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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 14 – 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by CN 113251814 (hereinafter referred to as CN ‘814).
In regard to claim 14, as shown in figure 1, CN ‘814 can be considered to disclose a dual-membrane separation apparatus. The first membrane separation component (106) includes a side upstream of the membrane that forms a first chamber having a gas inlet. The downstream side of the membrane of the first membrane separation component (106) and the upstream side of the membrane of the second membrane separation component (108) together form a second chamber. The first and second chambers share a first wall that is formed by the gas-selective membrane in the first membrane separation component (106). The gas-selective membrane is operable to at least partially separate a target chemical species from at least one other chemical species by selectively passing the target chemical species through the gas-selective membrane at a greater rate than the at least one other chemical species. The downstream side of the membrane in the second membrane separation component (108) forms a third chamber. The third chamber is shown to have two connections that are capable of acting as a liquid inlet and a liquid outlet. The second and third chambers share a second wall that is formed by the membrane of the second membrane separation component (108). This membrane is a diffusion-based membrane operable to pass the target chemical through the diffusion-based membrane and into an absorbent liquid in direct contact with one side of the diffusion-based membrane.
In regard to claim 15, the materials acted upon do not affect the structure of the apparatus. CN ‘814 is capable of being used where the target chemical species is carbon dioxide, and the mixed gas comprises nitrogen.
In regard to claim 16, the second chamber can be considered to have a first portion, which is part of the first membrane separation component (106), and a second portion, which is part of the second membrane separation component (108). The pressure of the concentrate gas is capable of increasing between the first portion and the second portion.
Claims 1 – 3, 6, 8, 9, 14, 18, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0360854 to Vaidya et al. (hereinafter referred to as Vaidya).
In regard to claims 1 and 14, Vaidya is directed to a process for removing and recovering CO2 (the “target chemical species”) using membranes and amine absorption (see paragraph [0006]: “… to produce an enriched carbon dioxide stream”). Paragraph [0057] also further states: “A simulation was carried out … with feed to membrane separation unit and amine absorption unit”, i.e. dissolving CO2 in a solvent. Therefore, Vaidya discloses a method for dissolving CO2 into an absorbent liquid (the amine solution). As discussed in paragraphs [0057]-[0058], and shown in figure 6, Vaidya discloses a “sour gas stream 603” (mixed gas of ~90 mol% CO-2 and 10 mol% H2S) is compressed and fed to the first membrane stage 620. That membrane stage can be viewed as the “first chamber” receiving the mixed gas (CO2 + H2S), see paragraph [0057] that recites “a sour gas … is introduced to the membrane separation unit”. As discussed in paragraph [0058], the first membrane stage 620 is CO2-selective, producing permeate stream 622 that is “enriched” in CO2. That permeate side can be interpreted as the “second chamber” containing the “concentrated gas” (higher CO2 content). As discussed in paragraph [0059], and shown in figure 6, after the first membrane, the permeate stream 622 is compressed and sent to the second membrane stage 630. The second membrane’s permeate 632 is combined with tail gas 641 and introduced to the selective amine absorption unit 650. The second membrane stage 630 can be read as the “diffusion-based membrane”, and the “third chamber” can be the amine absorber 650, which is “a chamber with liquid”. Since amine absorbers operate to dissolve CO2 into the liquid solution, the CO2 “dissolves in the absorbent liquid” in that “third chamber”. As discussed in paragraphs [0059] and [0046]-[0047], Vaidya indicates that once CO2 is absorbed in the amine, the amine system typically produces an enriched CO2 stream or a CO2-laden solvent in the outlet stream 651. The process discussed above includes all of the structural features of the dual-membrane separation of claim 14 of the present application.
In regard to claim 2, as discussed above, the target chemical species in Vaidya is carbon dioxide. As further discussed in paragraph [0013], the mixed gas can include nitrogen as one of the at least one other chemical species.
In regard to claim 3, given the mole and volume concentrations recited in paragraphs [0038] and [0052] for the mixed gas, the mixed gas inherently can have from 50 wt.% to 99 wt.% of carbon dioxide.
In regard to claim 6, the compressor 625 can be considered to increase pressure between a first portion and a second portion of the second chamber such that the pressure of the concentrated gas increases between the first portion and the second portion.
In regard to claims 8 and 18, the stream 621 in Vaidya can be considered passing an impermeable gas within the mixed gas from the first chamber to an atmosphere outside the first chamber.
In regard to claims 9 and 19, the stream 652 in Vaidya can be considered passing undissolved gases from the third chamber to an atmosphere outside the third chamber.
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Vaidya.
Vaidya is discussed above in section 4. Vaidya does not specifically disclose the concentration of carbon dioxide in the absorbent liquid. There is no evidence this value is critical. The concentration of the carbon dioxide absorbed in the amine solution can be affected by the design of the absorber, such as the time the CO2 enriched stream is in contact with the absorbent liquid. An amine absorbent liquid is capable of having a concentration of 1.2 g/L to 1.4 g/L of carbon dioxide.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Vaidya to have a concentration of carbon dioxide in the absorbent liquid of form 1.2 g/L to 1.4 g/L given this results from a residence time that allows for sufficient CO2 removal while maintaining a desired flow rate.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 7, 10 – 13, and 17 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
In regard to claims 5 and 10, Vaidya specifically discloses using amine absorption. There is no teaching or suggestion for the absorbent liquid to comprise at least 99 wt.% water.
In regard to claim 7, as shown in figure 6, Vaidya does not disclose passing at least a portion of the concentrate gas in the second chamber back to the first chamber, nor is this suggested within Vaidya.
Similarly, in regard to claim 17, there is no teaching or suggestion in Vaidya or CN ‘814 for a recycle pipe operable to pass at least a portion of the concentrated gas in the second chamber to the first chamber.
In regard to claim 11, there is no teaching or suggestion in Vaidya for the further steps of: passing at least a portion of the mixed gas from the first chamber of the first separation stage into a fourth chamber of a second separation stage comprising the fourth chamber, a fifth chamber, and a sixth chamber; processing the mixed gas in the second separation stage, the processing comprising: at least partially separating the target chemical species from the at least one other chemical species in the mixed gas by passing at least a portion of the target chemical species through a second gas-selective membrane and into a fifth chamber, such that the fifth chamber comprises a second concentrated gas, wherein the target chemical species in the concentrated gas in the fifth chamber has a greater concentration than the target chemical species in the mixed gas in the fourth chamber; selectively passing at least a portion of the target chemical species in the concentrated gas through a second diffusion-based membrane and into a sixth chamber, wherein the sixth chamber comprises the absorbent liquid and the target chemical species dissolves in the absorbent liquid; and passing the target chemical species dissolved in the absorbent liquid out of the sixth chamber and into the third chamber of the first separation stage. Claims 12 and 13 depend from claim 11 and would be allowable for at least the same reasoning as claim 11.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Other prior art references listed on the PTO-892 (Notice of References Cited) are considered to be of interest disclosing similar systems/processes that can separate CO2 from a mixed gas.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Robert Clemente whose telephone number is (571)272-1476. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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 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.
/ROBERT CLEMENTE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1773