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 .
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/29/2023, 04/05/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant's election with traverse of claims 1-9, 15 in the reply filed on 11/12/2025 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that Kaisalo does not disclose that the catalyst is a porous material structure comprising a porous material and a catalytic material and that the catalytic material is arranged on surfaces of pores of the porous material in the porous material structure and Kaisalo does not disclose that the catalyst could be heated electrically. This is not found persuasive because Kaisalo discloses the catalyst comprises at least one catalyst agent on a carrier material, the catalyst agent is selected from a metal of the noble group… the carrier material can be any suitable carrier material, e.g. Al2O3 (Pg. 5 lines 22-28). It is known in the art that Al2O3 is a porous material structure, and that "carrier material" means the catalyst agent would be arranged on surfaces of pores of the porous material in the porous material structure. Further, Kaisalo discloses in one embodiment, the catalyst is Rh/Al2O3 catalyst (Pg. 5 line 30) which is the same as the catalyst disclosed in the present application [0029].
Kaisalo discloses the reaction is started by heating, e.g. by means of an external heat device, in the reactor (Pg. 5 lines 16-17). Heating electrically is one of several straightforward possibilities from which a skilled person in the art would select as heating electrically is known in the art.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 and 112
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 15 provides for the use of the method according to claim 1, but, since the claim does not set forth any steps involved in the method, it is unclear what method applicant is intending to encompass. A claim is indefinite where it merely recites a use without any active, positive steps delimiting how this use is actually practiced. Further, claim 15 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed recitation of a use, without setting forth any steps involved in the process, results in an improper definition of a process, i.e., results in a claim which is not a proper process claim under 35 U.S.C. 101. See for example Ex parte Dunki, 153 USPQ 678 (Bd.App. 1967) and Clinical Products, Ltd. V. Brenner, 255 F. Supp. 131, 149 USPQ 475 (D.D.C. 1966).
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.
Claims 1-9, 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kaisalo et al (WO 2019175476 A1, cited in IDS 03/29/2023) in view of Hannula (“Preparation of Synthesis Gas from CO2 for Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis – Comparison of Alternative Process Configurations”, cited in IDS 03/29/2023).
Regarding claim 1, Kaisalo discloses a method and apparatus for producing carbon monoxide, wherein the carbon monoxide is formed from a gaseous feed (1) (Pg. 2 lines 11-13 meeting limitation “a method for producing a product gas from a feed”) which comprises at least carbon dioxide, wherein the method comprises supplying oxygen (2) to a carbon dioxide stream (3) for forming a carbon dioxide based mixture (4), supplying the carbon dioxide based mixture (4) to a hydrogen based stream (5) to form the gaseous feed (1), supplying a hydrocarbon containing stream (6) to the hydrogen based stream (5) before the supply of the carbon dioxide based mixture (4), (Pg. 2 lines 13-21 meeting limitation "a feed comprising at least carbon dioxide, hydrogen and hydrocarbons") feeding the gaseous geed into a reactor (7) which comprises at least one catalyst (Pg. 2 lines 21-22 meeting limitation "fed to a reactor comprising a catalyst").
The catalyst comprises at least on catalyst agent on a carrier material, and the catalyst agent is selected from a metal of the noble metal group (Pg. 5 lines 22-25). The carrier material can be any suitable carrier material, e.g. Al2O3 (Pg. 5 lines 22-28). It is known in the art that Al2O3 is a porous material structure, and that "carrier material" means the catalyst agent would be arranged on surfaces of pores of the porous material in the porous material structure. The reaction is started by heating, e.g. by means of an external heat device, in the reactor (7) (Pg. 5 lines 15-17).
Kaisalo further discloses the partial oxidation is carried out in the reactor (Pg. 6 lines 4-5 meeting limitation "supplying the feed through the catalyst and performing a reaction at least between carbon dioxide and hydrogen in the presence of the catalyst in the reactor"). Preferably, the product composition contains at least carbon monoxide and hydrogen (Pg. 6 lines 24-25 meeting limitation “forming the product gas comprising at least carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2) in the reactor”).
Kaisalo does not explicitly disclose “heating the catalyst electrically”.
Hannula discloses different approaches for the preparation of carbon monoxide-rich synthesis gas (syngas) for Fischer-Tropsch (FT) synthesis from carbon dioxide (CO2) (abstract). Three alternative methods for supplying heat to the syngas preparation step are investigated, namely… autothermal from electrical resistance (ER) heating (abstract). The syngas preparation step in the OT-ER and RC-ER designs is heated autothermally from electricity (Pg. 9 par. 2 lines 1-2). The reactions take place in tubes that are packed with catalyst and placed inside a reactor (Pg. 9 par. 2 line 2). The direct resistive heating of the reactor tubes is accomplished by applying an electric current along the tube (Pg. 9 par. 2 lines 3-4). The intimate contact between the electric heat source and the reaction site drives the reaction close to thermal equilibrium and allows compact reactor designs (Pg. 9 par. 2 lines 4-5).
Thus, prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to heat the catalyst electrically in the method of Kaisalo in order to allow compact reactor design as disclosed by Hannula.
Regarding claim 2, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses the carbon dioxide based mixture (4) is supplied to a hydrogen based stream (5) to form the gaseous feed (1) (Pg. 12 lines 19-21). The gaseous feed (1) is fed into a reactor (7) which comprises at least one catalyst (Pg. 12 lines 25-26 meeting limitation “wherein hydrogen is fed to the reactor”).
Regarding claim 3, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses oxygen (2) is supplied to a carbon dioxide stream (3) for forming a carbon dioxide based mixture (4) (Pg. 12 lines 17-19). The carbon dioxide based mixture (4) is supplied to a hydrogen based stream (5) to form the gaseous feed (1) (Pg. 12 lines 19-21). The gaseous feed (1) is fed into a reactor (7) which comprises at least one catalyst (Pg. 12 lines 25-26 meeting limitation “wherein oxygen is fed to the reactor”).
Regarding claim 4, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses oxygen (2) is supplied to a carbon dioxide stream (3) for forming a carbon dioxide based mixture (4) (Pg. 12 lines 17-19). The carbon dioxide based mixture (4) is supplied to a hydrogen based stream (5) to form the gaseous feed (1) (Pg. 12 lines 19-21). A hydrocarbon containing stream (6) is supplied to the hydrogen based stream (5) before the supply of the carbon dioxide based mixture (4) to the hydrogen based stream (Pg. 12 lines 21-25). The gaseous feed (1) is fed into a reactor (7) which comprises at least one catalyst (Pg. 12 lines 25-26 meeting limitation “wherein the feed comprises at least carbon dioxide, hydrogen, oxygen and hydrocarbons”).
Regarding claim 5, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including oxygen (2) is supplied to a carbon dioxide stream (3) for forming a carbon dioxide based mixture (4) (Pg. 12 lines 17-19 meeting limitation “wherein oxygen is added to a carbon dioxide stream”). The carbon dioxide based mixture (4) is supplied to a hydrogen based stream (5) to form the gaseous feed (1) (Pg. 12 lines 19-21 meeting limitation “the carbon dioxide stream is combined with a hydrogen based stream to form the feed”). A hydrocarbon containing stream (6) is supplied to the hydrogen based stream (5) before the supply of the carbon dioxide based mixture (4) to the hydrogen based stream (Pg. 12 lines 21-25 meeting limitation “a hydrocarbon containing stream is supplied to the hydrogen based stream before combining with the carbon dioxide stream”).
Regarding claim 6, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including the partial oxidation is carried out in the reactor (Pg. 6 lines 4-5 meeting limitation “wherein a partial oxidation is carried out in the reactor”).
Regarding claim 7, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses in one embodiment, the catalyst is Rh/Al2O3 catalyst (Pg. 5 line 30 meeting limitation “wherein the catalyst is Rh/Al2O3 catalyst”).
Regarding claim 8, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above including Hannula discloses the direct resistive heating of the reactor tubes is accomplished by applying an electric current along the tube (Pg. 9 par. 2 lines 3-4 meeting limitation “wherein the catalyst is heated resistively”).
Regarding claim 9, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses non-condensable products, such as off-gasses, of the FT process can be utilized and recirculated to the partial oxidation process (Pg. 11 lines 30-32 meeting limitation “wherein an off-gas stream from a Fischer-Tropsch process is recirculated as hydrocarbons and is added to the feed”).
Regarding claim 15, Kaisalo in view of Hannula discloses all the limitations in the claims as set forth above and further discloses the method is used and utilized in a production of hydrocarbons, Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process, treatment of carbon dioxide, carbon dioxide capture process, catalytic partial oxidation (CPOX) process, methanation process, production of methanol, or their combinations (Pg. 11 lines 10-16).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NICOLE L QUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-5803. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8:30-5:00.
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, Sally Merkling can be reached at (571) 272-6297. 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.
/N.L.Q./Examiner, Art Unit 1738 /SALLY A MERKLING/SPE, Art Unit 1738