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 Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: “(3)” should be removed. Appropriate correction is required.
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 8, 11 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being 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.
Regarding claim 8, it is unclear whether “a second transition zone” requires a first transition zone.
Regarding claim 11, it is unclear whether “a second cooling assembly” requires a first cooling assembly.
A broad range or limitation together with a narrow range or limitation that falls within the broad range or limitation (in the same claim) may be considered indefinite if the resulting claim does not clearly set forth the metes and bounds of the patent protection desired. See MPEP § 2173.05(c). In the present instance, claim 12 recites the broad recitation “below 0”, and the claim also recites 3 narrower ranges. The claims is considered indefinite because there is a question or doubt as to whether the feature introduced by such narrower language is (a) merely exemplary of the remainder of the claim, and therefore not required, or (b) a required feature of the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5 and 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Elliott USPA 2015/0010452 A1.
Regarding claim 1, Elliott discloses a carbon capture device (Abstract), comprising: a flue gas input, a flue gas output, a carbon adsorption zone that is in fluid communication with the flue gas input and in fluid communication with the flue gas output (figure 7: gas inlet into Reactor #1 and gas outlet from Reactor #1; paragraph 140), where a first flue gas communication channel comprises the carbon adsorption zone (paragraph 140: adsorber bed in Reactor #1), where the first flue gas communication channel comprises a first fluid input and a first fluid output, and the carbon adsorption zone comprises a first CO.sub.2 sorbent material positioned downstream from the first fluid input and upstream to/of the first fluid output, where the first fluid input is in fluid communication with the flue gas input, and where the flue gas is directed past the CO.sub.2 sorbent material and towards the first fluid output, where the first fluid output is in fluid communication with the flue gas output (see figure 7; also figure 8), a carbon desorption zone (figure 7: Reactor #2), where the carbon desorption zone comprises a second CO.sub.2 sorbent material (paragraph 140), and an actuation device, where the actuation device is configured to transport carbon-rich first CO.sub.2 sorbent material from the carbon adsorption zone to the carbon desorption zone and to transport carbon-lean second CO.sub.2 sorbent material from the carbon desorption zone to the carbon adsorption zone (paragraph 140: sorbent is transferred back and forth via pneumatic transport, screw conveyor or bucket elevator).
Regarding claim 3, Elliott discloses that the actuation device may be in the form of a screw (auger) conveyor device or a belt conveyor having transport pockets (paragraph 140).
Regarding claim 4, Elliott discloses that the carbon capture device comprises a closed loop system, where the carbon adsorption zone is in communication with the carbon desorption zone and/or where the carbon desorption zone is in communication with the carbon adsorption zone (figure 7).
Regarding claim 5, Elliott discloses that the carbon capture device comprises a closed circulating structure configured to receive the carbon adsorption material, and where the closed circulating structure comprises the carbon adsorption zone, the carbon desorption zone and/or the actuation device (figure 7).
Regarding claim 9, Elliott discloses that the carbon adsorption zone is arranged in a first tubular body, and the carbon desorption zone is arranged in a second tubular body (paragraph 185).
Regarding claim 10, Elliott discloses that the carbon adsorption zone and/or the carbon desorption zone is in the form of a constantly moving fluidized bed (paragraph 107).
Regarding claims 11 and 12, since the second cooling assembly is optional (“may”), Elliott anticipates these claims.
Regarding claim 13, the device of Elliott could be used for an engine; therefore, the limitations are anticipated. Claims directed to an apparatus must be distinguished in the prior art in terms of structure rather than function. MPEP 2114.
Regarding claim 14. Elliott discloses that the first CO.sub.2 sorbent material and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is in the form of pellets, powder, a granular substance, a grainy substance, extruded forms, fibres or particulates (paragraph 140).
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.
Claims 2 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott USPA 2015/0010452 A1 in view of Bower USPN 5,814,234.
Elliott is relied upon as above.
Regarding claims 2 and 6, Elliott does not disclose that the device comprises a heat exchanger that is configured to extract heat energy from the flue gas upstream from the flue gas input. Bower discloses cooling flue gases prior to their passage to sorbents/filters, thereby transferring thermal energy to a first cooling fluid (see Bower column 10, lines 5-28). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Elliott, to include a heat exchanger that is configured to extract heat energy from the flue gas upstream from the flue gas input, thereby transferring thermal energy to a first cooling fluid, as disclosed by Bower, for the purpose of brining the flue gas stream to the ideal temperature.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott USPA 2015/0010452 A1 in view of Knaebel USPN 7,594,956 B2.
Elliott is relied upon as above.
Regarding claims 7 and 8, Elliott does not disclose the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is heated from a first temperature to a second temperature in a first transition zone between the carbon adsorption zone and the carbon desorption zone or wherein the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is cooled from a second temperature to a first temperature in a second transition zone between the carbon desorption zone and the carbon adsorption zone. Knaebel discloses a similar invention where the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is heated from a first temperature to a second temperature in a first transition zone between the carbon adsorption zone and the carbon desorption zone or wherein the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is cooled from a second temperature to a first temperature in a second transition zone between the carbon desorption zone and the carbon adsorption zone (see Knaebel column 5, line 55 – column 6, line 39). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to modify Elliott to include a structure such that the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is heated from a first temperature to a second temperature in a first transition zone between the carbon adsorption zone and the carbon desorption zone or wherein the first and/or the second CO.sub.2 sorbent material is cooled from a second temperature to a first temperature in a second transition zone between the carbon desorption zone and the carbon adsorption zone, as disclosed by Knaebel, for the purpose of pre-heating/pre-cooling the adsorbent prior to regeneration and adsorption, respectively.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Elliott USPA 2015/0010452 A1 in view of Hamad USPA 2013/0298761 A1.
Elliott is relied upon as above.
Regarding claim 15, Elliott does not disclose an internal combustion engine of a vehicle. Hamad discloses utilizing such a system to capture CO2 from an internal combustion engine of a vehicle (see Hamad Abstract). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the system on an internal combustion engine of a vehicle, as disclosed by Hamad, for the purpose of capturing CO2 from the exhaust of the engine.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER P JONES whose telephone number is (571)270-7383. The examiner can normally be reached 9AM-6PM EST M-F.
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, Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at (571)270-7872. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER P JONES/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1776