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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/10/2023 has been considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-4, 7-10, 13-17 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingels (US Patent Publication 2021/0354077 A1) in view of Smith et al. (The Ohio State University, 2020).
In regard to claims 1, 7 and 14, Ingels discloses a method of forming a nitrogen-containing fertilizer and a fertilizer [title] formed by:
ionizing nitrogen gas using an electric-magnetic ionization system to form ionized nitrogen (e.g. an electromagnetic plasma generator forming a plasma gas, which, by definition involves electromagnetic fields which dissociate nitrogen and oxygen in air into reactive radicals N and O) [para. 0030];
transferring an organic carbon compound into a nitrogen infusion reactor (e.g. raw material flow (28) is fed to the circulation tank (20) and absorption towers (14) (16)) [Fig. 2; 0034-0048]
PNG
media_image1.png
528
738
media_image1.png
Greyscale
infusing the organic carbon compound with the ionized nitrogen in a reaction vessel (e.g. plasma gas mixture is applied to liquid phase of organic material) [0030] to form a nitrogen-infused compound (e.g. to form stable nitrate solution in the organic material solution) [0034];
transferring the nitrogen-infused compound into an oxidation reactor and oxidizing the nitrogen-infused compound to form the nitrogen-containing fertilizer (e.g. exposure of the product flow to reactive oxidizing radicals in the plasma with oxidation device (24) for oxidizing NO to NO2) [0037]; and
separating molecules within the nitrogen-containing fertilizer based on a size of the molecules and packaging smaller-sized molecules as a final fertilizer product (e.g. product flow extracted from the product loop (26) and gas flow (9) vented or recycled).
Ingels does not explicitly teach the step of infusing the organic carbon compound with the ionized nitrogen “under high temperature and high pressure”, however, generally, differences in […] temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidenced indicating such […] temperature is critical and where the generally conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In this case one of skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the Ingels process at high temperature and high pressure to increase reaction rate.
Ingels describes flowable organic raw material (e.g. liquid manure, digestate or organic waste solution) [0048]. The reference does not explicitly disclose the preparation steps of the hydrolyzed carbon compound. Smith et al describes hydrothermal liquification which is a method to heat and chemically decompose organic material [pg. 1, 1st para] including:
preparing a starting material by grinding the starting material into a powder to increase surface area for further processing and to form a prepared starting material (e.g. feedstock preparation including mixing and grinding) [pg. 6, table 5], wherein the starting material is selected from the group of corn, wood, carbohydrates, alcohols, plastics, and oils (e.g. manure, wherein carbohydrates and oils are significant components of manure) [pg. 6];
hydrolyzing (e.g. performing hydrothermal liquefaction) [pg. 1, last para.] the prepared starting material by applying heat and pressure to a reaction vessel containing the prepared starting material and water, to form a hydrolyzed carbon compound (e.g. high temperature high pressure reaction to form product) [pg. 6, table 5].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to perform hydrothermal treatment to arrive at the liquified manure of Ingels. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to utilize a hydrothermal liquification as taught by Smith to transform manure solids into useful products and to destroy pathogens present within the manure [pg. 1, 3rd para.].
In regard to claim 2, Smith et al. disclose hydrolyzing the organic starting material by applying heat and pressure to the reaction vessel containing the prepared starting material comprises applying a heat of about 100 to about 900 degrees Celsius and applying a pressure of about 1 atm to about 200 atm (e.g. 200-400°C and 5-20 MPa) [pg. 3, Table 2].
In regard to claim 3, Ingels teaches transferring the organic compound into the reactor comprising transferring the hydrolyzed carbon compound under high heat and high pressure (e.g. pressurizing the circulation flow) [0059].
In regard to claims 4 and 13, Ingels does not explicitly teach the step of infusing the organic carbon compound with the ionized nitrogen “under high temperature and high pressure”, however, generally, differences in […] temperature will not support the patentability of subject matter encompassed by the prior art unless there is evidenced indicating such […] temperature is critical and where the generally conditions of a claim are discloses in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation. In this case one of skill in the art would have been motivated to perform the Ingels process at high temperature and high pressure to increase
In regard to claims 8 and 15, Ingels describes flowable organic raw material (e.g. liquid manure, digestate or organic waste solution, wherein carbohydrates and oils are significant components of manure) [0048[
In regard to claims 9-10 and 16-17, Ingels teaches separating nitrogen gas and oxygen gas from atmosphere to obtain separated nitrogen and separated oxygen, and wherein oxidizing the nitrogen-infused compound to form the fertilizer comprises injecting the separated oxygen into a reaction vessel (e.g. plasma generator treats waste mixture with nitrogen and oxygen from air) [0030], wherein infusing the hydrolyzed carbon compound with nitrogen under high temperature and high pressure to form a nitrogen- infused compound comprises injecting the ionized nitrogen into a reaction vessel. (e.g. oxidizing and reducing plasma components in the nitrogen gas react at the liquid-gas interface through ions and radicals being formed in the liquid phase [0057].
In regard to claim 20, Ingels teaches wherein the nitrogen-based fertilizer is formed using renewable materials as the starting material (e.g. treating organic material, such as manure, organic waste or biogas-residue) [0001].
Claims 5-6, 11-12 and 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ingels (US Patent Publication 2021/0354077 A1) in view of Smith et al. (The Ohio State University, 2020) as applied to claims 1, 7 and 14 above, and further in view of Walch (Nachurs, 2019).
In regard to claims 5-6, 11-12 and 18-19, Ingels as modified by Smith disclose the method of claims 1 and 7 and the fertilizer of claim 14 but do not explicitly teach wherein the final fertilizer product has a salt index of less than 40 (claims 5, 11) or wherein the final fertilizer product has a salt index of about 5 to about 40 (claim 6, 12, 18, 19).
Nachurs describes fertilizer salt index. The lower the salt index, the less likely a fertilizer material will cause root burn [pg. 1]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to formulate a fertilizer with a salt index within the claimed ranges. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide adequate nutrition while preventing seed burn [Nachurs, pg. 1, first para.].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jennifer A Smith whose telephone number is (571)270-3599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am-6pm 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, Amber R Orlando can be reached at (571) 270-3149. 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.
/JENNIFER A SMITH/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1731 March 16, 2026