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 .
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.
Election/Restrictions
Newly submitted claims 10-13 are directed to an invention that is independent or distinct from the invention originally claimed for the following reasons:
Species A: Claims 1-9: a carbon dioxide recovery system without a wind direction and speed sensor.
Species B: Claims 10-13: a carbon dioxide recovery system with a wind direction and speed sensor.
Since applicant has received an action on the merits for the originally presented invention, this invention has been constructively elected by original presentation for prosecution on the merits. Accordingly, claims 10-13 have withdrawn from consideration as being directed to a non-elected invention. See 37 CFR 1.142(b) and MPEP § 821.03.
To preserve a right to petition, the reply to this action must distinctly and specifically point out supposed errors in the restriction requirement. Otherwise, the election shall be treated as a final election without traverse. Traversal must be timely. Failure to timely traverse the requirement will result in the loss of right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144. If claims are subsequently added, applicant must indicate which of the subsequently added claims are readable upon the elected invention.
Should applicant traverse on the ground that the inventions are not patentably distinct, applicant should submit evidence or identify such evidence now of record showing the inventions to be obvious variants or clearly admit on the record that this is the case. In either instance, if the examiner finds one of the inventions unpatentable over the prior art, the evidence or admission may be used in a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) of the other invention.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda et al (EP 3991827; hereinafter Umeda) in view of Higgins et al (US 10693165; hereinafter Higgins).
As regarding claim 1, Umeda discloses the claimed invention for a carbon dioxide recovery system (figs. 1 and 7) which recovers carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by an electrochemical reaction, the system comprising: an electrochemical cell (figs. 2-4, 7 and 14), disposed within a housing, which adsorbs carbon dioxide and desorbs adsorbed carbon dioxide in response to an applied electrical potential; a collector unit (100) which recovers carbon dioxide desorbed from the electrochemical cell; and a control unit (14) configured to control the electrochemical cell and the collector unit to perform: applying an adsorption potential to the electrochemical cell to adsorb carbon dioxide contained in the atmosphere introduced into the housing to the electrochemical cell; applying a desorption potential to the electrochemical cell to desorb carbon dioxide from the electrochemical cell; and acquiring information about substances contained in the atmosphere that may adhere to the electrochemical cell, wherein the control unit is configured to switch, at least, between execution and non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control based on the information acquired by the acquiring step ([0013]-[0018] and [0062]-[0065]).
Umeda does not disclose the control unit is configured to avoid execution of the control for carbon dioxide recovery in situations where the chemical cell may be contaminated with material. Higgins teaches the control unit (360 of figs. 1 and 5B; col 5 ln 32-39 and col 10 ln 22-40) is configured to avoid execution of the control for carbon dioxide recovery in situations where the chemical cell may be contaminated with material. Both Umeda and Higgins are directed to an adsorption filtration apparatus. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide the control unit is configured to avoid execution of the control for carbon dioxide recovery in situations where the chemical cell may be contaminated with material as taught by Higgins in order to improve system reliability and protect the electrochemical cell by preventing operation when contamination, clogging, or malfunction conditions are detected.
Umeda as modified discloses the acquiring information step includes acquiring the information about the substances in air in the vicinity of the carbon dioxide recovery system from an external server, and the substances are capable of accelerating deterioration of carbon dioxide adsorption performance of the electrochemical cell (Higgins – col 5 ln 5-21, col 10 ln 61-67, and col 11 ln 55-59 – ‘remote server’: 1760).
As regarding claim 2, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein the control unit is configured to block a path which introduces the atmosphere into the housing in the non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control ([0031] and [0077]).
As regarding claim 3, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein substances that may adhere to the electrochemical cell include at least one of salt, yellow sand, and fine particulate matter ([0057]).
As regarding claim 8, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention for wherein: the collector unit includes an opening (at collector unit 100 of fig. 1 and communicate with the atmosphere when the flow path witching valve 12 switches the flow path of the discharge gas to the atmosphere side) that opens to the atmosphere to introduce the atmosphere, and the acquiring information step includes acquiring the information about the substances in air in the vicinity of the carbon dioxide recovery system by monitoring flow of the atmosphere outside the opening.
Claim(s) 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda et al (EP 3991827; hereinafter Umeda) in view of Higgins et al (US 10693165; hereinafter Higgins), as applied supra, and further in view of Tagawa et al (EP 3667213; hereinafter Tagawa).
As regarding claim 4, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring information about location where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed, wind direction and wind speed as the information about the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell, if the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell may be salt, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control if the location where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed is a coastal area, the wind direction is from the sea to the land, and the wind speed is equal to or higher than a first reference value.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring information about location where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed, wind direction and wind speed as the information about the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell, if the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell may be salt, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control if the location where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed is a coastal area, the wind direction is from the sea to the land, and the wind speed is equal to or higher than a first reference value in order to enhance system performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Tagawa ([0007] and claims 1-4).
As regarding claim 6, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring information about an amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter included in the atmosphere as information about substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell in a case that the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell is yellow sand or fine particulate matter, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control if the amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter included in the atmosphere is equal to or greater than a third reference value. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring information about an amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter included in the atmosphere as information about substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell in a case that the substance that may adhere to the electrochemical cell is yellow sand or fine particulate matter, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform non-execution of carbon dioxide recovery control if the amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter included in the atmosphere is equal to or greater than a third reference value in order to enhance system performance, since it was known in the art as shown in Tagawa ([0007] and claims 1-4).
Claim(s) 5 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda et al (EP 3991827; hereinafter Umeda) in view of Higgins et al (US 10693165; hereinafter Higgins) and Tagawa et al (EP 3667213; hereinafter Tagawa), as applied supra, and further in view of WO 2022024937 (hereinafter WO ‘937).
As regarding claim 5, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention except for a blower unit which blows the atmosphere into the housing by forward rotation of a fan, wherein the blower unit can reverse flow of the atmosphere into the housing by rotating the fan in an opposite direction, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform a carbon dioxide recovery control and a control of the blower unit so that a direction of the atmosphere introduced into the housing is opposite to a wind direction from the sea to the land, if the wind speed is less than the first reference value and is greater than a second reference value.
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a blower unit which blows the atmosphere into the housing by forward rotation of a fan, wherein the blower unit can reverse flow of the atmosphere into the housing by rotating the fan in an opposite direction, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform a carbon dioxide recovery control and a control of the blower unit so that a direction of the atmosphere introduced into the housing is opposite to a wind direction from the sea to the land, if the wind speed is less than the first reference value and is greater than a second reference value in order to enhance system performance, since it was known in the art as shown in WO ‘937 (fig. 5 and [0150]-[0155]).
As regarding claim 7, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention except for a blower unit which blows the atmosphere into the housing by forward rotation of a fan, wherein the blower unit can reverse flow of the atmosphere into the housing by rotating the fan in an opposite direction, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring wind direction and wind speed as the information, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform a carbon dioxide recovery control and a control of the blower unit so that a direction of the atmosphere introduced into the housing is opposite to an acquired wind direction, if the amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter is less than a third reference value and is greater than a fourth reference value and a wind speed is less than a fifth reference value. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide a blower unit which blows the atmosphere into the housing by forward rotation of a fan, wherein the blower unit can reverse flow of the atmosphere into the housing by rotating the fan in an opposite direction, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform acquiring wind direction and wind speed as the information, and wherein the control unit is configured to perform a carbon dioxide recovery control and a control of the blower unit so that a direction of the atmosphere introduced into the housing is opposite to an acquired wind direction, if the amount of yellow sand or fine particulate matter is less than a third reference value and is greater than a fourth reference value and a wind speed is less than a fifth reference value in order to enhance system performance, since it was known in the art as shown in WO ‘937 (fig. 5 and [0150]-[0155]).
Claim(s) 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Umeda et al (EP 3991827; hereinafter Umeda) in view of Higgins et al (US 10693165; hereinafter Higgins), as applied supra, and further in view of KR 101875488 (hereinafter KR ‘488).
As regarding claim 9, Umeda as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Umeda as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein during the acquiring information step, the external server provides the control unit with information about an amount of yellow sand or an amount of fine particulate matter contained in the atmosphere in a geological area where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was made to provide wherein during the acquiring information step, the external server provides the control unit with information about an amount of yellow sand or an amount of fine particulate matter contained in the atmosphere in a geological area where the carbon dioxide recovery system is installed in order to obtain regional atmospheric contamination information from an external weather-station server, since it was known in the art as shown in KR ‘488 ([0010]-[0011], [0033]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s remark argues that Umeda and Higgins (alone or in combination) fails to disclose or teach or suggest the acquiring information step includes acquiring the information about the substances in air in the vicinity of the carbon dioxide recovery system from an external server, and the substances are capable of accelerating deterioration of carbon dioxide adsorption performance of the electrochemical cell. Specifically, Applicant asserts that, Higgins does not disclose that vehicle controller 1720 is configured to acquire information about substances in the air in the vicinity of the fuel cell from an external server.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Higgins describes environment sensor array 360 sensing contaminants in airflow associated with the fuel cell, with the sensed data being communicated through vehicle controller 1720 and/or storage device 1730 to remote server 1760. Higgins therefore, discloses transmission of environment sensor data from the vehicle to the remote server, rather than acquisition by vehicle controller 1720 from the remote server of information concerning substances in the air in the vicinity of the fuel cell. The disclosure that server 1760 may make vehicle data accessible through website 1770/data files 1780 likewise concerns remote retrieval of vehicle-generated data for analysis by users, not acquisition by vehicle controller 1720 of ambient-substance information originating at the remote server.
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 DUNG H BUI whose telephone number is (571)270-7077. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 - 4:30 ET.
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, Benjamin L. Lebron can be reached at (571) 272-0475. 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.
/DUNG H BUI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773
Prosecution Insights