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 filed 28 June 2023 has been considered.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 3, and 14-15 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 3, "producing NH3" should read "producing the NH3".
Claim 3, line 2, “admixing of nitrogen” should read “admixing of the nitrogen”.
Claim 3, line 3, "producing NH3" should read "producing the NH3".
Claim 14, line 1, “wherein water is” should read “wherein the water is”.
Claim 15, line 1, “wherein water is” should read “wherein the water is”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 12-13 are 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 12, line 2, recites “recycling of iron waste thereby producing an iron oxide, iron carbonate, or both”. It is unclear how this step relates to a process for producing NH3. It is interpreted the iron-containing material is recycled iron waste, which is converted to iron oxide, iron carbonate, or both during the process of producing NH3.
Claim 13, line 2, recites “capturing of carbon dioxide”. It is unclear how this step relates to a process for producing NH3. It is interpreted the captured CO2 is used as the CO2 in the process for producing NH3.
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.
Claims 1-8, 11-16, 20-21, and 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cussler (US 2020/0325030) in view of Eba ("Progress of hydrogen gas generation by reaction between iron and steel powder and carbonate water in the temperature range near room temperature").
Regarding Claim 1, Cussler discloses a process for producing ammonia (NH3), the process comprising contacting nitrogen (N2) and hydrogen (H2) and a catalyst in a reactor to produce ammonia (claim 14). Cussler further discloses the catalyst comprises a metal catalyst comprising one transition metal, which may be Fe (iron) (metal catalyst comprising iron meets the limitation of an iron-containing material; claims 19-20).
Cussler is silent to contacting water and CO2 (carbon dioxide) with the iron-containing material and nitrogen.
Cussler, however, teaches any source of hydrogen may be used [0018].
Eba discloses a process for hydrogen gas generation from water in the temperature range of 10-60°C using iron and carbon dioxide (Abstract). Eba further discloses this system allows for the production of clean (hydrogen) energy from scrap (iron) and CO2 (Highlights). Eba further discloses the reaction takes place in a bottle (bottle meets the limitation of a reactor; pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to contact water, an iron-containing material, and CO2 with nitrogen in a reactor thereby producing NH3, in order to provide a clean hydrogen energy source for reaction with nitrogen to produce ammonia, as recognized by Eba (Highlights), as Cussler teaches any source of hydrogen may be used [0018].
Regarding Claim 2, Eba teaches contacting a mixture of water, iron, and CO2 to produce H2 (Abstract) , and Cussler teaches contacting H2 and N2 to produce ammonia (claim 14), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to form a mixture the water, the iron-containing material, and the CO2, and contact the mixture with the nitrogen, because selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04 IV C).
Regarding Claim 3, Eba teaches contacting a mixture of water, iron, and CO2 to produce H2 (Abstract) , and Cussler teaches contacting H2 and N2 to produce ammonia (claim 14), such that it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to contact the water, the iron-containing material, and the CO2 source for a period of time followed by admixing of nitrogen thereby producing NH3, because contacting the water, the iron-containing material, and the CO2 for a period of time produces H2, as recognized by Eba (Abstract), and H2 is necessary for ammonia synthesis, such that admixing the nitrogen to react with the H2 would produce the desired ammonia product, and selection of any order of performing process steps is prima facie obvious in the absence of new or unexpected results (MPEP 2144.04 IV C).
Regarding Claim 4, Cussler discloses a process for producing ammonia (NH3), the process comprising contacting nitrogen (N2) and hydrogen (H2) and a catalyst in a reactor to produce ammonia (claim 14), wherein the reactor is a batch reactor (batch reactor meets the limitation of a closed reactor; [0070]).
Eba discloses the reaction taking place in a bottle (bottle meets the limitation of a closed reactor; pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 4).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to perform the process of producing ammonia in a single step in a closed reactor, because both Cussler (claim 14, [0070]) and Eba (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 4) teach the reactions taking place in a closed reactor, and the process would necessarily be performed in a single step with all of the reactants present in the closed reactor, absent a showing of unexpected results.
Regarding Claim 5, Cussler discloses the ammonia may be collected [0033].
Regarding Claim 6, Cussler and Eba are silent to the use of electrolysis.
Regarding Claim 7, Cussler and Eba are silent to the use of irradiation.
Regarding Claim 8, Cussler discloses in some embodiments, the apparatus includes a heat transfer device [0022], which is configured to increase the temperature of the gas mixture to 200-650°C [0023].
Regarding the temperature in claim 8, it appears that 200-650°C taught by Cussler overlaps the claimed range of 290°C or less such that the range taught by Cussler obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Eba discloses a temperature of 10-60°C, which meets the limitation of 290°C or less.
Regarding Claim 11, Cussler discloses a heat transfer device in some embodiments [0022], such that an external energy source is not required, and therefore, Cussler meets the limitation of performing the process in the absence of external energy.
Regarding Claim 12, Cussler is silent to recycling iron waste thereby producing an iron oxide, iron carbonate, or both.
Eba discloses the production of clean energy from scrap iron and CO2 (Highlights). Eba further discloses conversion of iron and CO2 to iron carbonate (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 3). Eba further discloses iron and steel are the most common and widely used metals in construction materials and lead to the generation of large amounts of scrap iron (pg. 13833, Col. 1, par. 1), and the reaction of Eba could be used on site where CO2 is produced as a byproduct, enabling the production of clean energy while efficiently utilizing both scrap and the greenhouse gas, CO2 (pg. 13839, Col. 1, par. 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to recycle iron waste for use as the iron-containing material thereby producing an iron carbonate, because iron is a commonly used metal, and therefore, leads to the generation of large amounts of scrap iron (pg. 13833, Col. 1, par. 1), and the reaction of Eba could be used on site where CO2 is produced as a byproduct, enabling the production of clean (hydrogen) energy while efficiently utilizing both scrap (iron) and the greenhouse gas, CO2, as recognized by Eba (pg. 13839, Col. 1, par. 1).
Regarding Claim 13, Cussler is silent to capturing CO2.
Eba discloses the issue of CO2 emissions is receiving a great deal of attention from the perspective of global warming, and the development of carbon capture and storage technologies and efficient processes and absorbents for CO2 capture is being promoted, and reactions that can use and fix CO2 are desirable. (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 1). The reaction of Eba could be used on site where CO2 is produced as a byproduct, enabling the production of clean energy while efficiently utilizing both scrap (iron) and the greenhouse gas, CO2 (pg. 13839, Col. 1, par. 1), such that Eba meets the limitation of carbon capture.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba to capture CO2, because CO2 emissions are receiving a great deal of attention from the perspective of global warming, and the development of carbon capture and storage technologies are being promoted, such that reactions that can use and fix CO2, such as the reaction of Eba, are desirable. (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 1).
Regarding Claim 14, Cussler is silent to the use of water.
Eba discloses the use of purified water (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 4). Purified water includes water purified by various methods, including deionization and distillation. Therefore, Eba meets the limitation wherein the water is partially purified water, deionized water, or distilled water.
Regarding Claim 15, Cussler is silent to the use of water.
Eba discloses bubbling CO2 into water (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 4), such that the water of Eba is in a liquid state.
Regarding Claim 16, Cussler discloses examples of catalysts include iron oxide-based catalysts, such as magnetite (Fe3O4), wustite (FeO) [0034].
Regarding Claim 20, Cussler is silent to the iron-containing material being in the form of a powder and having an average particle size in the range of about 1.5 to about 4.5 µm.
Eba discloses iron powder with a particle size of 3-5 µm (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 3).
Regarding the particle size in claim 20, it appears that 3-5 µm taught by Eba overlaps the claimed range of about 1.5 to about 4.5 µm such that the range taught by Eba obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba wherein the iron-containing material is in the form of a powder having an average particle size in the range of about 1.5 to about 4.5 µm, because a particle size of 3-5 µm for iron powder is a process parameter well-known in the art of producing hydrogen, as recognized by Eba.
Regarding Claim 21, Cussler is silent to using CO2.
Eba discloses the reaction (of Fe, CO2, and water to produce hydrogen) could be used on site where CO2 is produced as a byproduct, enabling the production of clean energy while efficiently utilizing both scrap (iron) and the greenhouse gas, CO2 (pg. 13839, Col. 1, par. 1), such that Eba meets the limitation of CO2 gas from a CO2 producing plant.
Regarding Claim 28, Cussler discloses in some embodiments, the apparatus includes a first gas transport device, which may be provided as a mechanical device that adjusts the pressure of the gas mixture [0020]. Cussler further discloses the first gas transport device is configured to increase the pressure of the gas mixture to a pressure that ranges from 5 atm to 500 atm [0021], which is equivalent to 5 bar to 507 bar.
Regarding the pressure in claim 28, it appears that 5-507 bar taught by Cussler overlaps the claimed range of about 100 Bar to about 350 Bar such that the range taught by Cussler obviates the claimed range. See MPEP 2144.05 (I).
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cussler (US 2020/0325030) in view of Eba ("Progress of hydrogen gas generation by reaction between iron and steel powder and carbonate water in the temperature range near room temperature") and Kindig (US 2002/0127165).
Regarding Claim 17, Cussler and Eba teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 16.
Cussler discloses examples of catalysts include, but are not limited to, iron oxide-based catalysts, such as magnetite (Fe3O4), wustite (FeO) [0034].
Cussler is silent to the iron-containing material being an iron metal Fe0.
Eba discloses the use of chemical grade pure iron powder (pg. 13834, Col. 1, par. 3), which meets the limitation of iron metal Fe0.
Kindig discloses reacting iron metal with water to form hydrogen gas [0030], followed by reacting the hydrogen gas with nitrogen over an iron catalyst to form ammonia (claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Eba and Kindig wherein the iron-containing material is an iron metal Fe0, because reacting iron metal and water to produce hydrogen for ammonia synthesis is a process parameter well-known in the art of ammonia production, as recognized by Kindig, and use of an iron catalyst to form ammonia is a process parameter well-known in the art of ammonia production, as recognized by Kindig.
Claims 18 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cussler (US 2020/0325030) in view of Eba ("Progress of hydrogen gas generation by reaction between iron and steel powder and carbonate water in the temperature range near room temperature") and Wang (US 2019/0153562).
Regarding Claim 18, Cussler and Eba teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Cussler discloses examples of catalysts include, but are not limited to, iron oxide-based catalysts, such as magnetite (Fe3O4), wustite (FeO) [0034].
Cussler is silent to the iron- containing material comprising iron-containing coal combustion product.
Wang discloses isolating pure iron oxide from coal ash (coal ash meet the limitation of iron-containing coal combustion product; claim 1). Wang further discloses coal ash is the largest type of waste generated in the United States and in many other countries, and there are urgent needs to put the massive amount of industrial waste coal ash to a meaningful use and reduce the environmental impacts of those coal-fired power plants [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Wang wherein the iron-containing material comprises iron-containing coal combustion product, because coal ash is the largest type of waste generated in the United States and in many other countries, and there are urgent needs to put the massive amount of industrial waste coal ash to a meaningful use and reduce the environmental impacts of those coal-fired power plants, as recognized by Wang [0007].
Regarding Claim 25, Cussler discloses examples of catalysts include, but are not limited to, iron oxide-based catalysts, such as magnetite (Fe3O4), wustite (FeO) [0034].
Cussler is silent to pre-treating at least one of the water, the nitrogen, the iron-containing material and the CO2 source.
Wang discloses treating coal ash (coal ash meets the limitation of an iron-containing material) to produce substantially pure iron oxide (claim 1). Wang further discloses coal ash is the largest type of waste generated in the United States and in many other countries, and there are urgent needs to put the massive amount of industrial waste coal ash to a meaningful use and reduce the environmental impacts of those coal-fired power plants [0007].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cussler to incorporate the teachings of Wang to pre-treat the iron-containing material prior to the step of contacting thereof, because there are urgent needs to put the massive amount of industrial waste coal ash to a meaningful use and reduce the environmental impacts of those coal-fired power plants, as recognized by Wang [0007].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SLONE ELZABETH SIMKINS whose telephone number is (571)272-3214. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30AM-4:30PM.
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, KEITH WALKER can be reached at (571)272-3458. 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.
/S.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1735
/PAUL A WARTALOWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735