Prosecution Insights
Last updated: May 04, 2026
Application No. 18/359,293

CO2 RECOVERY DEVICE

Final Rejection §103
Filed
Jul 26, 2023
Examiner
BUI, DUNG H
Art Unit
1773
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.
OA Round
2 (Final)
78%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
0m
Est. Remaining
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 78% — above average
78%
Career Allowance Rate
967 granted / 1233 resolved
+13.4% vs TC avg
Strong +24% interview lift
Without
With
+24.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 6m
Avg Prosecution
79 currently pending
Career history
1312
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§103
48.2%
+8.2% vs TC avg
§102
26.7%
-13.3% vs TC avg
§112
18.7%
-21.3% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1233 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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. 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) 1-2 and 5-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsutsumi et al (WO 2021/131629; hereinafter Tsutsumi) in view of Takashina et al (JP 20031056; hereinafter Takashina) and CN 106017782 (hereinafter CN ‘782). As regarding claim 1, Tsutsumi discloses the claimed invention for a CO2 recovery device (fig. 2; [0024]-[0030]) comprising: a cooling tower (60) into which an exhaust gas containing carbon dioxide is introduced to cool the exhaust gas; and an absorption tower (70) into which the exhaust gas cooled in the cooling tower is introduced and which brings the exhaust gas into contact with an absorption liquid to remove the carbon dioxide from the exhaust gas, wherein the absorption tower comprises: an absorption tower body through which the exhaust gas is flowable and which has a tubular shape, and a demister ([0029]) that is disposed inside the absorption tower body and is configured to remove mist contained in the exhaust gas as the exhaust gas flows therethrough. Tsutsumi does not disclose a flow velocity regulating section that is configured to regulate a flow velocity of the exhaust gas flowing through the demister to be within a predetermined range. Takashina teaches a flow velocity regulating section that is configured to regulate a flow velocity of the exhaust gas flowing through the demister to be within a predetermined range ([0010]-[0015], [0091]-[0099] and [0117]-[0119]; 15, 60, 43A-43C, 73 and 76 of figs. 1, 3, 7-12, 14-19 and 21-24). 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 flow velocity regulating section that is configured to regulate a flow velocity of the exhaust gas flowing through the demister to be within a predetermined range as taught by Takashina in order to enhance device performance. Tsutsumi as modified does not disclose the flow velocity regulating section comprises: a differential pressure acquisition unit that acquires information on a differential pressure between a position upstream of the demister and a position downstream of the demister in a flow direction of the exhaust gas in the absorption tower; and a control unit configured to control the differential pressure acquired by the differential pressure acquisition unit to be a predetermined value. CN ‘782 teaches the flow velocity regulating section comprises: a differential pressure acquisition unit that acquires information on a differential pressure between a position upstream of the demister and a position downstream of the demister (11 of fig. 1; [0002], [0004] and [0021]) in a flow direction of the exhaust gas in the absorption tower; and a control unit (1 of fig. 1; [0009]) configured to control the differential pressure acquired by the differential pressure acquisition unit to be a predetermined 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 the flow velocity regulating section comprises: a differential pressure acquisition unit that acquires information on a differential pressure between a position upstream of the demister and a position downstream of the demister in a flow direction of the exhaust gas in the absorption tower; and a control unit configured to control the differential pressure acquired by the differential pressure acquisition unit to be a predetermined value as taught by CN ‘782 in order to monitor a pressure difference between upstream and downstream sides of the demister for detecting demister fouling or abnormal conditions and enabling control of the absorption tower to maintain stable mist removal performance. As regarding claim 2, Tsutsumi as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Tsutsumi as modified discloses the claimed invention for the differential pressure acquired by the differential pressure acquisition unit is a differential pressure between a pressure of the exhaust gas before being supplied to the demister inside the absorption tower and a pressure of the exhaust gas after passing through the demister inside the absorption tower (CN ‘782- 11 of fig. 1; [0002], [0004] and [0021]). Tsutsumi as modified does not disclose an additional supply line configured to supply a fluid to the exhaust gas before being supplied to the absorption tower body, and a flow rate regulating valve configured to regulate a supply amount of the fluid through the additional supply line. 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 an additional supply line configured to supply a fluid to the exhaust gas before being supplied to the absorption tower body, and a flow rate regulating valve configured to regulate a supply amount of the fluid through the additional supply line in order to enhance device performance, since it was known in the art as shown JP H04293516 (hereinafter JP ‘516; [0003]-[0007], [0009], examples, figs. 1-3). 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 control unit configured to control an opening of the flow rate regulating valve and controls to increase the opening of the flow rate regulating valve in a case in which the differential pressure acquired by the differential pressure acquisition unit is below a specified differential pressure value determined in advance in order to enhance device performance, since it was known in the art as shown in JP S54134079 (hereinafter JP ‘079; [0002]-[0003] and figs. 1-3). As regarding claim 5, Tsutsumi as modified discloses all of limitations as set forth above. Tsutsumi as modified discloses the claimed invention except for wherein the additional supply line supplies the exhaust gas from which the carbon dioxide has been removed in the absorption tower, as the fluid (JP ‘516 - [0003]-[0007], [0009], examples, figs. 1-3). Claims 6-8 are likewise rejected for reasons analogous to those outlined with respect to claims 1-2 above. Response to Arguments Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-2 and 5-8 have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection. 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
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Nov 20, 2025
Response Filed
Jan 08, 2026
Final Rejection — §103
Apr 02, 2026
Request for Continued Examination
Apr 05, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12611624
PROTUBERANT COMPRESSIBLE FILTER SEAL DESIGN UTILIZING UNDERCUTS
3y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12611623
GAS-LIQUID SEPARATOR
2y 10m to grant Granted Apr 28, 2026
Patent 12607178
GAS COOLER
2y 9m to grant Granted Apr 21, 2026
Patent 12601509
MULTI-STAGE DEHUMIDIFICATION SYSTEM FOR LOCAL AREA DEHUMIDIFICATION OF DRY ROOM
3y 11m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12599248
SYSTEMS AND METHOD FOR ELIMINATING AIRBORNE CONTAMINANTS
1y 11m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

Strategy Recommendation AI-generated — please review before filing

Get a prosecution strategy drawn from examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Typically takes 5-10 seconds — AI-generated, attorney review required before filing

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
78%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+24.5%)
2y 6m (~0m remaining)
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1233 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allowance rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month