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 .
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.
Claims 1 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 11,519,089 of Faure et al in view of US 2022/0136119 of Flanders et al.
As to claim 1, Faure teaches of an apparatus, comprising:
an electrolysis stack configured to perform electrolysis using electric power (Faure, col 6 lines 4-32)
a carbon dioxide supply unit configured to supply carbon dioxide to the electrolysis stack (Faure, col 6 lines 1-20, col 7 lines 20-47 and Fig. 1);
a voltage sensor configured to detect a voltage of the electrolysis stack (Faure, col 3 lines 21-39, col 9 lines 51-61 and Fig. 4); and
a control unit including a processor and a memory coupled to the processor and configured to control the carbon dioxide supply unit to supply carbon dioxide to the electrolysis stack when the voltage detected by the voltage sensor exceeds a predetermined value and configured to control the carbon dioxide supply unit to stop supply of carbon dioxide to the electrolysis stack when the voltage detected by the voltage sensor is equal to or less than the predetermined value (Faure, col 10 lines 14-63, col 11 line 39 thru col 12 line 28, col 13 lines 21-56 and col 15 lines 2-7).
As seen in Faure, an electrolysis stack for CO2 electrolysis includes a carbon dioxide supply, various sensors and actuators including a voltage sensor and actuators and a control unit. The control unit can monitor cells within the stack and when operational conditions are no longer optimal, the system can regulate the operational parameters of the cell by stopping voltage, stopping supply of reagents, etc. to mitigate issues within the system.
Faure does not teach of a first storage unit, a second storage unit and a reactor.
Faure also does not teach that the electrolysis stack is powered by renewable energy.
Flanders teaches of carbon dioxide electrolyzer (Flanders, Abstract) and specifically about focuses on reactor control (Flanders, [0004 - [0005]).
Flanders teaches that the electrolyzer has a power supply including renewable energy sources like solar, wind, geothermal (Flanders, [0076] and [0577]).
Flanders also teaches the CO2 electrolyzer includes downstream reactors to produce valuable commodities such that reactors include Fischer-Tropsch reactors that utilize CO and H2- (both are products of CO2 electrolysis) from the CO2 electrolyzer (Flanders, [0058], [0059], [0073]).
Flanders further teaches separating the generated CO (and other carbon based products) from the by-product hydrogen gas as well as storing the produced products prior to conversion in a downstream process (Flanders, [0073] – [0074], [0087], [0375] – [0379] and Fig. 7A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Faure as per Flanders so as to utilize the desired components of the system in order to produce, store and react the CO2 products in generating a valuable commodity in a downstream reactor.
As to claim 4, Faure in view of Flanders teaches to the system of claim 1.
Faure teaches carbon monoxide and hydrogen gas a produced in the CO2 reactor (Faure, col 15 lines 56-60).
Faure does not teach the downstream reactor.
Flanders teaches of carbon dioxide electrolyzer (Flanders, Abstract) and specifically about focuses on reactor control (Flanders, [0004 - [0005]).
Flanders also teaches the CO2 electrolyzer includes downstream reactors to produce valuable commodities such that reactors include Fischer-Tropsch reactors that utilize CO and H2- (both are products of CO2 electrolysis) from the CO2 electrolyzer to produce a renewable fuel (Flanders, [0058], [0059], [0073]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Faure as per Flanders so as to utilize the desired reactor in order to produce a renewable fuel as a valuable commodity.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Faure in view of Flanders as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of US 2016/0107952 of Schulz.
As to claim 3, Faure in view of Flanders teaches to the system of claim 1.
Faure in view of Flanders do not teach a temperature sensor for the reactor or a flow controller to the reactor based on the temperature sensor.
Schulz teaches of a downstream reactor to consume carbon oxides and hydrogen gas in producing a fuel (Shultz, Abstract and [0059]).
Schulz teaches that the reactor includes a temperature sensor and flow controls to the reactor to allow for maximum conversion rates of the reagents to produce the desired fuel (Schulz, [0060], [0064] - [0065], [0074] – [0075]).
Therefore it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Faure in view of Flanders as per Schulz so as to utilize a heat control mechanism and flow controllers within the reactor to maximize (or optimize) conversion rates within the reactor.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 2 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 2 requires a temperature increasing unit configured to increase a temperature of the reactor by off-gas generate in the purification units. While US 10,590,548 teaches a reactor temperature increasing unit, it does not suggest the connection the purification units.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN W COHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-7961. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9 am to 5 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, Curtis Mayes can be reached at 571-272-1234. 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.
BRIAN W. COHEN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 1759
/BRIAN W COHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1759
Prosecution Insights