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, 3-7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunihiro et al. (JP 2019195795) in view of Kambara et al. (US 2019/0322526).
Regarding claim 1, the reference Kunihiro et al. discloses an ammonia decomposition system (see paras. [0007]; [0024]-[0025]; Fig. 4) comprising:
a decomposition unit (2) configured to decompose ammonia comprising: a catalyst (1) that decomposes ammonia (see paras. [0024]-[0025]); and a pair of electrodes (230) in contact with the catalyst and configured to apply an electric field to the catalyst (see para. [0042]; Fig. 4); and
a controller (24) configured to control a decomposition rate of ammonia in the decomposition unit (see paras. [0041]-[0042]; Fig. 4).
The reference Kunihiro et al., however, does not specifically specify that the controller is configured to change the decomposing rate by changing a temperature of the catalyst.
However, as evidenced by the reference Kambara et al. (see paras. [0019]; [0025]; [0048]), that art recognizes that ammonia-decomposing catalysts typically have an operating temperature range of 150° C. to 600° C., and that once an ammonia-decomposing catalyst is activated at a temperature of 150° C. or higher, the amount of ammonia decomposed by the catalyst increases in proportion to an increase in the operating temperature, which advantageously facilitates for control of the amount of hydrogen that may be generated (see paras. [0019]; [0025]; [0048]).
Accordingly, 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 Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al., and configured the controller (24) of Kunihiro et al. to change the decomposition rate of ammonia by changing a temperature of the catalyst, since the reference Kambara et al. teaches that such a modification advantageously provides for control of the amount of hydrogen that may be generated by the decomposition unit (see para. [0025]).
Regarding claim 3, the reference Kunihiro et al. teaches that the controller (24) is configured to variably control current applied to the catalyst (1) by the pair of electrodes (230) (see para. [0041]). The reference Kunihiro et al. further teaches that hydrogen gas can be generated without applying an electric field, but more hydrogen gas can be generated when an electric field is applied to the catalyst (see para. [0042]). Thus, according to the teachings of Kunihiro et al., the controller (24) is configured to change the decomposition rate by changing a value of current flowing through the catalyst (see para. [0042]). In addition, the reference Kambara et al. teaches that by optimizing the flow rate of ammonia gas passing through the ammonia decomposition catalyst and the temperature conditions of the catalyst, 95% or more of the ammonia can be decomposed by the catalyst (see paras. [0045]; [0053]). Accordingly, 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 controller (24) of Kunihiro et al. configured to optimize the amount of ammonia which can be decomposed by the catalyst by changing a temperature of the catalyst, a value of current flowing through the catalyst, or a flow rate of ammonia passing through the catalyst, since the reference Kunihiro et al. teaches that hydrogen gas can be generated without applying an electric field, but more hydrogen gas can be generated when an electric field is applied (see para. [0042]); and the reference Kambara et al. teaches that by optimizing the flow rate of ammonia gas passing through the ammonia decomposition catalyst and the temperature conditions of the catalyst, 95% or more of the ammonia can be decomposed by the catalyst (see para. [0053]).
Regarding claim 4, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. disclose the ammonia decomposition system, wherein the controller is configured to change the decomposition rate according to at least the current value in such a manner that as the current value increases, the decomposition rate increases (see Kunihiro et al. paras. [0041]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 5, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. disclose that the ammonia decomposition system further comprises a heating unit (22) configured to heat the catalyst (1), wherein the heating unit (2) is configured to bring a temperature of the catalyst within a range from 50°C or higher to 600°C or lower (see Kunihiro et al.: para. [0039]; Kambara et al.: paras. [0025]; [0045]).
Regarding claim 6, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. disclose the ammonia decomposition system, wherein: the catalyst includes an active metal and an oxide, the active metal is Ru, Ni, Fe, or Co, and the oxide includes Ce or Zr (see Kunihiro et al.: paras. [0013]-[0015]).
Regarding claim 7, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. disclose the ammonia decomposition system, wherein the oxide is CexZr(1-x)O2 (see Kunihiro et al.: para. [0055]).
Regarding claim 15, the reference Kunihiro et al. teaches that the controller (24) is configured to variably control current applied to the catalyst (1) by the pair of electrodes (230) (see para. [0041]). The reference Kunihiro et al. further teaches that hydrogen gas can be generated without applying an electric field, but more hydrogen gas can be generated when an electric field is applied to the catalyst (see para. [0042]). Thus, according to the teachings of Kunihiro et al., the controller (24) is configured to change the decomposition rate by changing a value of current flowing through the catalyst (see para. [0042]). In addition, the reference Kambara et al. teaches that by optimizing the flow rate of ammonia gas passing through the ammonia decomposition catalyst and the temperature conditions of the catalyst, 95% or more of the ammonia can be decomposed by the catalyst (see paras. [0045]; [0053]). Accordingly, 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 controller (24) of Kunihiro et al. configured to optimize the amount of ammonia which can be decomposed by the catalyst by continuously changing a temperature of the catalyst, a value of current flowing through the catalyst, and a flow rate of ammonia passing through the catalyst, since the reference Kunihiro et al. teaches that hydrogen gas can be generated without applying an electric field, but more hydrogen gas can be generated when an electric field is applied (see para. [0042]); and the reference Kambara et al. teaches that by optimizing the flow rate of ammonia gas passing through the ammonia decomposition catalyst and the temperature conditions of the catalyst, 95% or more of the ammonia can be decomposed by the catalyst (see para. [0053]).
Claims 8-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunihiro et al. in view of Kambara et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Heaton et al. (US 2023/0349334).
Regarding claim 8, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. are silent with respect to an internal combustion engine system comprising: the ammonia decomposition system and an engine that is configured to be driven by receiving supply of gas outputted from the ammonia decomposition system.
The reference Heaton et al. teaches an internal combustion engine system (100; 200;300) comprising: an ammonia decomposition system (110); a controller configured to control a decomposition rate of ammonia in the decomposition unit (see paras. [0006]; [0007]; [0031]; [0045]; [0047]; Figs. 1-4); and an engine (120) that is configured to be driven by receiving supply of gas outputted from the ammonia decomposition system (110) (see paras. [0031]; [0034]; [0036]; Figs. 1-3).
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 Heaton et al., Kunihiro et al, and Kambara et al., and modified the internal combustion engine system of Heaton et al. to include the ammonia decomposition system as taught by Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. since the reference Kunihiro et al. teaches that the catalyst to which an electric field can be applied to has higher catalyst stability than conventional catalyst and allow for generation of hydrogen gas event without applying an electric field to the catalyst (see paras. [0008]; [0042]).
Regarding claim 9, the references Kunihiro et al., Kambara et al., and Heaton et al. disclose the internal combustion engine system, wherein the decomposition unit is configured to be heated by use of exhaust heat of the engine (see Heaton et al.: paras. [0031]; [0048]).
Regarding claim 10, the references Kunihiro et al., Kambara et al., and Heaton et al. disclose the internal combustion engine system, wherein the engine is configured to use hydrogen obtained in the decomposition unit, as at least a part of a fuel (see Heaton et al.: paras. [0032]; [0033]).
Regarding claim 11, the references Kunihiro et al., Kambara et al., and Heaton et al. disclose the internal combustion engine system, wherein the engine is configured to use the hydrogen obtained in the decomposition unit, and ammonia, as the fuel (see Heaton et al.: paras. [0032]; [0033]).
Regarding claim 12, the references Kunihiro et al., Kambara et al., and Heaton et al. disclose the internal combustion engine system, wherein the ammonia as the fuel for the engine is housed in a tank common with the ammonia to be decomposed in the decomposition unit (see Heaton et al.: paras. [0036]; [0046]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kunihiro et al. in view of Kambara et al. as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Homma et al. (US 2022/0170415).
Regarding claim 14, the references Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al. are silent with respect to the decomposition unit further comprises a temperature sensor, the temperature sensor measures a catalyst temperature and outputs the catalyst temperature to the controller, and the controller changes the decomposition rate of ammonia according to at least the catalyst temperature.
However, as evidenced by the reference Homma et al. (see paras. [0033]-[0034], [0044]; [0055]-[0058]), it is typical in the art to provide a temperature sensor (26) to an ammonia decomposition unit (12) comprising an ammonia decomposition catalyst (21) so as to measure the temperature of the catalyst and output the catalyst temperature to a controller (28) configured to control operating conditions of the ammonia decomposition unit based on the measured catalyst temperature.
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide a temperature sensor as claimed by applicant to the ammonia decomposition system of Kunihiro et al. and Kambara et al., since the reference Kambara et al. suggest for monitoring the temperature of the catalyst to control the decomposition rate of ammonia (see paras. [0019]; [0025]; [0048]), and such a modification 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks page 6, filed on 18 August 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (a)(1) have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Kambara et al. (US 2019/0322526). The examiner notes that claim 3 as originally presented did not require that the controller is configured to change the decomposition rate of ammonia by changing a temperature of the catalyst. Instead, this claim limitation was presented in an alternative claim format. When a claim requires selection of an element from a list of alternatives, the prior art teaches the element if one of the alternatives is taught by the prior art. See, e.g., Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc., 582 F.3d 1288, 1298 (Fed. Cir. 2009). See MPEP § 2143.03.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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