Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/193,404

PRODUCING HYDROGEN FROM HYDROGEN SULFIDE

Non-Final OA §102
Filed
Mar 30, 2023
Examiner
SPEER, JOSHUA MAXWELL
Art Unit
1736
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Saudi Arabian Oil Company
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 1m
To Grant
79%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
53 granted / 61 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Minimal -8% lift
Without
With
+-8.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 1m
Avg Prosecution
32 currently pending
Career history
93
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.4%
-39.6% vs TC avg
§103
39.1%
-0.9% vs TC avg
§102
29.3%
-10.7% vs TC avg
§112
29.6%
-10.4% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 61 resolved cases

Office Action

§102
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 Election/Restrictions Claims 11-20 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected Group II, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election of Group I (claims 1-10) was made without traverse in the reply filed on 12/11/2025. 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 and 8-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160115026 A1 Angelini et al. Claim 1 requires “heating a feed stream comprising hydrogen sulfide to a preheat temperature; after heating the feed stream, converting at least a portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream into hydrogen and sulfur to form a mixed product stream comprising the hydrogen, the sulfur, and a remaining, unconverted portion of the hydrogen sulfide”. Angelini et al. discloses forming H2 and elemental sulfur from a H2S stream “In a broad sense, the invention is based on the simultaneous occurrence of cracking and partial oxidation of H2S so as to provide concurrent production of sulphur and of a significant amount of hydrogen.” [0023] and that the feed may be preheated “In one embodiment, the feedstock to Catalytic Oxidative Cracking reaction zone or zones (H₂S-containing acid gas and oxygen-containing gas) is preheated in order to increase the reaction temperature, to boost hydrogen production and to depress SO, formation.” [0043]. Regarding unconverted H2S Angelini et al. discloses “As a consequence of the lower H2S conversion, a higher acid gas recycle rate from H2S-containing gas source (e.g. an amine regenerator) to reaction chamber is obtained as compared to a traditional Claus Plant.” [0047]. Claim 1 further requires “wherein the preheat temperature is a temperature that is sufficiently hot to maintain a desired reaction temperature while converting at least the portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream into hydrogen and sulfur”. It is understood that the preheat temperature is implicitly disclosed as being sufficient to maintain the desired reaction temperature, otherwise the invention would not function as intended. Nonetheless regarding the required temperature for reaction Angelini et al. discloses “It should be noted that the reaction preferably is conducted autothermally. This refers to the fact that, whilst the process is preferably adiabatic, heat exchange takes in fact place, since the oxidation reaction is exothermal, and the cracking reaction is endothermal, whereby heat made available through the exothermal reaction is utilized in the endothermal reaction.” [0046] which strongly suggests to one of ordinary skill in the art that the preheat temperature should be near or at the desired reaction temperature. Claim 1 further requires “and cooling at least a portion of the mixed product stream to condense the sulfur to form a sulfur stream comprising the sulfur that has condensed from the portion of the mixed product stream.”. Angelini et al. discloses “The quench zone (which preferably is a zone of the reaction chamber) is preferably followed by a waste heat boiler and a sulphur condenser to cool down the process gas and to recover liquid sulphur.” [0051]. Claim 8 requires “converting, in the presence of oxygen, at least a portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream to sulfur and sulfur dioxide to form a second feed stream.”. Angelini et al. discloses oxygen as a reagent “The quantity of oxygen fed to the reactor is selected so as to achieve a ratio H2S/O2 in the feedstock higher than typical figure of about 2:1.” [0041] and production of SO2 “Although the process of the invention substantially reduces the formation of SO2, it will be inevitable that some SO2 is formed.” [0053]. Claim 9 requires “cooling the second feed stream to condense sulfur to form a second sulfur stream and a third feed stream, wherein the second sulfur stream comprises the sulfur that has condensed from the second feed stream, and the third feed stream comprises a remaining, gaseous portion of the second feed stream”. Angelini et al. discloses cooling to condense sulfur “The quench zone (which preferably is a zone of the reaction chamber) is preferably followed by a waste heat boiler and a sulphur condenser to cool down the process gas and to recover liquid sulphur.” [0051]. Claim 9 further requires “and converting at least a portion of the sulfur dioxide of the third feed stream back into hydrogen sulfide to form a fourth feed stream”. Angelini et al. discloses “The tail gas is preferably preheated and fed to a hydrogenation reactor. Therein the SO2, as well as other residual sulphur compounds, such as COS and CS2, are converted into H2S, which is then removed. This removal can be done in a conventional manner, e.g., by scrubbing the gas with a lean amine solution in an absorber.” [0054]. Claim 9 further requires “wherein converting the portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream into hydrogen and sulfur comprises converting at least a portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the fourth feed stream into hydrogen and sulfur to form the mixed product stream.”. Angelini et al. discloses recycling the H2S from the amine scrubber back into the process “As a consequence of the lower H₂S conversion, a higher acid gas recycle rate from H₂S-containing gas source (e.g. an amine regenerator) to reaction chamber is obtained as compared to a traditional Claus Plant.” [0047]. It is understood that the reactor the H2S is recycling into is capable of converting at least a portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream into hydrogen and sulfur (see Claim 1). Claim 10 requires “heating an oxidizing stream comprising oxygen, wherein the oxygen present while converting at least the portion of the hydrogen sulfide in the feed stream to sulfur and sulfur dioxide is provided by the oxidizing stream after the oxidizing stream has been heated.”. Angelini et al. discloses “In one embodiment, the feedstock to Catalytic Oxidative Cracking reaction zone or zones (H2S-containing acid gas and oxygen-containing gas) is preheated in order to increase the reaction temperature” [0043]. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 2-7 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 closest prior art to Claim 2 is given by US 20160115026 A1 Angelini et al. Claim 2 requires “receiving, by a plurality of pressure swing adsorption beds, an acid gas stream comprising carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide; separating, by the plurality of pressure swing adsorption beds, at least a portion of the carbon dioxide from the acid gas stream to produce a carbon dioxide stream and the feed stream, the carbon dioxide stream comprising the carbon dioxide that has separated from the acid gas stream, the feed stream comprising a remaining portion of the acid gas stream.”. Angelini et al. is silent towards removing CO2 through a plurality of pressure swing adsorption beds. Claims 3-7 depend upon Claim 2 and are allowable for similar reasons. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER whose telephone number is (703)756-5471. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-5pm 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, 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. /JOSHUA MAXWELL SPEER/ Examiner Art Unit 1736 /DANIEL BERNS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1736
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Mar 30, 2023
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102
Mar 31, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12589382
RUTHENIUM OXIDE AND CATALYST COMPRISING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12551862
SORBENT FOR REMOVING RADON, PRODUCTION METHOD FOR SAME, AND RADON REMOVAL METHOD USING SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 17, 2026
Patent 12544749
METHOD FOR PREPARING SINGLE-ATOM, ATOMIC CLUSTER OR SINGLE-MOLECULAR CATALYST FOR OXIDATIVE COUPLING OF METHANE USING CHEMICAL VAPOR DEPOSITION
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Patent 12540529
SUBSURFACE CARBON DIOXIDE ANALYSIS METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 03, 2026
Patent 12533659
METHOD OF PRODUCING CATALYST-BEARING SUPPORT AND METHOD OF PRODUCING FIBROUS CARBON NANOSTRUCTURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Jan 27, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
79%
With Interview (-8.2%)
3y 1m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 61 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month