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 .
Drawings
The 8/4/23 drawings are provisionally accepted. Due to their complexity and/or numerosity, applicant’s assistance is requested to ensure that all component labels therein are correctly identified in the specification and vice versa. 37 CFR 1.3 (courtesy required).
Information Disclosure Statement (“IDS”)
The 8/7/24 IDS fails to comply with 37 CFR 1.98(a)(2), which requires a legible copy of each cited foreign patent document; each non-patent literature publication or that portion which caused it to be listed; and all other information or that portion which caused it to be listed. The IDS has been placed in the application file, but the lined-through information referred to therein (CM18406) has not been considered, as no copy thereof was received/found in the file. Should applicant wish to correct this deficiency by filing a copy of this reference in a subsequent IDS, MPEP 609.05(a) states that “the date that the new IDS or correction is filed will be the date of the IDS for purposes of determining compliance with the requirements based on the time of filing of the IDS (37 CFR 1.97)."
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s 5/7/26 election of Group II (claims 18-34) is acknowledged. Because applicant did not distinctly and specifically point out the/any supposed errors in the 2/27/26 Restriction Requirement, the election has been treated as an election without traverse (MPEP 818.01(a)). Claims 1-17 are withdrawn from further consideration per 37 CFR 1.142(b) as drawn to a nonelected Group, there being no allowable generic or linking claim.
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 18-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par. as 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 18 recites “providing sufficient reaction time to augment the transfer…”, but does not denote what will constitute (or infringe) “sufficient reaction time”, nor what “augment the transfer” constitutes (does it mean increasing the loading amount, loading rate, both, or something else?). The foregoing uncertainties create confusion as to the claimed scope and how to avoid infringement thereof (MPEP 2173.02), rendering claim 18 rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par.
Applicant is hereby advised that, as independent claim 18 is rejected for deficiencies under 35 USC 112(b)/2nd par., all claims depending therefrom also contain such deficiencies and are likewise rejected (unless the deficiencies are resolved by the dependent claim’s own limitations) - cure thereof is required for any and all claims affected even if any such claim were otherwise found allowable. See, e.g., In re Jolly, 172 F.2d 566, 567 (CCPA 1949) (holding that dependent claims of indefinite claims are thusly indefinite), and Ex parte Kristensen, 10 USPQ2d 1701, 1702-04 (BPAI 1989) (same); 35 USC 112(d)/4th par.
Claim 34 is rejected for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. 112(b)/2nd par. for the same reasons detailed above vis-à-vis claim 18 due to claim 34’s recitation “providing sufficient reaction time”. MPEP 2173.02.
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 18-34 are not anticipated nor rendered prima facie obvious over the prior art and do not suffer from any deficiencies under 35 U.S.C. 101; the 35 U.S.C. 112 rejections thereof must be overcome before any claims can be deemed allowable, however. Regarding independent claim 18, the most pertinent prior art of record appears to be EP2535314A1 (2012) (“’314”). ‘314 teaches a method comprising mixing a CO2-comprising raw gas with a pH 8.6 alkaline solution to give a pH 4.7 carbonic acid solution, converting the carbonic acid solution into a metal carbonate solution by adding a basic solution thereto (a “sufficient reaction time” is implicitly provided since metal carbonate solution was indeed formed, see MPEP 2112 & 2144.01 regarding implicit teachings and reasonably-drawn inferences), and recycling the filtrate obtained by filtering off metal carbonate precipitate to a further raw gas-contacting step; a CO2-lean gas (with a majority of the CO2 removed therefrom compared to the CO2 content of the raw gas) is implicitly outputted/vented (MPEP 2112 & 2144.01), lest a dangerous pressure buildup occur in the machinery employed. See ‘314 at, e.g., par. 13 and 44; Ex. 30-31; clm. 1.
Claim 18 is not anticipated nor rendered prima facie obvious over ‘314, however, at least because ‘314 does not teach or suggest the claimed steps of i) minimizing formation of metal carbonate precipitate (‘314 instead intends to maximize metal carbonate precipitation, see id. at, e.g., par. 21-22 and 55) and ii) maintaining the pH of the alkaline solution that was initially mixed with the raw gas (‘314 instead maintains the pH of its basic solution that was added to convert the carbonic acid solution into a metal carbonate solution), as required by the claim.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL BERNS whose telephone number is (469)295-9161. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00 (Central). 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, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at (571) 270-3591. 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.
/DANIEL BERNS/ August 7, 2026
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1736
Prosecution Insights