20) having a bed and a freeboard (see col. 8, lines 15-23; Fig. 1); a combustor (30) having a bottom end and a top end (see col. 13, lines 13-28; Fig. 1); a lower branch conduit (25) connecting the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30); the lower branch conduit (25) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the lower branch conduit (25) optionally having a lower branch non-mechanical device (70) permitting control of rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30) (see col. 13, lines 20-28; Fig. 1); an upper branch conduit (35) connecting the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20); the upper branch conduit (35) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the combustor (20) to the gasifier (20) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the upper branch conduit (35) having an upper portion, a middle portion, and a lower portion (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the lower portion of the upper branch conduit (35) optionally having an upper branch non-mechanic device (80) permitting control of rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; col. 17, lines 5-11; Fig. 1). The reference Jiang et al., however, does not specifically disclose a solid circulation monitoring system comprising a plurality of pressure sensors, each measuring a pressure at a location within the dual-bed gasification apparatus while the dual-bed gasification apparatus is in operation.
The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches a control system for use in controlling one or more processes implemented in a gasification system for the conversion of carbonaceous feedstock into a gas, which may be used for one or more downstream applications (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the control system operatively controls various local, regional and/or global processes related to the overall gasification process, and thereby adjusts various control parameters thereof adapted to affect these processes for a selected result (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that various sensing elements and response elements are therefore distributed throughout the controlled system and used to acquire various process, reactant and/or product characteristics, compare these characteristics to suitable ranges of such characteristics conducive to achieving the desired result, and respond by implementing changes to in one or more of the ongoing processes via one or more controllable process devices (see Abstract; paras. [0141]; [0168]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that the various sensing elements include pressure sensors to monitor the pressure throughout the entire gasification system, and data relating to the pressure of the system can be used by the control system to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see para. [0188]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that pressure drop across each individual component of the gasification system can also be monitored via a plurality of pressure sensing elements to rapidly pinpoint developing problems during an ongoing process to generate gas suitable for use in a selected downstream operation, or to maximize process outputs and efficiencies (see para. [0190]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., and modified the system of Jiang et al. to include a plurality of pressure sensors at various locations where pressure fluctuations are likely to occur, including at the various locations as claimed by applicant, and predictably arrived at the instantly claimed system for controlling solids circulation, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]). Furthermore, the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 14, references Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al. teach the system for controlling solids circulation, wherein the lower branch non-mechanical device (70) and/or the upper branch non-mechanical device (80) is an L-valve, a J-valve, an approximated J-valve, or a seal pot (see col. 20, lines 11-26), and the operating of the non-mechanical device comprises adjusting a rate of flow of aeration gas through the non-mechanical device (see col. 14, lines 4-9).
Regarding claim 15, references Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al. teach the system for controlling solids circulation further comprises upper aeration ports (141d and distribution nozzles in the GSP) in the upper branch conduit (35) (see col. 10, lines 25-30; col. 20, lines 5-10; Fig. 1) and/or lower aeration ports (141b, 141c, and distribution nozzles in the CSP) in the lower branch conduit (25) (see col. 10, lines 25-30; col. 20, lines 5-10; Fig. 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to operate the upper aeration ports and/or lower aeration ports of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al. to increase or decrease the passage of the heat carrier particles in response to changes in pressure at the various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including to pressure changes at the various locations as recited in claim 15, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 16, references Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al. do not specifically disclose wherein the operating of the lower branch non-mechanical device (70) and/or the upper branch non-mechanical device occurs (80) in an automated fashion. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have the operations of the lower branch non-mechanical device (70) and/or the upper branch non-mechanical device (80) occur in an automated fashion in response to the change in pressure at the various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including to pressure changes at the various locations as recited in claim 16, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the gasification system can be provided with a control system which can operatively control various local, regional and/or global processes related to the overall gasification process, and thereby adjusts various control parameters thereof adapted to affect these processes for a selected result (see Abstract; para. [0141]).
Regarding claim 17, the reference Jiang et al. discloses a system for controlling solids circulation in a dual-bed gasification apparatus, the dual-bed gasification apparatus (see col. 6, lines 59-65; Fig. 1) comprising: a gasifier (20) having a bed and a freeboard (see col. 8, lines 15-23; Fig. 1); a combustor (30) having a bottom end and a top end (see col. 13, lines 13-28; Fig. 1); a lower branch conduit (25) connecting the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30); the lower branch conduit (25) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the lower branch conduit (25) optionally having a lower branch non-mechanical device (70) permitting control of rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30) (see col. 13, lines 20-28; Fig. 1); an upper branch conduit (35) connecting the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20); the upper branch conduit (35) configured to allow transfer of heat carrier particles from the combustor (20) to the gasifier (20) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the upper branch conduit (35) having an upper portion, a middle portion, and a lower portion (see col. 13, lines 20-23; Fig. 1); the lower portion of the upper branch conduit (35) optionally having an upper branch non-mechanic device (80) permitting control of rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20) (see col. 13, lines 20-23; col. 17, lines 5-11; Fig. 1). The reference Jiang et al., however, does not specifically disclose a method comprising monitoring, while the dual-bed gasification apparatus is in operation, a plurality of pressures, each pressure at a location within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, and increasing or decreasing one or more of: (a) the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the combustor to the gasifier by operating the upper branch non-mechanic device; and (b) increasing or decreasing the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the gasifier to the combustor, by operating the lower branch non-mechanic device; when one or more of the plurality of pressures, or where the difference between two of the plurality of pressures reach a defined threshold.
The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches a control system for use in controlling one or more processes implemented in a gasification system for the conversion of carbonaceous feedstock into a gas, which may be used for one or more downstream applications (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the control system operatively controls various local, regional and/or global processes related to the overall gasification process, and thereby adjusts various control parameters thereof adapted to affect these processes for a selected result (see Abstract). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that various sensing elements and response elements are therefore distributed throughout the controlled system and used to acquire various process, reactant and/or product characteristics, compare these characteristics to suitable ranges of such characteristics conducive to achieving the desired result, and respond by implementing changes to in one or more of the ongoing processes via one or more controllable process devices (see Abstract; paras. [0141]; [0168]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that the various sensing elements include pressure sensors to monitor the pressure throughout the entire gasification system, and data relating to the pressure of the system can be used by the control system to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see para. [0188]). The reference Tsangaris et al. further teaches that pressure drop across each individual component of the gasification system can also be monitored via a plurality of pressure sensing elements to rapidly pinpoint developing problems during an ongoing process to generate gas suitable for use in a selected downstream operation, or to maximize process outputs and efficiencies (see para. [0190]).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., and monitored, while the dual-bed gasification apparatus is in operation, a plurality of pressures, each pressure at a location within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, and increased or decreased one or more of: (a) the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20) by operating the upper branch non-mechanic device (80); and (b) increased or decreased the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30), by operating the lower branch non-mechanic device (70); when one or more of the plurality of pressures, or where the difference between two of the plurality of pressures reach a defined threshold, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [0031]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 18, the references Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al. do not specifically disclose increasing or decreasing an aeration gas flow to the lower portion and/or the middle portion of the upper branch conduit, when one or more of the plurality of pressures, or where the difference between two of the plurality of pressures, reach a defined threshold, as recited in claim 18. However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to increase or decrease an aeration gas flow to the lower portion and/or the middle portion of the upper branch conduit (35), when one or more of the plurality of pressures, or where the difference between two of the plurality of pressures, reach a defined threshold, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including within the non-mechanic devices (70, 80), within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Regarding claim 19, the recitation in the claim with respect to the particular locations where the plurality of pressures is monitored does not patentably distinguish the claim over the prior art because it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, in view of the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., to provide a plurality of pressure sensors at suitable locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, including at the various locations as recited in claim 9, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 31 March 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Applicant argues that the reference Tsangaris et al. discloses plasma gasification systems, which are fundamentally different from dual bed gasifiers, and therefore, one of ordinary skill in the art seeking to address solids circulation control in a dual bed system would not look to the teachings of Tsangaris et al. (see Remarks, pages 12-13).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Contrary to applicant’s assertion, the reference Tsangaris et al. is not directed to plasma gasification systems, but rather to a control system for the conversion of carbonaceous feedstock into a gas to efficiently gasify carbonaceous feedstock in a manner that maximizes the overall efficiency of the process, and/or the steps comprising the overall process (see paras. [0019]-[0022]; [0116]). In addition, the reference Tsangaris et al. expressly teaches that the disclosed control system may find applications in a number of gasification processes, and that the gasifier or converter employed can be based on one of a number of standard converters known in the art such as entrained flow converters, moving bed converters, and fluidized bed converters (see paras. [0161]; [0212]). The reference Tsangaris et al. is not limited to its specific embodiments. Rather, the reference Tsangaris et al. must be considered for the full scope of its disclosure. See In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976). In the reference Tsangaris et al., the exemplary gasification systems which employ plasma heat to drive the gasification process are mere exemplary embodiments to which the control system of Tsangaris et al. may be applied to (see paras. [0019]; [0150]-[0152]). The reference Tsangaris et al. also teaches that the disclosed control system may suitably be applied to gasification systems which employ indirect heating to drive the gasification process (see paras. [0193]; [0201]). The reference Jiang et al. employs indirect heating to drive the gasification process in the dual-bed gasification system (see Abstract; col. 6, lines 59-67; Fig. 1). Thus, the examiner asserts that one of ordinary skill in the art seeking to improve control of solids circulation in the dual bed gasification system of Jiang et al., would look to the teachings of the reference Tsangaris et al. since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that the disclosed control system may suitably be used to monitor operation of the various components of a gasification system for assuring proper operation (see para. [0121]).
Applicant argues that neither reference addresses solids circulation control in a dual bed system, and because the cited references operate on fundamentally different principles, there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation that would lead one of ordinary skill in the art to combine these references in the manner proposed by the Examiner (see Remarks page 13).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The reference Jiang et al. does, in fact, suggests for the need to control solids circulation through the dual-bed gasification system to ensure continuous flow of heat transfer material from the combustor back into the gasifier (see col. 16, lines 18-43). The reference Jiang et al. teaches that to maintain continuous flow of materials from the combustor back to the gasifier, the pressure of the combustor at the inlet to the combustor should be less than the gasifier pressure (see col. 16, lines 16-26). The reference Jiang et al. further teaches that adequate pressure should also be maintained at the heat transfer material outlet of the combustor to ensure flow of the heat transfer material from the combustor back to the gasifier (see col. 16, lines 26-43).
Accordingly, the examiner maintains the position that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Jiang et al. and Tsangaris et al., and modified the dual-bed gasification apparatus of Jiang et al. to include a plurality of pressure sensors at various locations where pressure fluctuations are likely to occur, including at the various locations as claimed by applicant, and predictably arrived at the instantly claimed solid circulation monitoring system, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [00319]). Furthermore, the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Applicant argues that the description in the reference Jiang et al., at Column 3, lines 41-44, by no means suggest to the skilled person the use of or need for pressure sensors (see Remarks, page 14).
The examiner respectfully disagree. Although, the reference Jiang et al. does not explicitly specify pressure sensors at the cited section, one of ordinary skill in the art, upon review of the teachings the reference Jiang et al. as a whole, would infer the use of or need for pressure sensors at various locations within the dual-bed gasification system of Jiang et al., including within the combustor and the gasifier, for the purpose of monitoring pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification system of Jiang et al.. In considering the disclosure of a reference, it is proper to take into account not only specific teachings of the reference but also the inferences which one skilled in the art would reasonably be expected to draw therefrom. In re Preda, 401 F.2d 825, 826 (COPA 1968).
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., gasification production optimized using only pressure sensors, at strategically placed positions throughout the gasifier (see Remarks, pages 14-15)) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Applicant argues that there is nothing in either prior art reference that teaches or suggests a lower branch non-mechanical device or an upper branch non-mechanical device operating to increase or decrease the passage of heat carrier particles in response to changes in pressure at various locations within a gasifier, as claimed in claim 13 or 17 (see Remarks, page 16).
The examiner respectfully disagrees. The reference Jiang et al. teaches that in order to maintain continuous flow of materials from the combustor back to the gasifier, the pressure of the combustor at the inlet to the combustor should be less than the gasifier pressure (see col. 16, lines 16-26). The reference Jiang et al. further teaches that adequate pressure should also be maintained at the heat transfer material outlet of the combustor to ensure flow of the heat transfer material from the combustor back to the gasifier (see col. 16, lines 26-43).
Thus, the examiner asserts that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, seeking to maintain continuous flow of solids between the combustor (30) and gasifier (20) of Jiang et al., to monitor a plurality of pressures, each pressure at a location within the dual-bed gasification apparatus, and increased or decreased one or more of: (a) the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the combustor (30) to the gasifier (20) by operating the upper branch non-mechanic device (80) of Jiang et al.; and (b) increased or decreased the rate of passage of the heat carrier particles from the gasifier (20) to the combustor (30), by operating the lower branch non-mechanic device (70) of Jiang et al.; when one or more of the plurality of pressures, or where the difference between two of the plurality of pressures reach a defined threshold, since the reference Tsangaris et al. teaches that data relating to the pressures measured at the various locations within the gasification system can be used to determine, on a real time basis, whether adjustments to the various control parameters are required (see paras. [0188]; [0316]; [0031]); and the reference Jiang et al. suggests for the need to maintain the pressure or differential pressures at various locations within the dual-bed gasification apparatus within desired ranges (see col. 3, lines 41-44; col. 19, line 65 to col. 20, line 40).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lessanework T Seifu whose telephone number is (571)270-3153. The examiner can normally be reached M-T 9:00 am - 6:30 pm; F 9:00 am - 1:00 pm.
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 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.
/LESSANEWORK SEIFU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights