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Claims 10-12 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected method, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on April 23, 2026.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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) 1-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakamura (JP 2009197733 A).
Regarding claim 1, Nakamura discloses an ammonia manufacturing apparatus comprising: an ammonia synthesis unit synthesizing ammonia under a chemical reaction using hydrogen and nitrogen as a raw material gas in a reactor (173); and a heat storage unit (parabolic trough type collector, 160) including a heating medium (water vapor), wherein the heat storage unit can supply heat from the heating medium to the ammonia synthesis unit when an amount of the raw material gas supplied to the ammonia synthesis unit increases (see Abstract; figure 7; and paragraphs 0121-0124).
Regarding claim 2, Nakamura disclose an apparatus further comprising a hydrogen production unit (171) producing at least a part of the hydrogen supplied to the ammonia synthesis unit by electrolysis of water, wherein the hydrogen production unit uses renewable energy as at least a part of an energy source for the electrolysis (see Abstract; figures 1-7; and paragraphs 0019-0129), since the use of the apparatus isn't limiting or the material the apparatus acts upon isn't limiting and since Nakamura discloses that when hydrogen is obtained without using a relatively high temperature heat source, that is, for example, by electrolysis of water, electric power, particularly electric power obtained by using solar thermal energy obtained in step (a), or synthesized ammonia It is possible to use electric power obtained by using as fuel (see paragraph 0108).
Regarding claims 3-7, Nakamura discloses an apparatus wherein the ammonia synthesis unit (reactor, 173) includes a heating medium-raw material gas heat exchanger, through piping (179), capable of supplying heat from the heating medium to the raw material gas; wherein the ammonia synthesis unit (173) includes: a heating medium-produced gas heat exchanger, through piping (179), capable of supplying heat from the heating medium to a produced gas obtained on an outlet side of the reactor (173); and a produced gas-raw material gas heat exchanger capable of supplying heat from the produced gas passing through the heating medium-produced gas heat exchanger to the raw material gas; wherein heat can be stored in the heating medium using the produced gas obtained on the outlet side of the reactor (173); wherein heat can be stored in the heating medium using surplus power generated by renewable energy; and wherein heat can be stored in the heating medium using exhaust heat of a gas turbine using hydrogen as fuel.
Regarding claim 8, Nakamura disclose an apparatus further comprising a hydrogen production unit (171) producing at least a part of the hydrogen supplied to the ammonia synthesis unit by electrolysis of water, wherein the heating medium (molten salt, in pipe (178)) can be used as a heating source for the electrolysis (see Abstract; figures 1-7; and paragraphs 0019-0129), since the use of the apparatus isn't limiting or the material the apparatus acts upon isn't limiting and since Nakamura discloses that when hydrogen is obtained without using a relatively high temperature heat source, that is, for example, by electrolysis of water, electric power, particularly electric power obtained by using solar thermal energy obtained in step (a), or synthesized ammonia It is possible to use electric power obtained by using as fuel (see paragraph 0108).
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.
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.
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakamura (JP 2009197733 A) as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Ostuni et al. (US 9,463,983 B2).
Regarding claim 9, Nakamura discloses an apparatus further comprising an air separation device using cryogenic separation as a nitrogen supply unit (air cryogenic separator, 172) supplying the nitrogen to the ammonia synthesis unit (see figure 7 and paragraph 0124).
Nakamura fails to disclose an air separation device using temperature swing adsorption (TSA) as a nitrogen supply unit supplying the nitrogen to the ammonia synthesis unit, wherein the heating medium can be used as a heating source of the air separation device.
Ostuni et al. discloses a nitrogen current (4) is preferably obtained by separation from an air flow (12), more preferably with a technique chosen between: molecular sieves; pressure swing adsorption (PSA); vacuum pressure swing adsorption (VPSA); temperature swing adsorption (TSA); a process based on membranes; a process of cryogenic separation (see figure 1 and column5, lines 28-35).
Because these two separation device (a cryogenic separator and a TSA type or molecular sieve) were art-recognized equivalents before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, one of ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious to substitute a TSA type or molecular sieve for a cryogenic separator.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NATASHA E YOUNG whose telephone number is (571)270-3163. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00 am - 6:00 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, Wang Claire 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.
NATASHA E. YOUNG
Examiner
Art Unit 1774
/NATASHA E YOUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
Prosecution Insights