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 .
Status of the Claims
The amendment filed on 04/30/2026 has been entered. Claim 1 has been amended and claims 4 and 13-17 have been canceled. Thus claims 1-3 and 5-12 are currently pending and are under examination.
Withdrawn Objections and Rejections
The objections to the specification and claim 1 has been withdrawn in view of the amendments.
Claim 1 has been amended to now recite “wherein the electrified steam-methane reforming reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel, and wherein the nickel catalyst is a solid solution”. International publication WO2022/171643A1 (WO’643; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) fails to teach or suggest the newly recited limitation and thus the 102(a)(1) rejection as being anticipated by WO’643 has been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-3, 5 and 8-12 are newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International publication WO2022/171643A1 (WO’643; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) in view of International publication WO2021/110754A1 (WO’754; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025).
Regarding claim 1, WO’643 teaches a process for producing liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the process comprises:
a. converting water into an electrolysis product stream comprising H2 using an electrolysis module powered by an amount of electricity (page 12, lines 9-15);
b. reacting CO2 with the electrolysis product stream in a reverse water gas shift module to produce a first synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2 (page 5, lines 6-9)
c. converting the first synthesis gas mixture into a product mixture using a hydrocarbon synthesis module (page 5, lines 10-25), wherein the product mixture comprises liquid hydrocarbons, light gases, and wherein the liquid hydrocarbons comprise C5-C24 hydrocarbons, and the light gases comprise C1-C4 hydrocarbons and unreacted CO and H2 (page 10, lines 1-7; page 15, lines 24-29).
WO’643 is silent that the product mixture comprises water, however, since the reference teaches every limitation of steps a-c, there is a prima facie case of anticipation for the product mixture of WO’643 to also comprise water. See MPEP § 2112.01.
The reference further teaches
d. separating the liquid hydrocarbons for further processing and the light gases (pages 5 and 15) and water would have necessarily been separated before processing the liquid hydrocarbons;
e. feeding the light gases to an electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor to produce a second synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2 (page 15, line 31 to page 16, lines 1-15 and lines 25-30; and page 38, lines 28-33);
f. feeding the second synthesis gas mixture back to the hydrocarbon synthesis module thereby producing additional liquid hydrocarbons (page 38, lines 28-33).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, since WO’643 teaches feeding of the second synthesis gas mixture back to the hydrocarbon synthesis module (page 38, lines 28-33), the amount of electricity used to power the electrolysis module in necessarily reduced, wherein the amount of electricity used to power the electrolysis module is necessarily reduced in an amount ranging from five percent to forty percent.
Regarding claim 3, the liquid hydrocarbons are distilled to provide a primary liquid hydrocarbon product and a secondary product, wherein the primary liquid hydrocarbon product is diesel fuel, and the secondary product is naphtha (page 38, lines 19-24; page 37, lines 23-25).
Regarding claim 5, the light gases are pre-reformed using a pre-reformer before being fed into the electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor (page 16, lines 1-23).
Regarding claim 8. the electrolysis module of WO’643 comprises a solid oxide electrolysis electrolyzer (page 37, lines 19-20).
Regarding claims 10-12, WO’643 is silent that the liquid hydrocarbons are 51-100 mol %, 60-100 mol % or 80-100 mol % C5-C24 hydrocarbons. However, since the reference teaches the same process steps (a)-(c) as claimed in producing liquid hydrocarbons, there is a prima facie case of anticipation for the liquid hydrocarbons of WO’643 to be 51-100 mol %, 60-100 mol % or 80-100 mol % C5-C24 hydrocarbons. See MPEP § 2112.01.
Regarding claim 1, while WO’643 teaches the use of electrified SMR reactor, the reference fails to teach that the reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel.
The deficiency is cured by WO’754.
WO’754 teaches a method of using electrically heated steam methane reformer comprising a vertical tube having structured catalyst to reform methane to syngas, wherein the structured catalyst comprises Ni, Ru, Rh, Ir, or a combination thereof as a catalytically active material (Figs. 1a-b, reactor 70; Figs. 3a-b, reactor 700; page 16, lines 27-30). The reference teaches the method further comprises providing a plurality of reforming reactors arranged in parallel to each other (page 13, lines 7-9).
WO’643 fails to teach the details of eSMR, and thus a skilled artisan would have been motivated to use the eSMR of WO’754 in the process of WO’643 with a reasonable expectation of success at arriving at the method of claim 4.
It would thus have been prima facie obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the instant invention to conduct a process for producing liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the process comprises: a. converting water into an electrolysis product stream comprising H2 using an electrolysis module powered by an amount of electricity; b. reacting CO2 with the electrolysis product stream in a reverse water gas shift module to produce a first synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2; c. converting the first synthesis gas mixture into a product mixture using a hydrocarbon synthesis module, wherein the product mixture comprises liquid hydrocarbons, light gases, and water, and wherein the liquid hydrocarbons comprise C5-C24 hydrocarbons, and the light gases comprise C1-C4 hydrocarbons and unreacted CO and H2; d. separating the liquid hydrocarbons from the water and the light gases; e. feeding the light gases to an electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor to produce a second synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2, wherein the electrified steam-methane reforming reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel, and wherein the nickel catalyst is a solid solution; f. feeding the second synthesis gas mixture back to the hydrocarbon synthesis module thereby producing additional liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the electrified steam-methane reforming reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel in view of the teachings of WO’653 and WO’754.
Claim 6 is newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International publication WO2022/171643A1 (WO’643; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) in view of International publication WO2021/110754A1 (WO’754; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) as applied to claims 1-3, 5 and 8-12 above, and further in view of Patent application publication number US2021/0113980A1 (US’980; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025).
The teachings of WO’643 and WO’754 has been set forth above.
Regarding claim 6, WO’643 further teaches heating light gases before being fed to e-SMR (page 26, lines 29-33) but fails to teach that the light gases are heated using an electrically heated radiant furnace before being fed into the electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor.
The deficiency is cured by US’980.
US’980 teaches a method of using electrically heated steam methane reformer to reform methane to syngas. The reference further teaches preheating the reactant gases using electrical radiative heating element, wherein the heating element is in no direct contact with the eSMR reactor tube ([0009]-[0013]).
WO’643 fails to teach the details of the preheating process of the light gases, and thus a skilled artisan would have been motivated to use the methods of US’980 in the process of WO’643 with a reasonable expectation of success at arriving at the method of claim 6.
It would thus have been prima facie obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the instant invention to conduct a process for producing liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the process comprises: a. converting water into an electrolysis product stream comprising H2 using an electrolysis module powered by an amount of electricity; b. reacting CO2 with the electrolysis product stream in a reverse water gas shift module to produce a first synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2; c. converting the first synthesis gas mixture into a product mixture using a hydrocarbon synthesis module, wherein the product mixture comprises liquid hydrocarbons, light gases, and water, and wherein the liquid hydrocarbons comprise C5-C24 hydrocarbons, and the light gases comprise C1-C4 hydrocarbons and unreacted CO and H2; d. separating the liquid hydrocarbons from the water and the light gases; e. feeding the light gases to an electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor to produce a second synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2, wherein the electrified steam-methane reforming reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel, and wherein the nickel catalyst is a solid solution; f. feeding the second synthesis gas mixture back to the hydrocarbon synthesis module thereby producing additional liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the light gases are heated using an electrically heated radiant furnace before being fed into the electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor in view of the teachings of WO’653 and US’980.
Claim 7 is newly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over International publication WO2022/171643A1 (WO’643; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) in view of International publication WO2021/110754A1 (WO’754; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025) as applied to claims 1-3, 5 and 8-12 above, and further in view of Patent application publication number US2011/0054047A1 (US’047; cited in PTO-892 11/03/2025).
The teachings of WO’643 and WO’754 has been set forth above.
Regarding claim 7, while the combination of WO’643 and WO’754 teaches production of hydrogen by water electrolysis and further using hydrogen in RWGS, the reference fails to teach the electrolysis product stream comprising H2 is stored, and wherein the electrolysis product stream is fed to the reverse water gas shift module upon receipt of a stimulus.
The deficiency is cured by US’047.
US’047 teaches a method of electrolyzing water to hydrogen and reacting hydrogen in RWGS. US’047 further teaches control of hydrogen supply to the RWGS subassembly, in which the essential purpose of this control is to supply enough hydrogen for the desired H2/CO ratio on the output of the RWGS subassembly ([0285] and Fig. 31). As such, a skilled artisan would understand that hydrogen would have to be stored if enough hydrogen is already supplied to RWGS.
Thus, a skilled artisan would have been motivated to use the methods of US’047 in the process of WO’643 with a reasonable expectation of success in controlling the hydrogen supply to RWGS for the desired H2/CO ratio.
Accordingly, it would have been prima facie obvious to a skilled artisan before the effective filing date of the instant invention to conduct a process for producing liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the process comprises: a. converting water into an electrolysis product stream comprising H2 using an electrolysis module powered by an amount of electricity; b. reacting CO2 with the electrolysis product stream in a reverse water gas shift module to produce a first synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2; c. converting the first synthesis gas mixture into a product mixture using a hydrocarbon synthesis module, wherein the product mixture comprises liquid hydrocarbons, light gases, and water, and wherein the liquid hydrocarbons comprise C5-C24 hydrocarbons, and the light gases comprise C1-C4 hydrocarbons and unreacted CO and H2; d. separating the liquid hydrocarbons from the water and the light gases; e. feeding the light gases to an electrified steam-methane-reforming reactor to produce a second synthesis gas mixture comprising CO and H2, wherein the electrified steam-methane reforming reactor comprises vertical tubes comprising a catalyst, and wherein the catalyst comprises nickel, and wherein the nickel catalyst is a solid solution; f. feeding the second synthesis gas mixture back to the hydrocarbon synthesis module thereby producing additional liquid hydrocarbons, wherein the electrolysis product stream comprising H2 is stored, and wherein the electrolysis product stream is fed to the reverse water gas shift module upon receipt of a stimulus in view of the teachings of WO’653 and US’047.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that WO’643 fails to teach amended claim 1 and that WO’754 does not cure the deficiency without providing the specifics and the reasons. The teachings of WO’754 and how it cures the deficiency of WO’643 have been set forth above. Applicant is advised to present detailed arguments what the disclosure of WO’754 is missing to not cure the teachings of WO’643.
Applicant further argues that light gases are reformed in the instant claim whereas the references teach methane reforming. Applicant then cites a reference that exemplifies the difference in reaction conditions for methane as opposed to higher hydrocarbons.
The examiner disagrees. The instant claim fails to recite what light gases encompass and thus under broadest reasonable interpretation, the component described as hydrocarbon light gas and tail gas in WO’643 read on the claimed light gases. In particular:
page 10, lines 4-7
PNG
media_image1.png
105
556
media_image1.png
Greyscale
page 15, lines 24-29
PNG
media_image2.png
143
553
media_image2.png
Greyscale
In view of the foregoing, the instantly claimed invention is obvious over the combination of WO’643 and WO’754.
Conclusion
Claims 1-3 and 5-12 are rejected and no claims are allowed.
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 MEDHANIT W BAHTA whose telephone number is (571)270-7658. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am-5pm.
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, Scarlett Goon can be reached at 571-270-5241. 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.
/MEDHANIT W BAHTA/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1692
Prosecution Insights