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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed July 2, 2026 has been entered.
Claims 16-22 and 24-30 remain pending in the application, with claims 16-21 being examined, and claimed 22 and 24-30 deemed withdrawn. Claims 1-15 and 23 are canceled.
Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every objection and 112(b) rejection previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed June 3, 2026.
Examiner’s Note: The Examiner previously indicated the examined claims as allowable over the prior art. However, upon further consideration, the Examiner has determined that the claims are not allowable over the prior art, and has rejected the examined claims over the prior art in a second Non-Final Rejection, in accordance with MPEP 706.07(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 16 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cordier et al. (Translation of EP Pub. No. 0240527; hereinafter Cordier; already of record).
Regarding claim 16, Cordier discloses a reactor at least for pyrolysis of hydrocarbon-containing fluids and at least for production of at least hydrogen-containing fluids (Pg. 5 3rd Para.-2nd to Last Para., see Figs. 1-2). The reactor comprises:
a reactor shell and a reactor shaft disposed within the reactor shell (Pg. 6 2nd-3rd Paras., Pg. 10 4th Para., see Figs. 2A-2B at reactor comprising refractory lining 2, enclosure 3, and metal casing or shield 1. See also Fig. 6, which shows that the enclosure may have a rectangular section, where the electrodes 74 are arranged on opposite sides of the rectangular section).
A reactor lining at least for thermal sealing of the reactor shaft with respect to the reactor shell disposed between the reactor shell and the reactor shaft, wherein the reactor shaft includes a polygonal geometry formed from at least four side walls, where at least one electrode for generation of thermal energy is disposed on each of two mutually opposite side walls of the reactor shaft (Pg. 6 2nd-3rd Paras., Pg. 10 4th Para., see Figs. 2A-2B at reactor comprising refractory lining 2, enclosure 3, and metal casing or shield 1. See also Fig. 6, which shows that the enclosure may have a rectangular section, where the electrodes 74 are arranged on opposite sides of the rectangular section. When the enclosure 3 is a rectangular section, the reactor shaft includes the claimed polygonal geometry, with electrodes disposed on each of two mutually opposite side walls of the reactor shaft).
Note: The instant Claims contain a large amount of functional language (ex: “at least for thermal sealing of the reactor shaft…”, “for generation of thermal energy…”closable feed openings and discharge openings…”, etc.). However, functional language does not add any further structure to an apparatus beyond a capability. Apparatus claims must distinguish over the prior art in terms of structure rather than function (see MPEP 2114). Therefore, if the prior art structure is capable of performing the function, then the prior art meets the limitation in the claims.
Regarding claim 19, Cordier discloses the reactor of claim 16, wherein the electrodes are arranged such that these generate an electrical field which is at least intermittently homogeneous in sections and viewed over cross section (the reactor of Cordier is identical to the instantly claimed invention, and is therefore capable of generating an at least intermittently homogeneous electrical field as claimed).
Regarding claim 20, Cordier discloses the reactor of claim 16, wherein the reactor includes a reactor head and a reactor bottom, where the reactor head and the reactor bottom each have closable feed openings and discharge openings through which at least fluids or solids, can be introduced or discharged, such that, for creation of a moving bed, particles are continuously introduced into the reactor shaft at least intermittently through the reactor head (Pg. 4 2nd Para., Pg. 6 3rd Para., Pg. 7 3rd Para., see Fig. 1 at belt conveyor 6 and hopper 5, which has a rotating bell 8 that is controllably opened by jack 9 for introducing balls into the furnace, and sealed lock airlock 46 for releasing cold coke on strip dosing extractor 50).
Regarding claim 21, Cordier discloses the reactor of claim 20, wherein the electrodes are arranged in such a way that they generate an electrical field aligned orthogonally at least in sections to the direction of movement of the particles of the moving bed that move through the reactor shaft (the reactor of Cordier is identical to the instantly claimed invention, and is therefore capable of generating an electrical field as claimed).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cordier as applied to claims 16 and 19-21 above in view of Appel et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0051770; hereinafter Appel; already of record).
Regarding claim 17, Cordier discloses the reactor of claim 16, and all limitations recited therein.
Cordier fails to explicitly disclose that the mutually opposite electrodes, viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of the reactor, are disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections.
Appell is in the analogous field of reactors for endothermic reactions with direct electrical heating (Appell; [0031]-[0032], see Figs. 1a, 1b). Appell teaches mutually opposite electrodes that, when viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of a reactor, are disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections (Appell; [0031]-[0032], see Figs. 1a, 1b at electrode pairs 4, 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the reactor of Cordier with the teachings of Appell so that the mutually opposite electrodes, viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of the reactor, are disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections, in order to provide a reactor capable of performing chemical reactions by direct electrical heating (Appell; [0001], [0031]-[0032], see Figs. 1a, 1b).
Regarding claim 18, Cordier discloses the reactor of claim 16, and all limitations recited therein.
Cordier fails to explicitly disclose that at least two or more electrodes for generation of thermal energy are disposed on each of the two mutually opposite side walls of the reactor shaft, and where at least one of the electrodes per side wall of the reactor shaft, viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of the reactor, is disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections, or each of the electrodes per side wall is disposed at least above or below the middle of the reactor shaft.
Appell teaches at least two or more electrodes for generation of thermal energy two or more electrodes for generation of thermal energy that are disposed in mutually opposed positions of the reactor shaft, and where at least one of the electrodes of the reactor shaft, viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of the reactor, is disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections, or each of the electrodes is disposed at least above or below the middle of the reactor shaft (Appell; [0031]-[0032], see Figs. 1a, 1b at electrode pairs 4, 5). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the reactor of Cordier with the teachings of Appell so that at least two or more electrodes for generation of thermal energy are disposed on each of the two mutually opposite side walls of the reactor shaft, and where at least one of the electrodes per side wall of the reactor shaft, viewed in vertical longitudinal direction (L) of the reactor, is disposed in the middle of the reactor shaft at least in sections, or each of the electrodes per side wall is disposed at least above or below the middle of the reactor shaft, in order to provide a reactor capable of performing chemical reactions by direct electrical heating (Appell; [0001], [0031]-[0032], see Figs. 1a, 1b).
Still further, in regards to providing two or more electrodes for generation of thermal energy, mere duplication of parts has no patentable significance unless a new and unexpected result is produced. See In re Harza, 274 F.2d 669, 124 USPQ 378 (CCPA 1960), and MPEP 2144.04(VI)(B). The motivation for providing two or more electrodes would have been to increase the heating capability of the reactor, thereby improving throughput.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed July 2, 2026 regarding the objections to the claims and the indefiniteness rejections on Pg. 5 of their Remarks have been fully considered and are persuasive.
However, regarding the allowable subject matter section on Pg. 5 of their Remarks, the Examiner has reconsidered the prior art, and has determined that the claims are not in condition for allowance over the prior art. The Examiner has therefore issued this rejection as non-final, in accordance with MPEP 706.07(a). Accordingly, the previously withdrawn claims have not been rejoined, and remain withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to John McGuirk whose telephone number is (571)272-1949. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-530pm.
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, Charles Capozzi can be reached at (571) 270-3638. 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.
/JOHN MCGUIRK/Examiner, Art Unit 1798
Prosecution Insights