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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed on July 27, 2026 has been received and considered. Claims 1-14 and 20 are canceled. Claims 24-28 are withdrawn from further consideration. Claim 29 is new. Claims 15-19, 21-23, and 29 are currently under consideration.
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.
Claims 15-18, 21, 22, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scotto et al. (US 2017/0312717 A1) in view of Davis (US 3,084,914 A) and Sauer (US 2004/0244588 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Scotto et al. discloses an installation (an apparatus) for the production of granules including urea (see FIG. 1), comprising:
a granulator (i.e., a urea granulation unit 2 for producing solid granules of urea 10 from a urea melt 9; for example, a fluid-bed granulation unit; see paragraph [0059]) configured to produce granules including urea;
a dust scrubber (i.e., a scrubbing unit 3 for washing a stream of dust- and ammonia-laden air 12 drawn off from the granulation unit 2 with water 17 and an acid solution 18 to produce a scrubbed purified stream 19 and an aqueous solution 13 containing urea and salts; see paragraphs [0059]-[0063]);
a concentrating device (i.e., a second evaporation section 4 for subjecting the aqueous solution 13 to an evaporation step to produce a gaseous stream 15 mainly consisting of water vapor and a stream 14 containing recovered urea and the majority of ammonium sulphate of the aqueous solution 13, and a small amount of water; see paragraph [0064]); and
a condensation device (i.e., a second condensation section 5 for condensing the gaseous stream 15 to produce an aqueous stream 16 containing water and small amounts of urea and ammonium sulphate; see paragraph [0065]);
wherein an exhaust gas flow (i.e., the stream of dust- and ammonia-laden air 12) from the granulator 2 is arranged to be fed to the dust scrubber 3, wherein the exhaust gas flow 12 from the granulator 2 is configured to be washed (i.e., using water 17 and acid solution 18) in the dust scrubber;
wherein an outflow (i.e., the aqueous solution 13) from the dust scrubber 3 is configured to be fed to the concentrating device 4, wherein the outflow 13 from the dust scrubber 3 is configured to be concentrated in the concentrating device; and
wherein vapors (i.e., the gaseous stream 15) created during concentration are configured to be fed, at least in part, to the condensation device 5, and wherein the vapors are at least partially configured to be condensed in the condensation device 5.
Scotto et al. fails to disclose that the condensation device 5 is configured such that possible deposits of non-water-soluble substances in the condensation device are avoided during operation or removed from the condensation device during operation.
Davis discloses a condensation device for at least partially condensing vapors that contain sublimable materials (see column 1, lines 10-12), said condensation device (i.e., a condenser 21; see FIG. 1-4) being configured such that deposits of the materials in the condensation device are removed from the condensation device during operation (i.e., to remove deposits of the material from the condenser 21, the coolant flow to the tubes 12 is periodically shut off, and the tubes 12 are heated by a flow of steam or other heating media; the deposits are thereby melted and removed as a liquid from the condenser through a liquid outlet nozzle 17; see column 3, lines 33-39).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the condensation device of Davis for the condensation device 5 in the installation of Scotto et al. because the condensation device would have allowed for periodic removal of deposits from the condensation device during operation, thereby preventing a reduction in the heat and mass transfer effectiveness of the condensation device that would arise from the obstruction of the flow path of the vapors by the deposits, as taught by Davis (see column 1, lines 51-62).
Scotto et al. (see FIG. 1) further discloses that the concentrating device 4 is fluidically connected (i.e., via gaseous stream 15) to the condensation device 5. Scotto et al., however, fails to disclose that the fluidic connection 15 is configured to be heated.
Sauer discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 3-4) comprising a condensation device (i.e., a cooling zone 120; or a first cooling zone 120 and a second cooling zone 220) and a fluidic connection (i.e., an inlet conduit 105) between a source (not shown) of a vapor containing substances to be at least partially condensed by the condensation device 120,220 and the condensation device 120,220. Specifically, Sauer discloses that the fluidic connection 105 is configured to be heated (i.e., by means a heat exchanger 115 provided in a heating zone 110, or heat exchangers 115,215 respectively provided in heating zones 110,210).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the fluidic connection between the concentrating device and the condensation device to be heated in the installation of Scotto et al. because the substances in the vapor would be prevented from undergoing a phase change (condensation/solidification) prior to entering the condensation device, so as to remain in the vapor phase in the fluidic connection, as taught by Sauer (see paragraphs [0015], [0038]).
The recitations with respect to the intended use of the installation for the production of granules including urea and sulfur do not impart further patentability (i.e., structural limitations) to the apparatus claim. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The modified installation of Scotto et al. would be capable of processing materials including urea and sulfur into granules, while avoiding possible deposits of non-water-soluble substances, including sulfur, in the condensation device, because any non-water-soluble substances would have been removed from the surfaces of the condensation device during operation, as taught by Davis.
Regarding claim 16, Davis (see column 3, lines 40-51) discloses that the condensation device preferably comprises at least a first condenser and a second condenser (i.e., multiple parallel condensers) configured such that the vapors are able to flow through the condensers independently of one another, and that, during operation, the vapors can selectively flow either through the first condenser or the second condenser (i.e., when deposits are to be removed from some of the condensers, the flow of coolant is shut off for these condensers and the vapor flow is diverted to the remaining condensers; a flow of steam is then fed to the tubes of the condensers to melt the deposits in those condensers where solids have deposited; at any given time, one set of condensers cools and at least partially condense the vapors, and the remaining condensers melt the deposits in order to remove the deposits from the condensers).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the condensation device to comprise at least a first condenser and a second condenser in the modified installation of Scotto et al. because the provision of multiple condensers, connected in parallel and operated simultaneously, would have allowed for the condensation to be performed as a continuous process, wherein, at any given time, one set of condensers operates to cool and at least partially condense the vapors, and the remaining condensers operate to melt the deposits in order to remove the deposits from the condensers, as taught by Davis.
Regarding claim 17, Davis discloses that the first condenser or the second condenser are selectively operated either with cooling water or with steam (see column 3, lines 33-51).
Regarding claim 18, Davis discloses that first condenser and/or the second condenser is/are designed as a U-tube condenser (i.e., the finned tubes 12 comprise U-tubes; see FIG. 1,4).
Regarding claim 21, Sauer (see FIG. 3-4) does not specifically disclose that the fluid connection 105 comprises at least one flange connection. However, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the fluid connection in the modified installation of Scotto et al. to comprise at least one flange connection, because the examiner takes Official notice that the provision of flange connections for attaching fluid piping to process units, so as to establish a fluid-tight connection for the passage of fluid between the process units, would have been well-known to one of ordinary skill in the engineering art.
Regarding claim 22, Sauer (see paragraph [0038]) also discloses that the fluidic connection 105 is configured to be heated to a temperature sufficient to ensure that substantially all of the substances within the vapor are prevented from undergoing a phase change and remain in the vapor phase.
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to configure the fluidic connection in the modified installation of Scotto et al. to be heated to a temperature that was sufficient to ensure that substantially all of the substances within the vapor (in this case, the water, urea, and ammonium sulphate in the gaseous stream) were prevented from undergoing a phase change (condensation/solidification) before entering the condensation device, and remained in the vapor phase in the fluidic connection, as taught by Sauer.
Furthermore, the specific temperature (of greater than 115 °C) to which the fluidic connection is to be heated is not considered to confer patentability to the claim because the precise temperature would have been considered a result effective variable by one of ordinary skill in the art. Accordingly, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to routinely optimize the temperature to which the fluidic connection was to be heated in the modified installation of Scotto et al. in order to ensure that substantially all of the substances within the vapor (in this case, the water, urea, and ammonium sulphate in the gaseous stream) remained in the vapor phase.
Regarding claim 29, the recitation that the “sulfur is elemental sulfur” does not impart further patentability to the claim. The sulfur is merely a material worked upon by the apparatus during an intended operation. It is not an element of the apparatus. See MPEP §2115.
Claims 15, 19, 23, and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scotto et al. (US 2017/0312717 A1) in view of Karasiak et al. (DE 102011007543 A1) and Sauer (US 2004/0244588 A1).
Regarding claim 15, Scotto et al. discloses an installation (apparatus) for the production of granules of urea (see FIG. 1), comprising:
a granulator (i.e., a urea granulation unit 2 for producing solid granules of urea 10 from a urea melt 9; for example, a fluid-bed granulation unit; see paragraph [0059]) configured to produce granules including urea;
a dust scrubber (i.e., a scrubbing unit 3 for washing a stream of dust- and ammonia-laden air 12 drawn off from the granulation unit 2 with water 17 and an acid solution 18 to produce a scrubbed purified stream 19 and an aqueous solution 13 containing urea and salts; see paragraphs [0059]-[0063]);
a concentrating device (i.e., a second evaporation section 4 for subjecting the aqueous solution 13 to an evaporation step to produce a gaseous stream 15 mainly consisting of water vapor and a stream 14 containing recovered urea and the majority of ammonium sulphate of the aqueous solution 13, and a small amount of water; see paragraph [0064]); and
a condensation device (i.e., a second condensation section 5 for condensing the gaseous stream 15 to produce an aqueous stream 16 containing water and small amounts of urea and ammonium sulphate; see paragraph [0065]);
wherein an exhaust gas flow (i.e., the stream of dust- and ammonia-laden air 12) from the granulator 2 is arranged to be fed to the dust scrubber 3, wherein the exhaust gas flow 12 from the granulator 2 is configured to be washed (i.e., using water 17 and acid solution 18) in the dust scrubber 3;
wherein an outflow (i.e., the aqueous solution 13) from the dust scrubber 3 is configured to be fed to the concentrating device 4, wherein the outflow 13 from the dust scrubber 3 is configured to be concentrated in the concentrating device 4; and
wherein vapors (i.e., the gaseous stream 15) created during concentration are configured to be fed, at least in part, to the condensation device 5, and wherein the vapors are at least partially configured to be condensed in the condensation device 5.
Scotto et al. fails to disclose that the condensation device 5 is configured such that possible deposits of non-water-soluble substances in the condensation device are avoided during operation or removed from the condensation device during operation.
Karasiak et al. discloses a condensation device for condensing vapors (i.e., an apparatus comprising a condensation region 311 with a spray condenser 3, the spray condenser 3 producing a liquid spray 51 as a coolant for at least partially condensing a vapor containing substances from a process equipment 1; see FIG. 2-8, translation), wherein the condenser is configured such that possible deposits of substances in the condensation device are avoided during operation (i.e., blockage by substances entrained in the vapors can be avoided by use of the spray condenser; see translation at page 3, second to last paragraph). Karasiak et al. (see translation at page 2, fourth paragraph) further discloses,
“Frequently, so-called spray condensers are used for the condensation, in which the vapors are condensed by sprayed liquid ... In such cases, the liquid is circulated while being filtered and cooled according to requirements, and then again in the condenser as a condensing agent available. These spray condensers are often used when the vapors to be condensed are loaded with substances which could contaminate or block tube bundle condensers.” (with emphasis added).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to provide the condensation device of Karasiak et al. for the condensation device 5 in the installation of Scotto et al. because condensation of the vapors by means of the spray condenser would have avoided the formation of deposits of the substances in the condensation device during operation, and thereby avoided a contamination or blockage of the condensation device by deposits of the substances, as taught by Karasiak et al.
Scotto et al. (see FIG. 1) further discloses that the concentrating device 4 is fluidically connected (i.e., via gaseous stream 15) to the condensation device 5. Scotto et al., however, fails to disclose that the fluidic connection 15 is configured to be heated.
Sauer discloses an apparatus (see FIG. 3-4) comprising a condensation device (i.e., a cooling zone 120; or a first cooling zone 120 and a second cooling zone 220) and a fluidic connection (i.e., an inlet conduit 105) between a source (not shown) of a vapor containing substances to be at least partially condensed by the condensation device 120,220 and the condensation device 120,220. Specifically, Sauer discloses that the fluidic connection 105 is configured to be heated (i.e., by means a heat exchanger 115 provided in a heating zone 110, or heat exchangers 115,215 respectively provided in heating zones 110,210).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further configure the fluidic connection between the concentrating device and the condensation device to be heated in the installation of Scotto et al. because the substances in the vapor would be prevented from undergoing a phase change (condensation/solidification) prior to entering the condensation device, so as to remain in the vapor phase in the fluidic connection, as taught by Sauer (see paragraphs [0015], [0038]).
The recitations with respect to the intended use of the installation for the production of granules including urea and sulfur do not impart further patentability (i.e., structural limitations) to the apparatus claim. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The modified installation of Scotto et al. would be capable of processing materials including urea and sulfur into granules, while avoiding possible deposits of non-water-soluble substances, including sulfur, in the condensation device, because any non-water-soluble substances would have been removed from the surfaces of the condensation device during operation, as taught by Karasiak et al.
Regarding claim 19, Karasiak et al. discloses that the condensation device comprises at least one spray condenser 3 (see FIG. 2-8).
Regarding claim 23, Karasiak et al. further discloses that the condensation device (see FIG. 4) comprises a pump 4 through which the spray liquid of the spray condenser is configured to be circulated (i.e., spray liquid is circulated through a closed cooling circuit, between a condensate collection area 312 and the spray condenser 3), and that the condensation device comprises a heat exchanger (i.e., a cooling device 5) through which the spray water of the spray condenser is configured to be cooled.
Regarding claim 29, the recitation that the “sulfur is elemental sulfur” does not impart further patentability to the claim. The sulfur is merely a material worked upon by the apparatus during an intended operation. It is not an element of the apparatus. See MPEP §2115.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on July 27, 2026 have been fully considered. In particular, Applicant (at page 5, last paragraph; with emphasis added) argues,
“Independent claim 15 is directed to an "installation for the production of granules including urea and sulfur" and has been amended herein to recite, among other things, "a granulator configured to produce granules including urea and sulfur" and "deposits of non-water- soluble substances, including sulfur, in the condensation device are avoided during operation or removed from the condensation device during operation" (emphasis added). The cited references fail to teach or suggest such a combination of features.
Because the combination of features presently recited in independent claim 15 is newly added by this amendment, the Examiner has not yet asserted that it is taught by the cited references. Indeed, it is not, as the cited references do not appear to teach or suggest anything regarding the features of the claims relating to sulfur. In particular, the cited references appear to be completely silent on this subject.”
The Office respectfully disagrees. The recitations with respect to the intended use of the installation for the production of granules including urea and sulfur do not impart further patentability (i.e., structural limitations) to the apparatus claim. The sulfur is merely a material to be worked upon by the apparatus during an intended operation. It is not an element of the apparatus. See MPEP §§ 2114, 2115. The modified installation of Scotto et al. would be capable of processing materials including urea and sulfur into granules, while avoiding possible deposits of non-water-soluble substances, including sulfur, in the condensation device, because any non-water-soluble substances would have been removed from the surfaces of the condensation device during operation, as was taught by Davis or Karasiak et al.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
* * *
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNIFER A LEUNG whose telephone number is (571)272-1449. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30 AM - 4:30 PM EST.
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, CLAIRE X WANG 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.
/JENNIFER A LEUNG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1774
