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
Applicant's election with traverse of group I, claims 1-7, 9-13, and 18 in the reply filed on 7 May 2026 is acknowledged. The traversal is on the ground(s) that I) Groups I and IV fall squarely into exception 37 CFR 1.475(b)(4), namely, a process and an apparatus or means specifically designed for carrying out the said process, and II) Groups I and III lack unity of invention because Lilong lacks the shared technical feature. This is not found persuasive because I) although claim 15 recites a system for producing a hydrogen product from ammonia, the system can be used to practice another process such as a method for producing a hydrogen product from hydrocarbons, such that claim 15 does not include the limitations of claim 1, and is not a proper dependent claim (See MPEP 608.01(n) III); and II) it appears that Shaw (US 2023/0242395) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240) teach the corresponding technical feature. See rejection below. Therefore, the restriction requirement is maintained.
The requirement is still deemed proper and is therefore made FINAL.
Claims 8 and 14-17 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a nonelected groups II-V, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Applicant timely traversed the restriction (election) requirement in the reply filed on 7 May 2026.
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed 7 May 2026 has been entered. Claims 1, 14, and 17 are amended; claim 18 is added. Accordingly, claims 1-18 remain pending in the application with claims 1-7, 9-13, and 18 considered in this Office Action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statements filed 09/07/2023, 05/01/2025, and 03/25/2026 have been considered.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 113, 116, and 117 (Fig. 2); 217 (Fig. 3).
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 1, 6, 10, and 12-13 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1, line 20, “separator, for generating” should read “separator for generating”.
Claim 6, line 2, “liquid ammonia and which has been” should read “liquid ammonia which has been”.
Claim 10, lines 1-2, “pre-heating prior to evaporation of the ammonia feed stream which is derived from liquid ammonia, comprises” should read “pre-heating prior to evaporation of the ammonia feed stream, which is derived from liquid ammonia, comprises”.
Claim 12, line 2, “unit for thereby producing” should read “unit for producing”.
Claim 13, line 4, “unit for thereby producing” should read “unit for producing”.
Claim 13, lines 5-6, “stream; or. the" should read “stream; or the”.
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 4-5, 7, 9-10, and 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 4 recites the limitation "the fire heated reactor" in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. This limitation is interpreted as requiring passing the off-gas stream to a fire heater reactor or convection heated reactor.
Claim 4, lines 3 and 5, recite “mixing it with an air stream”. It is unclear what “it” is referring to. This limitation is interpreted as requiring mixing the off-gas stream with an air stream.
Claim 5, lines 2-3 and 4-5, recite “supplying it as at least a portion of said separate fuel stream”. It is unclear what “it” is referring to. It is further unclear if supplying a separate fuel stream is required, as claim 4, lines 3 and 5-6 recite the separate fuel stream is optional. This limitation is interpreted as requiring: mixing the off-gas stream with the air stream and the separate fuel stream…; and…supplying a portion of said effluent gas stream as at least a portion of said separate fuel stream; and/or…supplying a portion of said ammonia stream as at least a portion of said separate fuel stream.
Claim 7, lines 1-2, recite “said water removal is conducted by…”. It is unclear if water removal is required, as claim 6, line 2, recites “optional water removal”. This limitation is interpreted as requiring the ammonia feed stream is derived from liquid ammonia which has been subjected to water removal, wherein said water removal is conducted by…
Claim 9, lines 1-2, recite “said water removal is conducted by…”. It is unclear if water removal is required, as claim 6, line 2, recites “optional water removal”. This limitation is interpreted as requiring the ammonia feed stream is derived from liquid ammonia which has been subjected to water removal, wherein said water removal is conducted by…
Claim 10, lines 1-2, recite “said pre-heating prior to evaporation…comprises…”. It is unclear if pre-heating is required, as claim 6, line 3, recites “optional pre-heating”. This limitation is interpreted as requiring the ammonia feed stream is derived from liquid ammonia which has been subjected to pre-heating, wherein said pre-heating…comprises…
Claim 10, lines 2-3, recite “heat exchanging with an overhead gas stream”. It is unclear what the overhead gas stream is being heat exchanged with. This limitation is interpreted as requiring heat exchanging the liquid ammonia with an overhead gas stream withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column.
Claim 13, line 4, recites “passing it to the second PSA unit”. It is unclear what “it” is referring to. This limitation is interpreted as requiring passing the first off-gas stream from the first PSA unit to the second PSA unit.
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 1-2, 4-6, 9-10, and 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2023/0242395; US PGPub of IDS Doc WO 2021/257944; appears to have a filing date of 18 June 2020 based on PRO Application No. 63/040,707) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240).
Regarding Claim 1, Shaw discloses a method for producing hydrogen from ammonia, comprising the steps of supplying heated ammonia (supplying heated ammonia meets the limitation of providing an ammonia feed stream and passing the ammonia feed stream) to catalyst-containing reactor tubes to cause cracking of the ammonia (reactor for cracking ammonia meets the limitation of an ammonia cracking reactor) into a cracked gas containing hydrogen gas and nitrogen gas (cracked gas containing hydrogen gas and nitrogen gas meets the limitation of an effluent gas stream comprising hydrogen and nitrogen; [0018]). Shaw further discloses purifying the cracked gas in a PSA device (PSA device meets the limitation of a hydrogen recovery unit per pg. 19, lines 31-33, of the Specification of the present application) to produce a hydrogen product gas and a PSA tail gas (PSA tail gas meets the limitation of an off-gas stream; [0019]). Shaw further discloses separating the PSA tail gas using a membrane separator to discharge a nitrogen-rich retentate gas and a hydrogen-rich permeate gas [0020], such that the PSA tail gas comprising hydrogen and nitrogen. Shaw further discloses ammonia may be removed from the PSA tail gas [0031], such that the PSA tail gas comprising unconverted ammonia, and the effluent gas stream comprises unconverted ammonia. Shaw further illustrates heat exchanging cracked gas 12 with heated ammonia feed stream 4 leaving heat exchanger E102 in heat exchanger E101 to form cooled cracked gas 28 (such that the effluent gas stream is cooled by heat exchange with the ammonia feed stream) prior to passing the cooled cracked gas 28 to the PSA device 26 (Fig. 5-6; [0088], [0102], [0107]). Shaw further discloses ammonia may be removed from the cracked gas by washing with water in a scrubber column prior to being supplied to the PSA unit, and the resultant ammonia-depleted gas (ammonia-depleted gas meets the limitation of an overhead stream) and ammonia solution (ammonia solution meets the limitation of a bottom liquid comprising the unconverted ammonia) are separated [0033], meeting the limitation of an effluent gas separator. The cracked gas contains nitrogen and hydrogen [0018] such that the ammonia-depleted gas necessarily comprises nitrogen and hydrogen. Shaw further discloses the ammonia can be recovered from the ammonia solution by stripping in a distillation column [0033], such that Shaw meets the limitation of recovering unconverted ammonia in the effluent gas stream by distillation in an ammonia recovery distillation column. Shaw further illustrates the system 90 for removing and recovering ammonia, comprising a scrubbing column and a distillation column is located after heat exchanger E101 ([0105], Fig. 4), such that the recovering of the unconverted ammonia is after said cooling of the effluent gas stream by heat exchange with the ammonia feed stream, and the effluent gas separator is necessarily after said cooling and prior to distillation.
Shaw is silent to pre-cracking the ammonia feed stream prior to cracking.
Jiang discloses an ammonia decomposition method using an ammonia decomposition apparatus [0016] comprising a reaction section provided with a first reaction zone (first reaction zone meets the limitation of at least one ammonia pre-cracking reactor) and a second reaction zone (second reaction zone meets the limitation of an ammonia cracking reactor) communicated successively, to ensure that the ammonia gas is decomposed into a nitrogen-hydrogen mixture after entering the first reaction zone, so that the decomposition efficiency of the ammonia gas is improved, and the second reaction zone can decompose for the second time the residual ammonia gas in the nitrogen-hydrogen mixture produced in the first reaction zone, to reduce the residual amount of ammonia gas in the nitrogen-hydrogen mixture in the second reaction zone, so that the ammonia gas is decomposed more thoroughly [0018].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shaw to incorporate the teachings of Jiang to pre-crack the ammonia feed stream prior to cracking by passing the ammonia feed stream to at least one ammonia pre-cracking reactor for producing a partly converted ammonia feed stream comprising ammonia, hydrogen and nitrogen followed by passing the partly converted ammonia feed stream to an ammonia cracking reactor for producing an effluent gas stream comprising hydrogen and nitrogen and optionally also unconverted ammonia, for improved decomposition efficiency of the ammonia gas and so that the ammonia gas is decomposed more thoroughly, as recognized by Jiang [0018]; further, providing an ammonia pre-cracking reactor prior to an ammonia cracking reactor is well-known in the art of producing hydrogen from ammonia cracking, as recognized by Jiang.
Regarding Claim 2, Shaw discloses combusting fuel in a furnace (combusting fuel in a furnace meets the limitation of a fire heated reactor) to heat the catalyst-containing reactor tubes (catalyst-containing reactor tubes meet the limitation of one or more catalyst-filled tubes; [0017]).
Regarding Claim 4, Shaw discloses combusting fuel in a furnace (combusting fuel in a furnace meets the limitation of a fire heated reactor) to heat the catalyst-containing reactor tubes [0017], wherein the heat required for the reaction is typically provided by combustion of PSA tail gas in the furnace [0083], such that the PSA tail gas (off-gas stream) is passed to a fire heated reactor for generating heat required in the fire heated reactor. Shaw further discloses if the PSA tail-gas has insufficient heating value than either vaporized ammonia, a portion of the product hydrogen, or an alternative fuel may be used with the tail-gas as a trim fuel (trim fuel meets the limitation of a separate fuel stream; [0083]). Shaw further discloses air is fed to the furnace for combustion of the fuel [0090], such that the off-gas stream of Shaw is passed to the fire heated reactor upon mixing the off-gas stream with an air stream.
Regarding Claim 5, Shaw discloses if the PSA tail-gas has insufficient heating value than either vaporized ammonia (vaporized ammonia meets the limitation of a portion of an ammonia stream), a portion of the product hydrogen, or an alternative fuel may be used with the tail-gas as a trim fuel (vaporized ammonia trim fuel meets the limitation of a separate fuel stream; [0083]).
Regarding Claim 6, Shaw discloses the heated ammonia is derived from liquid ammonia which has been subjected to heating and vaporizing (vaporizing meets the limitation of evaporation; [0014]-[0016]). Shaw further discloses water may be removed from the feed ammonia [0097].
Regarding Claim 9, Shaw discloses water may be removed from the feed ammonia, wherein the water removal can be incorporated into the stripping column [0097]. Shaw further discloses ammonia is evaporated, ensuring that the water is also carried through to the stripping column with the evaporated ammonia [0097], wherein the stripping takes place in a distillation column system (the ammonia recovery distillation column) [0033], such that the ammonia feed gas stream from the evaporation step is subjected to distillation in said ammonia recovery distillation column. Shaw further discloses the overhead vapor leaving through the top of the column contains the feed ammonia (free of water) plus the ammonia recovered from the cracker gas stream [0097], such that the ammonia feed stream is generated.
Regarding Claim 10, Shaw discloses the heated ammonia is derived from liquid ammonia which has been subjected to heating and vaporizing (vaporizing meets the limitation of evaporation; [0014]-[0016]), such that pre-heating necessarily takes place prior to evaporation. Shaw further discloses producing an overhead vapor leaving through the top of the distillation column, containing the feed ammonia (free of water) plus the ammonia recovered from the cracker gas stream [0097]. Shaw further discloses the recovered ammonia is recycled to the feed to the cracking reactor [0096], such that the recovered ammonia is pre-heated ammonia and does not require further heating.
Shaw is silent to heat exchanging the liquid ammonia with the overhead gas stream withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column.
However, It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shaw to heat exchange the liquid ammonia with the overhead gas stream withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column, because, in the absence of unexpected results, the overhead gas stream withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column of Shaw is pre-heated to a temperature such that the stream can be supplied directly to the cracking reactor [0096], therefore, the overhead gas stream withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column of Shaw is capable of pre-heating the liquid ammonia of Shaw via heat exchange, and pre-heating liquid ammonia via heat exchange is well-known in the art of ammonia cracking, as recognized by Shaw ([0014]-[0016]; Fig. 1-6).
Regarding Claim 12, Shaw discloses purifying the cracked gas in a PSA device (PSA device meets the limitation of a hydrogen recovery unit comprising at least one Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) unit) to produce a hydrogen product gas and a PSA tail gas (PSA tail gas meets the limitation of an off-gas stream; [0019]).
Regarding Claim 13, Shaw discloses purifying the cracked gas in a PSA device (PSA device meets the limitation of a PSA unit) to produce a hydrogen product gas and a PSA tail gas [0019] and separating the PSA tail gas using a membrane separator (membrane separator meets the limitation of a membrane unit) to discharge a nitrogen-rich retentate gas and a hydrogen-rich permeate gas [0020], such that the hydrogen recovery unit of Shaw comprises a membrane unit and a PSA unit.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2023/0242395; US PGPub of IDS Doc WO 2021/257944; appears to have a filing date of 18 June 2020 based on PRO Application No. 63/040,707) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240) and Nielsen (US 2023/0383420).
Regarding Claim 3, Shaw and Jiang teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Shaw discloses the temperature of the cracking reactor (cracking reactor meets the limitation of the ammonia creaking reactor) is 350°C [0025], which meets the limitation of operating in the temperature range 300-700°C. Shaw further discloses catalyst-containing reactor tubes for cracking the ammonia [0018], wherein a large number of catalysts are known in the art as useful for the ammonia cracking reaction and any of these conventional catalysts may be used in this invention [0027].
Shaw is silent to the catalyst being an ammonia synthesis catalyst.
Nielsen discloses a method for cracking ammonia using ammonia synthesis catalysts (Abstract). Nielsen further discloses it is known that ammonia synthesis catalysts can be used for decomposition or cracking of ammonia [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 Shaw to incorporate the teachings of Nielsen wherein the catalyst is an ammonia synthesis catalyst, because the catalyst of Shaw is not particularly limited [0027], and it is known that ammonia synthesis catalysts can be used for decomposition or cracking of ammonia, as recognized by Nielsen [0007].
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2023/0242395; US PGPub of IDS Doc WO 2021/257944; appears to have a filing date of 18 June 2020 based on PRO Application No. 63/040,707) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240) and Nielsen (US 2023/0383420) and Nakazawa (US 2014/0151217).
Regarding Claim 7, Shaw and Jiang teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 6.
Shaw discloses water may be removed from the feed ammonia to prevent damage to the ammonia cracking catalyst [0097].
Shaw is silent to said water removal being conducted by subjecting the liquid ammonia imported from storage to electrolysis in an alkaline or polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolysis unit, thereby generating said ammonia feed stream, as well as an oxygen product and a hydrogen product.
Nielsen discloses a method for cracking ammonia using ammonia synthesis catalysts (Abstract). Nielsen further discloses pre-treatment of ammonia before decomposition [0023] involving removing water from ammonia by electrolysis, which is more efficient and effective than typical distillation because the energy spent for electrolysis of water into oxygen and hydrogen will not be lost, since the hydrogen thereby produced will end up contributing to the product gas [0054]. Nielsen further discloses high-pressure electrolysis of water [0045].
Shaw and Nielsen are silent to electrolysis in an alkaline or polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolysis unit.
Nakazawa discloses a method for performing high-pressure water electrolysis using a polymer electrolyte membrane [0010], therefore, meeting the limitation of electrolysis in a polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolysis unit.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shaw to incorporate the teachings of Nielsen and Nakazawa to subject the liquid ammonia imported from storage to electrolysis in an alkaline or polymer electrolyte membrane (PEM) electrolysis unit, thereby generating said ammonia feed stream, as well as an oxygen product and a hydrogen product, because removing water from the feed ammonia prevents damage to the ammonia cracking catalyst, as recognized by Shaw [0097], and removing water from ammonia by electrolysis is efficient, because the energy spent for electrolysis of water into oxygen and hydrogen will not be lost, since the hydrogen thereby produced will end up contributing to the product gas, as recognized by Nielsen [0054]. Further performing electrolysis in a PEM electrolysis unit is well-known in the art of high-pressure water electrolysis, as recognized by Nakazawa [0010].
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2023/0242395; US PGPub of IDS Doc WO 2021/257944; appears to have a filing date of 18 June 2020 based on PRO Application No. 63/040,707) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240) and Kennedy (US 2,767,057).
Regarding Claim 11, Shaw and Jiang teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Shaw discloses the overhead vapor of the distillation column contains ammonia [0097]. Shaw further discloses ammonia may be removed from the cracked gas by washing with water, and the resultant ammonia-depleted gas and ammonia solution are separated [0033], meeting the limitation of an effluent gas separator. The cracked gas contains nitrogen and hydrogen [0018] such that the ammonia-depleted gas necessarily comprises nitrogen and hydrogen; therefore, the effluent gas separator of Shaw separates hydrogen and ammonia. Shaw further discloses the ammonia-depleted gas is separated to produce hydrogen gas [0041].
Shaw is silent to a light overhead gas stream comprising hydrogen and ammonia is withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column, suitably from said overhead gas stream, and supplied to said effluent gas separator.
Kennedy discloses a quenched mixture comprising ammonia and hydrogen, which is passed into a distillation tower, where ammonia and hydrogen are taken as the overhead stream from the distillation tower (Col. 3, lines 22-33). Kennedy further discloses the ammonia is separated from the hydrogen, wherein hydrogen is a product of the process and ammonia is recycled to the reactor (Col. 3, lines 34-39).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shaw to incorporate the teachings of Kennedy wherein a light overhead gas stream comprising hydrogen and ammonia is withdrawn from the ammonia recovery distillation column, suitably from said overhead gas stream, and supplied to said effluent gas separator, in order to separate hydrogen as a product of the process and recycle ammonia back to the reactor, as recognized by Kennedy (Col. 3, lines 34-39), as the effluent gas separator of Shaw separates hydrogen and ammonia ([0018, [0033]).
Claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw (US 2023/0242395; US PGPub of IDS Doc WO 2021/257944; appears to have a filing date of 18 June 2020 based on PRO Application No. 63/040,707) in view of Jiang (US 2020/0398240) and Wang (CN 101863729).
Regarding Claim 18, Shaw and Jiang teach the elements as described above with regards to claim 1.
Shaw is silent to an ammonia pre-cracking reactor, and Jiang is silent to the ammonia pre-cracking reactor being adiabatic.
Wang discloses a cracking process is adiabatic, which is beneficial because the cracking process does not require external heating [0008].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shaw to incorporate the teachings of Jiang and Wang wherein the ammonia pre-cracking reactor is adiabatic so the cracking process does not require external heating, as recognized by Wang [0008].
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
Prosecution Insights